Algosys College Basketball

Search teams and players

Type a team or player name. Results are alphabetical; players show their 2026 team. Up and Down move, Enter opens the highlighted result or the first one, Esc closes.

Cincinnati

B12 · 2025–26 · Raw net rank 67 · Raw net 8.0 · Tempo 69.2 · 33 Division I games · Through 2026-03-11

All seasons
Record
18–15
18 wins
AdjNet
12.7β
rank 49 of 365
AdjO
108.6β
rank 166 of 365
AdjD
95.9β
rank 11 of 365
AdjT
68.6β
SOS
7.2β
rank 48 of 363
NCSOS
-2.5β
WAB
-2.2β
rank 73 of 363
RR
-1.7β
Exp. W
19.7β

Scouting Report

CategoryOffenseDefenseD-I Average
Efficiency
Efficiency / 100 poss.105.324497.39108.5
Four Factors
Effective FG%50.521347.32751.4
TO / 100 poss.17.020418.28916.7
Offensive rebound %30.617427.34630.6
FTA / FGA %29.432130.06035.0
Shooting
3P%33.917631.03433.9
2P%50.224747.94251.7
FT%68.132471.110272.5
Style
3PA / FGA %43.839.939.5
Assists / FGM %63.754.552.6
Blocks / opp. 2PA %12.16.89.5
Point Distribution
3-pointers %36.832.031.4
2-pointers %46.749.648.8
Free throws %16.518.419.8

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

Rotation Depth

Effective Rotation Size
9.5
Top Three Share of Minutes
43%
Bench Share of Minutes
35%
Players with Logged Minutes
13

Bench: players outside the top five in minutes. Definitions

Schedule and Results

DateOpponentResultPoss.SiteRecord
11-03Western Caro.W 94–6380.0Home1–0
11-07Georgia St.W 74–6475.4Home2–0
11-11DaytonW 74–6281.2Home3–0
11-16Mount St. Mary'sW 72–5573.0Home4–0
11-21LouisvilleL 64–7471.4Neutral4–1
11-24NJITW 94–6776.0Home5–1
11-26Eastern Mich.L 56–6465.6Home5–2
12-01Tarleton St.W 76–5870.9Home6–2
12-05XavierL 74–7973.7Away6–3
12-13GeorgiaL 65–8476.7Neutral6–4
12-17Alabama St.W 88–5169.6Home7–4
12-21ClemsonL 65–6866.9Neutral7–5
12-29LipscombW 89–6272.2Home8–5
01-03HoustonL 60–6763.9Home8–6
01-06West VirginiaL 60–6263.7Away8–7
01-11UCFL 72–7367.0Away8–8
01-14ColoradoW 77–6872.9Home9–8
01-17Iowa St.W 79–7066.3Home10–8
01-21ArizonaL 51–7765.0Away10–9
01-24Arizona St.L 68–8269.5Away10–10
01-28BaylorW 67–5768.5Home11–10
01-31HoustonL 54–7659.4Away11–11
02-05West VirginiaL 54–5960.1Home11–12
02-08UCFW 92–7270.0Home12–12
02-11Kansas St.W 91–6270.4Away13–12
02-15UtahW 69–6563.8Home14–12
02-21KansasW 84–6867.7Away15–12
02-24Texas TechL 68–8060.8Away15–13
02-28Oklahoma St.W 91–6871.8Home16–13
03-03BYUW 90–6871.7Home17–13
03-07TCUL 63–7363.4Away17–14
03-10UtahW 73–6665.6Neutral18–14
03-11UCFL 65–66 1OT76.5Neutral18–15

Roster · 13 players

Player logs in 33 of 33 team games

MinutesPer 40 MinutesShootingLast Five Team Games
PlayerGMPGTeam Min%PtsRebAstStlBlkTOPF2P2P%3P3P%FTFT%eFG%TS%FTA/FGAGMPGMin%Pts/G
Day Day Thomas3330:2275.6%15.24.14.61.30.72.33.248–13336.1%72–18938.1%69–7888.5%48.4%53.5%24.2%533:35 +3:1381.9%15.4 +3.9
Baba Miller3131:4074.1%16.513.04.70.91.52.82.9138–22860.5%10–5219.2%98–14965.8%54.6%58.5%53.2%533:29 +1:4981.7%9.0 −4.0
Moustapha Thiam3127:0763.5%18.910.50.81.12.42.02.9145–25357.3%15–5228.8%62–9863.3%54.9%57.0%32.1%532:44 +5:3779.9%16.0 +3.2
Jalen Celestine3223:3657.0%14.65.32.21.50.41.23.225–5149.0%70–17340.5%15–2365.2%†58.0%58.7%10.3%530:10 +6:3473.6%13.6 +5.0
Jizzle James2330:0752.3%14.52.92.80.90.22.22.654–12343.9%42–9544.2%17–2277.3%†53.7%55.1%10.1%530:28 +0:2174.3%10.4 −0.5
Sencire Harris3116:5239.4%13.66.43.62.80.41.95.055–12544.0%6–3318.2%†50–8062.5%40.5%46.1%50.6%511:23 −5:2827.8%2.4 −3.3
Kerr Kriisa1920:4629.8%11.22.55.80.70.22.41.64–850.0%31–9732.0%9–1275.0%†48.1%49.9%11.4%————
Keyshuan Tillery3112:2228.9%12.24.05.81.70.43.93.224–6040.0%16–4833.3%†21–3070.0%44.4%48.3%27.8%518:54 +6:3146.1%6.4 +2.6
Shon Abaev2415:5428.8%17.57.22.70.90.53.02.826–5448.1%26–10125.7%37–5764.9%41.9%46.4%36.8%47:01 −8:5213.7%2.0 −5.0
Tyler McKinley2512:0922.9%5.87.12.11.10.81.45.021–3953.8%†0–20.0%†2–922.2%†51.2%†48.9%†22.0%†22:24 −9:452.3%1.0 −0.8
Halvine Dzellat268:1416.2%10.39.50.60.70.62.14.921–3756.8%†0–10.0%†13–1872.2%†55.3%†59.9%†47.4%†56:35 −1:3916.1%1.2 −0.9
Jordi Rodriguez157:468.8%11.75.82.41.00.01.71.72–633.3%†8–2927.6%†6–1060.0%†40.0%†43.1%†28.6%†————
Grant Darbyshire71:110.6%0.04.80.00.00.04.80.00–40.0%†0–0—0–0—0.0%†0.0%†0.0%†21:28 +0:171.4%0.0 0.0
Team, games with logs · per 40 team minutes33 games72.837.216.54.211.7563–112150.2%296–87233.9%399–58668.1%50.5%53.6%29.4%
Sum of players72.834.216.56.24.211.215.9Shooting residuals: see Player Lines Against Team Totals.
Residual: team minus players0.0+3.00.00.0+0.5

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
$3.55M
80% Range $2.50M to $5.00M
Tier
Power 4
medium evidence
Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4
$3.55M in all four
Scenario medians
Players with Figures
13
1 floor only
Players in possession-share order
PlayerPoss. ShareSpeculative Best Guess80% RangeRange GraphicMedian % of Team PoolScenarios Z1 to Z4Floor PartEvidence and Flags
Day Day Thomas76.1%$585K$385K to $905K16.2%$585K in all four$26KSufficient evidence
Baba Miller73.9%$780K$505K to $1.35M21.3%$780K in all four$26KSufficient evidence
Moustapha Thiam64.9%$500K$305K to $795K13.9%$500K in all four$26KSufficient evidence
Jalen Celestine56.7%$465K$300K to $745K12.7%$465K in all four$26KSufficient evidence
Jizzle James51.7%$220K$54K to $380K6.7%$220K in all four$26KSufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Sencire Harris38.4%$225K$105K to $365K6.7%$225K in all four$26KSufficient evidence
Keyshuan Tillery30.5%$130K$37K to $230K3.9%$130K in all four$26KSufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Kerr Kriisa30.0%$185K$93K to $290K5.4%$185K in all four$26KSufficient evidence
Shon Abaev28.9%$135K$43K to $240K4.1%$135K in all four$26KSufficient evidence
Tyler McKinley23.2%$79K$24K to $155K2.4%$79K in all four$26KSufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Halvine Dzellat15.4%$73K$29K to $125K2.2%$73K in all four$26KSufficient evidence
Jordi Rodriguez9.5%$55K$27K to $91K1.6%$55K in all four$26KLimited evidence
Grant Darbyshire0.8%$26K$15K to $43K0.8%$26K in all four$26KFloor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Team Pool—$3.55M$2.50M to $5.00M100%$3.55M in all four—

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, University of Cincinnati-Main Campus (NCAA Division I-FBS)
MeasureSchool-Reported AmountNote
Men's basketball revenue$12,321,038Equals expenses (budget identity)
Men's basketball expenses$12,321,038
Athletics department expenses$119,327,103
Athletics department revenue$119,327,103

Team Totalsβ

Season per 40 minutes, 33 games, 2,291 possessions. Observed box-score sums, unadjusted. Per 40 uses 1325 game minutes, 5 per overtime period. Definitions

StatisticTeamOpponents
Points72.867.3
Field goals made25.923.9
Field goals attempted60.258.0
3-pointers made8.97.2
3-pointers attempted26.323.2
Free throws made12.012.4
Free throws attempted17.717.4
Offensive rebounds11.19.8
Defensive rebounds26.125.1
Total rebounds37.234.9
Assists16.513.0
Blocks4.22.3
Turnovers11.712.6
StealsNo team figure. Players sum to 207.
Personal foulsNo team figure. Players sum to 527.
Minutes (derived)200.0

33 of 33 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

StatisticStatusTeam Total, Logged GamesSum of PlayersResidualToleranceTeam Total, Games Without Logs
PointsReconciled2,4132,4130±12.10
Field goals madeReconciled8598590±4.30
Field goals attemptedReconciled1,9931,9930±10.00
3-pointers madeReconciled2962960±2.00
3-pointers attemptedReconciled8728720±4.40
Free throws madeReconciled3993990±2.00
Free throws attemptedReconciled5865860±2.90
Offensive reboundsNo player split
Defensive reboundsNo player split
Total reboundsReconciled1,2311,133+98±98.50
AssistsReconciled5475470±2.70
BlocksReconciled1401400±2.00
TurnoversResidual shown389371+18±11.70
StealsNo team figure207
Personal foulsNo team figure527
Minutes (derived)Reconciled6,6256,597+28.1±132.50

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.
PlayerPoss. ShareNet and RangeβRange Graphic
Day Day Thomas76.1%+3.6range +2.3 to +4.6Sufficient evidence
Baba Miller73.9%+4.9range +3.8 to +5.9Sufficient evidence
Moustapha Thiam64.9%+3.3range +2.2 to +4.5Sufficient evidence
Jalen Celestine56.7%+3.7range +2.4 to +5.0Sufficient evidence
Jizzle James51.7%+0.8range -0.3 to +2.4Sufficient evidence
Sencire Harris38.4%+2.0range +0.8 to +3.3Sufficient evidence
Keyshuan Tillery30.5%+0.5range -0.7 to +1.9Sufficient evidence
Kerr Kriisa30.0%+2.0range +0.9 to +3.3Sufficient evidence
Shon Abaev28.9%+1.0range -0.4 to +2.3Sufficient evidence
Tyler McKinley23.2%-0.4range -1.6 to +0.8Sufficient evidence
Halvine Dzellat15.4%+0.4range -0.9 to +1.4Sufficient evidence
Jordi Rodriguez9.5%+0.4range -0.2 to +1.1Limited evidence
Grant Darbyshire0.8%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
+12.0range +11.2 to +12.9Sufficient evidence

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

12 valued players hold 99.8% of on-court time. 1 without a value (under 300 possessions) holds 0.2%, counted at replacement level -9.5. Limited-evidence players hold 1.9%.

NIL Methodology · Scheduling and Model-Implied Value