SportiveWorldSportiveWorld
Ivan Kharchenkov

Ivan Kharchenkov

Arizona Wildcats · NCAA Division I · Small forward · Freshman · 2.01 m

SportiveWorld evaluation

SW#16Projection Round 1Modelled
Potential · MediumConfidence · HighMarket #16·SW ±01

Main reading

Our lenses point lower: #29 on his signals alone, #26 by comparables.

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: 39 of the team's 39 games) · Board computed on 2026-09-20 15:05 UTC · served from cache (3 min ago; recomputed every hour)

Why he is here

#11
NCAA model · of 39
52 %
NBA career prob.
NCAA model · Model weight in his rank: 67 %
Looks too highLow convictionReliability · highProfile · Rotation wing

The NCAA model places him #11 of 39 — and our own lenses point lower: #29 on his signals alone, #26 by comparables. The rank rests on the environment. Market: #16.

Measured over 39 games with a box score · 2025-26 · Arizona Wildcats

  • fact52 % probability of an NBA career (≥ 2,000 min). On the model's scale: context +4.67 · player +0.33. With average opponent and team, the same profile would give 1.0 %; on the environment alone, 44 %.
  • factMeasured environment: Arizona Wildcats, strength +16.8 (+2.5 sd) · average opponent +6.2 (+2.6 sd) — environment #3 of 39 ranked
  • factHis individual signal adding the most: Minutes per game 28.4 min (+0.5 sd · contribution +0.28). On his individual signals alone he would be #29 of 39.
  • factHistorical comparables: 24 of 300 similar university seasons reached the NBA (8 %) — #26 of 36 ranked in that lens. The model gives him 75 % 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.

interpretationTwo independent in-house lenses point lower than our rank: without the environment he drops and the historical comparables do not follow. It is the sign that the model is crediting him with the quality of his team and schedule.

Production
−0.02
Efficiency
+0.07
Minutes
+0.28
Opponent quality + Team strength
+4.67
1.0 %
On his signals alone
44 %
On his environment alone
#29
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: #17 → #16 (+1) · 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 · MediumConfidence · High

factStarts from the NCAA model: 52% probability of an NBA career (#11 of 39 measured).High

  • The market (#16) does not disagree with the model enough to move the reading.
  • On his individual signals alone he would be #29 of 39 (≥ 8 places worse than his model #11): 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 · Arizona Wildcats · 10.4p · 4.3r · 2.3a · 28.4 min · 39 of 39 games with a box score · TS 58.1 %

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
2025-263928.414.76.13.22.158.1 %
Opponents +8 or better1312-132.614.26.62.42.157.2 %
Other opponents2624-226.314.95.73.72.158.6 %
Postseason87-132.815.46.62.62.363.9 %
Away / neutral1211-128.714.15.33.82.354.3 %

Strengths

Signals that add the most

Opponent quality +6.2 (+2.6 SD)
+2.53
Team strength +16.8 (+2.5 SD)
+2.14
Minutes per game 28.4 min (+0.5 SD)
+0.28

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

  • Comparables: only 24 of 300 historical analogues reached the NBA

Would make us move him down

  • The performance not travelling: without the Arizona Wildcats environment his signals leave him #29 of 39
  • The shot not holding up: 31.7 % from three with 34 % of his attempts from outside
  • The comparables: only 8 % of 300 similar seasons reached the NBA (#26 in that lens)
  • More sources consolidating the consensus #16

Would make us move him up

  • More scoring per 40 min: today 14.7 (−0.1 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
  • The same performance in another context (another role, a team other than Arizona Wildcats): 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 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 (28.4 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 39 of 39 games (100%) · 28.4 min (71% of the available minutes)
  • ·Usage 17.7% of his team's possessions while on the floor · 17% of its points
  • ·Creation: assists 13.0% of his teammates' baskets while on the floor · 1.60 assists per turnover · 14.0% of his possessions end in a turnover
  • ·Team record with him on the floor: 36-3 · estimated pace 71.1 possessions per 40 min

His team and schedule

  • ·Arizona Wildcats · Big 12 Conference · 29-2 in the standings · 16-2 in conference
  • ·Latest poll: Coaches Poll, week 21, #3 (36-3)
  • ·Postseason with a box score: 8 games, 5 in the NCAA Tournament (up to Final Four)
  • ·Team strength +16.8 (+2.5 sd in the cohort) · average opponent +6.2 (+2.6 sd): the model's two context signals

Development

2025-26
Arizona Wildcats
10.4p · 4.3r · 2.3a · 28.4 min · TS 58.1 %
39 of 39 games with a box score
52 %

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.

fact24 of the 300 university seasons most like his 2025-26 reached the NBA (8 %) · statistical archetype: Rotation wing

Ceiling
Russell Westbrook
43,051 NBA min · pick #4
Expected
Markel Brown
1,800 NBA min · pick #44
Floor
Lamar Patterson
435 NBA min · pick #48

NBA twins · what they share

Toure' Murry d 1.19 · 390 NBA minSteals per 40 +0.9
Lamar Patterson d 1.32 · 435 NBA min
Javon Freeman-Liberty d 1.40 · 402 NBA min

Computed on 2025-26 (39 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.

#16
Market
+5
Gap
#11
SW rank · of 39
Tankathon#161 cited publication(s)· #5 by consensus among the 39 SW-ranked

factExternal consensus #16 (Tankathon #16; 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

Looks too high
  • On his individual signals alone (average opponent and team) he would be #29 of 39: +18 places versus SW #11, with a 1.0 % probability
  • On his environment alone (opponent and team) he would be #3 of 39, with 44 %
  • The comparables lens places him relatively lower on the board: #26 of 36 (+15 places versus SW #11). It is a relative rank, not a rate: 8 % of 300 similar seasons reached the NBA; the model gives him 75 % 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

Low convictionHow much the data backs what we say — it is not the rank. A #1 can carry low conviction and a #30, high. 2 of 5 factors in favour.
  • Sample: 39 of 39 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 place him far from the SW rank (#29 versus #11)
  • Historical comparables place him far away (#26 of 36 versus SW #11)
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 #11 · consensus #16: 5 places higher. Pushing up: Opponent quality · Team strength · Minutes. Holding back: —. Consensus sources: 1.

unknownWe know the consensus rank (#16: Tankathon #16). We do not know why they place him there: the sources publish rankings, not reasons.

Pushes the rank up

Opponent quality +2.53
Opponent quality +6.2 (z +2.6)
Team strength +2.14
Team strength +16.8 (z +2.5)
Minutes +0.28
Minutes per game 28.4 min (z +0.5)

Holds the rank back

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 · Production −0.14 · Creation +0.06 · Efficiency +0.08 · Outside shooting −0.02 · Box-score defence +0.07

Rank history
#9#14#1809-1309-1409-1509-1609-1709-1809-20
SWConsensus

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

Movement in the mocks

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

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
+6.2
+2.53
Team strength
+16.8
+2.14
Minutes per game
28.4 min
+0.28
Steals per 40
1.9
+0.21
Shot volume per 40
11.0
+0.08
Assists per 40
3.2
+0.06
Free-throw rate (FTA/FGA)
33.1 %
+0.02
Offensive rebounding per 40
1.6
−0.01
Turnovers per 40
2.1
−0.01
Three-point accuracy
31.7 %
−0.01
Share of threes
34.1 %
−0.01
True shooting (TS%)
58.1 %
−0.03
Rebounding per 40
6.1
−0.03
Scoring per 40
14.7
−0.11
Blocks per 40
0.4
−0.13

Calibrated probability of an NBA career of ≥ 2,000 minutes, given this season = 52.2 % · P(playing in the NBA) = 75.1 %

39 of 39 games with a box score · 21 conference · Average opponent +6.2 (+2.6 sd vs the cohort) · team +16.8 (+2.5 sd) · standardization from the Scout census

Who he is

Identity
Accredited by NCAA box score (ESPN id 5311896, corroborated by season and school)
Position
Small forward
Team / school
Arizona Wildcats · Freshman
Country
Germany
Born
no data
Height
201 cm · official NCAA roster 2025-26 (ESPN)
Weight
100 kg

The games with a box score in the measured season

2025-26Opponentopp. ratingminptsrebast
2026-04-05Michigan Wolverines L 73-91 · Final Four+17.829641box score
2026-03-29Purdue Boilermakers W 79-64 · NCAA Tournament+11.1381880box score
2026-03-27Arkansas Razorbacks W 109-88 · NCAA Tournament+9.2351535box score
2026-03-23Utah State Aggies W 78-66 · NCAA Tournament+11.437952box score
2026-03-20Long Island University Sharks W 92-58 · NCAA Tournament+1.92614102box score
2026-03-14Houston Cougars W 79-74 · Conference Tournament+14.5361271box score
2026-03-13Iowa State Cyclones W 82-80 · Conference Tournament+16.4321735box score
2026-03-12UCF Knights W 81-59 · Conference Tournament+2.3291031box score
2026-03-08@ Colorado Buffaloes W 89-79+0.4241034box score
2026-03-03Iowa State Cyclones W 73-57+16.420040box score
2026-02-28Kansas Jayhawks W 84-61+6.1341162box score
2026-02-25@ Baylor Bears W 87-80+5.337866box score
2026-02-21@ Houston Cougars W 73-66+14.5391693box score
2026-02-19BYU Cougars W 75-68+8.1351872box score
2026-02-14Texas Tech Red Raiders L 75-78+7.2381343box score
2026-02-10@ Kansas Jayhawks L 78-82+6.1331361box score
2026-02-07Oklahoma State Cowboys W 84-47+0.720771box score
2026-01-31@ Arizona State Sun Devils W 87-74−2.0261241box score
2026-01-27@ BYU Cougars W 86-83+8.1341063box score
2026-01-24West Virginia Mountaineers W 88-53+4.921722box score
2026-01-22Cincinnati Bearcats W 77-51+5.5291421box score
2026-01-17@ UCF Knights W 84-77+2.3271012box score
2026-01-15Arizona State Sun Devils W 89-82−2.0291542box score
2026-01-10@ TCU Horned Frogs W 86-73+5.331716box score
2026-01-08Kansas State Wildcats W 101-76−2.325421box score
2026-01-03@ Utah Utes W 97-78−4.7251333box score
2025-12-30South Dakota State Jackrabbits W 99-71+2.6271232box score
2025-12-23Bethune-Cookman Wildcats W 107-71−1.6281453box score
2025-12-21San Diego State Aztecs W 68-45+7.2291021box score
2025-12-17Abilene Christian Wildcats W 96-62−2.1211150box score
2025-12-14@ Alabama Crimson Tide W 96-75+8.5241022box score
2025-12-07Auburn Tigers W 97-68+4.2291258box score
2025-11-29Norfolk State Spartans W 98-61+2.69211box score
2025-11-25Denver Pioneers W 103-730.0252053box score
2025-11-20@ UConn Huskies W 71-67+11.430821box score
2025-11-15@ UCLA Bruins W 69-65+6.014431box score
2025-11-12Northern Arizona Lumberjacks W 84-49−5.125044box score
2025-11-08Utah Tech Trailblazers W 93-67+1.922213box score
2025-11-04Florida Gators W 93-87+15.63512100box 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 #16
Identitydraft_board_prospect.espn_athlete_id · scripts/cross_bigboard_stats.mjsNCAA Division I5311896
Seasonncaa_player_box + ncaa_game · lib/scout/ejes.mjsNCAA 2025-26 · Arizona Wildcats39 of 39 games with a box score
Opponent qualitylib/draft/sql_rival.mjs (ncaa_game, ≥10 pj)NCAA 2025-2639 / 39
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 2025-2639 pj
The teamncaa_standings · ncaa_ranking · ncaa_gameNCAA 2025-26Big 12 Conference
Comparables and outlook (Scout)scout_nba_outlook (scripts/scout_outlook.mjs)NCAA 2025-2639 pj · 2026-09-13
Physicalncaa_player (ESPN, 2026)NCAA 2025-26201 cm · 100 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).