2026-27 Self Scout

Self scout

2026-27

8–5–114 games

Hudl report exports, four files, imported 2026-10-08

The keys, stacked

3 of 3100%1–01 game
2 of 350%3–3–17 games
1 of 375%3–14 games
0 of 350%1–12 games

The keys did not separate results here. At least two: 4–3–1 (57%). One or none: 4–2 (67%). On 14 games that is as likely to be noise as a finding — it is worth watching, not coaching to.

Rows drawn faintly rest on fewer than six games. Trust the shape of the ladder, not any single rung.

Each key on its own

KeyWhen we hit itWhen we didn’tSwing
1We shoot more free throws than they do4–267%4–3–157%+10
2Fewer than 11 turnovers3–2–160%5–363%-3
3Five or more killsNever charted. A key with no data is not a key that was missed.
4Seven or fewer offensive rebounds allowed5–3–163%3–260%+3

Read the free-throw key carefully. Teams that lead late get fouled on purpose, so some of that swing is the win producing the stat rather than the other way round. It looks like the strongest key and is the most contaminated one. Offensive rebounds allowed is the cleanest of the three.

What separates a win from a loss

Each factor’s correlation with point margin, and its average in wins against its average in losses.

Effective field goal percentage — shooting percentage that counts a three as worth more than a two: (made + half the threes made) ÷ attempts. A night of 3-for-8 from the arc beats 4-for-8 inside it, and plain FG% cannot see that.+0.6653.3% vs 47.0%
The share of available rebounds we took at our own end — our defensive rebounds against the total that could have been had. Not a count, so it is not inflated by a night when both teams missed everything.+0.4171.5% vs 61.5%
Turnovers as a share of possessions, rather than a raw count. A team that plays fast gives the ball away more times per game without being any looser with it; this is the version that compares.+0.1019.0% vs 19.4%
Free throws attempted per field goal attempt — how often we get to the line, not how well we shoot once there. Attempts, not makes: a team can raise this while missing every one.-0.170.11 vs 0.13
The share of our own misses we rebounded. Across last season and this summer it barely moved with winning either time, which is the evidence behind sending four back instead of crashing.+0.0631.0% vs 28.0%
Hudl’s own composite rating: one number per possession built from scoring and the events around it. It tracks winning more tightly than any single factor because it already contains the result — read it as a summary of how the night went, not as a cause of it.+0.771.35 vs 1.06

These rest on 14 games. A correlation off a set this small moves a long way on one result, so read the direction and ignore the precision. Anything here that disagrees with a full season is probably the sample talking.

Against the shot standards

Every zone measured against the bar the standards set: 1.10 points per shot. Size is how often we shoot there. Not measured against our own average — the standard does not move.

1RimHighest-value target. Always a good shot, for anyone.Not counted yet
2Free throwsSecond priority. A trip to the line beats most field goal attempts.Not counted yet
3Paint-touch 3Catch-and-shoot three created after the defense has been touched in the paint. Green for anyone, from anywhere.Not counted yet
4Mastery shotA specific player from a specific spot, earned by producing 1.10 points per shot there over enough attempts to believe it.Not counted yet

Tiers one to three need charted film. Whether a three came after a paint touch, and whether it was a catch-and-shoot, are possession facts — no Hudl report carries them. They fill in as games are charted. Tier four is below, and works today.

Rim — 165 of 276, 1.20 points per shot. Clears the 1.10 bar.1.20Paint — 25 of 47, 1.06 points per shot. Just short of the 1.10 bar.1.06Mid — 33 of 79, 0.84 points per shot. Below the 1.10 bar.0.84L Wing — 13 of 50, 0.78 points per shot. Well below the 1.10 bar.0.78R Wing — 14 of 49, 0.86 points per shot. Below the 1.10 bar.0.86L Corner — 20 of 63, 0.95 points per shot. Below the 1.10 bar.0.95R Corner — 16 of 48, 1.00 points per shot. Just short of the 1.10 bar.1.00Top — 5 of 18, 0.83 points per shot. Below the 1.10 bar.0.83

1 of 8 zones clear 1.10, and they take 44% of our shots.

ZoneMadeFG% Pts/shotShare vs 1.10
Rim2pt165–27659.8%1.2043.8%Clears it
Paint2pt25–4753.2%1.067.5%Just short
Mid2pt33–7941.8%0.8412.5%Below
L Wing3pt13–5026.0%0.787.9%Well below
R Wing3pt14–4928.6%0.867.8%Below
L Corner3pt20–6331.7%0.9510.0%Below
R Corner3pt16–4833.3%1.007.6%Just short
Top3pt5–1827.8%0.832.9%Below

Mastery shots — tier four

Judged across all 18 charted players.

Nobody has earned one yet. Outside the rim, no player clears 1.10 on enough attempts to believe it. That is the shrinkage doing its job rather than a verdict on the shooting — raw numbers would hand out several.

Shooting well enough, not yet enough attempts.

  • Braden White · L Corner7 of 14 · 1.25 adjusted

18 players, 630 of 631 attempts charted.

By quarter

PeriodHudl rowseFG%TO%DREB%OREB%FT factor
Overall1451.3%18.4%66.7%29.3%0.12
1st1448.2%17.5%66.1%27.9%0.13
2nd1450.7%19.0%69.9%29.4%0.15
3rd851.4%14.8%67.3%29.1%0.07
4th860.7%23.1%60.4%34.3%0.06

Shooting swings from 48.2% in the 1st to 60.7% in the 4th. That gap is a practice problem, not a talent one.

The free-throw factor climbing late is the deliberate fouling showing up in the data, which is the same effect that inflates key 1.

Game by game

DateOpponentResult1234
Jun 17@ MilfordW 62–49××·×
Jun 13CordovaW 46–28✓×·✓
Jun 13Liberty CreekW 46–44✓✓·✓
Jun 13PortlandW 58–36×✓·✓
Jun 12ECSW 46–32××·✓
Jun 11HarpethW 66–39✓✓·×
Jun 11OaklandL 32–40××·✓
Jun 9@ MBAL 45–46✓×·✓
Jun 9@ Pope John Paul IIL 30–47×✓·✓
Jun 4Stewarts CreekL 53–55✓✓·×
Jun 4GCHST 53–53×✓·✓
Jun 2CommunityW 53–48✓×·×
Jun 2EHHSW 49–35××·✓
May 28LebanonL 54–59××·×

A dot means that key was never charted for that game. It is not a miss.