UChicago
Model Outputs
2024-2025
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 → | 1114 (#56) | - |
| Bradley-Terry Bradley-Terry Static logistic paired-comparison model with one team strength parameter. More → | 1206 (#25) | - |
| Margin Margin Linear team-strength model fit on point differential instead of binary wins. More → | +21.1 (#22) | HCA +2.4 |
| Pythagorean Pythagorean Pythagorean win expectation from raw points scored and allowed. More → | 0.744 (#336) | - |
| Efficiency Efficiency Tempo-adjusted efficiency version of Pythagorean ratings. More → | 0.631 (#190) | NetEff +4.1 |
| Adjusted Efficiency Adjusted Efficiency Opponent-adjusted efficiency model with separate offensive and defensive components. More → | 0.972 (#149) | AdjNet +30.7 |
| Log Adjusted Log Adjusted Log-scale adjusted efficiency model that downweights blowout leverage. More → | 0.974 (#150) | AdjNet +30.7 |
| Points Off/Def Points Off/Def Raw points regression with separate offensive and defensive team parameters. More → | 0.848 (#150) | AdjO 70.6 | AdjD 51.7 |
2025 Schedule & Results
| Date | Vs/At | Opponent | Result | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-11-08 | vs | Carthage | W | 58 - 48 |
| 2024-11-12 | @ | North Park | W | 73 - 53 |
| 2024-11-15 | vs | Millikin | W | 61 - 45 |
| 2024-11-17 | vs | Middlebury | W | 66 - 41 |
| 2024-11-22 | @ | Concordia Chicago | W | 60 - 52 |
| 2024-11-26 | vs | Carroll (WI) | W | 81 - 70 |
| 2024-11-30 | @ | Albion | W | 66 - 47 |
| 2024-12-04 | @ | North Central (IL) | W | 66 - 62 |
| 2024-12-17 | @ | Ill. Wesleyan | L | 52 - 71 |
| 2025-01-02 | @ | Pomona-Pitzer | W | 82 - 75 |
| 2025-01-03 | @ | Claremont-M-S | W | 68 - 60 |
| 2025-01-11 | @ | WashU | L | 45 - 72 |
| 2025-01-17 | vs | Carnegie Mellon | W | 62 - 54 |
| 2025-01-19 | vs | CWRU | W | 64 - 51 |
| 2025-01-24 | @ | Emory | L | 47 - 52 |
| 2025-01-26 | @ | Rochester (NY) | L | 55 - 63 |
| 2025-01-31 | vs | NYU | L | 49 - 76 |
| 2025-02-02 | vs | Brandeis | L | 66 - 72 |
| 2025-02-07 | @ | NYU | L | 58 - 80 |
| 2025-02-09 | @ | Brandeis | W | 69 - 55 |
| 2025-02-14 | @ | Carnegie Mellon | L | 57 - 60 |
| 2025-02-16 | @ | CWRU | W | 67 - 52 |
| 2025-02-21 | vs | Emory | L | 55 - 62 |
| 2025-02-23 | vs | Rochester (NY) | L | 53 - 54 |
| 2025-03-01 | vs | WashU | W | 65 - 55 |
2025 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/G | PM/40 | FG% | 3P% | FT% | RAPM | TS% | eFG% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sophia North | - | 25 | 29.6 | 11.4 | 3.6 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 2.2 | 11.0 | 4.2 | -36 | -1.4 | -1.5 | 37.2 | 33.9 | 68.8 | -0.31 | 49.6 | 48.2 |
| Bella Alfaro | - | 25 | 30.5 | 10.2 | 3.6 | 2.1 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 1.9 | 7.4 | 7.2 | 6 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 38.6 | 37.7 | 83.3 | 0.23 | 57.7 | 50.3 |
| Kate Gross | - | 25 | 28.6 | 8.3 | 4.6 | 2.2 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 2.1 | 7.7 | 6.4 | -15 | -0.5 | -0.5 | 40.4 | 38.3 | 64.4 | 0.4 | 48.9 | 46.4 |
| Bri Simpson | - | 25 | 19.7 | 7.4 | 3.1 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 1.9 | 7.2 | 3.5 | -38 | -1.2 | -1.9 | 38.5 | 24.1 | 70.7 | 0.07 | 45.5 | 40.5 |
| Kasi Samuda | - | 25 | 19.5 | 7.0 | 6.2 | 1.2 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 1.4 | 5.4 | 9.0 | 25 | 0.8 | 1.1 | 46.3 | 0 | 68.5 | 1.1 | 52.3 | 46.3 |
| Annabelle Spotts | - | 23 | 17.3 | 6.3 | 4.6 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 1.6 | 5.3 | 5.9 | -26 | -0.8 | -1.4 | 46.3 | 33.3 | 76.3 | 0.19 | 53.0 | 48.3 |
| Chris Sanders | - | 25 | 21.5 | 4.6 | 2.5 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 0.1 | 1.6 | 4.3 | 3.6 | -1 | -0.0 | -0.0 | 36.4 | 26.1 | 75.0 | 0.4 | 47.1 | 42.1 |
| Alexis Clark | - | 18 | 8.1 | 3.9 | 2.7 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 3.6 | 3.1 | -47 | -2.2 | -5.8 | 43.1 | 0 | 77.8 | 0.04 | 48.0 | 43.1 |
| Caroline Workman | - | 25 | 23.8 | 3.6 | 4.0 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 0.6 | 1.4 | 3.9 | 5.5 | -45 | -1.4 | -1.7 | 34.7 | 31.8 | 63.6 | -0.06 | 43.3 | 41.8 |
| Paige Lim | - | 25 | 2.9 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 2 | 0.1 | 1.1 | 25.0 | 22.2 | 0 | 0.03 | 33.3 | 33.3 |
| Lauren Miller | - | 20 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.5 | -3 | -0.4 | -0.5 | 0.0 | 0 | 70.0 | 0.03 | 64.8 | 0.0 |
| Kendall Braaten | - | 9 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | - | - | - | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 |
| Amber Williams | - | 13 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 79 | 2.7 | 6.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1.4 | 0 | 0 |
| Lindsey Carter | - | 8 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 19 | 0.8 | 1.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -0.29 | 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