Embry-Riddle (FL)
Model Outputs
2025-2026
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 → | 1090 (#100) | - |
| Bradley-Terry Bradley-Terry Static logistic paired-comparison model with one team strength parameter. More → | 1065 (#128) | - |
| Bradley-Terry Recency Bradley-Terry Recency Static Bradley-Terry with exponential recency weights on newer games. More → | 970 (#434) | HCA +95 elo |
| Margin Margin Linear team-strength model fit on point differential instead of binary wins. More → | +12.0 (#75) | HCA +2.7 |
| Margin Recency Margin Recency Margin regression with exponential recency weights on newer games. More → | +4.2 (#257) | HCA +3.3 |
| Pythagorean Pythagorean Pythagorean win expectation from raw points scored and allowed. More → | 0.717 (#56) | - |
| Efficiency Efficiency Tempo-adjusted efficiency version of Pythagorean ratings. More → | 0.964 (#146) | NetEff +30.6 |
| Adjusted Efficiency Adjusted Efficiency Opponent-adjusted efficiency model with separate offensive and defensive components. More → | 0.873 (#60) | AdjNet +16.7 |
| Log Adjusted Log Adjusted Log-scale adjusted efficiency model that downweights blowout leverage. More → | 0.875 (#59) | AdjNet +16.8 |
| Points Off/Def Points Off/Def Raw points regression with separate offensive and defensive team parameters. More → | 0.776 (#45) | AdjO 88.5 | AdjD 74.9 |
| Points Off/Def Recency Points Off/Def Recency Off/def points regression with exponential recency weights. More → | 0.584 (#167) | AdjO 83.4 | AdjD 79.7 |
| Core Ensemble Core Ensemble Equal-logit blend of Elo, recency BT, recency margin, log-adjusted pyth, and points off/def. More → | 0.610 (#225) | 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. More → | 0.596 (#234) | Blend of Elo, BT, Margin, PythLog, PtsOD |
| Dynamic Bradley-Terry Dynamic Bradley-Terry Time-evolving paired-comparison model with latent team strength drift. More → | 1005 (#226) | RD 93 | GP 21 |
2026 Schedule & Results
| Date | Vs/At | Opponent | Result | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-11-15 | @ | Morehouse | W | 73 - 67 |
| 2025-11-16 | @ | Trevecca Nazarene | L | 82 - 88 |
| 2025-11-20 | @ | Flagler | L | 77 - 81 |
| 2025-11-22 | vs | Saint Leo | W | 104 - 80 |
| 2025-11-29 | vs | Valdosta St. | L | 91 - 103 |
| 2025-12-03 | vs | Trinity Baptist | W | 102 - 73 |
| 2025-12-06 | @ | Nova Southeastern | L | 81 - 96 |
| 2025-12-13 | vs | Barry | W | 77 - 70 |
| 2025-12-19 | vs | Fort Lauderdale | W | 104 - 79 |
| 2025-12-20 | vs | Newberry | L | 89 - 94 |
| 2025-12-31 | @ | Florida Tech | W | 95 - 62 |
| 2026-01-03 | vs | Eckerd | W | 99 - 73 |
| 2026-01-07 | vs | Palm Beach Atl. | L | 66 - 70 |
| 2026-01-10 | vs | Lynn | W | 101 - 79 |
| 2026-01-14 | @ | Fla. Southern | L | 83 - 89 |
| 2026-01-17 | vs | Tampa | L | 87 - 107 |
| 2026-01-21 | @ | Rollins | L | 88 - 96 |
| 2026-01-24 | @ | Eckerd | - | Incomplete score |
| 2026-01-28 | vs | Florida Tech | - | Incomplete score |
| 2026-01-31 | @ | Barry | L | 80 - 81 |
| 2026-02-07 | @ | Tampa | L | 93 - 104 |
| 2026-02-11 | vs | Rollins | W | 71 - 66 |
| 2026-02-14 | vs | Fla. Southern | L | 82 - 87 |
| 2026-02-18 | vs | Nova Southeastern | L | 92 - 98 |
| 2026-02-21 | @ | Lynn | W | 88 - 78 |
| 2026-02-25 | @ | Palm Beach Atl. | L | 75 - 90 |
| 2026-02-28 | @ | Saint Leo | W | 88 - 79 |
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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jared Berry | - | 27 | 32.4 | 20.6 | 5.0 | 4.9 | 1.4 | 0.1 | 3.7 | 15.4 | 12.8 | - | - | - | - | 46.2 | 39.5 | 86.5 | - | 58.3 | 52.3 |
| Dawson Barr | - | 25 | 27.1 | 13.2 | 4.5 | 1.2 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 1.7 | 10.6 | 8.0 | - | - | - | - | 45.7 | 45.0 | 66.7 | - | 59.2 | 58.3 |
| Jack Klinger | - | 27 | 29.5 | 13.0 | 5.9 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.5 | 7.3 | 12.6 | - | - | - | - | 72.2 | 0.0 | 70.3 | - | 73.5 | 72.2 |
| Evan Montanari | - | 25 | 21.6 | 8.4 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 7.9 | 4.0 | - | - | - | - | 36.4 | 35.0 | 76.2 | - | 50.7 | 49.0 |
| Braeden Moore | - | 27 | 19.2 | 7.1 | 3.2 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.6 | 6.2 | 4.6 | - | - | - | - | 38.7 | 40.8 | 88.9 | - | 55.5 | 54.5 |
| Logan Lewis | - | 26 | 19.7 | 6.8 | 4.2 | 2.0 | 0.7 | 0.1 | 1.3 | 5.0 | 7.4 | - | - | - | - | 49.6 | 25.0 | 73.6 | - | 57.3 | 52.7 |
| Clarens Pierre | - | 26 | 22.2 | 5.9 | 5.7 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 3.8 | 9.3 | - | - | - | - | 60.2 | 28.6 | 61.8 | - | 63.0 | 61.2 |
| Chalier Torres | - | 17 | 12.0 | 5.7 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 1.1 | 4.8 | 3.7 | - | - | - | - | 35.8 | 31.7 | 86.7 | - | 51.5 | 43.8 |
| Landen Harwood | - | 27 | 14.1 | 5.5 | 2.8 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 4.3 | 5.0 | - | - | - | - | 47.8 | 21.7 | 76.7 | - | 55.3 | 50.0 |
| Relja Vranesevic | - | 16 | 7.8 | 3.2 | 1.8 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.7 | 1.6 | 4.1 | - | - | - | - | 64.0 | 0 | 86.4 | - | 73.5 | 64.0 |
| Milan Skoric | - | 9 | 3.8 | 2.3 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 2.4 | -0.1 | - | - | - | - | 31.8 | 31.8 | 0 | - | 47.7 | 47.7 |
| Theo Stangas | - | 8 | 2.6 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 0.6 | - | - | - | - | 50.0 | 40.0 | 0 | - | 66.7 | 66.7 |
| Ryan Mueller | - | 6 | 2.8 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.2 | 0.2 | - | - | - | - | 14.3 | 0.0 | 100.0 | - | 20.2 | 14.3 |
| Walker Jackson | - | 6 | 4.8 | 0.5 | 1.7 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 1.0 | - | - | - | - | 20.0 | 0.0 | 50.0 | - | 25.5 | 20.0 |
Numbers/Game vs RAPM
Not enough players with both Numbers/Game and RAPM to plot.
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