The MRI
2026–27 · Week 3

NJIT

Am. East · 1–4

Power-17.1#354 of 365
Résumé-0.99#475 · wins above average
Movement-4down from #350 last week
Best winSaint Peter's (54–52)
Worst lossIona (49–72)
Schedule faced+2.4 avg opponent
Schedule ahead-9.3 avg opponent
Returning production32% of last season's win shares · #106 of 364
Incoming production1.7 win shares from other schools' players

How this rating is built

Power = w × (average margin counted + average opponent rating) + (1 − w) × preseason prior, where w = games ÷ (games + 8). After 5 games, w is 38%, so the preseason prior is 62% of this rating — mostly preseason, for now. Every game played shrinks that share.

PartValueWeightAdds
Margin counted-25.1 avg× 38%-9.7
Opponents faced+2.4 avg× 38%+0.9
Preseason prior-13.6× 62%-8.3
Power-17.1

This explains how the model reached the number. The opponent ratings come out of the same fitted model, so it is not independent proof that the rating is right.

Results

Expected is the margin the model's ratings imply for that matchup and site. Perf is how far the actual margin beat it — the result against expectation. Adds is a different question: how many points of Power the game contributes, counting its margin and the strength of the opponent together. A game can beat expectation and still add little, or the reverse. Adds, plus the preseason prior, sum to Power (figures are rounded so the column adds up). Hover an Adds figure for its arithmetic.

WkOpponentResult ExpectedPerfAdds
2 at Dayton L 58–89 -24.1 -6.9 -2.0
2 at Iona L 49–72 -15.0 -8.0 -2.2
2 vs Saint Peter's W 54–52 -2.1 +4.1 -1.3
3 at Rutgers L 64–101 -29.4 -7.6 -1.9
3 at VCU L 49–87 -35.6 -2.4 -1.4
Preseason prior (62% of the rating)-8.3
Power-17.1

Remaining schedule

WkOpponent ProjectedWin prob
3 at Fairfield -12.0 14%
4 at Fairleigh Dickinson -7.2 26%
4 at Boston College -27.0 1%
5 vs Manhattan -0.1 50%
5 at Sacred Heart -10.2 18%
10 at UMBC -14.2 10%
11 at Maine -6.9 26%
11 at New Hampshire -10.3 18%

Season by season

Best finish: #164 in 2018–19. 17 seasons rated. The two columns' numbers are not comparable; the rank within each is. Season links open that year's game log.

25 1 400 2009–10 (MRI Classic): #317 of 335 (10-21)2010–11 (MRI Classic): #246 of 346 (15-15)2011–12 (MRI Classic): #251 of 345 (13-17)2012–13 (MRI Classic): #201 of 347 (12-13)2013–14 (MRI Classic): #285 of 351 (13-16)2014–15 (MRI Classic): #167 of 351 (21-12)2015–16 (MRI Classic): #170 of 351 (20-15)2016–17 (MRI Classic): #259 of 351 (11-20)2017–18 (MRI Classic): #194 of 351 (14-16)2018–19 (MRI Classic): #164 of 353 (21-13)2019–20 (MRI Classic): #289 of 353 (8-21)2020–21 (MRI 2.0): #280 of 347 (7-12)2021–22 (MRI 2.0): #330 of 358 (11-18)2022–23 (MRI 2.0): #329 of 363 (7-23)2023–24 (MRI 2.0): #338 of 362 (7-21)2024–25 (MRI 2.0): #351 of 364 (6-25)2025–26 (MRI 2.0): #330 of 365 (16-17) MRI 2.0Classic 2009–10 2025–26

Finishing rank, best at the top, on an axis running to 400 — this team's own range, not the size of the field. Two lines where both ratings cover a season - MRI 2.0 in red, Classic in grey. Hover a point for the season.

SeasonRec MRI 2.0MRI Classic
2025–26 16–17 #330 of 365 · -13.20 –
2024–25 6–25 #351 of 364 · -15.97 –
2023–24 7–21 #338 of 362 · -14.15 –
2022–23 7–23 #329 of 363 · -11.86 –
2021–22 11–18 #330 of 358 · -12.52 –
2020–21 7–12 #280 of 347 · -8.45 –
2019–20 8–21 – #289 of 353 · -22.09
2018–19 21–13 – #164 of 353 · 33.07
2017–18 14–16 – #194 of 351 · 26.61
2016–17 11–20 – #259 of 351 · -4.03
2015–16 20–15 – #170 of 351 · 38.92
2014–15 21–12 – #167 of 351 · 36.71
2013–14 13–16 – #285 of 351 · -12.55
2012–13 12–13 – #201 of 347 · 18.73
2011–12 13–17 – #251 of 345 · -4.59
2010–11 15–15 – #246 of 346 · -1.36
2009–10 10–21 – #317 of 335 · -56.15