Tyler Tanner
Vanderbilt Commodores · NCAA Division I · Point guard · Sophomore · 1.83 m
SportiveWorld evaluation
Main reading
Measured production against measured opponents (36 games, 2025-26); on his signals alone, #2 of 39.
Why he is here
The NCAA model places him #5 of 39: measured production against measured opponents, and his individual signals alone leave him #2. The market has him 33 places lower (#38).
Measured over 36 games with a box score · 2025-26 · Vanderbilt Commodores
- fact75 % probability of an NBA career (≥ 2,000 min). On the model's scale: context +3.54 · player +2.48. With average opponent and team, the same profile would give 8.1 %; on the environment alone, 20 %.
- factMeasured environment: Vanderbilt Commodores, strength +10.8 (+1.6 sd) · average opponent +5.5 (+2.3 sd) — environment #16 of 39 ranked
- factHis individual signal adding the most: Scoring per 40 23.3 (+1.9 sd · contribution +1.67). On his individual signals alone he would be #2 of 39.
- factHistorical comparables: 14 of 42 similar university seasons reached the NBA (33 %) — #1 of 36 ranked in that lens. The model gives him 88 % 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not yet measure age, physique or projection; those dimensions could explain part of the gap, but the consensus sources do not publish the reason for their rank here.
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.
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.
factStarts from the NCAA model: 75% probability of an NBA career (#5 of 39 measured). → Elite
- ◎The market (#38) sees him two bands below the model: down one level.
- ◎On his individual signals alone he would be #2 of 39: consistent with his model #5.
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 · Vanderbilt Commodores · 19.5p · 3.6r · 5.1a · 33.5 min · 36 of 36 games with a box score · TS 62.0 %
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.
| pj | W-L | min | pts/40 | reb/40 | ast/40 | tov/40 | TS | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | 36 | — | 33.5 | 23.3 | 4.3 | 6.1 | 2.3 | 62.0 % |
| Opponents +8 or better | 13 | 8-5 | 34.7 | 22.5 | 4.2 | 5.1 | 2.2 | 64.2 % |
| Other opponents | 23 | 19-4 | 32.8 | 23.8 | 4.5 | 6.7 | 2.3 | 60.9 % |
| Postseason | 5 | 3-2 | 36.8 | 23.3 | 4.8 | 4.8 | 1.1 | 58.1 % |
| Away / neutral | 16 | 10-6 | 34.8 | 22.8 | 3.9 | 6.0 | 1.9 | 62.6 % |
Strengths
Signals that add the most
- ▲Comparables: 14 of 42 historical analogues reached the NBA
What travels: holds up against strong opponents
- ▲Scoring per 40: 22.5 against +8 opponents (13 games) versus 23.3 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
Would make us move him down
- ▼More sources consolidating the consensus #38
Would make us move him up
- ▲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 mocks: captured daily; today the consensus is 1 source(s)
- →His minutes (33.5 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.
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 36 games (100%) · 33.5 min (83% of the available minutes)
- ·Usage 26.5% of his team's possessions while on the floor · 27% of its points
- ·Creation: assists 28.9% of his teammates' baskets while on the floor · 2.70 assists per turnover · 10.7% of his possessions end in a turnover
- ·Team record with him on the floor: 27-9 · estimated pace 70.6 possessions per 40 min
His team and schedule
- ·Vanderbilt Commodores · Southeastern Conference · 24-7 in the standings · 11-7 in conference
- ·Latest poll: Coaches Poll, week 21, #17 (27-9)
- ·Postseason with a box score: 5 games, 2 in the NCAA Tournament (up to second round (32))
- ·Team strength +10.8 (+1.6 sd in the cohort) · average opponent +5.5 (+2.3 sd): the model's two context signals
Development
Development
The previous season (2024-25) has 6 games with a box score: too small a sample to compare.
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.
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 42 university seasons most like his 2025-26 reached the NBA (33 %) · statistical archetype: Foul-drawing scorer
NBA twins · what they share
Computed on 2025-26 (36 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)
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
percentile 97 among the PGs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 3 of 74)
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)
percentile 85 among the PGs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 11 of 66)
interpretationVertical above his position: measured explosiveness, not eyeballed
A snapshot of that day (2026): weight, vertical and times change with physical work
What falls shortest
percentile 3 among the PGs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 71 of 73)
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)
percentile 22 among the PGs measured in 2022-2026 (rank 58 of 74)
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
Market vs SportiveWorld
Outside reference: the rank given by the cited publications. We know the rank; they do not publish the why.
factExternal consensus #38 (Tankathon #30; 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
- ◎On his individual signals alone he would be #2 of 39: the same zone as SW #5
- ◎On his environment alone (opponent and team) he would be #16 of 39, with 20 %
- ◎The comparables lens places him in the same zone of the board: #1 of 36 versus SW #5. A relative rank, not a rate: 33 % of 42 similar seasons reached the NBA; the model gives him 88 % 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
- ✓Sample: 36 of 36 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 (#2 versus SW #5)
- ✓Historical comparables agree on the zone (#1 of 36 versus SW #5)
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 #5 · consensus #38: 33 places higher. Pushing up: Opponent quality · Production · Team strength · Minutes · Creation · Box-score defence. Holding back: Efficiency. Consensus sources: 1.
unknownWe know the consensus rank (#38: Tankathon #30). We do not know why they place him there: the sources publish rankings, not reasons.
Pushes the rank up
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 (Sophomore): the model does not adjust for them; the same production from a younger player projects higher
- ◇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 +0.00
Rank history ▾
7 captures, from 2026-09-13 to 2026-09-20
Movement in the mocks
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.
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
Calibrated probability of an NBA career of ≥ 2,000 minutes, given this season = 75.3 % · P(playing in the NBA) = 87.9 %
36 of 36 games with a box score · 21 conference · Average opponent +5.5 (+2.3 sd vs the cohort) · team +10.8 (+1.6 sd) · standardization from the Scout census
Who he is
The games with a box score in the measured season
| 2025-26 | Opponent | opp. rating | min | pts | reb | ast | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-22 | @ Nebraska Cornhuskers L 72-74 · NCAA Tournament | +10.8 | 38 | 27 | 2 | 4 | box score |
| 2026-03-19 | McNeese Cowboys W 78-68 · NCAA Tournament | +12.9 | 37 | 26 | 7 | 5 | box score |
| 2026-03-15 | @ Arkansas Razorbacks L 75-86 · Conference Tournament | +9.2 | 37 | 15 | 5 | 1 | box score |
| 2026-03-14 | @ Florida Gators W 91-74 · Conference Tournament | +15.6 | 37 | 20 | 2 | 8 | box score |
| 2026-03-13 | Tennessee Volunteers W 75-68 · Conference Tournament | +9.3 | 35 | 19 | 6 | 4 | box score |
| 2026-03-07 | @ Tennessee Volunteers W 86-82 | +9.3 | 35 | 25 | 3 | 3 | box score |
| 2026-03-04 | @ Ole Miss Rebels W 89-86 | −0.2 | 44 | 34 | 5 | 7 | box score |
| 2026-02-28 | @ Kentucky Wildcats L 77-91 | +6.2 | 38 | 19 | 3 | 6 | box score |
| 2026-02-26 | Georgia Bulldogs W 88-80 | +9.6 | 39 | 17 | 6 | 5 | box score |
| 2026-02-21 | Tennessee Volunteers L 65-69 | +9.3 | 31 | 16 | 2 | 2 | box score |
| 2026-02-19 | @ Missouri Tigers L 80-81 | +3.8 | 38 | 27 | 2 | 5 | box score |
| 2026-02-14 | Texas A&M Aggies W 82-69 | +7.1 | 31 | 4 | 3 | 6 | box score |
| 2026-02-11 | @ Auburn Tigers W 84-76 | +4.2 | 39 | 25 | 4 | 6 | box score |
| 2026-02-07 | Oklahoma Sooners L 91-92 | +5.5 | 39 | 37 | 3 | 9 | box score |
| 2026-01-31 | Ole Miss Rebels W 71-68 | −0.2 | 37 | 24 | 3 | 3 | box score |
| 2026-01-28 | Kentucky Wildcats W 80-55 | +6.2 | 37 | 19 | 4 | 5 | box score |
| 2026-01-24 | @ Mississippi State Bulldogs W 88-56 | −4.2 | 33 | 24 | 5 | 5 | box score |
| 2026-01-21 | @ Arkansas Razorbacks L 68-93 | +9.2 | 34 | 11 | 2 | 6 | box score |
| 2026-01-17 | Florida Gators L 94-98 | +15.6 | 37 | 20 | 3 | 5 | box score |
| 2026-01-15 | @ Texas Longhorns L 64-80 | +6.6 | 34 | 17 | 3 | 2 | box score |
| 2026-01-10 | LSU Tigers W 84-73 | +2.9 | 36 | 20 | 3 | 3 | box score |
| 2026-01-08 | Alabama Crimson Tide W 96-90 | +8.5 | 33 | 29 | 3 | 7 | box score |
| 2026-01-03 | @ South Carolina Gamecocks W 83-71 | −1.5 | 37 | 19 | 4 | 14 | box score |
| 2025-12-30 | New Haven Chargers W 96-53 | −1.4 | 27 | 23 | 5 | 7 | box score |
| 2025-12-21 | @ Wake Forest Demon Deacons W 98-67 | +1.9 | 27 | 11 | 4 | 7 | box score |
| 2025-12-18 | @ Memphis Tigers W 77-70 | −1.5 | 41 | 16 | 7 | 3 | box score |
| 2025-12-13 | Central Arkansas Bears W 83-72 | +6.1 | 31 | 12 | 9 | 7 | box score |
| 2025-12-04 | SMU Mustangs W 88-69 | +6.1 | 37 | 26 | 5 | 6 | box score |
| 2025-11-28 | Saint Mary's Gaels W 96-71 | +12.8 | 30 | 13 | 3 | 3 | box score |
| 2025-11-27 | VCU Rams W 89-74 | +9.1 | 28 | 16 | 3 | 5 | box score |
| 2025-11-26 | @ Western Kentucky Hilltoppers W 83-78 | +3.2 | 21 | 11 | 0 | 3 | box score |
| 2025-11-21 | Texas Southern Tigers W 109-74 | −2.9 | 28 | 20 | 2 | 7 | box score |
| 2025-11-15 | Arkansas-Pine Bluff Golden Lions W 104-75 | −3.8 | 30 | 12 | 4 | 9 | box score |
| 2025-11-13 | Eastern Kentucky Colonels W 92-62 | −1.6 | 21 | 13 | 1 | 1 | box score |
| 2025-11-08 | @ UCF Knights W 105-93 | +2.3 | 24 | 17 | 3 | 4 | box score |
| 2025-11-04 | Lipscomb Bisons W 105-61 | +3.9 | 24 | 18 | 2 | 1 | box 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.
| Owner | Scope | Sample | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Outside consensus | draft_board_mock · lib/bigboard.ts | 1 mocks | Tankathon #30 |
| Identity | draft_board_prospect.espn_athlete_id · scripts/cross_bigboard_stats.mjs | NCAA Division I | 5187600 |
| Season | ncaa_player_box + ncaa_game · lib/scout/ejes.mjs | NCAA 2025-26 · Vanderbilt Commodores | 36 of 36 games with a box score |
| Opponent quality | lib/draft/sql_rival.mjs (ncaa_game, ≥10 pj) | NCAA 2025-26 | 36 / 36 |
| z | ncaa_season_profile (scripts/scout_perfil_ncaa.mjs) | NCAA 2025-26 | standardization from the Scout census |
| SW rank | lib/draft/modelo.ts · lib/draft/calibracion.json | 2005-2021 | n=26,550 · AUC 0.897 |
| The player within his team | ncaa_player_box (rolDe · fórmulas B-R) | NCAA 2025-26 | 36 pj |
| The team | ncaa_standings · ncaa_ranking · ncaa_game | NCAA 2025-26 | Southeastern Conference |
| Comparables and outlook (Scout) | scout_nba_outlook (scripts/scout_outlook.mjs) | NCAA 2025-26 | 36 pj · 2026-09-13 |
| Combine | player_combine · lib/basketball/fisico.ts | NBA Draft Combine 2026 | nombre_unico_en_ventana_y_no_drafteado · 2024-2026 |
| Physical | ncaa_player (ESPN, 2026) | NCAA 2025-26 | 183 cm · 78 kg |
| Rank history | draft_sw_board_snapshot · draft_board_mock_snapshot (mig 0329) | 2027 | 7 |
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).