Army

2026 · descriptive season · nil-value-v3 · Team results

Roster valuesβ

Roster values for Army, 2026: retrospective net points per 100 possessions and, for 2025–26 only, a speculative compensation best guess. Players are listed by possession share, not by value or dollars.
Player	Possession share	Net and range	Wins above replacement and range	Speculative compensation (best guess)	Compensation 80% range
Ryan Curry	84.2%	-1.3range -2.3 to -0.3Sufficient evidence	+3.7range +3.2 to +4.1Sufficient evidence	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Jacen Holloway	67.8%	-1.7range -2.9 to -0.3Sufficient evidence	+2.9range +2.5 to +3.4Sufficient evidence	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Jaxson Bell	61.2%	-0.7range -1.7 to +0.5Sufficient evidence	+2.9range +2.5 to +3.4Sufficient evidence	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Jackson Furman	58.4%	-3.8range -5.2 to -2.5Sufficient evidence	+1.9range +1.4 to +2.3Sufficient evidence	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Kevin McCarthy	57.1%	-3.0range -4.2 to -1.5Sufficient evidence	+2.1range +1.7 to +2.6Sufficient evidence	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Tate Laczkowski	53.3%	+1.5range +0.5 to +2.8Sufficient evidence	+3.2range +2.8 to +3.6Sufficient evidence	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Jorn Everson	45.2%	-1.0range -2.2 to +0.4Sufficient evidence	+2.2range +1.8 to +2.6Sufficient evidence	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Joshua Eli	32.8%	+0.2range -0.7 to +1.3Sufficient evidence	+1.8range +1.6 to +2.0Sufficient evidence	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Alex Engro	9.9%	-0.3range -1.2 to +0.5Limited evidence	+0.5range +0.5 to +0.6Limited evidence	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Dylan Benner	7.6%	-1.6range -2.6 to -0.9Limited evidence	+0.4range +0.3 to +0.4Limited evidence	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Dillon Watt	7.4%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Jackson Mayo	5.6%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Dayon Polk	4.5%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Dylan Murans	2.1%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Jahaan Green	1.8%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Brendon O'Keefe	0.8%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Nnaemeka Ikechi	0.2%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading
Chanse Perkins	0.1%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$0 (assumed opted out)Loading	80% range $0 to $0 (assumption, not data)Loading

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.

Team pool and per-player compensation · 2025–26β

Team Pool: $0 (assumed opted out); 80% Range $0 to $0 (assumed)
Tier: Low and other; low evidence

Assumed from one unverified press article that names schools that did not opt in. Methodology

No player figures. The Team Pool is $0.

What-if calculator on the team page

School Finances · School-Reported (EADA)

Self-reported to the U.S. Department of Education. Expenses cover coaching, travel, aid and operations, not player pay.

No EADA match for this school.

Coverage and exclusions

29 of 30 games passed lineup acceptance (97%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.

1 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

No program revenue was published for this team.

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
3 or more days	28

Rest is capped at three days. Descriptive count.

Load summary

Mean games in prior 7 days	1.7
Games with fewer rest days than the opponent	1
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