North Carolina

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

Roster valuesβ

Roster values for North Carolina, 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
Henri Veesaar	73.0%	+8.9range +7.4 to +10.0Sufficient evidence	+9.0range +8.2 to +9.5Sufficient evidence	$1.20MspeculativeLoading	$680K to $2.30MLoading
Jarin Stevenson	63.7%	+3.0range +1.5 to +4.3Sufficient evidence	+5.3range +4.5 to +6.0Sufficient evidence	$390KspeculativeLoading	$170K to $605KLoading
Luka Bogavac	61.4%	+2.4range +1.1 to +3.8Sufficient evidence	+4.9range +4.2 to +5.5Sufficient evidence	$325KspeculativeLoading	$115K to $520KLoading
Caleb Wilson	59.1%	+4.7range +3.6 to +5.9Sufficient evidence	+5.6range +5.0 to +6.1Sufficient evidence	$495KspeculativeLoading	$320K to $750KLoading
Seth Trimble	57.5%	+0.6range -0.9 to +1.9Sufficient evidence	+3.8range +3.2 to +4.3Sufficient evidence	$185KspeculativeLoading	$31K to $365KLoading
Derek Dixon	54.3%	+0.8range -0.7 to +2.2Sufficient evidence	+3.7range +3.1 to +4.3Sufficient evidence	$190KspeculativeLoading	$32K to $365KLoading
Kyan Evans	45.8%	+3.0range +1.8 to +4.2Sufficient evidence	+3.8range +3.3 to +4.2Sufficient evidence	$280KspeculativeLoading	$130K to $430KLoading
Jonathan Powell	39.1%	+1.4range +0.2 to +2.5Sufficient evidence	+2.8range +2.4 to +3.1Sufficient evidence	$165KspeculativeLoading	$45K to $285KLoading
Zayden High	19.9%	-0.5range -2.1 to +1.0Sufficient evidence	+1.1range +0.9 to +1.4Sufficient evidence	$57KspeculativeLoading	$18K to $130KLoading
Jaydon Young	17.0%	-0.2range -1.5 to +1.1Sufficient evidence	+1.0range +0.9 to +1.2Sufficient evidence	$57KspeculativeLoading	$20K to $120KLoading
James Brown	4.1%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$22Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$12K to $35KLoading
Isaiah Denis	2.5%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$22Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$12K to $35KLoading
Elijah Davis	0.8%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$22Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$12K to $35KLoading
John Holbrook	0.6%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$22Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$12K to $35KLoading
Evan Smith	0.6%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$22Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$12K to $35KLoading
Ivan Matlekovic	0.5%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$22Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$12K to $35KLoading

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: $3.60M; 80% Range $2.60M to $5.00M
Tier: Power 4; medium evidence
Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4: $3.60M in all four; Scenario medians
Players with Figures: 16; 6 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
Henri Veesaar	73.0%	$1.20M	$680K to $2.30M	31.9%	$1.20M in all four	$22K	Sufficient evidence
Jarin Stevenson	63.7%	$390K	$170K to $605K	11.3%	$390K in all four	$22K	Sufficient evidence
Luka Bogavac	61.4%	$325K	$115K to $520K	9.6%	$325K in all four	$22K	Sufficient evidence
Caleb Wilson	59.1%	$495K	$320K to $750K	13.6%	$495K in all four	$22K	Sufficient evidence
Seth Trimble	57.5%	$185K	$31K to $365K	5.4%	$185K in all four	$22K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Derek Dixon	54.3%	$190K	$32K to $365K	5.6%	$190K in all four	$22K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Kyan Evans	45.8%	$280K	$130K to $430K	8.2%	$280K in all four	$22K	Sufficient evidence
Jonathan Powell	39.1%	$165K	$45K to $285K	4.9%	$165K in all four	$22K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Zayden High	19.9%	$57K	$18K to $130K	1.7%	$57K in all four	$22K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Jaydon Young	17.0%	$57K	$20K to $120K	1.7%	$57K in all four	$22K	Sufficient evidence
James Brown	4.1%	$22K	$12K to $35K	0.6%	$22K in all four	$22K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Isaiah Denis	2.5%	$22K	$12K to $35K	0.6%	$22K in all four	$22K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Elijah Davis	0.8%	$22K	$12K to $35K	0.6%	$22K in all four	$22K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Evan Smith	0.6%	$22K	$12K to $35K	0.6%	$22K in all four	$22K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
John Holbrook	0.6%	$22K	$12K to $35K	0.6%	$22K in all four	$22K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Ivan Matlekovic	0.5%	$22K	$12K to $35K	0.6%	$22K in all four	$22K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Team Pool	—	$3.60M	$2.60M to $5.00M	100%	$3.60M in all four	—

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, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (NCAA Division I-FBS)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$39,742,088
Men's basketball expenses	$16,738,604
Athletics department expenses	$180,835,031
Athletics department revenue	$180,835,031

Coverage and exclusions

31 of 33 games passed lineup acceptance (94%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.

2 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

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 expenses

Reported revenue	$39,742,088	Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output.
Reported expenses	$16,738,604	Reported by the school.

EADA link: matched by a manual override chosen by the model author. Its checks (IPEDS identity, state, home-venue city) confirm only that the pick is self-consistent. They are not independent proof that this school is the same program. If the match were wrong, these figures would belong to a different school.manual EADA match, not independently verified

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
2 days	4
3 or more days	28

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	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