Wright St

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

Roster valuesβ

Roster values for Wright St, 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
Dominic Pangonis	68.2%	+1.5range +0.5 to +2.7Sufficient evidence	+5.8range +5.1 to +6.5Sufficient evidence	$22KspeculativeLoading	$6K to $67KLoading
Solomon Callaghan	68.1%	-1.4range -2.6 to -0.3Sufficient evidence	+4.2range +3.4 to +5.0Sufficient evidence	$6KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $30KLoading
TJ Burch	62.6%	+1.6range +0.6 to +2.8Sufficient evidence	+5.4range +4.7 to +6.0Sufficient evidence	$22KspeculativeLoading	$7K to $66KLoading
Michael Imariagbe	60.0%	+3.7range +2.3 to +4.8Sufficient evidence	+6.1range +5.3 to +6.8Sufficient evidence	$40KspeculativeLoading	$12K to $125KLoading
Kellen Pickett	58.9%	+2.1range +1.0 to +3.3Sufficient evidence	+5.3range +4.7 to +6.0Sufficient evidence	$26KspeculativeLoading	$8K to $77KLoading
Michael Cooper	57.1%	+1.2range +0.3 to +2.0Sufficient evidence	+4.7range +4.1 to +5.2Sufficient evidence	$17KspeculativeLoading	$5K to $51KLoading
Logan Woods	45.3%	+0.2range -1.1 to +1.4Sufficient evidence	+3.3range +2.8 to +3.8Sufficient evidence	$9KspeculativeLoading	$2K to $33KLoading
Andrea Holden	34.5%	+1.8range +0.3 to +3.0Sufficient evidence	+3.0range +2.5 to +3.4Sufficient evidence	$13KspeculativeLoading	$4K to $42KLoading
Sam Alamutu	26.9%	+0.8range -0.3 to +1.9Sufficient evidence	+2.1range +1.8 to +2.4Sufficient evidence	$8KspeculativeLoading	$2K to $26KLoading
Bryan Etumnu	11.2%	+0.9range -0.0 to +1.6Limited evidence	+0.9range +0.8 to +1.0Limited evidence	$4KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $12KLoading
Alex Bruskotter	7.2%	+1.6range +0.9 to +2.3Limited evidence	+0.6range +0.5 to +0.6Limited evidence	$4KspeculativeLoading	$1K to $11KLoading
Ayden Davis	0.0%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence	Not applicable	$2Kspeculative, 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: $190K; 80% Range $65K to $515K
Tier: Low and other; low evidence
Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4: $175K to $255K; Scenario medians
Players with Figures: 12; 1 floor only

The widest scenario range, $88K to $660K, 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
Dominic Pangonis	68.2%	$22K	$6K to $67K	12.9%	$20K to $30K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Solomon Callaghan	68.1%	$6K	$1K to $30K	4.4%	$5K to $7K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
TJ Burch	62.6%	$22K	$7K to $66K	12.5%	$20K to $29K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Michael Imariagbe	60.0%	$40K	$12K to $125K	18.9%	$35K to $52K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Kellen Pickett	58.9%	$26K	$8K to $77K	13.3%	$23K to $35K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Michael Cooper	57.1%	$17K	$5K to $51K	10.3%	$15K to $23K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Logan Woods	45.3%	$9K	$2K to $33K	6.4%	$8K to $12K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Andrea Holden	34.5%	$13K	$4K to $42K	7.4%	$12K to $18K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Sam Alamutu	26.9%	$8K	$2K to $26K	4.9%	$7K to $11K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Bryan Etumnu	11.2%	$4K	$1K to $12K	2.5%	$4K to $6K	$2K	Limited evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Alex Bruskotter	7.2%	$4K	$1K to $11K	2.1%	$4K to $5K	$2K	Limited evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Ayden Davis	0.0%	$2K	$0 to $4K	0.8%	$1K to $2K	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Team Pool	—	$190K	$65K to $515K	100%	$175K to $255K	—

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, Wright State University-Main Campus (NCAA Division I without football)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$2,583,303	Equals expenses (budget identity)
Men's basketball expenses	$2,583,303
Athletics department expenses	$11,873,145
Athletics department revenue	$11,873,145

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

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	$2,583,303	Reported by the school; not NIL pay and not a model output.
Reported expenses	$2,583,303	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	2
2 days	2
3 or more days	28

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