Stony Brook
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Collin O'Connor | 84.0% | -2.5range -3.4 to -1.6Sufficient evidence | +2.0range +1.5 to +2.4Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Andre Snoddy | 82.3% | -1.4range -2.3 to -0.6Sufficient evidence | +2.3range +2.0 to +2.8Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| CJ Luster | 75.1% | -1.3range -2.2 to -0.4Sufficient evidence | +2.2range +1.9 to +2.6Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Ben Wight | 72.7% | +0.0range -0.9 to +0.9Sufficient evidence | +2.6range +2.2 to +2.9Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Joe Octave | 46.8% | -2.9range -3.9 to -1.7Sufficient evidence | +1.1range +0.8 to +1.4Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Nick Woodard | 42.5% | -2.9range -4.3 to -1.5Sufficient evidence | +1.0range +0.6 to +1.3Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Jared Frey | 37.3% | -2.4range -3.3 to -1.2Sufficient evidence | +1.0range +0.7 to +1.3Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Sabry Philip | 29.2% | -3.9range -4.9 to -2.7Sufficient evidence | +0.5range +0.3 to +0.8Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Leon Nahar | 15.4% | -0.3range -1.5 to +0.8Limited evidence | +0.6range +0.5 to +0.7Limited evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Quin Gorman | 10.2% | -1.4range -2.0 to -0.7Limited evidence | +0.3range +0.3 to +0.4Limited evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Jeremiah Nyarko | 4.4% | 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
25 of 31 games passed lineup acceptance (81%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.
- 6 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 | $3,701,192 | Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output. |
|---|---|---|
| Reported expenses | $3,701,192 | 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 | 9 |
| 3 or more days | 21 |
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 | 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