Loyola Maryland

Pat · 2025–26 · Raw net rank 272 · Raw net -7.0 · Tempo 68.1 · 30 Division I games · Through 2026-03-05

Record: 10–20; 10 wins
AdjNet: -11.1β; rank 313 of 365
AdjO: 104.5β; rank 262 of 365
AdjD: 115.6β; rank 329 of 365
AdjT: 68.9β
SOS: -6.1β; rank 344 of 363
NCSOS: -4.1β
WAB: -15.4β; rank 320 of 363
RR: -2.0β
Exp. W: 12.0β

Scouting Report

Scouting report with national ranks
Category	Offense	Defense	D-I Average
Efficiency
Efficiency / 100 poss.	106.4222	113.3299	108.5
Four Factors
Effective FG%	50.4219	54.7319	51.4
TO / 100 poss.	15.5106	15.3265	16.7
Offensive rebound %	27.6279	29.0104	30.6
FTA / FGA %	29.9311	32.7123	35.0
Shooting
3P%	32.6253	32.8107	33.9
2P%	51.9172	58.3353	51.7
FT%	71.5223	73.0220	72.5
Style
3PA / FGA %	47.2	39.6	39.5
Assists / FGM %	48.8	55.5	52.6
Blocks / opp. 2PA %	9.9	8.4	9.5
Point Distribution
3-pointers %	37.7	29.2	31.4
2-pointers %	44.8	52.9	48.8
Free throws %	17.5	17.9	19.8

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

Rotation Depth

Effective Rotation Size: 9.6
Top Three Share of Minutes: 42%
Bench Share of Minutes: 38%
Players with Logged Minutes: 14

Bench: players outside the top five in minutes. Definitions

Schedule and Results

Schedule and results
Date	Opponent	Result	Poss.	Site	Record
11-03	Towson	L 56–67	65.2	Neutral	0–1
11-11	NJIT	L 64–66	67.9	Home	0–2
11-15	Stonehill	W 74–63	65.8	Neutral	1–2
11-16	Fairfield	L 82–85	71.3	Away	1–3
11-19	Duquesne	L 78–92	74.7	Away	1–4
11-21	Kentucky	L 46–88	72.0	Away	1–5
11-30	Coppin St.	W 95–84	70.6	Home	2–5
12-03	Hampton	L 71–93	73.4	Away	2–6
12-09	VMI	L 70–86	62.8	Away	2–7
12-13	Mount St. Mary's	L 73–81	74.7	Home	2–8
12-21	George Mason	L 79–86	67.1	Away	2–9
12-31	American	L 69–84	67.1	Away	2–10
01-03	Lafayette	L 64–79	65.2	Home	2–11
01-07	Army West Point	W 84–76 1OT	72.8	Away	3–11
01-10	Bucknell	L 67–70	68.4	Away	3–12
01-14	Colgate	L 80–86	72.2	Home	3–13
01-17	Boston U.	W 74–57	70.5	Home	4–13
01-19	Lehigh	L 81–88	68.0	Away	4–14
01-24	Bucknell	W 67–62	63.3	Home	5–14
01-28	American	W 77–68	74.2	Home	6–14
01-31	Navy	L 71–87	65.3	Away	6–15
02-04	Lehigh	W 89–84 2OT	80.3	Home	7–15
02-07	Boston U.	L 69–78	69.6	Away	7–16
02-11	Lafayette	W 68–54	65.5	Away	8–16
02-15	Holy Cross	W 83–73	65.1	Home	9–16
02-18	Army West Point	L 77–87	69.0	Home	9–17
02-21	Colgate	L 98–101 1OT	87.3	Away	9–18
02-25	Navy	L 51–78	60.9	Home	9–19
02-28	Holy Cross	W 76–62	63.3	Away	10–19
03-05	Colgate	L 77–90	64.5	Away	10–20

Roster · 14 players

Player logs in 30 of 30 team games

Team roster, per game
Column groups	Minutes			Per Game							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
Braeden Speed	30	33:12	81.6%	15.8	4.4	3.7	1.0	0.2	2.0	2.2	97–187	51.9%	54–147	36.7%	118–146	80.8%	53.3%	59.5%	43.7%	5	34:30 +1:18	84.1%	14.6 −1.2
Jordan Stiemke	30	27:35	67.8%	9.7	3.1	1.3	0.8	0.5	0.8	2.1	49–111	44.1%	50–154	32.5%	43–53	81.1%	46.8%	50.5%	20.0%	5	29:32 +1:57	72.0%	10.8 +1.1
Tyson Commander	30	23:39	58.1%	4.2	2.6	1.0	0.7	0.3	1.2	1.8	27–53	50.9%†	20–46	43.5%†	13–18	72.2%†	57.6%†	59.4%†	18.2%†	5	26:58 +3:20	65.8%	6.2 +2.0
Emmett Adair	26	25:22	54.1%	14.8	5.3	0.9	0.3	0.3	1.4	2.6	106–183	57.9%	43–138	31.2%	43–49	87.8%	53.1%	56.0%	15.3%	5	29:40 +4:18	72.3%	17.2 +2.4
Jacob Theodosiou	25	23:13	47.6%	12.8	3.5	2.6	1.7	0.2	2.5	1.6	80–146	54.8%	26–91	28.6%	81–119	68.1%	50.2%	55.1%	50.2%	5	14:12 −9:01	34.6%	10.4 −2.4
Sam Springer	30	16:50	41.4%	4.4	2.0	0.6	0.1	0.1	0.6	1.4	23–50	46.0%	20–65	30.8%	25–37	67.6%	46.1%	49.9%	32.2%	5	13:12 −3:38	32.2%	4.2 −0.2
Sebastien Emenalo	30	14:39	36.0%	3.1	3.1	0.4	0.5	0.3	0.6	0.8	18–39	46.2%†	16–54	29.6%	10–20	50.0%†	45.2%†	46.2%†	21.5%†	5	17:18 +2:39	42.2%	1.0 −2.1
Troy Cicero Jr.	30	13:41	33.7%	5.4	2.2	0.7	0.8	0.0	0.5	1.0	14–38	36.8%	39–109	35.8%	17–22	77.3%†	49.3%	51.7%	15.0%	5	16:09 +2:28	39.4%	6.4 +1.0
Carter Berg-McLean	28	13:37	31.3%	3.5	2.3	1.4	0.1	0.3	0.7	1.3	34–70	48.6%†	5–25	20.0%†	16–21	76.2%†	43.7%†	47.5%†	22.1%†	5	14:12 +0:35	34.6%	4.4 +0.9
Jonas Sirtautas	17	19:41	27.4%	5.9	3.2	0.6	0.4	1.9	0.9	2.6	39–54	72.2%†	2–14	14.3%†	17–38	44.7%	61.8%†	59.6%†	55.9%†	—	—	—	—
Everett Barnes	23	7:59	15.1%	1.0	1.3	0.3	0.1	0.3	0.3	1.4	8–20	40.0%†	2–4	50.0%†	2–12	16.7%†	45.8%†	41.0%†	50.0%†	5	7:08 −0:51	17.4%	0.6 −0.4
Garrett BrennanUnder 100 minutes	13	2:33	2.7%	0.3	0.2	0.2	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.5	0–1	0.0%†	1–4	25.0%†	1–4	25.0%†	30.0%†	29.6%†	80.0%†	2	0:59 −1:34	1.0%	0.0 −0.3
Peter SpositoFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	9	0:50	0.6%	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.1	0–2	0.0%†	0–1	0.0%†	0–1	0.0%†	0.0%†	0.0%†	33.3%†	3	1:06 +0:17	1.6%	0.0 0.0
Ben MenkerUnder 100 minutes	11	0:37	0.6%	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.2	0.0	0–0	—	0–2	0.0%†	0–0	—	0.0%†	0.0%†	0.0%†	3	0:33 −0:04	0.8%	0.0 0.0
Team, games with logs · per game	30 games			73.7	33.6	12.6	not published	3.5	10.7	not published	495–954	51.9%	278–854	32.6%	386–540	71.5%	50.4%	54.0%	29.9%
Sum of players				73.7	30.1	12.6	6.1	3.4	10.3	16.8	Shooting residuals: see Player Lines Against Team Totals.
Residual: team minus players				0.0	+3.5	0.0	not published	+0.1	+0.4	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: $0 (assumed opted out); 80% Range $0 to $0 (assumed)
Tier: Low and other; low evidence

Assumed from one unverified press article that names schools that did not opt in. Methodology

No player figures. The Team Pool is $0.

What-If Calculator · Speculativeβ

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

No modelled Team Pool (opted out). Enter a pool of your own.

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, Loyola University Maryland (NCAA Division I without football)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$2,130,645	Equals expenses (budget identity)
Men's basketball expenses	$2,130,645
Athletics department expenses	$23,484,724
Athletics department revenue	$23,484,724

Team Totalsβ

Season per game, 30 games, 2,078 possessions. Observed box-score sums, unadjusted. Definitions

Team and opponent season totals
Statistic	Team	Opponents
Points	73.7	78.5
Field goals made	25.8	28.4
Field goals attempted	60.3	58.9
3-pointers made	9.3	7.6
3-pointers attempted	28.5	23.3
Free throws made	12.9	14.1
Free throws attempted	18.0	19.3
Offensive rebounds	10.0	9.6
Defensive rebounds	23.6	26.3
Total rebounds	33.6	36.0
Assists	12.6	15.8
Blocks	3.5	2.7
Turnovers	10.7	10.6
Steals	No team figure. Players sum to 184.
Personal fouls	No team figure. Players sum to 505.
Minutes (derived)	203.3	not published

30 of 30 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	2,210	2,210	0	±11.1	0
Field goals made	Reconciled	773	773	0	±3.9	0
Field goals attempted	Reconciled	1,808	1,808	0	±9.0	0
3-pointers made	Reconciled	278	278	0	±2.0	0
3-pointers attempted	Reconciled	854	854	0	±4.3	0
Free throws made	Reconciled	386	386	0	±2.0	0
Free throws attempted	Reconciled	540	540	0	±2.7	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	1,008	902	+106	±80.6	0
Assists	Reconciled	377	377	0	±2.0	0
Blocks	Residual shown	106	103	+3	±2.0	0
Turnovers	Residual shown	322	309	+13	±9.7	0
Steals	No team figure	not published	184	not published	not published	not published
Personal fouls	No team figure	not published	505	not published	not published	not published
Minutes (derived)	Reconciled	6,100	6,075	+24.9	±122.0	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
Braeden Speed	81.9%	-0.0range -1.1 to +1.1Sufficient evidence
Jordan Stiemke	68.5%	-1.6range -2.8 to -0.5Sufficient evidence
Tyson Commander	58.1%	-1.7range -2.7 to -0.8Sufficient evidence
Emmett Adair	54.0%	-0.0range -1.5 to +1.4Sufficient evidence
Jacob Theodosiou	48.5%	-1.2range -2.3 to +0.0Sufficient evidence
Sam Springer	42.3%	-3.2range -4.8 to -1.5Sufficient evidence
Sebastien Emenalo	35.9%	-0.9range -2.7 to +0.4Sufficient evidence
Troy Cicero Jr.	33.3%	+2.6range +1.4 to +3.9Sufficient evidence
Carter Berg-McLean	30.6%	-0.2range -1.6 to +0.9Sufficient evidence
Jonas Sirtautas	27.7%	+0.0range -0.8 to +1.0Sufficient evidence
Everett Barnes	15.1%	-1.4range -2.4 to -0.6Sufficient evidence
Garrett Brennan	2.7%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Peter Sposito	0.7%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Ben Menker	0.6%	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: +8.6range +7.7 to +9.5Sufficient evidence

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

11 valued players hold 99.2% of on-court time. 3 without a value (under 300 possessions) hold 0.8%, counted at replacement level -9.5. Limited-evidence players hold 0.0%.

NIL Methodology · Scheduling and Model-Implied Value