Tennessee Tech

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

Roster valuesβ

Roster values for Tennessee Tech, 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
Ty Owens	70.7%	-0.2range -1.2 to +0.8Sufficient evidence	+3.7range +3.2 to +4.0Sufficient evidence	$24KspeculativeLoading	$2K to $81KLoading
Mekhi Cameron	68.9%	-0.2range -1.4 to +0.9Sufficient evidence	+3.6range +3.1 to +4.1Sufficient evidence	$23KspeculativeLoading	$2K to $82KLoading
Brandon Muntu	64.8%	-1.3range -2.5 to -0.2Sufficient evidence	+3.0range +2.5 to +3.4Sufficient evidence	$11KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $47KLoading
JaJuan Nicholls	46.8%	+1.7range +0.3 to +2.9Sufficient evidence	+3.0range +2.6 to +3.4Sufficient evidence	$44KspeculativeLoading	$12K to $175KLoading
Dani Pounds	40.3%	-0.2range -1.2 to +1.0Sufficient evidence	+2.2range +1.9 to +2.5Sufficient evidence	$16KspeculativeLoading	$2K to $60KLoading
Grant Slatten	38.3%	-1.3range -2.7 to +0.1Sufficient evidence	+1.9range +1.5 to +2.1Sufficient evidence	$8KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $33KLoading
Ja'Quavian Florence	37.6%	-1.0range -2.1 to +0.2Sufficient evidence	+1.9range +1.6 to +2.1Sufficient evidence	$9KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $36KLoading
Malik Ferguson	31.4%	-1.9range -2.5 to -1.2Sufficient evidence	+1.4range +1.2 to +1.6Sufficient evidence	$4KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $21KLoading
Jacobe Whitted	31.0%	+0.0range -0.8 to +0.8Sufficient evidence	+1.7range +1.5 to +1.9Sufficient evidence	$13KspeculativeLoading	$3K to $43KLoading
C.J. McPherson	21.9%	-0.8range -1.8 to +0.2Sufficient evidence	+1.1range +1.0 to +1.3Sufficient evidence	$6KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $23KLoading
Jah'Kim Payne	21.4%	-2.6range -3.9 to -1.4Sufficient evidence	+0.9range +0.7 to +1.0Sufficient evidence	$3KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $13KLoading
Mekhi Turner	18.0%	-0.4range -1.2 to +0.5Limited evidence	+1.0range +0.9 to +1.1Limited evidence	$7KspeculativeLoading	$2K to $26KLoading
Owen Varnado	8.6%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$1Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$0 to $4KLoading
Hagan Preston	0.2%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$1Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$0 to $4KLoading
Colin Ayers	0.1%	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: $215K; 80% Range $75K to $585K
Tier: Low and other; low evidence
Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4: $210K to $220K; Scenario medians
Players with Figures: 15; 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
Ty Owens	70.7%	$24K	$2K to $81K	13.5%	$24K to $25K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Mekhi Cameron	68.9%	$23K	$2K to $82K	13.4%	$23K to $24K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Brandon Muntu	64.8%	$11K	$1K to $47K	8.3%	$11K in all four	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
JaJuan Nicholls	46.8%	$44K	$12K to $175K	17.6%	$43K to $45K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Dani Pounds	40.3%	$16K	$2K to $60K	8.2%	$15K to $16K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Grant Slatten	38.3%	$8K	$1K to $33K	5.3%	$8K in all four	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Ja'Quavian Florence	37.6%	$9K	$1K to $36K	5.8%	$8K to $9K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Malik Ferguson	31.4%	$4K	$1K to $21K	2.8%	$4K in all four	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Jacobe Whitted	31.0%	$13K	$3K to $43K	6.7%	$13K to $14K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
C.J. McPherson	21.9%	$6K	$1K to $23K	4.0%	$6K to $7K	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Jah'Kim Payne	21.4%	$3K	$1K to $13K	1.1%	$3K in all four	$1K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Mekhi Turner	18.0%	$7K	$2K to $26K	3.9%	$7K to $8K	$1K	Limited evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Owen Varnado	8.6%	$1K	$0 to $4K	0.7%	$1K in all four	$1K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Hagan Preston	0.2%	$1K	$0 to $4K	0.7%	$1K in all four	$1K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Colin Ayers	0.1%	$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	—	$215K	$75K to $585K	100%	$210K to $220K	—

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, Tennessee Technological University (NCAA Division I-FCS)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$1,828,387	Equals expenses (budget identity)
Men's basketball expenses	$1,828,387
Athletics department expenses	$20,355,959
Athletics department revenue	$20,355,959

Coverage and exclusions

23 of 28 games passed lineup acceptance (82%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.

5 of 28 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	$1,828,387	Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output.
Reported expenses	$1,828,387	Reported by the school.

EADA link: matched through an NCES IPEDS institution alias, with state and home-venue city agreeing.

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	11
3 or more days	16

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	3
Longest run of consecutive away games	5

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