Toledo
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sonny Wilson | 86.7% | -0.5range -1.5 to +0.7Sufficient evidence | +3.7range +3.2 to +4.5Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Sam Lewis | 80.7% | +0.3range -1.0 to +1.5Sufficient evidence | +3.9range +3.1 to +4.6Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Isaiah Adams | 76.0% | -0.7range -1.7 to +0.4Sufficient evidence | +3.2range +2.6 to +3.9Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Javan Simmons | 75.5% | +2.1range +1.2 to +3.2Sufficient evidence | +4.5range +4.0 to +5.1Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Bryce Ford | 54.0% | -0.7range -1.8 to +0.4Sufficient evidence | +2.3range +1.8 to +2.7Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Seth Hubbard | 51.6% | -2.1range -3.0 to -1.1Sufficient evidence | +1.7range +1.3 to +2.2Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Andre Lorentsson | 31.8% | -0.4range -1.6 to +0.9Sufficient evidence | +1.4range +1.2 to +1.8Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Jaylan Ouwinga | 25.3% | -1.0range -2.2 to +0.3Sufficient evidence | +1.0range +0.8 to +1.3Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Grgur Brcic | 15.8% | -1.4range -2.4 to -0.5Limited evidence | +0.6range +0.5 to +0.7Limited evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Tyler Ode | 2.3% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Jaylen Murphy | 0.4% | Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — |
| Colin O'Rourke | 0.0% | 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
26 of 32 games passed lineup acceptance (81%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.
- 6 of 32 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 | $3,167,166 | Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output. |
|---|---|---|
| Reported expenses | $3,167,166 | 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 | 3 |
| 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 | 4 |
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