Algosys College Basketball

Search teams and players

Type a team or player name. Results are alphabetical; players show their 2026 team. Up and Down move, Enter opens the highlighted result or the first one, Esc closes.

MS Valley St

2023 · evaluation season · nil-value-v3 · Team results

Roster valuesβ

Roster values for MS Valley St, 2023: retrospective net points per 100 possessions and, for 2025–26 only, a speculative compensation best guess. Players are listed by possession share, not by value or dollars.
PlayerPossession shareNet and rangeWins above replacement and rangeSpeculative compensation (best guess)Compensation 80% range
Alvin Stredic84.3%-3.1range -4.2 to -2.1Sufficient evidence+1.2range +0.7 to +1.6Sufficient evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Terry Collins83.8%-0.6range -1.4 to +0.1Sufficient evidence+2.0range +1.7 to +2.3Sufficient evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Danny Washington63.6%-1.8range -2.8 to -0.9Limited evidence+1.3range +0.9 to +1.6Limited evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Arecko Gipson51.1%-3.9range -5.9 to -2.2Limited evidence+0.6range +0.1 to +1.0Limited evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Kadar Waller45.5%-0.3range -0.9 to +0.4Limited evidence+1.2range +1.0 to +1.5Limited evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Michael Barber38.2%-0.2range -0.8 to +0.4Limited evidence+1.1range +0.9 to +1.2Limited evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Ernest Minton33.3%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—
Jordan Johnson20.3%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—
Daniel Umoh19.9%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—
Rayquan Brown14.5%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—
George Ivory III14.3%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—
Walter Hamilton12.9%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—
Ronald Williams8.5%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—
Quorien Waldon6.9%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—
Charles Jones3.1%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—

Ranges are the 10th to 90th percentile of whole-game resampling draws. They are not calibrated intervals. Compensation is a speculative best guess of a share of the school's own revenue-sharing budget, not observed pay.

Coverage and exclusions

6 of 32 games passed lineup acceptance (19%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.

  • 26 of 32 audited games did not pass lineup acceptance; per-game reasons are counted for the whole season (see methodology), not per team

Program revenueβ

No program revenue was published for this team.

Schedule loadβ

Counts are descriptive and associational, with neutral formatting. Consecutive away games is the only travel proxy; distance, time zones and injuries are not modeled.

Rest days before each game

Rest daysGames
First game (no rest value)1
1 day1
2 days12
3 or more days18

Rest is capped at three days. Descriptive count.

Load summary

Mean games in prior 7 days1.7
Games with fewer rest days than the opponent3
Longest run of consecutive away games11

Association between rest and margin, all teams

Pooled association passes the declared test (gate S1); not causal and not specific to this team · 0.86 points of margin associated with each extra rest day, range +0.33 to +1.41

This is an association, not a causal lever, pooled across Division I and not specific to this team.

Manifest 13921361a27d · NIL methodology