North Dakota
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treysen Eaglestaff | 83.8% | +1.0range +0.2 to +1.7Sufficient evidence | +3.8range +3.4 to +4.3Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Eli King | 74.0% | +1.4range +0.6 to +2.3Sufficient evidence | +3.6range +3.3 to +4.0Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Mier Panoam | 72.5% | +0.8range +0.3 to +1.2Sufficient evidence | +3.3range +3.0 to +3.7Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Amar Kuljuhovic | 68.8% | +1.2range +0.3 to +2.2Sufficient evidence | +3.3range +2.9 to +3.7Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Deng Mayar | 53.6% | -0.9range -1.7 to -0.2Limited evidence | +2.0range +1.7 to +2.4Limited evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Dariyus Woodson | 45.6% | -0.7range -1.3 to +0.0Limited evidence | +1.8range +1.6 to +2.0Limited evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Mambourou Mara | 36.5% | +1.0range +0.6 to +1.4Limited evidence | +1.8range +1.6 to +2.0Limited evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Zach Kraft | 24.2% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Brian Mathews | 23.6% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Reggie Thomas | 17.0% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Ryan Erikson | 0.5% | 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
8 of 30 games passed lineup acceptance (27%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.
- 22 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 | $2,405,937 | Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output. |
|---|---|---|
| Reported expenses | $2,405,937 | 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 | 2 |
| 2 days | 9 |
| 3 or more days | 18 |
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 | 4 |
| Longest run of consecutive away games | 3 |
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