UT San Antonio

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

Roster valuesβ

Roster values for UT San Antonio, 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
Jamir Simpson	88.4%	-4.0range -4.9 to -2.8Sufficient evidence	+1.4range +1.1 to +1.6Sufficient evidence	$35KspeculativeLoading	$3K to $165KLoading
Dorian Hayes	65.7%	-4.2range -5.5 to -3.1Sufficient evidence	+1.0range +0.8 to +1.3Sufficient evidence	$25KspeculativeLoading	$3K to $115KLoading
Brent Moss	65.4%	-2.9range -4.5 to -1.6Sufficient evidence	+1.2range +1.0 to +1.4Sufficient evidence	$39KspeculativeLoading	$3K to $160KLoading
Baboucarr Njie	62.1%	-1.1range -2.6 to +0.1Sufficient evidence	+1.4range +1.2 to +1.6Sufficient evidence	$105KspeculativeLoading	$6K to $415KLoading
Austin Nunez	52.0%	-3.4range -4.8 to -1.9Sufficient evidence	+1.0range +0.7 to +1.2Sufficient evidence	$27KspeculativeLoading	$3K to $115KLoading
Matheo Coffi	49.6%	-1.6range -2.6 to -0.1Sufficient evidence	+1.1range +1.0 to +1.4Sufficient evidence	$74KspeculativeLoading	$5K to $335KLoading
Kaidon Rayfield	42.2%	-1.0range -1.9 to -0.0Sufficient evidence	+1.1range +0.9 to +1.2Sufficient evidence	$82KspeculativeLoading	$7K to $390KLoading
Daniel Akitoby	27.9%	-1.5range -2.8 to -0.3Sufficient evidence	+0.7range +0.6 to +0.8Sufficient evidence	$39KspeculativeLoading	$4K to $165KLoading
LJ Brown	17.4%	-1.6range -2.4 to -0.7Sufficient evidence	+0.4range +0.4 to +0.5Sufficient evidence	$25KspeculativeLoading	$4K to $83KLoading
Mo Njie	13.3%	-2.1range -3.1 to -1.3Limited evidence	+0.3range +0.3 to +0.4Limited evidence	$15KspeculativeLoading	$3K to $48KLoading
Macaleab Rich	11.4%	-1.5range -2.1 to -1.0Limited evidence	+0.3range +0.3 to +0.3Limited evidence	$17KspeculativeLoading	$4K to $52KLoading
Pierce Spencer	3.9%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$5Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$2K to $13KLoading
Stanley Borden	0.7%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$5Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$2K to $13KLoading
Jackson Fazande	0.0%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$5Kspeculative, floor onlyLoading	$2K to $13KLoading

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: $765K; 80% Range $320K to $1.70M
Tier: Mid and high major; low to medium evidence
Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4: $580K to $875K; Scenario medians
Players with Figures: 14; 3 floor only

The widest scenario range, $385K to $1.90M, is wider than the 80% Range above (soft check S5). Methodology

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
Jamir Simpson	88.4%	$35K	$3K to $165K	7.5%	$28K to $42K	$5K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Dorian Hayes	65.7%	$25K	$3K to $115K	4.7%	$19K to $28K	$5K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Brent Moss	65.4%	$39K	$3K to $160K	8.1%	$30K to $45K	$5K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Baboucarr Njie	62.1%	$105K	$6K to $415K	14.5%	$79K to $120K	$5K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Austin Nunez	52.0%	$27K	$3K to $115K	5.5%	$21K to $32K	$5K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Matheo Coffi	49.6%	$74K	$5K to $335K	10.9%	$57K to $86K	$5K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Kaidon Rayfield	42.2%	$82K	$7K to $390K	10.7%	$63K to $96K	$5K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Daniel Akitoby	27.9%	$39K	$4K to $165K	6.2%	$30K to $46K	$5K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
LJ Brown	17.4%	$25K	$4K to $83K	4.1%	$19K to $29K	$5K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Mo Njie	13.3%	$15K	$3K to $48K	2.9%	$12K to $17K	$5K	Limited evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Macaleab Rich	11.4%	$17K	$4K to $52K	2.9%	$13K to $20K	$5K	Limited evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Pierce Spencer	3.9%	$5K	$2K to $13K	0.7%	$4K to $6K	$5K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Stanley Borden	0.7%	$5K	$2K to $13K	0.7%	$4K to $6K	$5K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Jackson Fazande	0.0%	$5K	$2K to $13K	0.7%	$4K to $6K	$5K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Team Pool	—	$765K	$320K to $1.70M	100%	$580K to $875K	—

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, The University of Texas at San Antonio (NCAA Division I-FBS)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$2,897,731	Equals expenses (budget identity)
Men's basketball expenses	$2,897,731
Athletics department expenses	$49,898,232
Athletics department revenue	$54,436,434

Coverage and exclusions

27 of 28 games passed lineup acceptance (96%). 100% of accepted on-court possessions are bound to registered players.

1 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	$2,897,731	Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output.
Reported expenses	$2,897,731	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	26

Rest is capped at three days. Descriptive count.

Load summary

Mean games in prior 7 days	1.3
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