Evansville
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gabriel Pozzato | 99.4% | +0.6range +0.1 to +1.2Sufficient evidence | +4.2range +3.8 to +4.6Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Tayshawn Comer | 96.4% | +1.2range +0.5 to +1.7Sufficient evidence | +4.4range +3.9 to +4.8Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Joshua Hughes | 86.2% | +0.3range -0.4 to +0.7Sufficient evidence | +3.6range +3.2 to +4.0Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Tanner Cuff | 81.9% | +0.2range -0.4 to +1.0Sufficient evidence | +3.4range +3.1 to +3.9Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Connor Turnbull | 63.0% | +1.9range +1.3 to +2.5Sufficient evidence | +3.3range +2.9 to +3.6Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Gui Tesch | 35.3% | -1.3range -2.0 to -0.5Limited evidence | +1.3range +1.1 to +1.5Limited evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Kaia Berridge | 20.8% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Michael Day | 13.6% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Trent Hundley | 3.5% | 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
9 of 31 games passed lineup acceptance (29%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.
- 22 of 31 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 | $3,212,821 | Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output. |
|---|---|---|
| Reported expenses | $3,212,821 | Reported by the school. |
EADA link: matched to the registry school by a unique institution name and state.
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 | 1 |
| 3 or more days | 29 |
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 | 0 |
| Longest run of consecutive away games | 2 |
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