Algosys College Basketball

Search teams and players

Type a team or player name. Results are alphabetical; players show their 2026 team. Up and Down move, Enter opens the highlighted result or the first one, Esc closes.

Missouri

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

Roster valuesβ

Roster values for Missouri, 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.
PlayerPossession shareNet and rangeWins above replacement and rangeSpeculative compensation (best guess)Compensation 80% range
Mark Mitchell84.1%+3.2range +1.9 to +4.7Sufficient evidence+6.3range +5.7 to +7.0Sufficient evidenceLoadingLoading
Anthony Robinson II66.9%+2.5range +1.0 to +3.9Sufficient evidence+4.9range +4.2 to +5.4Sufficient evidenceLoadingLoading
Jayden Stone57.9%+2.4range +0.8 to +4.0Sufficient evidence+4.2range +3.7 to +4.7Sufficient evidenceLoadingLoading
T.O. Barrett56.1%-0.1range -1.1 to +1.2Sufficient evidence+3.3range +2.9 to +3.8Sufficient evidenceLoadingLoading
Jacob Crews51.3%+1.9range +0.8 to +3.2Sufficient evidence+3.6range +3.2 to +4.1Sufficient evidenceLoadingLoading
Shawn Phillips Jr.48.1%+1.0range -0.6 to +2.3Sufficient evidence+3.1range +2.5 to +3.6Sufficient evidenceLoadingLoading
Trent Pierce41.1%+1.7range +0.6 to +2.7Sufficient evidence+2.9range +2.6 to +3.2Sufficient evidenceLoadingLoading
Sebastian Mack23.5%-0.3range -1.6 to +1.3Sufficient evidence+1.4range +1.2 to +1.6Sufficient evidenceLoadingLoading
Luke Northweather19.3%+2.1range +1.2 to +3.1Sufficient evidence+1.4range +1.3 to +1.6Sufficient evidenceLoadingLoading
Jevon Porter17.3%+3.8range +2.6 to +5.1Sufficient evidence+1.5range +1.3 to +1.6Sufficient evidenceLoadingLoading
Annor Boateng13.0%-1.7range -2.8 to -0.1Limited evidence+0.7range +0.5 to +0.8Limited evidenceLoadingLoading
Trent Burns12.7%-0.6range -1.7 to +0.7Limited evidence+0.7range +0.6 to +0.9Limited evidenceLoadingLoading
Nicholas Randall8.7%-2.9range -3.8 to -1.6Limited evidence+0.4range +0.3 to +0.5Limited evidenceLoadingLoading

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

Loading Speculative compensation

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.

Loading School finances

Coverage and exclusions

32 of 33 games passed lineup acceptance (97%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.

  • 1 of 33 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 daysGames
First game (no rest value)1
2 days1
3 or more days31

Rest is capped at three days. Descriptive count.

Load summary

Mean games in prior 7 days1.4
Games with fewer rest days than the opponent0
Longest run of consecutive away games2

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