Lindenwood

OVC · 2025–26 · Raw net rank 196 · Raw net -0.9 · Tempo 73.0 · 30 Division I games · Through 2026-03-05

Record: 15–15; 15 wins
AdjNet: -5.0β; rank 243 of 365
AdjO: 101.9β; rank 310 of 365
AdjD: 106.9β; rank 138 of 365
AdjT: 72.6β
SOS: -5.1β; rank 323 of 363
NCSOS: 3.3β
WAB: -9.7β; rank 220 of 363
RR: -0.7β
Exp. W: 15.7β

Scouting Report

Scouting report with national ranks
Category	Offense	Defense	D-I Average
Efficiency
Efficiency / 100 poss.	101.8307	102.854	108.5
Four Factors
Effective FG%	48.0313	49.172	51.4
TO / 100 poss.	18.7309	18.477	16.7
Offensive rebound %	33.283	31.8244	30.6
FTA / FGA %	38.686	37.4248	35.0
Shooting
3P%	29.4347	32.485	33.9
2P%	49.6269	49.474	51.7
FT%	67.4335	68.411	72.5
Style
3PA / FGA %	30.7	32.9	39.5
Assists / FGM %	49.1	47.9	52.6
Blocks / opp. 2PA %	10.7	9.5	9.5
Point Distribution
3-pointers %	22.2	25.9	31.4
2-pointers %	56.5	53.5	48.8
Free throws %	21.3	20.7	19.8

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

Rotation Depth

Effective Rotation Size: 7.4
Top Three Share of Minutes: 46%
Bench Share of Minutes: 25%
Players with Logged Minutes: 13

Bench: players outside the top five in minutes. Definitions

Schedule and Results

Schedule and results
Date	Opponent	Result	Poss.	Site	Record
11-04	Texas Tech	L 60–98	76.6	Away	0–1
11-10	Saint Louis	L 66–109	81.0	Away	0–2
11-14	Charleston So.	W 83–77	78.2	Neutral	1–2
11-16	Alabama A&M	L 65–74	67.9	Away	1–3
11-20	Indiana	L 53–73	71.2	Away	1–4
11-24	Kansas City	W 80–67	75.6	Home	2–4
12-02	NIU	W 99–64	74.3	Away	3–4
12-06	Eastern Ill.	W 82–74	71.7	Away	4–4
12-18	Western Ill.	W 92–76	75.7	Home	5–4
12-23	Missouri St.	L 65–70	68.8	Away	5–5
01-01	Morehead St.	W 77–64	69.3	Home	6–5
01-03	Southern Ind.	W 83–80	71.7	Home	7–5
01-06	SIUE	L 62–66	69.8	Away	7–6
01-10	Little Rock	L 74–82	68.7	Home	7–7
01-15	Southeast Mo. St.	W 88–76	81.5	Away	8–7
01-17	UT Martin	L 55–69	71.0	Away	8–8
01-22	Tennessee Tech	W 89–68	76.4	Home	9–8
01-24	Tennessee St.	L 86–96	78.1	Home	9–9
01-29	Southern Ind.	W 73–60	77.6	Away	10–9
01-31	Morehead St.	W 79–78	72.5	Away	11–9
02-03	SIUE	L 72–78	73.0	Home	11–10
02-05	Little Rock	W 79–74	67.8	Away	12–10
02-12	UT Martin	W 75–74	69.3	Home	13–10
02-14	Southeast Mo. St.	L 61–73	72.4	Home	13–11
02-19	Tennessee St.	L 80–89	79.3	Away	13–12
02-21	Tennessee Tech	L 57–72	66.2	Away	13–13
02-26	Eastern Ill.	L 67–71	69.2	Home	13–14
02-28	Western Ill.	W 91–69	70.5	Away	14–14
03-04	Little Rock	W 72–62	77.4	Neutral	15–14
03-05	Southeast Mo. St.	L 66–68	67.9	Neutral	15–15

Roster · 13 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
Anias Futrell	29	32:56	79.6%	17.4	6.0	1.9	2.1	0.9	2.6	2.4	97–206	47.1%	71–202	35.1%	99–119	83.2%	49.9%	55.0%	29.2%	5	31:44 −1:12	79.3%	16.0 −1.4
Dontrez Williams	28	32:33	76.0%	15.2	5.1	2.1	2.7	0.8	2.7	2.6	134–272	49.3%	26–91	28.6%	79–142	55.6%	47.7%	49.9%	39.1%	5	33:37 +1:04	84.0%	15.0 −0.2
Mekhi Cooper	30	30:14	75.6%	5.9	2.7	3.5	1.1	0.0	2.2	2.6	25–89	28.1%	30–101	29.7%	37–48	77.1%	36.8%	41.9%	25.3%	5	34:42 +4:28	86.8%	7.0 +1.1
Jadis Jones	25	34:36	72.1%	15.5	8.8	2.6	1.3	0.8	1.6	3.0	151–264	57.2%	0–8	0.0%†	85–141	60.3%	55.5%	57.9%	51.8%	5	35:22 +0:46	88.4%	12.6 −2.9
Milos Nenadic	30	28:19	70.8%	11.8	6.1	0.9	0.9	1.2	1.7	2.5	111–219	50.7%	15–60	25.0%	88–124	71.0%	47.8%	53.2%	44.4%	5	28:09 −0:11	70.4%	10.4 −1.4
Clayton Jackson	30	25:00	62.5%	6.7	2.7	2.1	0.4	0.0	1.8	1.6	51–109	46.8%	14–67	20.9%	58–73	79.5%	40.9%	48.5%	41.5%	5	19:26 −5:34	48.6%	6.0 −0.7
Robert Lewis	30	15:27	38.6%	4.3	3.4	0.3	0.1	0.6	0.6	2.3	55–89	61.8%†	2–9	22.2%†	13–32	40.6%	59.2%†	57.5%†	32.7%†	5	12:04 −3:23	30.2%	2.6 −1.7
Jeremiah TaltonFew games	8	12:39	8.4%	3.6	2.1	0.3	0.4	0.5	0.1	1.9	0–6	0.0%†	7–22	31.8%†	8–9	88.9%†	37.5%†	45.4%†	32.1%†	—	—	—	—
Kevin AnthonyUnder 100 minutes	15	6:33	8.2%	1.0	1.1	0.0	0.0	0.2	0.3	0.9	5–9	55.6%†	0–0	—	5–12	41.7%†	55.6%†	52.5%†	133.3%†	2	7:23 +0:50	7.4%	2.5 +1.5
Todd BiegUnder 100 minutes	12	2:58	3.0%	0.1	0.2	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.0	0.7	0–0	—	0–0	—	1–2	50.0%†	—	56.8%†	—	2	1:19 −1:39	1.3%	0.0 −0.1
Tidiane d'AlmeidaFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	8	3:22	2.2%	0.3	0.4	0.5	0.1	0.0	0.4	0.1	0–2	0.0%†	0–1	0.0%†	2–2	100.0%†	0.0%†	25.8%†	66.7%†	2	1:19 −2:03	1.3%	0.0 −0.3
Jaylon McDanielFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	2	7:59	1.3%	0.5	2.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	0.5	1.0	0–3	0.0%†	0–0	—	1–2	50.0%†	0.0%†	12.9%†	66.7%†	—	—	—	—
William CampbellFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	2	1:24	0.2%	1.0	1.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1–1	100.0%†	0–0	—	0–0	—	100.0%†	100.0%†	0.0%†	—	—	—	—
Team, games with logs · per game	30 games			74.4	38.2	13.0	not published	4.4	13.6	not published	630–1269	49.6%	165–561	29.4%	476–706	67.4%	48.0%	52.1%	38.6%
Sum of players				74.4	34.3	13.0	8.4	4.4	13.1	17.6	Shooting residuals: see Player Lines Against Team Totals.
Residual: team minus players				0.0	+3.9	0.0	not published	0.0	+0.6	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: $210K; 80% Range $76K to $560K
Tier: Low and other; low evidence
Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4: $170K to $220K; Scenario medians
Players with Figures: 13; 6 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
Anias Futrell	80.1%	$34K	$11K to $100K	17.1%	$28K to $37K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Jadis Jones	77.4%	$47K	$16K to $140K	21.3%	$39K to $50K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Mekhi Cooper	77.0%	$6K	$1K to $36K	3.5%	$5K to $6K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Dontrez Williams	74.9%	$23K	$3K to $75K	13.6%	$19K to $25K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Milos Nenadic	71.3%	$45K	$15K to $135K	20.0%	$36K to $48K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Clayton Jackson	60.5%	$16K	$2K to $54K	9.9%	$13K to $17K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Robert Lewis	37.8%	$6K	$1K to $24K	3.7%	$5K to $6K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Kevin Anthony	7.3%	$2K	$1K to $4K	0.8%	$1K to $2K	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Jeremiah Talton	6.5%	$2K	$1K to $4K	0.8%	$1K to $2K	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Todd Bieg	3.1%	$2K	$1K to $4K	0.8%	$1K to $2K	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Tidiane d'Almeida	2.4%	$2K	$1K to $4K	0.8%	$1K to $2K	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Jaylon McDaniel	1.6%	$2K	$1K to $4K	0.8%	$1K to $2K	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
William Campbell	0.3%	$2K	$1K to $4K	0.8%	$1K to $2K	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Team Pool	—	$210K	$76K to $560K	100%	$170K to $220K	—

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, Lindenwood University (NCAA Division I-FCS)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$1,241,973	Equals expenses (budget identity)
Men's basketball expenses	$1,241,973
Athletics department expenses	$21,376,019
Athletics department revenue	$21,376,019

Team Totalsβ

Season per game, 30 games, 2,191 possessions. Observed box-score sums, unadjusted. Definitions

Team and opponent season totals
Statistic	Team	Opponents
Points	74.4	75.0
Field goals made	26.5	26.5
Field goals attempted	61.0	60.6
3-pointers made	5.5	6.5
3-pointers attempted	18.7	20.0
Free throws made	15.9	15.5
Free throws attempted	23.5	22.7
Offensive rebounds	12.8	11.8
Defensive rebounds	25.4	25.6
Total rebounds	38.2	37.5
Assists	13.0	12.7
Blocks	4.4	4.0
Turnovers	13.6	13.5
Steals	No team figure. Players sum to 251.
Personal fouls	No team figure. Players sum to 527.
Minutes (derived)	200.0	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	2,231	2,231	0	±11.2	0
Field goals made	Reconciled	795	795	0	±4.0	0
Field goals attempted	Reconciled	1,830	1,830	0	±9.2	0
3-pointers made	Reconciled	165	165	0	±2.0	0
3-pointers attempted	Reconciled	561	561	0	±2.8	0
Free throws made	Reconciled	476	476	0	±2.4	0
Free throws attempted	Reconciled	706	706	0	±3.5	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	1,146	1,030	+116	±91.7	0
Assists	Reconciled	390	390	0	±2.0	0
Blocks	Reconciled	131	131	0	±2.0	0
Turnovers	Residual shown	409	392	+17	±12.3	0
Steals	No team figure	not published	251	not published	not published	not published
Personal fouls	No team figure	not published	527	not published	not published	not published
Minutes (derived)	Reconciled	6,000	5,982	+17.9	±120.0	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
Anias Futrell	80.1%	+0.8range +0.0 to +1.8Sufficient evidence
Jadis Jones	77.4%	+1.7range +0.5 to +3.0Sufficient evidence
Mekhi Cooper	77.0%	-2.5range -3.8 to -1.1Sufficient evidence
Dontrez Williams	74.9%	+0.1range -1.1 to +1.6Sufficient evidence
Milos Nenadic	71.3%	+1.7range +0.6 to +3.1Sufficient evidence
Clayton Jackson	60.5%	-0.2range -1.5 to +1.0Sufficient evidence
Robert Lewis	37.8%	-1.5range -2.7 to -0.3Sufficient evidence
Kevin Anthony	7.3%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Jeremiah Talton	6.5%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Todd Bieg	3.1%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Tidiane d'Almeida	2.4%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Jaylon McDaniel	1.6%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
William Campbell	0.3%	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: +9.2range +8.4 to +10.3Sufficient evidence

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

7 valued players hold 95.8% of on-court time. 6 without a value (under 300 possessions) hold 4.2%, counted at replacement level -9.5. Limited-evidence players hold 0.0%.

NIL Methodology · Scheduling and Model-Implied Value