Ohio
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jackson Paveletzke | 81.9% | +1.3range +0.2 to +2.7Sufficient evidence | +4.9range +4.3 to +5.8Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| AJ Clayton | 64.2% | +1.2range +0.2 to +2.1Sufficient evidence | +3.9range +3.3 to +4.5Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| AJ Brown | 60.9% | +1.3range +0.2 to +2.2Sufficient evidence | +3.7range +3.1 to +4.3Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Elmore James | 60.7% | -0.2range -1.4 to +1.1Sufficient evidence | +3.0range +2.5 to +3.7Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Shereef Mitchell | 57.2% | -0.6range -1.6 to +0.5Sufficient evidence | +2.7range +2.2 to +3.3Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Ajay Sheldon | 47.6% | -0.4range -1.8 to +0.8Sufficient evidence | +2.3range +1.8 to +2.8Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Vic Searls | 46.4% | +1.9range +0.5 to +3.2Sufficient evidence | +3.0range +2.6 to +3.5Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Elijah Elliott | 38.3% | +0.5range -0.9 to +1.8Sufficient evidence | +2.1range +1.7 to +2.6Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Aidan Hadaway | 35.5% | +1.8range +0.9 to +2.7Sufficient evidence | +2.3range +2.1 to +2.6Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Ayden Evans | 5.5% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Ben Estis | 0.9% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Ben Nicol | 0.9% | 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
27 of 31 games passed lineup acceptance (87%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.
- 4 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 | $3,751,341 | Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output. |
|---|---|---|
| Reported expenses | $3,751,341 | 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 | 1 |
| 2 days | 1 |
| 3 or more days | 28 |
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