CS Fullerton
2025 · evaluation season · nil-value-v3 · Team results
Roster valuesβ
| Player | Possession share | Net and range | Wins above replacement and range | Speculative compensation (best guess) | Compensation 80% range |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Donovan Oday | 59.1% | -2.2range -3.7 to -0.9Sufficient evidence | +0.9range +0.6 to +1.2Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Kendrick De Luna | 58.5% | -4.1range -5.1 to -2.8Sufficient evidence | +0.6range +0.4 to +0.9Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Antwan Robinson | 56.5% | -3.6range -4.8 to -2.4Sufficient evidence | +0.6range +0.4 to +0.9Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| LoLo Rudolph | 53.2% | -2.9range -3.7 to -1.6Sufficient evidence | +0.7range +0.6 to +1.0Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Keith Richard | 52.4% | -5.4range -6.7 to -3.7Sufficient evidence | +0.3range +0.0 to +0.7Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Kobe Young | 50.3% | -2.7range -4.0 to -1.2Sufficient evidence | +0.7range +0.5 to +0.9Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Kaleb Brown | 48.9% | -3.0range -4.2 to -1.8Sufficient evidence | +0.6range +0.4 to +0.9Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Zachary Visentin | 40.6% | -1.9range -3.0 to -0.4Sufficient evidence | +0.7range +0.5 to +0.9Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| John Mikey Square | 33.1% | -0.8range -1.9 to +0.6Sufficient evidence | +0.7range +0.6 to +0.8Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Zion Richardson | 30.3% | +0.2range -0.8 to +1.6Sufficient evidence | +0.7range +0.6 to +0.9Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Davis Bynum | 11.1% | +0.6range -0.1 to +1.3Limited evidence | +0.3range +0.3 to +0.3Limited evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Freddie Cooper | 6.1% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: 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
25 of 30 games passed lineup acceptance (83%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.
- 5 of 30 audited games did not pass lineup acceptance; per-game reasons are counted for the whole season (see methodology), not per team
Program revenueβ
EADA year 2024-25 (primary pairing to repo season 2025; fiscal-year mapping unconfirmed) · self-reported by the school, no external review · EADA revenue is any money used to pay expensesrevenue equals expenses
| Reported revenue | $2,214,622 | Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output. |
|---|---|---|
| Reported expenses | $2,214,622 | Reported by the school. |
EADA link: matched through an NCES IPEDS institution alias, with state and home-venue city agreeing.
No model-implied dollar range is shown (status: suppressed). The published dollar status could not be loaded; see NIL methodology for the reason.
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 days | Games |
|---|---|
| First game (no rest value) | 1 |
| 2 days | 10 |
| 3 or more days | 19 |
Rest is capped at three days. Descriptive count.
Load summary
| Mean games in prior 7 days | 1.4 |
|---|---|
| Games with fewer rest days than the opponent | 2 |
| Longest run of consecutive away games | 4 |
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