On the court
Off the court
Combo size
Columns
| Workload | Efficiency | Four Factors | Opponent | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lineup | |||||||||||||
| Totals | 2,246 | 1,027 | -16.0— | 101.3— | 117.3— | 46.2%— | 32.4%— | 19.0%— | 30.6%— | 54.1%— | 63.7%— | 19.3%— | 46.1%— |
| Jamerson IIS. Jamerson IIClouetK. ClouetTrouetS. TrouetDahlkeD. DahlkeDuckettT. Duckett | 159 | 83 | -22.9— | 100.2— | 123.1— | 51.1%— | 32.5%— | 22.1%— | 26.3%— | 66.0%— | 66.7%— | 21.0%— | 26.4%— |
| Jamerson IIS. Jamerson IITrouetS. TrouetBradley Jr.K. Bradley Jr.DahlkeD. DahlkeDuckettT. Duckett | 77 | 39 | -5.5— | 94.8— | 100.3— | 45.3%— | 26.8%— | 19.5%— | 29.7%— | 42.5%— | 74.5%— | 13.8%— | 43.3%— |
| Jamerson IIS. Jamerson IITrouetS. TrouetDahlkeD. DahlkePierreB. PierreDuckettT. Duckett | 65 | 33 | -12.2— | 102.9— | 115.1— | 43.7%— | 32.5%— | 12.3%— | 23.8%— | 59.6%— | 62.1%— | 24.2%— | 36.5%— |
| Jamerson IIS. Jamerson IITrouetS. TrouetBradley Jr.K. Bradley Jr.DahlkeD. DahlkePierreB. Pierre | 53 | 28 | -26.9— | 77.2— | 104.1— | 34.8%— | 40.5%— | 28.2%— | 32.6%— | 54.1%— | 71.9%— | 18.0%— | 24.5%— |
| Jamerson IIS. Jamerson IITrouetS. TrouetWebbK. WebbMunceyD. MunceyDuckettT. Duckett | 48 | 26 | 0.7— | 91.3— | 90.7— | 38.6%— | 29.0%— | 14.5%— | 29.5%— | 47.4%— | 79.2%— | 21.6%— | 18.4%— |
| Jamerson IIS. Jamerson IIClouetK. ClouetTrouetS. TrouetChammaaJ. ChammaaDuckettT. Duckett | 40 | 16 | 71.3— | 108.8— | 37.5— | 50.0%— | 36.4%— | 22.8%— | 60.0%— | 15.8%— | 76.5%— | 40.3%— | 63.2%— |
Only combinations that played at least 30 possessions together are listed. Percentiles rank each row against every Division I five-man unit that cleared the same floor in 2024-25. +/-, GP, POSS, MINS and Pace are unranked: they scale with playing time, so a combination and a single lineup are not comparable on them.
