A&M-Corpus Christi
Slnd · 2025–26 · Raw net rank 204 · Raw net -1.3 · Tempo 66.6 · 29 Division I games · Through 2026-03-10
Scouting Report
| Category | Offense | Defense | D-I Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Efficiency | |||
| Efficiency / 100 poss. | 102.4298 | 103.771 | 108.5 |
| Four Factors | |||
| Effective FG% | 49.5270 | 50.1104 | 51.4 |
| TO / 100 poss. | 19.4334 | 19.049 | 16.7 |
| Offensive rebound % | 31.7137 | 28.896 | 30.6 |
| FTA / FGA % | 41.145 | 46.3353 | 35.0 |
| Shooting | |||
| 3P% | 35.0122 | 31.648 | 33.9 |
| 2P% | 48.1307 | 51.5163 | 51.7 |
| FT% | 67.4334 | 70.987 | 72.5 |
| Style | |||
| 3PA / FGA % | 31.4 | 34.9 | 39.5 |
| Assists / FGM % | 50.6 | 49.4 | 52.6 |
| Blocks / opp. 2PA % | 7.7 | 11.6 | 9.5 |
| Point Distribution | |||
| 3-pointers % | 26.0 | 24.9 | 31.4 |
| 2-pointers % | 52.1 | 50.4 | 48.8 |
| Free throws % | 21.9 | 24.7 | 19.8 |
Best · Median · Worst · Mark: further right is a better national rank, of 365 teams.
Rotation Depth
- Effective Rotation Size
- 11.0
- Top Three Share of Minutes
- 35%
- Bench Share of Minutes
- 46%
- Players with Logged Minutes
- 16
Bench: players outside the top five in minutes. Definitions
Schedule and Results
| Date | Opponent | Result | Poss. | Site | Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11-06 | SMU | L 58–69 | 68.9 | Away | 0–1 |
| 11-08 | Tarleton St. | L 77–85 | 69.2 | Away | 0–2 |
| 11-11 | Kansas | L 46–77 | 71.3 | Away | 0–3 |
| 11-16 | Oklahoma St. | L 69–85 | 78.1 | Away | 0–4 |
| 11-28 | Xavier | L 67–88 | 75.0 | Away | 0–5 |
| 12-06 | Lamar University | W 57–49 | 60.1 | Away | 1–5 |
| 12-17 | SFA | L 60–69 | 64.0 | Away | 1–6 |
| 12-29 | Nicholls | L 71–76 | 63.1 | Home | 1–7 |
| 12-31 | LSU New Orleans | W 83–69 | 68.8 | Home | 2–7 |
| 01-03 | UTRGV | W 63–59 | 62.9 | Away | 3–7 |
| 01-05 | Houston Christian | W 81–65 | 69.1 | Away | 4–7 |
| 01-10 | Northwestern St. | L 78–79 | 67.8 | Away | 4–8 |
| 01-12 | East Texas A&M | W 61–50 | 66.9 | Away | 5–8 |
| 01-17 | Southeastern La. | W 68–56 | 70.3 | Home | 6–8 |
| 01-19 | McNeese | L 53–69 | 58.9 | Home | 6–9 |
| 01-24 | UIW | W 79–71 | 68.6 | Away | 7–9 |
| 01-26 | UTRGV | L 55–64 | 63.7 | Home | 7–10 |
| 01-31 | Houston Christian | W 73–71 | 60.7 | Home | 8–10 |
| 02-02 | UIW | L 69–71 | 65.7 | Home | 8–11 |
| 02-07 | Nicholls | W 83–76 | 67.7 | Away | 9–11 |
| 02-09 | LSU New Orleans | L 78–84 1OT | 87.1 | Away | 9–12 |
| 02-14 | Lamar University | W 76–63 | 67.2 | Home | 10–12 |
| 02-16 | SFA | L 68–78 | 67.0 | Home | 10–13 |
| 02-21 | McNeese | L 54–70 | 65.6 | Away | 10–14 |
| 02-23 | Southeastern La. | W 73–68 | 64.7 | Away | 11–14 |
| 02-28 | Northwestern St. | W 71–59 | 60.5 | Home | 12–14 |
| 03-02 | East Texas A&M | W 84–71 | 67.2 | Home | 13–14 |
| 03-09 | LSU New Orleans | W 74–61 | 58.2 | Neutral | 14–14 |
| 03-10 | SFA | L 58–60 | 61.3 | Neutral | 14–15 |
Roster · 16 players
Player logs in 29 of 29 team games
| Column groups | Minutes | Per 40 Minutes | 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 |
| Sheldon Williams | 29 | 26:47 | 66.7% | 17.9 | 10.3 | 1.5 | 1.1 | 0.6 | 2.4 | 4.5 | 121–213 | 56.8% | 11–37 | 29.7%† | 73–113 | 64.6% | 55.0% | 58.1% | 45.2% | 5 | 26:30 −0:18 | 66.2% | 13.4 +1.4 |
| Nicholas Shogbonyo | 25 | 28:11 | 60.5% | 17.3 | 4.9 | 1.9 | 1.4 | 0.0 | 2.6 | 3.6 | 45–103 | 43.7% | 43–104 | 41.3% | 85–105 | 81.0% | 52.9% | 60.0% | 50.7% | 5 | 27:12 −0:59 | 68.0% | 12.6 +0.4 |
| Leo Torbor | 29 | 19:44 | 49.1% | 9.3 | 3.7 | 3.1 | 2.5 | 0.9 | 2.7 | 4.0 | 52–119 | 43.7% | 1–9 | 11.1%† | 26–54 | 48.1% | 41.8% | 43.8% | 42.2% | 5 | 11:54 −7:50 | 29.8% | 1.8 −2.8 |
| Mason Gibson | 26 | 22:00 | 49.1% | 17.1 | 3.4 | 1.9 | 2.0 | 0.1 | 1.8 | 2.4 | 41–91 | 45.1% | 38–105 | 36.2% | 49–68 | 72.1% | 50.0% | 54.2% | 34.7% | 5 | 16:03 −5:56 | 40.1% | 6.2 −3.2 |
| Franck Yetna | 29 | 18:02 | 44.9% | 13.9 | 6.8 | 2.4 | 1.5 | 0.9 | 1.5 | 4.3 | 50–101 | 49.5% | 18–42 | 42.9%† | 28–42 | 66.7% | 53.8% | 56.4% | 29.4% | 5 | 19:36 +1:34 | 49.0% | 6.2 −0.1 |
| Cenker Evran | 23 | 22:31 | 44.5% | 10.6 | 9.3 | 1.6 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 1.8 | 3.6 | 54–95 | 56.8%† | 0–0 | — | 29–45 | 64.4% | 56.8%† | 59.7%† | 47.4%† | 5 | 27:34 +5:03 | 68.9% | 6.6 +0.6 |
| DA Houston | 25 | 20:40 | 44.4% | 16.5 | 2.6 | 5.4 | 1.1 | 0.5 | 4.3 | 5.2 | 41–93 | 44.1% | 27–73 | 37.0% | 50–76 | 65.8% | 49.1% | 53.4% | 45.8% | 5 | 25:27 +4:46 | 63.6% | 11.4 +2.9 |
| Daniel Michelini-Jackson | 26 | 17:15 | 38.5% | 10.1 | 7.1 | 2.7 | 1.2 | 0.4 | 2.6 | 2.8 | 22–51 | 43.1% | 14–49 | 28.6%† | 27–30 | 90.0% | 43.0% | 49.9% | 30.0% | 5 | 26:17 +9:02 | 65.7% | 10.4 +6.1 |
| Kam Parker | 22 | 17:20 | 32.7% | 8.9 | 4.3 | 3.4 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 1.9 | 4.0 | 15–38 | 39.5%† | 12–47 | 25.5%† | 19–24 | 79.2%† | 38.8%† | 44.5%† | 28.2%† | 5 | 11:23 −5:57 | 28.5% | 1.6 −2.3 |
| Bryson Wheatfall | 24 | 10:32 | 21.7% | 11.1 | 5.9 | 2.1 | 1.7 | 0.9 | 1.3 | 5.2 | 26–70 | 37.1%† | 2–9 | 22.2%† | 12–20 | 60.0%† | 36.7%† | 39.9%† | 25.3%† | 2 | 3:35 −6:57 | 3.6% | 1.0 −1.9 |
| Devon Kobi Pearson | 28 | 7:57 | 19.1% | 14.4 | 7.5 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 0.9 | 3.4 | 7.0 | 26–45 | 57.8%† | 3–8 | 37.5%† | 19–38 | 50.0% | 57.5%† | 57.4%† | 71.7%† | 5 | 3:55 −4:02 | 9.8% | 1.0 −1.9 |
| Jaden Haire | 22 | 9:37 | 18.2% | 9.5 | 6.8 | 1.5 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 3.2 | 4.4 | 16–41 | 39.0%† | 0–1 | 0.0%† | 18–29 | 62.1% | 38.1%† | 45.7%† | 69.0%† | 1 | 2:56 −6:41 | 1.5% | 0.0 −2.3 |
| Jamal AmbroseUnder 100 minutes | 11 | 4:13 | 4.0% | 5.2 | 1.7 | 0.9 | 2.6 | 0.9 | 2.6 | 7.8 | 3–7 | 42.9%† | 0–0 | — | 0–1 | 0.0%† | 42.9%† | 40.3%† | 14.3%† | 3 | 2:27 −1:46 | 3.7% | 0.7 +0.1 |
| Cedric HortonFew gamesUnder 100 minutes | 9 | 5:07 | 3.9% | 12.2 | 2.6 | 2.6 | 2.6 | 2.6 | 0.9 | 7.8 | 4–8 | 50.0%† | 2–5 | 40.0%† | 0–0 | — | 53.8%† | 53.8%† | 0.0%† | — | — | — | — |
| Kayden CrosbyFew gamesUnder 100 minutes | 3 | 1:39 | 0.4% | 24.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0–0 | — | 1–2 | 50.0%† | 0–0 | — | 75.0%† | 75.0%† | 0.0%† | 1 | 0:10 −1:29 | 0.1% | 0.0 −1.0 |
| Trenton PaneFew gamesUnder 100 minutes | 2 | 2:01 | 0.3% | 39.7 | 9.9 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 9.9 | 0.0 | 2–2 | 100.0%† | 0–1 | 0.0%† | 0–0 | — | 66.7%† | 66.7%† | 0.0%† | — | — | — | — |
| Team, games with logs · per 40 team minutes | 29 games | 68.2 | 34.0 | 12.0 | not published | 2.6 | 12.9 | not published | 518–1077 | 48.1% | 172–492 | 35.0% | 435–645 | 67.4% | 49.5% | 53.6% | 41.1% | ||||||
| Sum of players | 68.2 | 29.9 | 12.0 | 7.0 | 2.6 | 12.1 | 20.4 | Shooting residuals: see Player Lines Against Team Totals. | |||||||||||||||
| Residual: team minus players | 0.0 | +4.1 | −0.0 | not published | 0.0 | +0.8 | 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
- $200K
- 80% Range $75K to $540K
- Tier
- Low and other
- low evidence
- Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $195K to $225K
- Scenario medians
- Players with Figures
- 16
- 4 floor only
The widest scenario range, $83K to $605K, is wider than the 80% Range above (soft check S5). Methodology
| Player | Poss. Share | Speculative Best Guess | 80% Range | Range Graphic | Median % of Team Pool | Scenarios Z1 to Z4 | Floor Part | Evidence and Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sheldon Williams | 68.0% | $33K | $11K to $98K | 15.8% | $32K to $36K | $1K | Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Nicholas Shogbonyo | 54.4% | $20K | $6K to $61K | 10.9% | $19K to $22K | $1K | Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Franck Yetna | 48.4% | $12K | $2K to $41K | 7.8% | $12K to $14K | $1K | Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Leo Torbor | 48.0% | $9K | $1K to $33K | 6.3% | $8K to $10K | $1K | Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Mason Gibson | 47.3% | $35K | $11K to $115K | 16.0% | $34K to $39K | $1K | Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| DA Houston | 45.9% | $14K | $3K to $46K | 8.4% | $14K to $16K | $1K | Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Daniel Michelini-Jackson | 41.6% | $12K | $2K to $37K | 7.2% | $11K to $13K | $1K | Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Cenker Evran | 41.1% | $25K | $9K to $78K | 11.5% | $24K to $28K | $1K | Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Kam Parker | 37.6% | $3K | $1K to $18K | 1.9% | $3K to $4K | $1K | Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Bryson Wheatfall | 21.8% | $4K | $1K to $14K | 2.3% | $3K to $4K | $1K | Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Jaden Haire | 18.7% | $2K | $1K to $9K | 0.9% | $2K to $3K | $1K | Limited evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Devon Kobi Pearson | 18.2% | $5K | $1K to $17K | 3.2% | $5K to $6K | $1K | Limited evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Cedric Horton | 4.1% | $1K | $0 to $4K | 0.6% | $1K in all four | $1K | Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Jamal Ambrose | 4.0% | $1K | $0 to $4K | 0.6% | $1K in all four | $1K | Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Kayden Crosby | 0.6% | $1K | $0 to $4K | 0.6% | $1K in all four | $1K | Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Trenton Pane | 0.5% | $1K | $0 to $4K | 0.6% | $1K in all four | $1K | Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data | |
| Team Pool | — | $200K | $75K to $540K | 100% | $195K to $225K | — |
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.
| Measure | School-Reported Amount | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Men's basketball revenue | $2,195,184 | Equals expenses (budget identity) |
| Men's basketball expenses | $2,195,184 | |
| Athletics department expenses | $16,927,943 | |
| Athletics department revenue | $16,927,943 |
Team Totalsβ
Season per 40 minutes, 29 games, 1,940 possessions. Observed box-score sums, unadjusted. Per 40 uses 1165 game minutes, 5 per overtime period. Definitions
| Statistic | Team | Opponents |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 68.2 | 69.1 |
| Field goals made | 23.7 | 23.1 |
| Field goals attempted | 53.9 | 51.9 |
| 3-pointers made | 5.9 | 5.7 |
| 3-pointers attempted | 16.9 | 18.1 |
| Free throws made | 14.9 | 17.1 |
| Free throws attempted | 22.1 | 24.1 |
| Offensive rebounds | 10.8 | 9.4 |
| Defensive rebounds | 23.2 | 23.2 |
| Total rebounds | 34.0 | 32.6 |
| Assists | 12.0 | 11.4 |
| Blocks | 2.6 | 4.3 |
| Turnovers | 12.9 | 12.7 |
| Steals | No team figure. Players sum to 203. | |
| Personal fouls | No team figure. Players sum to 594. | |
| Minutes (derived) | 200.0 | not published |
29 of 29 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
| Statistic | Status | Team Total, Logged Games | Sum of Players | Residual | Tolerance | Team Total, Games Without Logs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Points | Reconciled | 1,987 | 1,987 | 0 | ±9.9 | 0 |
| Field goals made | Reconciled | 690 | 690 | 0 | ±3.5 | 0 |
| Field goals attempted | Reconciled | 1,569 | 1,569 | 0 | ±7.8 | 0 |
| 3-pointers made | Reconciled | 172 | 172 | 0 | ±2.0 | 0 |
| 3-pointers attempted | Reconciled | 492 | 492 | 0 | ±2.5 | 0 |
| Free throws made | Reconciled | 435 | 435 | 0 | ±2.2 | 0 |
| Free throws attempted | Reconciled | 645 | 645 | 0 | ±3.2 | 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 | 990 | 872 | +118 | ±79.2 | 0 |
| Assists | Reconciled | 349 | 350 | −1 | ±2.0 | 0 |
| Blocks | Reconciled | 76 | 76 | 0 | ±2.0 | 0 |
| Turnovers | Residual shown | 376 | 352 | +24 | ±11.3 | 0 |
| Steals | No team figure | not published | 203 | not published | not published | not published |
| Personal fouls | No team figure | not published | 594 | not published | not published | not published |
| Minutes (derived) | Reconciled | 5,825 | 5,802 | +23.3 | ±116.5 | 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.
| Player | Poss. Share | Net and Rangeβ | Range Graphic |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sheldon Williams | 68.0% | +1.5range +0.4 to +2.5Sufficient evidence | |
| Nicholas Shogbonyo | 54.4% | +0.8range -0.1 to +1.8Sufficient evidence | |
| Franck Yetna | 48.4% | +0.0range -1.2 to +1.2Sufficient evidence | |
| Leo Torbor | 48.0% | -0.6range -1.4 to +0.4Sufficient evidence | |
| Mason Gibson | 47.3% | +2.7range +1.3 to +4.1Sufficient evidence | |
| DA Houston | 45.9% | +0.5range -0.7 to +1.4Sufficient evidence | |
| Daniel Michelini-Jackson | 41.6% | +0.2range -0.7 to +1.1Sufficient evidence | |
| Cenker Evran | 41.1% | +2.1range +1.2 to +2.8Sufficient evidence | |
| Kam Parker | 37.6% | -2.2range -3.1 to -1.2Sufficient evidence | |
| Bryson Wheatfall | 21.8% | -1.2range -2.2 to -0.2Sufficient evidence | |
| Jaden Haire | 18.7% | -2.8range -3.5 to -2.1Limited evidence | |
| Devon Kobi Pearson | 18.2% | -0.1range -1.0 to +0.8Limited evidence | |
| Cedric Horton | 4.1% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | |
| Jamal Ambrose | 4.0% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | |
| Kayden Crosby | 0.6% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | |
| Trenton Pane | 0.5% | 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
- +9.7range +8.8 to +10.5Sufficient evidence
200 joint draws. The range is the 10th to 90th percentile. Player ranges cannot be added.
12 valued players hold 98.2% of on-court time. 4 without a value (under 300 possessions) hold 1.8%, counted at replacement level -9.5. Limited-evidence players hold 7.4%.