SportiveWorldSportiveWorld
Andrej Stojakovic

Andrej Stojakovic

Illinois Fighting Illini · NCAA Division I · Shooting guard · Junior · 2.01 m

SportiveWorld evaluation

SW#44Projection Round 2Modelled
Potential · LimitedConfidence · HighMarket #46·SW +2

Main reading

His model rank rests on the environment (Illinois Fighting Illini); on his signals alone, #30 of 39.

Freshness · CurrentDaily board snapshot: 2026-09-20 (matches the computation value by value: rank, score, consensus, Δ, sample) · 7 day(s) of history · Mocks captured: 2026-09-20 · Box scores up to 2026-04-07 (season 2025-26: 34 of the team's 37 games) · Board computed on 2026-09-20 15:05 UTC · served from cache (2 min ago; recomputed every hour)

Why he is here

#20
NCAA model · of 39
31 %
NBA career prob.
NCAA model · Model weight in his rank: 67 %
Leans on contextMedium convictionReliability · highProfile · Perimeter scorer

The NCAA model places him #20 of 39: the bet is the environment (Illinois Fighting Illini, opponent +5.0), not individual dominance — on his signals alone he would be #30. The market has him 26 places lower (#46).

Measured over 34 games with a box score · 2025-26 · Illinois Fighting Illini

  • fact31 % probability of an NBA career (≥ 2,000 min). On the model's scale: context +3.82 · player +0.28. With average opponent and team, the same profile would give 1.0 %; on the environment alone, 25 %.
  • factMeasured environment: Illinois Fighting Illini, strength +14.5 (+2.2 sd) · average opponent +5.0 (+2.1 sd) — environment #12 of 39 ranked
  • factHis individual signal adding the most: Scoring per 40 20.5 (+1.2 sd · contribution +1.10). On his individual signals alone he would be #30 of 39.
  • factHistorical comparables: 13 of 110 similar university seasons reached the NBA (12 %) — #16 of 36 ranked in that lens. The model gives him 63 % to reach the NBA: the comparables are more conservative than the model for all 36 ranked, which is why this lens compares ranks, not figures.

interpretationThe position is a bet on having performed in one of the country's best environments: the model rewards surviving and producing against that schedule. What we do not know is how much of it travels with him to another team and another role.

Production
+0.69
Efficiency
−0.49
Minutes
+0.08
Opponent quality + Team strength
+3.82
1.0 %
On his signals alone
25 %
On his environment alone
#30
Rank on his signals alone

Where the rank comes from: how much his individual signals contribute and how much his environment (model scale). Below, the probability with an average opponent and team, and the probability on the environment alone.

MovementVersus the 2026-09-13 snapshot: #44 → #44 · NCAA model #19 → #20. · The earlier snapshot carried no board rank (pre-V3.2): recomputed with today's rule on its rows.

Potential

Categorical reading of the ceiling the accredited evidence supports. Not a score: it starts from the NCAA model (if any) or from the market prior and only moves one level with our own evidence, declared piece by piece.

Potential · LimitedConfidence · High

factStarts from the NCAA model: 31% probability of an NBA career (#20 of 39 measured).Medium

  • The market (#46) does not disagree with the model enough to move the reading.
  • On his individual signals alone he would be #30 of 39 (≥ 8 places worse than his model #20): his rank rests on the environment. Down one level.

Evidence moves the reading one level at most, in the direction the sum of the evidence pushes. · Confidence: NCAA season with ≥ 15 games with a box score and ≥ 60% of the team's games.

Production

2025-26 · Illinois Fighting Illini · 13.5p · 4.5r · 1.0a · 26.3 min · 34 of 37 games with a box score · TS 58.5 %

By opponent level

Per 40 minutes, over the games with a box score. Small samples within one season: read as a hint, not a verdict.

pjW-Lminpts/40reb/40ast/40tov/40TS
2025-263426.320.56.91.52.058.5 %
Opponents +8 or better137-627.517.96.01.32.254.2 %
Other opponents2119-225.622.37.41.61.861.1 %
Postseason64-227.021.26.71.21.559.5 %
Away / neutral1410-427.115.65.81.42.152.5 %

Strengths

Signals that add the most

Opponent quality +5.0 (+2.1 SD)
+1.99
Team strength +14.5 (+2.2 SD)
+1.83
Scoring per 40 20.5 (+1.2 SD)
+1.10
  • Trajectory: +6.2 pts/40 vs 2023-24

What travels: holds up against strong opponents

An individual signal is transferable if it holds against opponents rated +8 or better (≥ 90% of its season value). What evaporates as the level rises is stated.

Risks and what would change our mind

Signals that subtract

Shot volume per 40 15.0 (+1.1 SD)
−0.38
Steals per 40 0.6 (−1.3 SD)
−0.27
Assists per 40 1.5 (−0.8 SD)
−0.19
  • Junior: the model does not adjust for age or class; the same production from a freshman projects higher
  • Scoring per 40: 17.9 against +8 opponents (13 games) versus 20.5 over the season — drops as the level rises

Would make us move him down

  • The performance not travelling: without the Illinois Fighting Illini environment his signals leave him #30 of 39
  • Age: we do not adjust for it (Junior); the same production from a freshman projects higher
  • More sources consolidating the consensus #46

Would make us move him up

  • More box-score defence: steals 0.6 and blocks 0.7 per 40 min subtract today
  • A second source placing him nearby: today the consensus is a single mock
  • The same performance in another context (another role, a team other than Illinois Fighting Illini): it would separate the player from his environment

What to watch until the Draft

  • The 2026-27 season: every new box score is measured and can move the rank
  • The mocks: captured daily; today the consensus is 1 source(s)
  • His minutes (26.3 per game): a drop would show in the box score before any news

Context

Facts derived from the box score (Basketball-Reference formulas over the games he played) and the standings. No film or tracking data.

Role on his team

  • ·Started 21 of 34 games (62%) · 26.3 min (65% of the available minutes)
  • ·Usage 25.1% of his team's possessions while on the floor · 25% of its points
  • ·Creation: assists 7.6% of his teammates' baskets while on the floor · 0.80 assists per turnover · 10.1% of his possessions end in a turnover
  • ·Team record with him on the floor: 26-8 · estimated pace 66.1 possessions per 40 min

His team and schedule

  • ·Illinois Fighting Illini · Big Ten Conference · 24-7 in the standings · 15-5 in conference
  • ·Latest poll: Coaches Poll, week 21, #5 (28-9)
  • ·Postseason with a box score: 6 games, 5 in the NCAA Tournament (up to Final Four)
  • ·Team strength +14.5 (+2.2 sd in the cohort) · average opponent +5.0 (+2.1 sd): the model's two context signals

Development

2025-26
Illinois Fighting Illini
13.5p · 4.5r · 1.0a · 26.3 min · TS 58.5 %
34 of 37 games with a box score
31 %
2024-25
California Golden Bears
17.8p · 5.8r · 0.8a · 30.4 min · TS 54.8 %
5 of 33 games with a box score
2023-24
Stanford Cardinal
8.3p · 3.6r · 0.9a · 23.0 min · TS 49.2 %
30 of 32 games with a box score
0 %

Versus 2023-24: +6.2 pts/40 · +9.3 % TS · −0.1 ast/40 · +0.6 reb/40 · +3.3 min · SW score +31 pp · 2024-25 skipped: 5 games with a box score

Comparables and outlook (Scout)

Similarity of one season's statistical profile (12 axes per 40 minutes), not of playing style. 'Looks like X' means 'his season resembles it on these axes', nothing more.

fact13 of the 110 university seasons most like his 2025-26 reached the NBA (12 %) · statistical archetype: Perimeter scorer

Ceiling
DeMar DeRozan
43,658 NBA min · pick #9
Expected
Yakhouba Diawara
2,596 NBA min · undrafted
Floor
Malik Hairston
469 NBA min · pick #48

NBA twins · what they share

Luka Garza d 1.61 · 2,086 NBA minSteals per 40 −1.3 · Scoring per 40 +1.5 · Shot volume per 40 +1.2
Romeo Langford d 1.68 · 2,274 NBA minThree-point accuracy −1.5 · Scoring per 40 +1.2 · Shot volume per 40 +1.0
Craig Brackins d 1.69 · 121 NBA minSteals per 40 −1.4 · Three-point accuracy −1.5 · Shot volume per 40 +1.0

Computed on 2025-26 (34 games) · 2026-09-13

Combine

NBA Draft Combine 2026 · identity: unique name within the 2024-2026 window and undrafted · rank within HIS cohort (those who did the test that year)

What stands out most

Max vertical105 cm (41.50 ″)

percentile 93 among the SFs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 6 of 76)

interpretationVertical above his position: measured explosiveness, not eyeballed

A snapshot of that day (2026): weight, vertical and times change with physical work

Hand width25.4 cm (10.00 ″)

percentile 90 among the SFs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 9 of 83)

interpretationBig hands: ball control and grip above the norm for his position

Does not change with age: still true today (measured at the 2026 Combine)

What falls shortest

Standing reach254 cm (100.00 ″)

percentile 7 among the SFs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 77 of 83)

interpretationShort standing reach for his position: in the NBA he will play 'smaller' than his height

Does not change with age: still true today (measured at the 2026 Combine)

Wingspan204 cm (80.25 ″)

percentile 22 among the SFs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 65 of 83)

interpretationShort length for his position: shot defence and finishing depend more on technique and vertical

Does not change with age: still true today (measured at the 2026 Combine)

All measurements · 11
Height without shoes
197 cm (77.50 ″)
Wingspan
204 cm (80.25 ″)
percentile 22 among the SFs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 65 of 83)
Standing reach
254 cm (100.00 ″)
percentile 7 among the SFs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 77 of 83)
Hand length
21.6 cm (8.50 ″)
percentile 49 among the SFs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 43 of 83)
Hand width
25.4 cm (10.00 ″)
percentile 90 among the SFs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 9 of 83)
WeightA snapshot of that day (2026)
93 kg (206.0 lb)
Standing verticalA snapshot of that day (2026)
81 cm (32.00 ″)
percentile 88 among the SFs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 10 of 76)
Max verticalA snapshot of that day (2026)
105 cm (41.50 ″)
percentile 93 among the SFs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 6 of 76)
¾ court sprintA snapshot of that day (2026)
3.32 s (3.32 s)
percentile 24 among the SFs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 59 of 77)
Lane agilityA snapshot of that day (2026)
10.97 s (10.97 s)
percentile 68 among the SFs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 25 of 77)
Modified lane agilityA snapshot of that day (2026)
2.89 s (2.89 s)
percentile 81 among the SFs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 13 of 65)

Market vs SportiveWorld

Outside reference: the rank given by the cited publications. We know the rank; they do not publish the why.

#46
Market
+26
Gap
#20
SW rank · of 39
Tankathon#401 cited publication(s)· #23 by consensus among the 39 SW-ranked

factExternal consensus #46 (Tankathon #40; 1 source(s)). What we know: the rank. What we do NOT know: why they place him there — the sources publish rankings, not reasons.

Does our position hold? · The three lenses

Leans on context
  • On his individual signals alone (average opponent and team) he would be #30 of 39: +10 places versus SW #20, with a 1.0 % probability
  • On his environment alone (opponent and team) he would be #12 of 39, with 25 %
  • The comparables lens places him in the same zone of the board: #16 of 36 versus SW #20. A relative rank, not a rate: 12 % of 110 similar seasons reached the NBA; the model gives him 63 % to reach it

Three independent lenses against our own place: his individual signals alone, his environment alone and the historical comparables. A lens disagrees when it lands 8 places away or more. SportiveWorld can be wrong: this is where it shows.

Conviction

Medium convictionHow much the data backs what we say — it is not the rank. A #1 can carry low conviction and a #30, high. 4 of 6 factors in favour.
  • Sample: 34 of 37 games with a box score (92%)
  • Standardised by the Scout census (own season profile)
  • The consensus is a SINGLE source (1): it is not a market
  • His individual signals alone place him far from the SW rank (#30 versus #20)
  • Historical comparables agree on the zone (#16 of 36 versus SW #20)
  • Trajectory in favour: +31 pp of probability versus 2023-24
Why this gap exists

On our side the gap decomposes exactly: which dimensions push the rank up and which hold it back. On the consensus side we only see the rank: its sources publish rankings, not reasons, so why they place him there is UNKNOWN. All we can say is what our model does NOT measure.

factSportiveWorld #20 · consensus #46: 26 places higher. Pushing up: Opponent quality · Team strength · Production. Holding back: Efficiency · Box-score defence · Creation. Consensus sources: 1.

unknownWe know the consensus rank (#46: Tankathon #40). We do not know why they place him there: the sources publish rankings, not reasons.

Pushes the rank up

Opponent quality +1.99
Opponent quality +5.0 (z +2.1)
Team strength +1.83
Team strength +14.5 (z +2.2)
Production +1.16
Scoring per 40 20.5 (z +1.2) · Rebounding per 40 6.9 (z +0.2) · Offensive rebounding per 40 2.0 (z +0.2)

Holds the rank back

Efficiency −0.43
True shooting (TS%) 58.5 % (z +0.4) · Shot volume per 40 15.0 (z +1.1) · Free-throw rate (FTA/FGA) 38.1 % (z +0.2)
Box-score defence −0.27
Steals per 40 0.6 (z −1.3) · Blocks per 40 0.7 (z +0.0)
Creation −0.20
Assists per 40 1.5 (z −0.8) · Turnovers per 40 2.0 (z −0.3)

What our model does NOT measure (it could explain part of the gap; the consensus does not publish its reasons)

  • Age and class (Junior): the model does not adjust for them and favours the productive veteran
  • Physique and athleticism: measured at the 2026 Combine (below), but outside the model
  • Projection, film and future role: not in the box score

No appreciable weight · Outside shooting −0.05 · Minutes +0.08

Rank history
#17#33#4809-1309-1409-1509-1609-1709-1809-20
SWConsensus

7 captures, from 2026-09-13 to 2026-09-20

  • ·2026-09-15: SW #19 → #20 · consensus #46 → #46 · no accredited cause in his own data (movement of the mocks or the rest of the board)

Movement in the mocks

Tankathon: 09-13 #40 → 09-14 #40 → 09-15 #40 → 09-16 #40 → 09-17 #40 → 09-18 #40 → 09-20 #40

Data and evidence

Everything behind the reading, on demand: season signal by signal, trajectory, games with a box score, comparables, consensus and the provenance of every figure.

All the model's signals

Opponent quality
+5.0
+1.99
Team strength
+14.5
+1.83
Scoring per 40
20.5
+1.10
Minutes per game
26.3 min
+0.08
Rebounding per 40
6.9
+0.05
Offensive rebounding per 40
2.0
+0.01
Blocks per 40
0.7
+0.00
Turnovers per 40
2.0
−0.01
Share of threes
24.4 %
−0.02
Free-throw rate (FTA/FGA)
38.1 %
−0.03
Three-point accuracy
24.4 %
−0.03
True shooting (TS%)
58.5 %
−0.03
Assists per 40
1.5
−0.19
Steals per 40
0.6
−0.27
Shot volume per 40
15.0
−0.38

Calibrated probability of an NBA career of ≥ 2,000 minutes, given this season = 30.9 % · P(playing in the NBA) = 62.7 %

34 of 37 games with a box score · 20 conference · Average opponent +5.0 (+2.1 sd vs the cohort) · team +14.5 (+2.2 sd) · standardization from the Scout census

Who he is

Identity
Accredited by NCAA box score (ESPN id 5175007, corroborated by season and school)
Position
Shooting guard
Team / school
Illinois Fighting Illini · Junior
Country
USA
Born
no data
Height
201 cm · official NCAA roster 2025-26 (ESPN)
Weight
93 kg

The games with a box score in the measured season

2025-26Opponentopp. ratingminptsrebast
2026-04-04@ UConn Huskies L 62-71 · Final Four+11.429981box score
2026-03-28Iowa Hawkeyes W 71-59 · NCAA Tournament+8.3271750box score
2026-03-27@ Houston Cougars W 65-55 · NCAA Tournament+14.5281302box score
2026-03-22VCU Rams W 76-55 · NCAA Tournament+9.1262141box score
2026-03-20Pennsylvania Quakers W 105-70 · NCAA Tournament+1.520931box score
2026-03-13Wisconsin Badgers L 88-91 · Conference Tournament+6.9321770box score
2026-03-08@ Maryland Terrapins W 78-72−6.919820box score
2026-03-04Oregon Ducks W 80-54−3.12121122box score
2026-02-28Michigan Wolverines L 70-84+17.812010box score
2026-02-22@ UCLA Bruins L 94-95+6.027831box score
2026-02-19@ USC Trojans W 101-65+0.7172230box score
2026-02-08@ Michigan State Spartans L 82-85+10.5351770box score
2026-02-05Northwestern Wildcats W 84-44+1.2281742box score
2026-02-01@ Nebraska Cornhuskers W 78-69+10.829824box score
2026-01-30Washington Huskies W 75-66+3.533830box score
2026-01-24@ Purdue Boilermakers W 88-82+11.137571box score
2026-01-22Maryland Terrapins W 89-70−6.9333091box score
2026-01-17Minnesota Golden Gophers W 77-67+0.922723box score
2026-01-15@ Northwestern Wildcats W 79-68+1.223460box score
2026-01-11@ Iowa Hawkeyes W 75-69+8.3331750box score
2026-01-09Rutgers Scarlet Knights W 81-55−4.8251280box score
2026-01-04@ Penn State Nittany Lions W 73-65−5.7311261box score
2025-12-29Southern Jaguars W 90-55+1.723631box score
2025-12-23Missouri Tigers W 91-48+3.8261632box score
2025-12-13Nebraska Cornhuskers L 80-83+10.82719101box score
2025-12-10@ Ohio State Buckeyes W 88-80+6.7271741box score
2025-12-07@ Tennessee Volunteers W 75-62+9.321520box score
2025-11-28@ UConn Huskies L 61-74+11.424302box score
2025-11-25UT Rio Grande Valley Vaqueros W 87-73+6.4312460box score
2025-11-22Long Island University Sharks W 98-58+1.9242041box score
2025-11-20Alabama Crimson Tide L 86-90+8.5302630box score
2025-11-15Colgate Raiders W 84-65+1.827942box score
2025-11-12Texas Tech Red Raiders W 81-77+7.2262331box score
2025-11-08Florida Gulf Coast Eagles W 113-70+1.022953box score

Evidence and provenance

Every figure in this file comes from one of these sources, with its scope and its sample. What is not here has not been measured.

OwnerScopeSample
Outside consensusdraft_board_mock · lib/bigboard.ts1 mocksTankathon #40
Identitydraft_board_prospect.espn_athlete_id · scripts/cross_bigboard_stats.mjsNCAA Division I5175007
Seasonncaa_player_box + ncaa_game · lib/scout/ejes.mjsNCAA 2025-26 · Illinois Fighting Illini34 of 37 games with a box score
Opponent qualitylib/draft/sql_rival.mjs (ncaa_game, ≥10 pj)NCAA 2025-2634 / 34
zncaa_season_profile (scripts/scout_perfil_ncaa.mjs)NCAA 2025-26standardization from the Scout census
SW ranklib/draft/modelo.ts · lib/draft/calibracion.json2005-2021n=26,550 · AUC 0.897
The player within his teamncaa_player_box (rolDe · fórmulas B-R)NCAA 2025-2634 pj
The teamncaa_standings · ncaa_ranking · ncaa_gameNCAA 2025-26Big Ten Conference
Comparables and outlook (Scout)scout_nba_outlook (scripts/scout_outlook.mjs)NCAA 2025-2634 pj · 2026-09-13
Combineplayer_combine · lib/basketball/fisico.tsNBA Draft Combine 2026nombre_unico_en_ventana_y_no_drafteado · 2024-2026
Physicalncaa_player (ESPN, 2026)NCAA 2025-26201 cm · 93 kg
Rank historydraft_sw_board_snapshot · draft_board_mock_snapshot (mig 0329)20277
Measured season 2025-26: our base has a box score for 6,297 of 6,300 games (100%). By month: 11/25 100 % · 12/25 100 % · 01/26 100 % · 02/26 100 % · 03/26 100 % · 04/26 100 %.

Declared limits

  • · No adjustment for age or class (the historical census lacks them): bias in favour of the productive veteran.
  • · Physical measurements and the combine are not in the model: they are shown as context.
  • · Calibrated on the NCAA only: ACB, EuroLeague and FIBA are not scored.
  • · The mocks' history starts on 2026-09-13: before that date there is none (the ingester overwrote them daily).