Duquesne

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

Roster valuesβ

Roster values for Duquesne, 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
Tarence Guinyard	81.5%	+2.6range +1.5 to +3.4Sufficient evidence	+6.2range +5.6 to +6.6Sufficient evidence	$155KspeculativeLoading	$64K to $380KLoading
Jimmie Williams	75.9%	+2.7range +1.7 to +3.5Sufficient evidence	+5.9range +5.2 to +6.4Sufficient evidence	$150KspeculativeLoading	$64K to $365KLoading
Jakub Necas	59.6%	+2.2range +0.9 to +3.3Sufficient evidence	+4.5range +4.0 to +5.0Sufficient evidence	$105KspeculativeLoading	$42K to $255KLoading
David Dixon	54.9%	+1.2range +0.0 to +2.1Sufficient evidence	+3.8range +3.3 to +4.2Sufficient evidence	$68KspeculativeLoading	$21K to $170KLoading
Cameron Crawford	44.1%	+0.5range -0.9 to +1.7Sufficient evidence	+2.9range +2.5 to +3.3Sufficient evidence	$42KspeculativeLoading	$8K to $110KLoading
Alex Williams	43.1%	+0.3range -0.7 to +1.3Sufficient evidence	+2.8range +2.4 to +3.1Sufficient evidence	$39KspeculativeLoading	$8K to $105KLoading
Brandon Hall	37.6%	-0.2range -1.4 to +0.9Sufficient evidence	+2.3range +1.9 to +2.6Sufficient evidence	$26KspeculativeLoading	$4K to $79KLoading
John Hugley IV	32.3%	-0.6range -1.7 to +0.5Sufficient evidence	+1.9range +1.6 to +2.2Sufficient evidence	$20KspeculativeLoading	$4K to $63KLoading
Jake DiMichele	27.0%	-1.7range -2.5 to -0.4Sufficient evidence	+1.4range +1.2 to +1.7Sufficient evidence	$12KspeculativeLoading	$2K to $46KLoading
Maximus Edwards	24.5%	+0.3range -0.7 to +1.2Sufficient evidence	+1.6range +1.4 to +1.8Sufficient evidence	$23KspeculativeLoading	$6K to $61KLoading
Lazar Milosevic	6.3%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$4Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$2K to $10KLoading
Dom Aekins	6.3%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$4Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$2K to $10KLoading
Stef van Bussel	5.8%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$4Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$2K to $10KLoading
Seamus McDermott	0.4%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$4Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$2K to $10KLoading
Lucas Prolla	0.4%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$4Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$2K to $10KLoading
Ethan Anish	0.4%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$4Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$2K to $10KLoading

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: $705K; 80% Range $325K to $1.55M
Tier: Mid and high major; low to medium evidence
Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4: $670K to $835K; Scenario medians
Players with Figures: 16; 6 floor only

The widest scenario range, $380K to $1.80M, is wider than the 80% Range above (soft check S5). Methodology

Players in possession-share order
Player	Poss. Share	Speculative Best Guess	80% Range	Median % of Team Pool	Scenarios Z1 to Z4	Floor Part	Evidence and Flags
Tarence Guinyard	81.5%	$155K	$64K to $380K	20.7%	$145K to $180K	$4K	Sufficient evidence
Jimmie Williams	75.9%	$150K	$64K to $365K	20.0%	$140K to $175K	$4K	Sufficient evidence
Jakub Necas	59.6%	$105K	$42K to $255K	14.1%	$98K to $120K	$4K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
David Dixon	54.9%	$68K	$21K to $170K	10.4%	$64K to $79K	$4K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Cameron Crawford	44.1%	$42K	$8K to $110K	7.2%	$40K to $49K	$4K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Alex Williams	43.1%	$39K	$8K to $105K	6.7%	$36K to $45K	$4K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Brandon Hall	37.6%	$26K	$4K to $79K	4.7%	$25K to $31K	$4K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
John Hugley IV	32.3%	$20K	$4K to $63K	3.7%	$19K to $24K	$4K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Jake DiMichele	27.0%	$12K	$2K to $46K	2.0%	$11K to $14K	$4K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Maximus Edwards	24.5%	$23K	$6K to $61K	4.0%	$22K to $28K	$4K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Lazar Milosevic	6.3%	$4K	$2K to $10K	0.6%	$4K to $5K	$4K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Dom Aekins	6.3%	$4K	$2K to $10K	0.6%	$4K to $5K	$4K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Stef van Bussel	5.8%	$4K	$2K to $10K	0.6%	$4K to $5K	$4K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Ethan Anish	0.4%	$4K	$2K to $10K	0.6%	$4K to $5K	$4K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Lucas Prolla	0.4%	$4K	$2K to $10K	0.6%	$4K to $5K	$4K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Seamus McDermott	0.4%	$4K	$2K to $10K	0.6%	$4K to $5K	$4K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Team Pool	—	$705K	$325K to $1.55M	100%	$670K to $835K	—

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.

School-reported finances, 2024-25, Duquesne University (NCAA Division I-FCS)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$6,012,142	Equals expenses (budget identity)
Men's basketball expenses	$6,012,142
Athletics department expenses	$29,780,242
Athletics department revenue	$29,780,242

Coverage and exclusions

30 of 31 games passed lineup acceptance (97%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.

1 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 (alternate pairing to repo season 2026; 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	$6,012,142	Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output.
Reported expenses	$6,012,142	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
3 or more days	29

Rest is capped at three days. Descriptive count.

Load summary

Mean games in prior 7 days	1.3
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