SportiveWorld
Stefan Vaaks

Stefan Vaaks

Providence Friars · NCAA Division I · Shooting guard · Sophomore · 2.01 m

SportiveWorld evaluation

SW#63Projection Outside the 60

Main reading

The environment holds him back: on his signals alone he would be #20 of 39 (2025-26).

Data and sources
Freshness · CurrentDaily board snapshot: 2026-11-04 (matches the computation value by value: rank, score, consensus, Δ, sample) · 52 day(s) of history · Mocks captured: 2026-11-04 · Box scores up to 2026-04-07 (season 2025-26: 31 of the team's 33 games) · Board computed on 2026-11-04 18:52 UTC · served from cache (22 min ago; recomputed every hour)

Player evaluation

Why he is here

The NCAA model places him #38 of 39, but the environment drags him down: on his individual signals alone he would be #20 and the comparables see him #—. Market: #42.

The environment drags him down: his individual production, with average opponent and team, would be worth more places than we give him. A weak context hides signals that are genuinely his.

  • 5 % probability of an NBA career (≥ 2,000 min). On the model's scale: context +1.24 · player +0.82. With average opponent and team, the same profile would give 1.7 %; on the environment alone, 2 %.
  • Measured environment: Providence Friars, strength +1.3 (+0.1 sd) · average opponent +3.3 (+1.2 sd) — environment #39 of 39 ranked
  • His individual signal adding the most: Scoring per 40 20.1 (+1.1 sd · contribution +1.01). On his individual signals alone he would be #20 of 39.
How this evaluation is produced
#38
NCAA model · of 39
6 %
NBA career prob.
NCAA model · Model weight in his rank: 67 %
Looks too lowLow convictionReliability · high

The NCAA model places him #38 of 39, but the environment drags him down: on his individual signals alone he would be #20 and the comparables see him #—. Market: #42.

Measured over 31 games with a box score · 2025-26 · Providence Friars

  • fact5 % probability of an NBA career (≥ 2,000 min). On the model's scale: context +1.24 · player +0.82. With average opponent and team, the same profile would give 1.7 %; on the environment alone, 2 %.
  • factMeasured environment: Providence Friars, strength +1.3 (+0.1 sd) · average opponent +3.3 (+1.2 sd) — environment #39 of 39 ranked
  • factHis individual signal adding the most: Scoring per 40 20.1 (+1.1 sd · contribution +1.01). On his individual signals alone he would be #20 of 39.

interpretationThe environment drags him down: his individual production, with average opponent and team, would be worth more places than we give him. A weak context hides signals that are genuinely his.

Production
+0.58
Efficiency
−0.34
Minutes
+0.59
Opponent quality + Team strength
+1.24
1.7 %
On his signals alone
3 %
On his environment alone
#20
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 2026-10-28 snapshot: #63 → #63 · NCAA model #39 → #38.

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: 6% probability of an NBA career (#38 of 39 measured). → Limited

  • ◎The market (#42) does not disagree with the model enough to move the reading.
  • ◎On his individual signals alone he would be #20 of 39 (≥ 8 places better than his model #38): the environment holds him back. Up 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 · Providence Friars · 15.8p · 2.5r · 3.2a · 31.5 min · 31 of 33 games with a box score · TS 57.2 %

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
2025-2631—31.520.13.24.12.457.2 %
Opponents +8 or better61-533.518.35.02.61.654.2 %
Other opponents2512-1331.020.62.74.42.657.9 %
Postseason21-136.527.93.32.20.580.9 %
Away / neutral164-1232.520.83.23.12.361.4 %

Measured strengths and risks

Strengths

Signals that add the most

Opponent quality +3.3 (+1.2 SD)
+1.15
Scoring per 40 20.1 (+1.1 SD)
+1.01
Minutes per game 31.5 min (+1.0 SD)
+0.59

What travels: holds up against strong opponents

  • ▲Scoring per 40: 18.3 against +8 opponents (6 games) versus 20.1 over the season — it holds

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 15.6 (+1.2 SD)
−0.44
Rebounding per 40 3.2 (−1.2 SD)
−0.32
Blocks per 40 0.3 (−0.4 SD)
−0.17

Would make us move him up

  • ▲More box-score defence: steals 1.1 and blocks 0.3 per 40 min subtract today
  • ▲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 (31.5 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 22 of 31 games (71%) · 31.5 min (77% of the available minutes)
  • ·Usage 24.4% of his team's possessions while on the floor · 24% of its points
  • ·Creation: assists 18.2% of his teammates' baskets while on the floor · 1.70 assists per turnover · 12.1% of his possessions end in a turnover
  • ·Team record with him on the floor: 13-18 · estimated pace 72.9 possessions per 40 min

His team and schedule

  • ·Providence Friars · Big East Conference · 14-17 in the standings · 7-13 in conference
  • ·Postseason with a box score: 2 games, none in the NCAA Tournament
  • ·Team strength +1.3 (+0.1 sd in the cohort) · average opponent +3.3 (+1.2 sd): the model's two context signals

Development

2026-27
Illinois Fighting Illini
20.0p · 3.0r · 4.0a · 19.0 min · TS 101.2 %
1 of 1 games with a box score
—
2025-26
Providence Friars
15.8p · 2.5r · 3.2a · 31.5 min · TS 57.2 %
31 of 33 games with a box score
5 %

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

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

Market vs SportiveWorld

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

#42
Market
+4
Gap
#38
SW rank · of 39
Tankathon#351 cited publication(s)· #19 by consensus among the 39 SW-ranked

factExternal consensus #42 (Tankathon #35; 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 low
  • ◎On his individual signals alone he would be #20 of 39: −18 places versus SW #38 — the environment drags him down
  • ◎On his environment alone (opponent and team) he would be #39 of 39, with 2 %
  • ◎No Scout historical comparables for this season: that lens does not apply

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: 31 of 33 games with a box score (94%)
  • ✓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 (#20 versus #38)
  • ✗No historical comparables for this season
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 #38 · consensus #42: aligned (4 places). Pushing up: Opponent quality · Production · Minutes · Creation. Holding back: Efficiency · Box-score defence.

unknownWe know the consensus rank (#42: Tankathon #35). We do not know why they place him there: the sources publish rankings, not reasons.

Pushes the rank up

Opponent quality +1.15
Opponent quality +3.3 (z +1.2)
Production +0.65
Scoring per 40 20.1 (z +1.1) · Rebounding per 40 3.2 (z −1.2) · Offensive rebounding per 40 0.6 (z −1.0)
Minutes +0.59
Minutes per game 31.5 min (z +1.0)
Creation +0.20
Assists per 40 4.1 (z +0.8) · Turnovers per 40 2.4 (z +0.3)

Holds the rank back

Efficiency −0.40
True shooting (TS%) 57.2 % (z +0.2) · Shot volume per 40 15.6 (z +1.2) · Free-throw rate (FTA/FGA) 29.5 % (z −0.4)
Box-score defence −0.27
Steals per 40 1.1 (z −0.5) · Blocks per 40 0.3 (z −0.4)

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

  • ◇Age and class (Sophomore): 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 · Outside shooting +0.05 · Team strength +0.10

Rank history ▾
#36#41#4610-2110-2210-2310-2410-2510-2610-2710-2810-2910-3010-3111-0111-0211-0311-04
SWConsensus

15 captures, from 2026-10-21 to 2026-11-04

  • ·2026-10-22: SW #39 → #39 · consensus #41 → #42 · no accredited cause in his own data (movement of the mocks or the rest of the board)
  • ·2026-10-23: SW #39 → #39 · consensus #42 → #43 · no accredited cause in his own data (movement of the mocks or the rest of the board)
  • ·2026-10-24: SW #39 → #39 · consensus #43 → #44 · no accredited cause in his own data (movement of the mocks or the rest of the board)
  • ·2026-10-25: SW #39 → #38 · consensus #44 → #43 · no accredited cause in his own data (movement of the mocks or the rest of the board)
  • ·2026-10-26: SW #38 → #38 · consensus #43 → #41 · no accredited cause in his own data (movement of the mocks or the rest of the board)
  • ·2026-10-27: SW #38 → #38 · consensus #41 → #39 · no accredited cause in his own data (movement of the mocks or the rest of the board)
  • ·2026-10-28: SW #38 → #39 · consensus #39 → #42 · no accredited cause in his own data (movement of the mocks or the rest of the board)
  • ·2026-10-29: SW #39 → #39 · consensus #42 → #40 · no accredited cause in his own data (movement of the mocks or the rest of the board)
  • ·2026-10-30: SW #39 → #39 · consensus #40 → #43 · no accredited cause in his own data (movement of the mocks or the rest of the board)
  • ·2026-11-03: SW #39 → #38 · consensus #43 → #42 · no accredited cause in his own data (movement of the mocks or the rest of the board)

Movement in the mocks

Tankathon: 10-21 #33 → 10-22 #33 → 10-23 #35 → 10-24 #36 → 10-25 #35 → 10-26 #34 → 10-27 #32 → 10-28 #34 → 10-29 #33 → 10-30 #35 → 10-31 #35 → 11-01 #36 → 11-02 #36 → 11-03 #35 → 11-04 #35

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
+3.3
+1.15
Scoring per 40
20.1
+1.01
Minutes per game
31.5 min
+0.59
Assists per 40
4.1
+0.18
Team strength
+1.3
+0.10
Free-throw rate (FTA/FGA)
29.5 %
+0.06
Share of threes
68.4 %
+0.05
Turnovers per 40
2.4
+0.01
Three-point accuracy
35.0 %
+0.00
True shooting (TS%)
57.2 %
−0.01
Offensive rebounding per 40
0.6
−0.04
Steals per 40
1.1
−0.10
Blocks per 40
0.3
−0.17
Rebounding per 40
3.2
−0.32
Shot volume per 40
15.6
−0.44

Calibrated probability of an NBA career of ≥ 2,000 minutes, given this season = 5.5 % · P(playing in the NBA) = 15.0 %

31 of 33 games with a box score · 20 conference · Average opponent +3.3 (+1.2 sd vs the cohort) · team +1.3 (+0.1 sd) · standardization from the Scout census

Who he is

Identity
Accredited by NCAA box score (ESPN id 5311991, corroborated by season and school)
Position
Shooting guard
Team / school
Providence Friars · Sophomore · 2026-27 destination per the mocks: Illinois
Country
Estonia
Born
no data
Height
201 cm · official NCAA roster 2025-26 (ESPN)
Weight
98 kg

The games with a box score in the measured season

2025-26Opponentopp. ratingminptsrebast
2026-03-12@ St. John's Red Storm L 72-85 · Conference Tournament+11.3362351box score
2026-03-11@ Butler Bulldogs W 91-81 · Conference Tournament+1.8372813box score
2026-03-08@ Georgetown Hoyas L 79-80+0.7341125box score
2026-03-05Marquette Golden Eagles L 56-78−0.624433box score
2026-02-22@ DePaul Blue Demons W 71-68+0.7331411box score
2026-02-14St. John's Red Storm L 69-79+11.3342053box score
2026-02-12@ Seton Hall Pirates L 80-87+5.0312043box score
2026-02-07DePaul Blue Demons W 90-72+0.721804box score
2026-02-05Butler Bulldogs W 97-87+1.8372023box score
2026-01-31@ Villanova Wildcats L 73-87+5.9332514box score
2026-01-28@ UConn Huskies L 81-87+11.4351213box score
2026-01-24Georgetown Hoyas L 78-81+0.7341444box score
2026-01-19@ Marquette Golden Eagles L 104-105−0.6402614box score
2026-01-16Creighton Bluejays W 93-880.0372427box score
2026-01-13Villanova Wildcats L 82-88+5.9372111box score
2026-01-10@ Xavier Musketeers L 84-97−2.3322141box score
2026-01-08UConn Huskies L 98-103+11.4361143box score
2026-01-03@ St. John's Red Storm W 77-71+11.3281662box score
2025-12-19Seton Hall Pirates L 67-72+5.0281532box score
2025-12-13@ Butler Bulldogs L 110-113+1.8361023box score
2025-12-10Brown Bears W 86-79+0.3301024box score
2025-12-06Rhode Island Rams W 90-71+1.7331814box score
2025-12-03Fairleigh Dickinson Knights W 94-64−3.03010410box score
2025-11-28@ Florida Gators L 78-90+15.6321041box score
2025-11-27@ Wisconsin Badgers L 83-104+6.9301104box score
2025-11-22@ Penn State Nittany Lions W 77-65−5.7301535box score
2025-11-19New Hampshire Wildcats W 98-66−5.4301314box score
2025-11-15@ Colorado Buffaloes L 88-97+0.4281130box score
2025-11-12Pennsylvania Quakers W 106-81+1.5261435box score
2025-11-08@ Virginia Tech Hokies L 101-107+3.9251730box score
2025-11-04Holy Cross Crusaders W 89-79−5.1201912box 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.

SourceScopeSample
Outside consensusThe public mock drafts we track1 mocksTankathon #35
IdentityHis ESPN NCAA box scores, matched with the boardNCAA Division I5311991
SeasonESPN's NCAA box scores, game by gameNCAA 2025-26 · Providence Friars31 of 33 games with a box score
Opponent qualityNCAA games with the opponent's strength measured (at least 10)NCAA 2025-2631 / 31
Standard score (z) against the NCAAScout's census of NCAA players for that seasonNCAA 2025-26standardization from the Scout census
SW rankSportiveWorld's draft model, calibrated on past drafts2005-2021n=26,550 · AUC 0.897
The player within his teamHis NCAA box scores, with Basketball-Reference formulasNCAA 2025-2631 pj
The teamNCAA standings, the AP ranking and gamesNCAA 2025-26Big East Conference
PhysicalHis NCAA profile on ESPNNCAA 2025-26201 cm · 98 kg
Rank historyDaily snapshots of the board and the mock drafts202715
Measured season 2025-26: our base has a box score for 6,300 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).