SportiveWorldSportiveWorld
David Mirkovic

David Mirkovic

Illinois Fighting Illini · NCAA Division I · Power forward · Freshman · 2.06 m

SportiveWorld evaluation

SW#29Projection Round 1Modelled
Potential · HighConfidence · HighMarket #39·SW +102

Main reading

Measured production against measured opponents (37 games, 2025-26); on his signals alone, #18 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: 37 of the team's 37 games) · Board computed on 2026-09-20 15:05 UTC · served from cache (33 min ago; recomputed every hour)

Why he is here

#12
NCAA model · of 39
47 %
NBA career prob.
NCAA model · Model weight in his rank: 67 %
HoldsHigh convictionReliability · highProfile · Floor-spacing big

The NCAA model places him #12 of 39: measured production against measured opponents, and his individual signals alone leave him #18. The market has him 27 places lower (#39).

Measured over 37 games with a box score · 2025-26 · Illinois Fighting Illini

  • fact47 % probability of an NBA career (≥ 2,000 min). On the model's scale: context +3.68 · player +1.11. With average opponent and team, the same profile would give 2.2 %; on the environment alone, 23 %.
  • factMeasured environment: Illinois Fighting Illini, strength +14.5 (+2.2 sd) · average opponent +4.7 (+1.9 sd) — environment #14 of 39 ranked
  • factHis individual signal adding the most: Scoring per 40 18.1 (+0.7 sd · contribution +0.60). On his individual signals alone he would be #18 of 39.
  • factHistorical comparables: 14 of 125 similar university seasons reached the NBA (11 %) — #17 of 36 ranked in that lens. The model gives him 68 % 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 holds on what is measured: the rank does not change zone when the environment is removed or the comparables are consulted. SportiveWorld does not yet measure age, physique or projection; those dimensions could explain part of the gap, but the consensus sources do not publish the reason for their rank here.

Production
+0.89
Efficiency
−0.17
Minutes
+0.39
Opponent quality + Team strength
+3.68
2.2 %
On his signals alone
23 %
On his environment alone
#18
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: #31 → #29 (+2) · No changes of his own: others moved. · 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 · HighConfidence · High

factStarts from the NCAA model: 47% probability of an NBA career (#12 of 39 measured).High

  • The market (#39) does not disagree with the model enough to move the reading.
  • On his individual signals alone he would be #18 of 39: consistent with his model #12.

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 · 13.3p · 8.0r · 2.6a · 29.5 min · 37 of 37 games with a box score · TS 59.7 %

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
2025-263729.518.110.93.52.659.7 %
Opponents +8 or better137-630.212.910.43.42.548.0 %
Other opponents2421-329.021.011.23.62.665.2 %
Postseason64-231.317.911.53.42.657.1 %
Away / neutral1410-429.416.010.33.42.355.1 %

Strengths

Signals that add the most

Opponent quality +4.7 (+1.9 SD)
+1.85
Team strength +14.5 (+2.2 SD)
+1.83
Scoring per 40 18.1 (+0.7 SD)
+0.60

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

Steals per 40 0.6 (−1.3 SD)
−0.27
Shot volume per 40 13.4 (+0.5 SD)
−0.19
  • Scoring per 40: 12.9 against +8 opponents (13 games) versus 18.1 over the season — drops as the level rises

Would make us move him down

  • Turnovers staying high: 2.6 per 40 min
  • More sources consolidating the consensus #39

Would make us move him up

  • More box-score defence: steals 0.6 and blocks 0.5 per 40 min subtract today
  • Fewer turnovers: today 2.6 per 40 min (+0.5 sd)
  • Combine measurements (wingspan, reach, athleticism): we do not have them today
  • A second source placing him nearby: today the consensus is a single mock

What to watch until the Draft

  • The 2026-27 season: every new box score is measured and can move the rank
  • The 2027 Combine (May): wingspan, reach and athleticism we do not have today
  • The mocks: captured daily; today the consensus is 1 source(s)
  • His minutes (29.5 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 36 of 37 games (97%) · 29.5 min (73% of the available minutes)
  • ·Usage 22.8% of his team's possessions while on the floor · 22% of its points
  • ·Creation: assists 16.2% of his teammates' baskets while on the floor · 1.40 assists per turnover · 14.5% of his possessions end in a turnover
  • ·Team record with him on the floor: 28-9 · 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 +4.7 (+1.9 sd): the model's two context signals

Development

2025-26
Illinois Fighting Illini
13.3p · 8.0r · 2.6a · 29.5 min · TS 59.7 %
37 of 37 games with a box score
47 %

No earlier season in our base: nothing to compare against.

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.

fact14 of the 125 university seasons most like his 2025-26 reached the NBA (11 %) · statistical archetype: Floor-spacing big

Ceiling
Jeff Green
33,436 NBA min · pick #5
Expected
Derrick Brown
2,554 NBA min · pick #40
Floor
Malik Hairston
469 NBA min · pick #48

NBA twins · what they share

Jalen Wilson d 1.35 · 3,558 NBA minRebounding per 40 +1.7 · Steals per 40 −1.4 · Offensive rebounding per 40 +1.2
Vincent Edwards d 1.76 · 16 NBA minSteals per 40 −1.1
Dorian Finney-Smith d 1.84 · 17,142 NBA minRebounding per 40 +1.6 · Offensive rebounding per 40 +1.1

Computed on 2025-26 (37 games) · 2026-09-13

Combine

No Combine measurements: he does not appear in the 2024-2026 combines (or does not match uniquely by name). The physique above is what his programme lists, not a measurement.

Market vs SportiveWorld

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

#39
Market
+27
Gap
#12
SW rank · of 39
Tankathon#311 cited publication(s)· #16 by consensus among the 39 SW-ranked

factExternal consensus #39 (Tankathon #31; 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

Holds
  • On his individual signals alone he would be #18 of 39: the same zone as SW #12
  • On his environment alone (opponent and team) he would be #14 of 39, with 23 %
  • The comparables lens places him in the same zone of the board: #17 of 36 versus SW #12. A relative rank, not a rate: 11 % of 125 similar seasons reached the NBA; the model gives him 68 % 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

High 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 5 factors in favour.
  • Sample: 37 of 37 games with a box score (100%)
  • Standardised by the Scout census (own season profile)
  • The consensus is a SINGLE source (1): it is not a market
  • His individual signals alone leave him in the same zone (#18 versus SW #12)
  • Historical comparables agree on the zone (#17 of 36 versus SW #12)
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 #12 · consensus #39: 27 places higher. Pushing up: Opponent quality · Team strength · Production · Minutes. Holding back: Box-score defence · Efficiency. Consensus sources: 1.

unknownWe know the consensus rank (#39: Tankathon #31). We do not know why they place him there: the sources publish rankings, not reasons.

Pushes the rank up

Opponent quality +1.85
Opponent quality +4.7 (z +1.9)
Team strength +1.83
Team strength +14.5 (z +2.2)
Production +1.11
Scoring per 40 18.1 (z +0.7) · Rebounding per 40 10.9 (z +1.7) · Offensive rebounding per 40 3.4 (z +1.3)
Minutes +0.39
Minutes per game 29.5 min (z +0.7)

Holds the rank back

Box-score defence −0.34
Steals per 40 0.6 (z −1.3) · Blocks per 40 0.5 (z −0.2)
Efficiency −0.18
True shooting (TS%) 59.7 % (z +0.6) · Shot volume per 40 13.4 (z +0.5) · Free-throw rate (FTA/FGA) 30.5 % (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 (Freshman): the model does not adjust for them; the same production from a younger player projects higher
  • Physique and athleticism: no Combine measurements; only the listed height
  • Projection, film and future role: not in the box score

No appreciable weight · Creation +0.13 · Outside shooting +0.02

Rank history
#10#26#4109-1309-1409-1509-1609-1709-1809-20
SWConsensus

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

Movement in the mocks

Tankathon: 09-13 #31 → 09-14 #31 → 09-15 #31 → 09-16 #31 → 09-17 #31 → 09-18 #31 → 09-20 #31

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
+4.7
+1.85
Team strength
+14.5
+1.83
Scoring per 40
18.1
+0.60
Rebounding per 40
10.9
+0.46
Minutes per game
29.5 min
+0.39
Assists per 40
3.5
+0.10
Free-throw rate (FTA/FGA)
30.5 %
+0.05
Offensive rebounding per 40
3.4
+0.05
Turnovers per 40
2.6
+0.02
Three-point accuracy
37.5 %
+0.01
Share of threes
41.8 %
+0.00
True shooting (TS%)
59.7 %
−0.05
Blocks per 40
0.5
−0.07
Shot volume per 40
13.4
−0.19
Steals per 40
0.6
−0.27

Calibrated probability of an NBA career of ≥ 2,000 minutes, given this season = 47.0 % · P(playing in the NBA) = 67.6 %

37 of 37 games with a box score · 22 conference · Average opponent +4.7 (+1.9 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 5311832, corroborated by season and school)
Position
Power forward
Team / school
Illinois Fighting Illini · Freshman
Country
Montenegro
Born
no data
Height
206 cm · official NCAA roster 2025-26 (ESPN)
Weight
116 kg

The games with a box score in the measured season

2025-26Opponentopp. ratingminptsrebast
2026-04-04@ UConn Huskies L 62-71 · Final Four+11.428650box score
2026-03-28Iowa Hawkeyes W 71-59 · NCAA Tournament+8.3389122box score
2026-03-27@ Houston Cougars W 65-55 · NCAA Tournament+14.53414102box score
2026-03-22VCU Rams W 76-55 · NCAA Tournament+9.124754box score
2026-03-20Pennsylvania Quakers W 105-70 · NCAA Tournament+1.52829173box score
2026-03-13Wisconsin Badgers L 88-91 · Conference Tournament+6.9361955box score
2026-03-08@ Maryland Terrapins W 78-72−6.93622113box score
2026-03-04Oregon Ducks W 80-54−3.1271971box score
2026-02-28Michigan Wolverines L 70-84+17.83612102box score
2026-02-22@ UCLA Bruins L 94-95+6.025354box score
2026-02-19@ USC Trojans W 101-65+0.7211434box score
2026-02-15Indiana Hoosiers W 71-51+6.0372573box score
2026-02-11Wisconsin Badgers L 90-92+6.9331261box score
2026-02-08@ Michigan State Spartans L 82-85+10.5361866box score
2026-02-05Northwestern Wildcats W 84-44+1.2271272box score
2026-02-01@ Nebraska Cornhuskers W 78-69+10.8331081box score
2026-01-30Washington Huskies W 75-66+3.5311961box score
2026-01-24@ Purdue Boilermakers W 88-82+11.1281282box score
2026-01-22Maryland Terrapins W 89-70−6.9321593box score
2026-01-17Minnesota Golden Gophers W 77-67+0.9321282box score
2026-01-15@ Northwestern Wildcats W 79-68+1.229650box score
2026-01-11@ Iowa Hawkeyes W 75-69+8.3357125box score
2026-01-09Rutgers Scarlet Knights W 81-55−4.826873box score
2026-01-04@ Penn State Nittany Lions W 73-65−5.72613103box score
2025-12-29Southern Jaguars W 90-55+1.7211162box score
2025-12-23Missouri Tigers W 91-48+3.829955box score
2025-12-13Nebraska Cornhuskers L 80-83+10.823421box score
2025-12-10@ Ohio State Buckeyes W 88-80+6.7332291box score
2025-12-07@ Tennessee Volunteers W 75-62+9.3301062box score
2025-11-28@ UConn Huskies L 61-74+11.418882box score
2025-11-25UT Rio Grande Valley Vaqueros W 87-73+6.4221045box score
2025-11-22Long Island University Sharks W 98-58+1.9201282box score
2025-11-20Alabama Crimson Tide L 86-90+8.53010104box score
2025-11-15Colgate Raiders W 84-65+1.83827213box score
2025-11-12Texas Tech Red Raiders W 81-77+7.2361141box score
2025-11-08Florida Gulf Coast Eagles W 113-70+1.02817111box score
2025-11-04Jackson State Tigers W 113-55−13.52419144box 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 #31
Identitydraft_board_prospect.espn_athlete_id · scripts/cross_bigboard_stats.mjsNCAA Division I5311832
Seasonncaa_player_box + ncaa_game · lib/scout/ejes.mjsNCAA 2025-26 · Illinois Fighting Illini37 of 37 games with a box score
Opponent qualitylib/draft/sql_rival.mjs (ncaa_game, ≥10 pj)NCAA 2025-2637 / 37
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 2025-2637 pj
The teamncaa_standings · ncaa_ranking · ncaa_gameNCAA 2025-26Big Ten Conference
Comparables and outlook (Scout)scout_nba_outlook (scripts/scout_outlook.mjs)NCAA 2025-2637 pj · 2026-09-13
Physicalncaa_player (ESPN, 2026)NCAA 2025-26206 cm · 116 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).