Stanford

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

Roster valuesβ

Roster values for Stanford, 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
Ebuka Okorie	84.9%	+3.3range +2.4 to +4.6Sufficient evidence	+7.7range +7.0 to +8.4Sufficient evidence	$905KspeculativeLoading	$570K to $1.75MLoading
Benny Gealer	73.8%	+2.4range +0.9 to +3.5Sufficient evidence	+6.3range +5.4 to +6.9Sufficient evidence	$580KspeculativeLoading	$325K to $985KLoading
Aidan Cammann	53.5%	+0.9range -0.0 to +2.0Sufficient evidence	+4.0range +3.6 to +4.5Sufficient evidence	$300KspeculativeLoading	$115K to $470KLoading
Ryan Agarwal	52.3%	+0.8range -0.7 to +1.9Sufficient evidence	+3.9range +3.2 to +4.4Sufficient evidence	$270KspeculativeLoading	$55K to $450KLoading
AJ Rohosy	51.6%	+1.5range +0.4 to +2.5Sufficient evidence	+4.1range +3.6 to +4.5Sufficient evidence	$330KspeculativeLoading	$155K to $540KLoading
Jeremy Dent-Smith	48.5%	+0.9range -0.6 to +2.1Sufficient evidence	+3.6range +3.0 to +4.1Sufficient evidence	$265KspeculativeLoading	$73K to $430KLoading
Chisom Okpara	38.0%	+0.3range -0.8 to +1.1Sufficient evidence	+2.7range +2.3 to +3.0Sufficient evidence	$175KspeculativeLoading	$39K to $295KLoading
Oskar Giltay	34.7%	+2.0range +1.0 to +3.0Sufficient evidence	+2.9range +2.6 to +3.2Sufficient evidence	$265KspeculativeLoading	$160K to $420KLoading
Donavin Young	25.0%	-0.5range -1.7 to +0.8Sufficient evidence	+1.6range +1.3 to +1.9Sufficient evidence	$95KspeculativeLoading	$21K to $185KLoading
Jaylen Thompson	16.4%	+0.7range -0.1 to +1.3Sufficient evidence	+1.2range +1.1 to +1.3Sufficient evidence	$99KspeculativeLoading	$43K to $155KLoading
Cameron Grant	15.0%	-0.9range -2.1 to +0.2Sufficient evidence	+0.9range +0.8 to +1.1Sufficient evidence	$56KspeculativeLoading	$19K to $110KLoading
Kristers Skrinda	4.1%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$23Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$13K to $37KLoading
Evan Stinson	1.6%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$23Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$13K to $37KLoading
Tallis Toure	0.7%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$23Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$13K to $37KLoading
Ethan Kitch	0.1%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$23Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$13K to $37KLoading

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 $2.55M to $4.95M
Tier: Power 4; medium evidence
Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4: $3.60M in all four; Scenario medians
Players with Figures: 15; 4 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
Ebuka Okorie	84.9%	$905K	$570K to $1.75M	24.5%	$905K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Benny Gealer	73.8%	$580K	$325K to $985K	16.1%	$580K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Aidan Cammann	53.5%	$300K	$115K to $470K	9.0%	$300K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Ryan Agarwal	52.3%	$270K	$55K to $450K	8.1%	$270K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
AJ Rohosy	51.6%	$330K	$155K to $540K	9.6%	$330K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Jeremy Dent-Smith	48.5%	$265K	$73K to $430K	8.0%	$265K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Chisom Okpara	38.0%	$175K	$39K to $295K	5.3%	$175K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Oskar Giltay	34.7%	$265K	$160K to $420K	7.5%	$265K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Donavin Young	25.0%	$95K	$21K to $185K	2.9%	$95K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Jaylen Thompson	16.4%	$99K	$43K to $155K	3.0%	$99K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Cameron Grant	15.0%	$56K	$19K to $110K	1.7%	$56K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Kristers Skrinda	4.1%	$23K	$13K to $37K	0.7%	$23K in all four	$23K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Evan Stinson	1.6%	$23K	$13K to $37K	0.7%	$23K in all four	$23K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Tallis Toure	0.7%	$23K	$13K to $37K	0.7%	$23K in all four	$23K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Ethan Kitch	0.1%	$23K	$13K to $37K	0.7%	$23K in all four	$23K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Team Pool	—	$3.60M	$2.55M to $4.95M	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, Stanford University (NCAA Division I-FBS)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$10,765,368	Equals expenses (budget identity)
Men's basketball expenses	$10,765,368
Athletics department expenses	$192,802,320
Athletics department revenue	$192,802,320

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 expensesrevenue equals expenses

Reported revenue	$10,765,368	Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output.
Reported expenses	$10,765,368	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	31

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	0
Longest run of consecutive away games	3

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