Binghamton

AE · 2025–26 · Raw net rank 343 · Raw net -15.5 · Tempo 65.2 · 27 Division I games · Through 2026-02-28

Record: 4–23; 4 wins
AdjNet: -19.3β; rank 353 of 365
AdjO: 99.5β; rank 338 of 365
AdjD: 118.8β; rank 357 of 365
AdjT: 66.7β
SOS: -7.7β; rank 354 of 363
NCSOS: -5.3β
WAB: -19.6β; rank 357 of 363
RR: -3.0β
Exp. W: 7.0β

Scouting Report

Scouting report with national ranks
Category	Offense	Defense	D-I Average
Efficiency
Efficiency / 100 poss.	100.3324	115.8334	108.5
Four Factors
Effective FG%	49.7253	54.8323	51.4
TO / 100 poss.	18.8313	13.2349	16.7
Offensive rebound %	21.1361	29.2122	30.6
FTA / FGA %	42.228	35.1179	35.0
Shooting
3P%	32.4262	36.0296	33.9
2P%	50.2248	55.3314	51.7
FT%	75.374	69.848	72.5
Style
3PA / FGA %	31.0	38.5	39.5
Assists / FGM %	48.5	48.7	52.6
Blocks / opp. 2PA %	7.8	9.1	9.5
Point Distribution
3-pointers %	22.9	31.0	31.4
2-pointers %	52.9	50.8	48.8
Free throws %	24.2	18.3	19.8

Best · Median · Worst · Mark: further right is a better national rank, of 365 teams.

Rotation Depth

Effective Rotation Size: 7.7
Top Three Share of Minutes: 49%
Bench Share of Minutes: 26%
Players with Logged Minutes: 11

Bench: players outside the top five in minutes. Definitions

Schedule and Results

Schedule and results
Date	Opponent	Result	Poss.	Site	Record
11-03	Syracuse	L 47–85	69.0	Away	0–1
11-08	Niagara	L 59–67	63.8	Home	0–2
11-12	Georgetown	L 70–83	66.9	Away	0–3
11-15	Longwood	L 82–90	74.1	Away	0–4
11-22	UMES	L 52–63	59.5	Neutral	0–5
11-23	Canisius	L 66–75	61.6	Away	0–6
12-02	Lehigh	W 80–71 1OT	71.7	Home	1–6
12-06	Le Moyne	L 63–78	66.3	Home	1–7
12-13	Central Conn. St.	L 67–84	65.3	Home	1–8
12-17	Pittsburgh	L 63–103	71.6	Away	1–9
12-20	Mercyhurst	L 61–82	69.7	Away	1–10
12-23	Army West Point	L 85–95 1OT	78.3	Away	1–11
01-03	NJIT	L 65–73	62.4	Home	1–12
01-08	Vermont	L 59–60	61.5	Away	1–13
01-10	UMass Lowell	L 68–73	69.1	Home	1–14
01-15	UAlbany	L 53–69	63.2	Away	1–15
01-19	UMBC	L 60–78	63.4	Home	1–16
01-22	New Hampshire	L 82–88 3OT	84.2	Away	1–17
01-24	Maine	L 63–79	61.7	Away	1–18
01-29	Bryant	W 63–60	59.0	Home	2–18
02-05	UMBC	L 62–79	66.3	Away	2–19
02-07	NJIT	L 64–73	66.0	Away	2–20
02-12	Vermont	L 65–73	65.6	Home	2–21
02-14	UAlbany	L 74–77	68.5	Home	2–22
02-19	Bryant	W 79–67	60.6	Away	3–22
02-21	UMass Lowell	L 79–92	64.7	Away	3–23
02-28	Maine	W 74–67	65.8	Home	4–23

Roster · 11 players

Player logs in 27 of 27 team games

Team roster, season totals
Column groups	Minutes			Season Totals							Shooting									Last Five Team Games
Player	G	MPG	Team Min%	Pts	Reb	Ast	Stl	Blk	TO	PF	2P	2P%	3P	3P%	FT	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/FGA	G	MPG	Min%	Pts/G
Jeremiah Quigley	27	36:28	89.1%	391	131	171	32	0	90	68	128–257	49.8%	8–42	19.0%†	111–142	78.2%	46.8%	54.1%	47.5%	5	39:15 +2:47	98.1%	17.0 +2.5
Wes Peterson	25	35:44	80.8%	263	104	37	17	10	49	55	66–158	41.8%	27–73	37.0%	50–65	76.9%	46.1%	50.7%	28.1%	5	39:52 +4:08	99.7%	12.8 +2.3
Jackson Benigni	26	31:19	73.7%	275	72	17	30	1	20	67	21–31	67.7%	57–138	41.3%	62–70	88.6%	63.0%	68.8%	41.4%	5	32:36 +1:17	81.5%	14.4 +3.8
Bryson Wilson	26	28:36	67.3%	251	112	25	20	14	51	59	69–147	46.9%	11–47	23.4%†	80–103	77.7%	44.1%	52.4%	53.1%	4	31:09 +2:33	62.3%	10.5 +0.8
Zyier Beverly	25	25:20	57.3%	276	108	9	13	30	42	67	104–177	58.8%	3–7	42.9%†	59–92	64.1%	59.0%	61.5%	50.0%	5	25:45 +0:24	64.4%	10.8 −0.2
Ryan Richardson	19	23:40	40.7%	66	39	22	7	6	24	30	10–34	29.4%†	14–52	26.9%	4–13	30.8%†	36.0%†	36.0%†	15.1%†	—	—	—	—
Stephan Snagg	24	18:13	39.6%	78	57	6	8	7	9	58	32–57	56.1%†	0–0	—	14–24	58.3%†	56.1%†	57.7%†	42.1%†	5	23:35 +5:22	58.9%	5.2 +2.0
Demetrius Lilley	10	33:17	30.1%	145	92	7	7	7	27	25	39–77	50.6%	4–26	15.4%†	55–67	82.1%	43.7%	54.7%	65.0%	—	—	—	—
Jake Blackburn	12	14:10	15.4%	54	11	3	3	0	6	24	8–12	66.7%†	12–31	38.7%†	2–4	50.0%†	60.5%†	60.3%†	9.3%†	5	13:21 −0:50	33.4%	5.6 +1.1
Nevin IbrociUnder 100 minutes	12	1:45	1.9%	6	2	0	0	0	0	11	0–0	—	2–7	28.6%†	0–0	—	42.9%†	42.9%†	0.0%†	2	0:16 −1:30	0.3%	0.0 −0.5
Jayden KelseyFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	1	20:42	1.9%	0	1	2	0	0	0	2	0–0	—	0–3	0.0%†	0–0	—	0.0%†	0.0%†	0.0%†	—	—	—	—
Team, games with logs · season totals	27 games			1805	818	298	not published	75	338	not published	477–950	50.2%	138–426	32.4%	437–580	75.3%	49.7%	55.3%	42.2%
Sum of players				1805	729	299	137	75	318	466	Shooting residuals: see Player Lines Against Team Totals.
Residual: team minus players				0	+89	−1	not published	0	+20	not published

G: logged games. Team Min%: share of team minutes on court (40 per game plus overtime). 2P, 3P and FT show made–attempted. † Few attempts: under 100 FGA, 50 3PA or 25 FTA. Few G: under 10 games. <100 min: under 100 minutes. Last Five Team Games columns show change from the season value and hide on narrow screens.

Speculative Compensation · 2025–26β

Estimated share of the school's revenue-sharing budget for men's basketball. Not observed pay.

Team Pool: $220K; 80% Range $82K to $610K
Tier: Low and other; low evidence
Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4: $210K to $230K; Scenario medians
Players with Figures: 11; 2 floor only

Players in possession-share order
Player	Poss. Share	Speculative Best Guess	80% Range	Median % of Team Pool	Scenarios Z1 to Z4	Floor Part	Evidence and Flags
Jeremiah Quigley	90.3%	$26K	$2K to $105K	17.4%	$24K to $27K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Wes Peterson	79.2%	$10K	$1K to $54K	8.0%	$10K to $11K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Jackson Benigni	72.9%	$32K	$2K to $145K	15.7%	$30K to $34K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Bryson Wilson	67.6%	$10K	$1K to $50K	7.8%	$10K to $11K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Zyier Beverly	56.2%	$19K	$2K to $84K	11.1%	$18K to $20K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Ryan Richardson	39.9%	$8K	$1K to $36K	6.0%	$7K to $8K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Stephan Snagg	39.8%	$27K	$4K to $155K	10.3%	$25K to $28K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Demetrius Lilley	34.4%	$12K	$2K to $53K	7.2%	$12K to $13K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Jake Blackburn	15.4%	$5K	$1K to $20K	3.4%	$5K to $6K	$2K	Limited evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Jayden Kelsey	2.2%	$2K	$1K to $6K	0.9%	$2K in all four	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Nevin Ibroci	2.2%	$2K	$1K to $6K	0.9%	$2K in all four	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Team Pool	—	$220K	$82K to $610K	100%	$210K to $230K	—

What-If Calculator · Speculativeβ

Re-runs the 4,000 joint draws with your inputs. The address saves your inputs.

School Finances · School-Reported (EADA)

Self-reported to the U.S. Department of Education. Expenses cover coaching, travel, aid and operations, not player pay.

School-reported finances, 2024-25, Binghamton University (NCAA Division I without football)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$2,437,431	Equals expenses (budget identity)
Men's basketball expenses	$2,437,431
Athletics department expenses	$23,878,345
Athletics department revenue	$26,999,763

Team Totalsβ

Season totals, 27 games, 1,800 possessions. Observed box-score sums, unadjusted. Definitions

Team and opponent season totals
Statistic	Team	Opponents
Points	1,805	2,084
Field goals made	615	744
Field goals attempted	1,376	1,555
3-pointers made	138	215
3-pointers attempted	426	598
Free throws made	437	381
Free throws attempted	580	546
Offensive rebounds	177	265
Defensive rebounds	641	663
Total rebounds	818	928
Assists	298	362
Blocks	75	86
Turnovers	338	238
Steals	No team figure. Players sum to 137.
Personal fouls	No team figure. Players sum to 466.
Minutes (derived)	5,525	not published

27 of 27 games have player logs. Residual is team total minus sum of players. Team rebounds and team turnovers have no player owner, so a residual is expected. Definitions

Player lines against team totals
Statistic	Status	Team Total, Logged Games	Sum of Players	Residual	Tolerance	Team Total, Games Without Logs
Points	Reconciled	1,805	1,805	0	±9.0	0
Field goals made	Reconciled	615	615	0	±3.1	0
Field goals attempted	Reconciled	1,376	1,376	0	±6.9	0
3-pointers made	Reconciled	138	138	0	±2.0	0
3-pointers attempted	Reconciled	426	426	0	±2.1	0
Free throws made	Reconciled	437	437	0	±2.2	0
Free throws attempted	Reconciled	580	580	0	±2.9	0
Offensive rebounds	No player split	not published	not published	not published	not published	not published
Defensive rebounds	No player split	not published	not published	not published	not published	not published
Total rebounds	Residual shown	818	729	+89	±65.4	0
Assists	Reconciled	298	299	−1	±2.0	0
Blocks	Reconciled	75	75	0	±2.0	0
Turnovers	Residual shown	338	318	+20	±10.1	0
Steals	No team figure	not published	137	not published	not published	not published
Personal fouls	No team figure	not published	466	not published	not published	not published
Minutes (derived)	Reconciled	5,525	5,501	+24.4	±110.5	0

Model-Implied Player Valueβ

Ranges are the 10th to 90th percentile of whole-game resampling draws. They are not calibrated intervals.

Open circle: limited evidence. Filled circle: sufficient evidence. Line: zero. No graphic: insufficient evidence.

Net points per 100 possessions, in possession-share order.
Player	Poss. Share	Net and Rangeβ
Jeremiah Quigley	90.3%	-1.7range -2.6 to -0.7Sufficient evidence
Wes Peterson	79.2%	-3.4range -4.4 to -2.3Sufficient evidence
Jackson Benigni	72.9%	-1.4range -2.3 to -0.3Sufficient evidence
Bryson Wilson	67.6%	-3.1range -4.2 to -2.0Sufficient evidence
Zyier Beverly	56.2%	-1.6range -2.5 to -0.7Sufficient evidence
Ryan Richardson	39.9%	-2.6range -3.3 to -1.9Sufficient evidence
Stephan Snagg	39.8%	-0.9range -1.8 to +0.3Sufficient evidence
Demetrius Lilley	34.4%	-1.7range -2.6 to -0.7Sufficient evidence
Jake Blackburn	15.4%	-1.9range -3.1 to -1.1Limited evidence
Jayden Kelsey	2.2%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Nevin Ibroci	2.2%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence

Team Aggregate of Player Values, 2026β

Summary of the player values below. Split role: descriptive: not used in fit or gates. Model nil-value-v3. Definitions · NIL Methodology

Average value over five on-court slots, net points per 100 possessions: +7.3range +6.5 to +8.2Sufficient evidence

200 joint draws. The range is the 10th to 90th percentile. Player ranges cannot be added.

9 valued players hold 99.1% of on-court time. 2 without a value (under 300 possessions) hold 0.9%, counted at replacement level -9.5. Limited-evidence players hold 3.1%.

NIL Methodology · Scheduling and Model-Implied Value