Idaho St

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

Roster valuesβ

Roster values for Idaho St, 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
Connor Hollenbeck	75.9%	-1.9range -3.5 to -0.6Sufficient evidence	+3.7range +2.9 to +4.3Sufficient evidence	$8KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $45KLoading
Martin Kheil	72.0%	-0.3range -1.7 to +1.2Sufficient evidence	+4.1range +3.5 to +4.7Sufficient evidence	$22KspeculativeLoading	$2K to $78KLoading
Lachlan Brewer	71.9%	-1.4range -2.4 to -0.4Sufficient evidence	+3.7range +3.1 to +4.1Sufficient evidence	$9KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $48KLoading
Jamison Guerra	63.1%	+0.3range -0.8 to +1.3Sufficient evidence	+3.9range +3.4 to +4.3Sufficient evidence	$26KspeculativeLoading	$5K to $83KLoading
Caleb Van De Griend	44.9%	+2.1range +0.8 to +3.4Sufficient evidence	+3.3range +3.0 to +3.7Sufficient evidence	$43KspeculativeLoading	$12K to $160KLoading
Cheikh Sow	38.5%	-0.9range -2.0 to +0.3Sufficient evidence	+2.2range +1.8 to +2.5Sufficient evidence	$9KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $34KLoading
Evan Otten	36.7%	-1.2range -2.8 to +0.2Sufficient evidence	+2.0range +1.6 to +2.3Sufficient evidence	$7KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $30KLoading
Gus Etchison	33.0%	+0.9range -0.3 to +2.2Sufficient evidence	+2.2range +1.9 to +2.6Sufficient evidence	$19KspeculativeLoading	$5K to $66KLoading
Louis Bond	28.2%	-0.6range -1.8 to +0.9Sufficient evidence	+1.7range +1.4 to +2.0Sufficient evidence	$9KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $32KLoading
Blake Daberkow	19.3%	+0.8range -0.1 to +1.7Sufficient evidence	+1.3range +1.2 to +1.5Sufficient evidence	$11KspeculativeLoading	$3K to $36KLoading
Quin Patterson	12.5%	-2.4range -3.4 to -1.5Limited evidence	+0.6range +0.5 to +0.7Limited evidence	$3KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $9KLoading
Landen Birley	2.7%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$1Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$0 to $4KLoading
Jaedyn Brown	0.6%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$1Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$0 to $4KLoading
Kasen Carpenter	0.6%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$1Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$0 to $4KLoading

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: $205K; 80% Range $75K to $560K
Tier: Low and other; low evidence
Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4: $185K to $215K; Scenario medians
Players with Figures: 14; 3 floor only

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
Connor Hollenbeck	75.9%	$8K	$1K to $45K	6.3%	$7K to $8K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Martin Kheil	72.0%	$22K	$2K to $78K	13.0%	$19K to $23K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Lachlan Brewer	71.9%	$9K	$1K to $48K	7.8%	$8K to $10K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Jamison Guerra	63.1%	$26K	$5K to $83K	13.4%	$23K to $27K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Caleb Van De Griend	44.9%	$43K	$12K to $160K	18.1%	$38K to $45K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Cheikh Sow	38.5%	$9K	$1K to $34K	5.8%	$8K to $9K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Evan Otten	36.7%	$7K	$1K to $30K	5.0%	$6K to $7K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Gus Etchison	33.0%	$19K	$5K to $66K	8.5%	$17K to $20K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Louis Bond	28.2%	$9K	$1K to $32K	5.3%	$8K to $9K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Blake Daberkow	19.3%	$11K	$3K to $36K	5.2%	$10K to $12K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Quin Patterson	12.5%	$3K	$1K to $9K	1.1%	$2K to $3K	$1K	Limited evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Landen Birley	2.7%	$1K	$0 to $4K	0.7%	$1K in all four	$1K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Jaedyn Brown	0.6%	$1K	$0 to $4K	0.7%	$1K in all four	$1K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Kasen Carpenter	0.6%	$1K	$0 to $4K	0.7%	$1K in all four	$1K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Team Pool	—	$205K	$75K to $560K	100%	$185K to $215K	—

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, Idaho State University (NCAA Division I-FCS)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$1,428,073	Equals expenses (budget identity)
Men's basketball expenses	$1,428,073
Athletics department expenses	$20,271,087
Athletics department revenue	$20,271,087

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

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	$1,428,073	Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output.
Reported expenses	$1,428,073	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
2 days	11
3 or more days	17

Rest is capped at three days. Descriptive count.

Load summary

Mean games in prior 7 days	1.4
Games with fewer rest days than the opponent	2
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