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.

Michigan

2025 · evaluation season · nil-value-v3 · Team results

Roster valuesβ

Roster values for Michigan, 2025: 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
Tre Donaldson77.0%+3.0range +1.4 to +4.5Sufficient evidence+6.3range +5.4 to +7.4Sufficient evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Danny Wolf75.3%+6.3range +4.9 to +7.5Sufficient evidence+8.1range +7.4 to +9.0Sufficient evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Vladislav Goldin68.9%+5.0range +3.6 to +6.3Sufficient evidence+6.8range +5.9 to +7.7Sufficient evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Nimari Burnett66.2%+3.0range +1.6 to +4.0Sufficient evidence+5.4range +4.5 to +6.3Sufficient evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Roddy Gayle Jr.62.0%+2.5range +1.1 to +3.7Sufficient evidence+4.8range +4.0 to +5.5Sufficient evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Rubin Jones47.6%-0.2range -1.5 to +1.3Sufficient evidence+2.7range +2.1 to +3.3Sufficient evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Will Tschetter38.9%-0.1range -1.8 to +1.5Sufficient evidence+2.2range +1.7 to +2.7Sufficient evidenceNone: no budget that season—
L.J. Cason25.3%-0.2range -1.3 to +0.9Sufficient evidence+1.4range +1.1 to +1.6Sufficient evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Sam Walters19.6%+3.1range +1.7 to +4.4Sufficient evidence+1.6range +1.4 to +1.8Sufficient evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Justin Pippen12.7%+0.6range -0.4 to +1.7Sufficient evidence+0.8range +0.7 to +0.9Sufficient evidenceNone: no budget that season—
Phat Phat Brooks3.5%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—
Jace Howard1.4%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—
Harrison Hochberg0.5%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—
Ian Burns0.5%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—
Charlie May0.4%Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidenceNot applicableNone: no budget that season—
Howard Eisley Jr.0.3%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

34 of 37 games passed lineup acceptance (92%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.

  • 3 of 37 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$21,209,886Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output.
Reported expenses$14,358,515Reported 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 daysGames
First game (no rest value)1
1 day2
2 days2
3 or more days32

Rest is capped at three days. Descriptive count.

Load summary

Mean games in prior 7 days1.4
Games with fewer rest days than the opponent0
Longest run of consecutive away games2

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