Utah Valley
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dominick Nelson | 76.3% | +1.9range +0.3 to +3.2Sufficient evidence | +4.8range +3.8 to +5.7Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Tanner Toolson | 73.4% | +2.7range +1.6 to +3.9Sufficient evidence | +5.0range +4.4 to +5.8Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Trevan Leonhardt | 69.4% | +3.6range +2.6 to +4.6Sufficient evidence | +5.2range +4.6 to +5.9Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Carter Welling | 60.0% | +1.7range +0.5 to +2.5Sufficient evidence | +3.6range +3.0 to +4.2Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Osiris Grady | 43.7% | -2.0range -3.3 to -0.7Sufficient evidence | +1.5range +1.0 to +2.0Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Kylin Green | 37.2% | -0.1range -1.5 to +1.1Sufficient evidence | +1.7range +1.4 to +2.1Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Jackson Holcombe | 36.6% | +2.7range +1.3 to +3.8Sufficient evidence | +2.4range +2.1 to +2.8Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Ethan Potter | 31.5% | +1.0range -0.0 to +1.9Sufficient evidence | +1.7range +1.5 to +2.0Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Hayden Welling | 26.5% | -0.2range -1.0 to +0.5Sufficient evidence | +1.2range +1.0 to +1.5Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Cory Wells | 24.9% | -0.6range -1.7 to +0.7Sufficient evidence | +1.1range +0.8 to +1.4Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Noah Taitz | 19.8% | +0.9range -0.2 to +1.9Sufficient evidence | +1.1range +0.9 to +1.3Sufficient evidence | None: no budget that season | — |
| Majer Sullivan | 0.6% | 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 31 games passed lineup acceptance (84%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.
- 5 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 | $2,332,401 | Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output. |
|---|---|---|
| Reported expenses | $2,332,401 | 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 |
| 2 days | 7 |
| 3 or more days | 20 |
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 | 2 |
| 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