Louisville
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chucky Hepburn | 87.4% | +4.7range +3.5 to +5.7Sufficient evidence | +7.5range +6.6 to +8.3Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| J'Vonne Hadley | 82.6% | +3.1range +1.6 to +4.5Sufficient evidence | +6.0range +5.2 to +7.0Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Terrence Edwards Jr. | 81.3% | +4.1range +2.9 to +5.3Sufficient evidence | +6.6range +5.8 to +7.5Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Reyne Smith | 68.0% | +3.5range +2.1 to +4.6Sufficient evidence | +5.1range +4.5 to +5.8Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| James Scott | 60.4% | +3.6range +2.5 to +4.4Sufficient evidence | +4.5range +4.0 to +5.1Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Noah Waterman | 44.3% | -0.1range -1.3 to +1.4Sufficient evidence | +2.1range +1.7 to +2.7Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Khani Rooths | 31.1% | -0.6range -1.6 to +0.6Sufficient evidence | +1.3range +1.1 to +1.7Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Aboubacar Traore | 23.9% | +0.5range -0.7 to +1.8Sufficient evidence | +1.2range +1.0 to +1.5Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Kasean Pryor | 11.2% | +3.1range +1.8 to +4.4Limited evidence | +0.8range +0.6 to +0.9Limited evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Frank Anselem-Ibe | 5.0% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Koren Johnson | 3.1% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Patrick Antonelli | 0.5% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Cole Sherman | 0.5% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Aidan McCool | 0.4% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Spencer Legg | 0.3% | 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
32 of 35 games passed lineup acceptance (91%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.
- 3 of 35 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 expenses
| Reported revenue | $22,792,373 | Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output. |
|---|---|---|
| Reported expenses | $14,854,067 | 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 |
| 1 day | 4 |
| 3 or more days | 30 |
Rest is capped at three days. Descriptive count.
Load summary
| Mean games in prior 7 days | 1.5 |
|---|---|
| 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