๐Ÿปโฌ‡๏ธ๐Ÿ€

Cal Poly Mustangs

Also known as: Cal Poly Mustangs
Program History

2026 Team Stats (30 games)

56.9
PPG
72.4
Opp
-15.5
Margin
37.9%
FG%
26.9%
3P%
73.4%
FT%
34.8
RPG
10.6
APG
20.1
TO
71.2
Est. poss./game
55.0
Adj PPG
73.2
Adj Opp PPG
#335
Scoring Rank

Model Outputs

2025-2026
Catalog

Output is shown as model rating with league rank in parentheses when available.

Model Output Notes
Elo Elo Streaming paired-comparison rating with recency baked into sequential updates. More โ†’ 496 (#357) -
Bradley-Terry Bradley-Terry Static logistic paired-comparison model with one team strength parameter. More โ†’ 573 (#356) -
Bradley-Terry Recency Bradley-Terry Recency Static Bradley-Terry with exponential recency weights on newer games. HCA +106 elo More โ†’ 809 (#358) HCA +106 elo
Margin Margin Linear team-strength model fit on point differential instead of binary wins. HCA +2.4 More โ†’ -18.7 (#331) HCA +2.4
Margin Recency Margin Recency Margin regression with exponential recency weights on newer games. HCA +2.6 More โ†’ -18.7 (#339) HCA +2.6
Pythagorean Pythagorean Pythagorean win expectation from raw points scored and allowed. More โ†’ 0.029 (#356) -
Efficiency Efficiency Tempo-adjusted efficiency version of Pythagorean ratings. NetEff -27.2 More โ†’ 0.029 (#356) NetEff -27.2
Adjusted Efficiency Adjusted Efficiency Opponent-adjusted efficiency model with separate offensive and defensive components. AdjNet -28.1 More โ†’ 0.037 (#333) AdjNet -28.1
Log Adjusted Log Adjusted Log-scale adjusted efficiency model that downweights blowout leverage. AdjNet -28.7 More โ†’ 0.033 (#334) AdjNet -28.7
Points Off/Def Points Off/Def Raw points regression with separate offensive and defensive team parameters. AdjO 55.0 | AdjD 73.2 More โ†’ 0.161 (#335) AdjO 55.0 | AdjD 73.2
Points Off/Def Recency Points Off/Def Recency Off/def points regression with exponential recency weights. AdjO 55.8 | AdjD 69.8 More โ†’ 0.218 (#349) AdjO 55.8 | AdjD 69.8
Core Ensemble Core Ensemble Equal-logit blend of Elo, recency BT, recency margin, log-adjusted pyth, and points off/def. Blend of Elo, BT, Margin, PythLog, PtsOD More โ†’ 0.100 (#349) Blend of Elo, BT, Margin, PythLog, PtsOD
Recency Ensemble Recency Ensemble Equal-logit blend of Elo, recency BT, recency margin, log-adjusted pyth, and recency points off/def. Blend of Elo, BT, Margin, PythLog, PtsOD More โ†’ 0.107 (#351) Blend of Elo, BT, Margin, PythLog, PtsOD
Dynamic Bradley-Terry Dynamic Bradley-Terry Time-evolving paired-comparison model with latent team strength drift. RD 157 | GP 28 More โ†’ 589 (#355) RD 157 | GP 28

2026 Schedule & Results

2026 Roster

Minutes by Position

The surface stays filled across the five on-court roles. Use the labels or legend to isolate how each player absorbs guard-to-big minutes.

Player Pos GP MIN PTS REB AST STL BLK TO FGA Numbers PM PM GP PM/G PM/40 FG% 3P% FT% RAPM TS% eFG%
Vanessa McManus Vanessa McManus G 26 32.1 15.9 4.7 1.3 0.7 0.1 3.0 13.4 6.3 -208 22 -9.5 -11.8 40.5 29.8 79.2 2.55 51.5 45.7
Charish Thompson Charish Thompson F 29 29.9 14.2 5.3 1.1 0.8 0.4 2.8 10.9 8.2 -216 24 -9.0 -12.1 45.3 33.3 81.6 1.29 54.5 47.0
Nora Perez Nora Perez F 26 22.4 5.8 4.2 1.2 0.8 0.3 1.7 5.7 4.8 -260 22 -11.8 -21.2 43.6 25.0 45.7 -2.62 45.6 45.0
Dulci Vail Dulci Vail F 18 18.1 5.8 2.8 0.7 0.3 0.3 2.0 5.4 2.5 -108 17 -6.4 -14.8 39.2 43.8 80.8 -2.38 48.0 42.8
Madison Butcher Madison Butcher G 15 22.3 5.0 2.9 0.3 0.8 0.1 1.3 4.1 3.7 -114 11 -10.4 -19.4 43.5 39.5 100.0 -0.84 58.0 55.6
Alana Goosby Alana Goosby G 27 30.8 4.4 3.7 3.4 1.1 0.2 3.6 5.6 3.7 -316 23 -13.7 -17.8 34.0 21.9 55.6 -3.65 37.7 36.3
Avery Knapp Avery Knapp F 24 12.7 4.0 2.7 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.9 3.0 3.8 -161 20 -8.1 -25.8 38.4 26.7 83.3 -2.95 51.9 41.1
Katie Peiffer Katie Peiffer G 21 11.0 3.4 1.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.6 4.2 1.1 -126 17 -7.4 -27.6 25.8 21.2 70.6 -4.5 37.3 33.7
Gabby Robinson Gabby Robinson G 11 25.5 3.1 3.9 1.3 0.5 0.1 2.0 4.1 2.7 -152 8 -19.0 -25.1 31.1 0.0 60.0 -2.79 34.4 31.1
Arissa Garcia Arissa Garcia G 23 21.2 3.0 2.6 1.5 1.2 0.0 3.1 3.9 1.3 -230 20 -11.5 -22.3 26.7 17.4 60.0 -4.8 33.9 28.9
Jordan Billing Jordan Billing G 26 13.0 2.2 1.4 0.5 0.7 0.1 0.7 2.5 1.7 -183 23 -8.0 -26.2 31.2 23.3 66.7 -6.56 41.9 39.1
Ana Moleon Hidalgo Ana Moleon Hidalgo G 15 14.0 2.0 1.3 0.8 0.4 0.1 1.5 2.7 0.4 -55 11 -5.0 -16.0 32.5 40.0 33.3 -0.69 35.2 35.0
Gillian Bears Gillian Bears F 21 8.9 1.6 1.9 0.0 0.2 0.1 1.0 2.0 0.9 -116 16 -7.2 -38.9 26.8 20.0 61.1 -5.9 34.8 28.0
Maya Sharvit Maya Sharvit F 9 6.7 1.6 2.0 0.4 0.1 0.1 1.1 1.0 2.1 -20 9 -2.2 -13.0 66.7 100.0 50.0 -1.19 70.9 72.2
Vivian Franklin Vivian Franklin G 19 7.8 1.4 1.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 1.1 2.4 -0.6 -81 14 -5.8 -30.9 21.7 18.8 0.0 -4.71 27.7 28.3
Ella Skrzyniarz Ella Skrzyniarz G 1 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0 0 0 - 0 0

Numbers/Game vs RAPM

X-axis = Numbers/Game (PTS+REB+AST+STL+BLK-TO-FGA), Y-axis = RAPM.

Advanced: Numbers = PTS+REB+AST+STL+BLK-TO-FGA, PM = total +/-, PM/G = per game, PM/40 = per 40 minutes, RAPM = Regularized Adj Plus-Minus, TS% = True Shooting, eFG% = Effective FG

2025-2026 Shot Zones

1618 located field-goal attempts in 30 games (ESPN). Each zone is coloured by the player with the largest share of the team's made-shot points there (left) and of its misses there (right).

Thompson25% Thompson27% Thompson31% McManus39% McManus35% Billing38% Butcher38% McManus24% McManus31% McManus46%
Points: who the team's points here most likely come from
Thompson21% Thompson24% Thompson25% Thompson34% McManus37% Peiffer27% McManus29% McManus23% McManus28% McManus31%
Misses: who misses most here

Vanessa McManusCharish ThompsonMadison ButcherKatie PeifferJordan Billing

Zone FGM-FGA FG% Pts Top scorer Runner-up Most misses Runner-up
Restricted area 210-373 56.3 420 Charish Thompson 25% (104 pts) Vanessa McManus 18% (74 pts) Charish Thompson 21% (34 misses) Vanessa McManus 15% (25 misses)
Paint (non-RA) 175-510 34.3 350 Charish Thompson 27% (94 pts) Vanessa McManus 18% (62 pts) Charish Thompson 24% (80 misses) Nora Perez 15% (51 misses)
Mid-range left 29-85 34.1 58 Charish Thompson 31% (18 pts) Vanessa McManus 28% (16 pts) Charish Thompson 25% (14 misses) Vanessa McManus 20% (11 misses)
Mid-range center 44-85 51.8 88 Vanessa McManus 39% (34 pts) Charish Thompson 34% (30 pts) Charish Thompson 34% (14 misses) Vanessa McManus 32% (13 misses)
Mid-range right 34-113 30.1 68 Vanessa McManus 35% (24 pts) Charish Thompson 26% (18 pts) Vanessa McManus 37% (29 misses) Alana Goosby 15% (12 misses)
Left corner 3 8-38 21.1 24 Jordan Billing 38% (9 pts) Ana Moleon Hidalgo 12% (3 pts) Katie Peiffer 27% (8 misses) Jordan Billing 17% (5 misses)
Right corner 3 13-34 38.2 39 Madison Butcher 38% (15 pts) Jordan Billing 15% (6 pts) Vanessa McManus 29% (6 misses) Alana Goosby 14% (3 misses)
Above-break 3 left 37-138 26.8 111 Vanessa McManus 24% (27 pts) Katie Peiffer 22% (24 pts) Vanessa McManus 23% (23 misses) Katie Peiffer 20% (20 misses)
Above-break 3 center 29-98 29.6 87 Vanessa McManus 31% (27 pts) Charish Thompson 24% (21 pts) Vanessa McManus 28% (19 misses) Charish Thompson 16% (11 misses)
Above-break 3 right 35-144 24.3 105 Vanessa McManus 46% (48 pts) Madison Butcher 11% (12 pts) Vanessa McManus 31% (34 misses) Vivian Franklin 12% (13 misses)