Southland

Southeastern Louisiana

18-14NET#197Avg NET Rank, last 5 seasons: #261Coach: David Kiefer

Players

Columns

ON/OFF Difference

How the team's numbers change with each player on the floor. Ranked against every qualifying player in Division I.

	Possessions			Efficiency			Four Factors				Opponent

Sam Hines Jr.	1,790	326	84.6%	+13.1—	+5.0—	−8.2—	+1.3—	+4.4—	−0.4—	+4.5—	−0.5—	+4.4—	+3.1—	−5.3—
Jakevion Buckley	1,691	425	79.9%	+17.7—	+10.1—	−7.6—	+2.4—	+3.5—	−2.6—	+8.7—	−2.0—	+2.9—	+2.1—	+1.9—
Jeremy Elyzee	1,492	624	70.5%	+4.0—	+7.0—	+2.9—	+5.2—	−0.9—	+0.4—	+4.9—	+6.2—	+4.7—	+0.1—	−3.0—
Brody Rowbury	1,423	692	67.3%	+5.4—	+9.7—	+4.3—	+2.5—	+6.3—	−1.1—	+3.9—	+3.2—	+1.1—	+0.9—	−6.8—
Kam Burton	980	1,136	46.3%	−4.3—	−7.1—	−2.8—	−3.6—	−6.3—	−2.8—	−11.4—	−3.5—	−4.2—	+0.0—	−4.7—
Carlos Paez	892	1,224	42.1%	+1.7—	+3.0—	+1.3—	+0.6—	+2.4—	+0.3—	+3.1—	+1.1—	+1.4—	+0.1—	+1.2—
Jaiden Lawrence	693	1,422	32.8%	−2.3—	+0.8—	+3.1—	+0.4—	−0.8—	+0.9—	+12.7—	+2.4—	+3.1—	−0.7—	+7.4—
Kyle Edison	466	1,650	22.0%	−3.5—	+3.2—	+6.7—	+1.9—	−0.1—	−0.3—	−4.3—	+0.4—	−5.5—	−0.6—	+12.6—
Thomas Tut	387	1,729	18.3%	−8.4—	−15.4—	−7.0—	−3.8—	−5.3—	+3.3—	−9.1—	−5.3—	+0.5—	−2.7—	−6.4—
Ahmed Essahaty	338	1,778	16.0%	−10.0—	−6.1—	+3.9—	−2.1—	−2.2—	+1.8—	−3.1—	+1.3—	+0.1—	−1.9—	+0.8—
CJ Booker	162	1,954	7.7%	−22.4—	−19.7—	+2.7—	−7.2—	−6.4—	+1.1—	−13.4—	−1.7—	−11.5—	+2.4—	+4.4—
Asher Boney	136	1,979	6.4%	−21.7—	−17.9—	+3.8—	−10.0—	+0.0—	+0.9—	−17.5—	−1.4—	−3.8—	−0.7—	+3.8—

Player ON

What the team did while each player was on the floor.

	Possessions			Efficiency			Four Factors				Opponent

Sam Hines Jr.	1,790	326	84.6%	5.3—	108.4—	103.1—	49.5%—	34.4%—	17.4%—	35.2%—	50.4%—	69.3%—	20.1%—	35.0%—
Jakevion Buckley	1,691	425	79.9%	6.9—	109.7—	102.8—	49.8%—	34.4%—	16.9%—	36.3%—	50.0%—	69.2%—	20.0%—	36.2%—
Jeremy Elyzee	1,492	624	70.5%	4.5—	109.7—	105.2—	50.9%—	33.4%—	17.6%—	36.0%—	52.4%—	70.1%—	19.6%—	34.9%—
Brody Rowbury	1,423	692	67.3%	5.1—	110.8—	105.7—	50.2%—	35.8%—	17.1%—	35.8%—	51.5%—	69.0%—	19.9%—	33.6%—
Kam Burton	980	1,136	46.3%	1.0—	103.8—	102.8—	47.5%—	30.5%—	15.9%—	28.6%—	48.6%—	66.4%—	19.6%—	33.3%—
Carlos Paez	892	1,224	42.1%	4.3—	109.4—	105.1—	49.7%—	35.0%—	17.6%—	36.4%—	51.1%—	69.4%—	19.7%—	36.5%—
Jaiden Lawrence	693	1,422	32.8%	1.8—	108.2—	106.4—	49.6%—	33.1%—	18.0%—	43.3%—	52.1%—	70.7%—	19.1%—	40.9%—
Kyle Edison	466	1,650	22.0%	0.6—	110.1—	109.5—	50.9%—	33.6%—	17.2%—	31.2%—	50.8%—	64.3%—	19.1%—	45.6%—
Thomas Tut	387	1,729	18.3%	-3.6—	95.0—	98.6—	46.2%—	29.4%—	20.1%—	27.1%—	46.2%—	69.0%—	17.4%—	30.7%—
Ahmed Essahaty	338	1,778	16.0%	-5.1—	102.5—	107.6—	47.6%—	31.9%—	19.0%—	31.9%—	51.6%—	68.7%—	18.0%—	36.5%—
CJ Booker	162	1,954	7.7%	-17.4—	89.4—	106.8—	42.7%—	27.8%—	18.5%—	22.2%—	48.9%—	58.1%—	21.9%—	39.9%—
Asher Boney	136	1,979	6.4%	-16.9—	90.9—	107.8—	40.1%—	33.7%—	18.3%—	18.3%—	49.2%—	65.1%—	18.9%—	39.3%—

Player OFF

What the team did while each player sat.

	Possessions			Efficiency			Four Factors				Opponent

Sam Hines Jr.	1,790	326	84.6%	-7.8—	103.4—	111.2—	48.2%—	29.9%—	17.8%—	30.7%—	50.9%—	64.9%—	17.0%—	40.3%—
Jakevion Buckley	1,691	425	79.9%	-10.8—	99.5—	110.4—	47.4%—	30.9%—	19.5%—	27.6%—	52.0%—	66.2%—	17.9%—	34.3%—
Jeremy Elyzee	1,492	624	70.5%	0.5—	102.7—	102.2—	45.7%—	34.3%—	17.1%—	31.1%—	46.2%—	65.4%—	19.5%—	37.9%—
Brody Rowbury	1,423	692	67.3%	-0.3—	101.1—	101.4—	47.6%—	29.5%—	18.2%—	31.9%—	48.3%—	67.9%—	19.0%—	40.4%—
Kam Burton	980	1,136	46.3%	5.3—	110.9—	105.6—	51.1%—	36.8%—	18.8%—	40.0%—	52.1%—	70.6%—	19.6%—	38.1%—
Carlos Paez	892	1,224	42.1%	2.6—	106.3—	103.8—	49.1%—	32.7%—	17.3%—	33.2%—	50.0%—	68.0%—	19.5%—	35.3%—
Jaiden Lawrence	693	1,422	32.8%	4.1—	107.4—	103.3—	49.2%—	33.9%—	17.2%—	30.6%—	49.7%—	67.6%—	19.8%—	33.5%—
Kyle Edison	466	1,650	22.0%	4.1—	106.9—	102.8—	48.9%—	33.7%—	17.5%—	35.5%—	50.4%—	69.8%—	19.7%—	33.1%—
Thomas Tut	387	1,729	18.3%	4.9—	110.4—	105.6—	50.0%—	34.7%—	16.8%—	36.2%—	51.5%—	68.5%—	20.1%—	37.1%—
Ahmed Essahaty	338	1,778	16.0%	4.9—	108.6—	103.7—	49.7%—	34.0%—	17.2%—	35.0%—	50.2%—	68.6%—	19.9%—	35.7%—
CJ Booker	162	1,954	7.7%	5.0—	109.1—	104.1—	49.9%—	34.2%—	17.4%—	35.6%—	50.6%—	69.5%—	19.4%—	35.5%—
Asher Boney	136	1,979	6.4%	4.7—	108.8—	104.0—	50.1%—	33.7%—	17.4%—	35.8%—	50.6%—	68.9%—	19.6%—	35.6%—

How to read this

An on/off split is not a rating of the player. It is what the team did with him on the floor and with him off it, which also carries whoever replaced him, whoever he played alongside, and who the opponent had out there at the time. Two players on the same team can trade the same minutes and both look good, or both look bad, for reasons neither controls.

Players need 100 possessions both on and off the floor to appear. Both sides, not either: a starter who never sits has no off-court sample, and his difference would be the team measured against nothing.

In ON/OFF Difference, percentage columns are shown as points of difference, and each row is ranked against every qualifying player in Division I rather than against team ratings — a +7 net rating is a good lineup, a +7 net swing is an enormous one. Player ON and Player OFF are ranked against Division I five-man units instead, because those are ordinary team rates.

Sorting any of the three tables reorders all three, so a player stays on the same line throughout.