Utah Tech

WAC · 2025–26 · Raw net rank 229 · Raw net -3.2 · Tempo 68.0 · 31 Division I games · Through 2026-03-13

Record: 16–15; 16 wins
AdjNet: -2.7β; rank 215 of 365
AdjO: 108.8β; rank 163 of 365
AdjD: 111.4β; rank 259 of 365
AdjT: 67.5β
SOS: 0.1β; rank 153 of 363
NCSOS: 2.7β
WAB: -7.6β; rank 168 of 363
RR: 2.2β
Exp. W: 13.8β

Scouting Report

Scouting report with national ranks
Category	Offense	Defense	D-I Average
Efficiency
Efficiency / 100 poss.	106.9207	110.2223	108.5
Four Factors
Effective FG%	53.391	50.9151	51.4
TO / 100 poss.	17.6245	16.9159	16.7
Offensive rebound %	28.1260	34.5326	30.6
FTA / FGA %	30.6291	33.0132	35.0
Shooting
3P%	35.0113	30.728	33.9
2P%	53.795	53.5254	51.7
FT%	72.6185	72.6187	72.5
Style
3PA / FGA %	38.2	34.4	39.5
Assists / FGM %	53.1	48.6	52.6
Blocks / opp. 2PA %	7.5	7.4	9.5
Point Distribution
3-pointers %	31.2	25.1	31.4
2-pointers %	51.5	55.8	48.8
Free throws %	17.3	19.1	19.8

Best · Median · Worst · Mark: further right is a better national rank, of 365 teams.

Rotation Depth

Effective Rotation Size: 7.4
Top Three Share of Minutes: 49%
Bench Share of Minutes: 23%
Players with Logged Minutes: 12

Bench: players outside the top five in minutes. Definitions

Schedule and Results

Schedule and results
Date	Opponent	Result	Poss.	Site	Record
11-03	South Dakota	W 81–79 1OT	82.4	Away	1–0
11-07	Arizona	L 67–93	71.2	Away	1–1
11-09	Arizona St.	L 66–81	71.0	Away	1–2
11-12	Manhattan	L 75–79	64.8	Neutral	1–3
11-14	Mississippi Val.	W 81–75 2OT	74.3	Neutral	2–3
11-16	Hawaii	L 62–68	70.5	—	2–4
11-25	Portland St.	L 63–68	71.1	Home	2–5
11-29	UC Riverside	W 77–69	63.3	Home	3–5
12-03	Santa Clara	L 80–90	76.5	Away	3–6
12-20	Weber St.	W 82–80	66.6	Away	4–6
12-22	Creighton	L 69–92	72.0	Away	4–7
12-29	Southern Utah	W 80–66	72.1	Home	5–7
01-01	Abilene Christian	W 79–64	66.9	Away	6–7
01-08	California Baptist	L 72–84	62.5	Away	6–8
01-10	Utah Valley	L 76–92	76.7	Away	6–9
01-15	UT Arlington	L 52–56	67.8	Home	6–10
01-17	Tarleton St.	W 75–71	69.7	Home	7–10
01-21	California Baptist	L 64–73	61.9	Away	7–11
01-24	Southern Utah	W 102–91	72.4	Home	8–11
01-29	Abilene Christian	W 76–70	73.7	Away	9–11
01-31	Tarleton St.	W 65–59	63.4	Away	10–11
02-05	UT Arlington	W 87–84 2OT	76.4	Home	11–11
02-12	Utah Valley	W 81–77	67.6	Home	12–11
02-14	California Baptist	W 70–65	64.3	Home	13–11
02-19	UT Arlington	L 50–63	61.2	Away	13–12
02-21	Tarleton St.	W 80–72	64.8	Away	14–12
02-26	Abilene Christian	W 85–81	69.9	Home	15–12
02-28	Southern Utah	L 67–81	66.3	Away	15–13
03-07	Utah Valley	L 101–104 2OT	85.2	Home	15–14
03-12	Abilene Christian	W 80–74	70.4	Neutral	16–14
03-13	California Baptist	L 72–86	70.4	Neutral	16–15

Roster · 12 players

Player logs in 31 of 31 team games

Team roster, per game
Column groups	Minutes			Per Game							Shooting									Last Five Team Games
Player	G	MPG	Team Min%	Pts	Reb	Ast	Stl	Blk	TO	PF	2P	2P%	3P	3P%	FT	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/FGA	G	MPG	Min%	Pts/G
Noah Bolanga	31	33:43	82.0%	11.6	5.9	2.3	1.3	0.4	2.1	2.2	80–162	49.4%	51–160	31.9%	47–69	68.1%	48.6%	51.1%	21.4%	5	34:13 +0:30	81.5%	8.4 −3.2
Chance Trujillo	31	33:09	80.6%	12.3	3.3	2.7	0.9	0.3	1.5	2.6	56–111	50.5%	71–199	35.7%	57–72	79.2%	52.4%	55.9%	23.2%	5	35:22 +2:12	84.2%	17.4 +5.1
Ethan Potter	31	32:20	78.6%	17.1	7.9	2.0	0.6	0.8	1.4	2.1	208–337	61.7%	3–18	16.7%†	105–131	80.2%	59.9%	64.2%	36.9%	5	33:43 +1:23	80.3%	22.4 +5.3
Jusaun Holt	30	32:32	76.6%	12.0	4.2	3.4	0.8	0.8	3.3	2.2	62–158	39.2%	52–127	40.9%	80–98	81.6%	49.1%	54.9%	34.4%	5	36:42 +4:10	87.4%	16.8 +4.8
Tanner Davis	30	26:47	63.0%	7.2	3.1	1.8	1.6	0.3	1.0	1.8	78–130	60.0%	8–36	22.2%†	35–69	50.7%	54.2%	54.7%	41.6%	4	26:21 −0:25	50.2%	5.8 −1.4
Britton Berrett	31	22:46	55.4%	5.2	1.7	1.1	0.6	0.1	0.7	1.9	15–26	57.7%	37–90	41.1%	21–22	95.5%†	60.8%	64.4%	19.0%	5	28:54 +6:08	68.8%	5.4 +0.2
Madiba Owona	12	26:44	25.2%	10.3	3.6	1.6	1.3	0.1	1.7	2.5	33–71	46.5%	16–43	37.2%†	10–17	58.8%†	50.0%	51.0%	14.9%	—	—	—	—
Samuel Ariyibi	30	9:43	22.9%	2.4	1.7	0.5	0.5	0.3	0.8	1.2	23–50	46.0%†	1–9	11.1%†	22–33	66.7%	41.5%†	48.3%†	55.9%†	5	13:58 +4:15	33.3%	2.6 +0.2
Dario Domingos	23	5:51	10.6%	4.5	1.8	0.2	0.1	0.1	0.7	1.6	39–60	65.0%†	1–3	33.3%†	23–40	57.5%	64.3%†	64.5%†	63.5%†	3	5:37 −0:14	8.0%	3.3 −1.2
Boston HarkerFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	5	3:28	1.4%	0.4	0.6	0.2	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.2	1–2	50.0%†	0–1	0.0%†	0–0	—	33.3%†	33.3%†	0.0%†	—	—	—	—
Dallin GrantFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	7	1:36	0.9%	1.0	0.3	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.1	0.1	2–4	50.0%†	1–2	50.0%†	0–0	—	58.3%†	58.3%†	0.0%†	4	2:13 +0:37	4.2%	1.8 +0.8
Preston VandermydeFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	5	0:45	0.3%	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.2	0–0	—	0–0	—	0–0	—	—	—	—	3	0:58 +0:13	1.4%	0.0 0.0
Team, games with logs · per game	31 games			74.7	32.7	14.4	not published	3.0	12.3	not published	597–1111	53.7%	241–688	35.0%	400–551	72.6%	53.3%	56.7%	30.6%
Sum of players				74.7	30.4	14.4	6.9	3.0	11.7	16.1	Shooting residuals: see Player Lines Against Team Totals.
Residual: team minus players				0.0	+2.3	−0.0	not published	0.0	+0.6	not published

G: logged games. Team Min%: share of team minutes on court (40 per game plus overtime). 2P, 3P and FT show made–attempted. † Few attempts: under 100 FGA, 50 3PA or 25 FTA. Few G: under 10 games. <100 min: under 100 minutes. Last Five Team Games columns show change from the season value and hide on narrow screens.

Speculative Compensation · 2025–26β

Estimated share of the school's revenue-sharing budget for men's basketball. Not observed pay.

Team Pool: $210K; 80% Range $77K to $555K
Tier: Low and other; low evidence
Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4: $210K in all four; Scenario medians
Players with Figures: 12; 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
Noah Bolanga	82.5%	$21K	$2K to $73K	13.2%	$20K to $21K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Chance Trujillo	81.4%	$35K	$10K to $105K	17.0%	$35K in all four	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Ethan Potter	78.9%	$60K	$19K to $190K	25.5%	$60K in all four	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Jusaun Holt	77.6%	$7K	$1K to $39K	4.9%	$7K in all four	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Tanner Davis	62.8%	$16K	$2K to $54K	10.2%	$16K in all four	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Britton Berrett	57.2%	$24K	$6K to $77K	12.2%	$24K to $25K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Samuel Ariyibi	23.5%	$4K	$1K to $16K	2.5%	$4K in all four	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Madiba Owona	22.7%	$7K	$2K to $21K	4.3%	$7K in all four	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Dario Domingos	10.9%	$5K	$2K to $14K	2.7%	$5K in all four	$2K	Limited evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Boston Harker	1.3%	$2K	$1K to $5K	0.8%	$2K in all four	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Dallin Grant	0.9%	$2K	$1K to $5K	0.8%	$2K in all four	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Preston Vandermyde	0.3%	$2K	$1K to $5K	0.8%	$2K in all four	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Team Pool	—	$210K	$77K to $555K	100%	$210K in all four	—

What-If Calculator · Speculativeβ

Re-runs the 4,000 joint draws with your inputs. The address saves your inputs.

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, Utah Tech University (NCAA Division I-FCS)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$1,909,142
Men's basketball expenses	$1,894,269
Athletics department expenses	$18,870,761
Athletics department revenue	$23,448,672

Team Totalsβ

Season per game, 31 games, 2,167 possessions. Observed box-score sums, unadjusted. Definitions

Team and opponent season totals
Statistic	Team	Opponents
Points	74.7	77.0
Field goals made	27.0	27.9
Field goals attempted	58.0	61.2
3-pointers made	7.8	6.5
3-pointers attempted	22.2	21.0
Free throws made	12.9	14.7
Free throws attempted	17.8	20.2
Offensive rebounds	9.4	12.3
Defensive rebounds	23.4	24.0
Total rebounds	32.7	36.3
Assists	14.4	13.6
Blocks	3.0	2.6
Turnovers	12.3	11.8
Steals	No team figure. Players sum to 214.
Personal fouls	No team figure. Players sum to 498.
Minutes (derived)	205.6	not published

31 of 31 games have player logs. Residual is team total minus sum of players. Team rebounds and team turnovers have no player owner, so a residual is expected. Definitions

Player lines against team totals
Statistic	Status	Team Total, Logged Games	Sum of Players	Residual	Tolerance	Team Total, Games Without Logs
Points	Reconciled	2,317	2,317	0	±11.6	0
Field goals made	Reconciled	838	838	0	±4.2	0
Field goals attempted	Reconciled	1,799	1,799	0	±9.0	0
3-pointers made	Reconciled	241	241	0	±2.0	0
3-pointers attempted	Reconciled	688	688	0	±3.4	0
Free throws made	Reconciled	400	400	0	±2.0	0
Free throws attempted	Reconciled	551	551	0	±2.8	0
Offensive rebounds	No player split	not published	not published	not published	not published	not published
Defensive rebounds	No player split	not published	not published	not published	not published	not published
Total rebounds	Reconciled	1,015	943	+72	±81.2	0
Assists	Reconciled	445	446	−1	±2.2	0
Blocks	Reconciled	94	94	0	±2.0	0
Turnovers	Residual shown	382	364	+18	±11.5	0
Steals	No team figure	not published	214	not published	not published	not published
Personal fouls	No team figure	not published	498	not published	not published	not published
Minutes (derived)	Reconciled	6,375	6,340	+35.2	±127.5	0

Model-Implied Player Valueβ

Ranges are the 10th to 90th percentile of whole-game resampling draws. They are not calibrated intervals.

Open circle: limited evidence. Filled circle: sufficient evidence. Line: zero. No graphic: insufficient evidence.

Net points per 100 possessions, in possession-share order.
Player	Poss. Share	Net and Rangeβ
Noah Bolanga	82.5%	-0.4range -1.6 to +0.8Sufficient evidence
Chance Trujillo	81.4%	+0.6range -0.3 to +1.6Sufficient evidence
Ethan Potter	78.9%	+1.9range +1.2 to +2.7Sufficient evidence
Jusaun Holt	77.6%	-2.1range -3.2 to -0.8Sufficient evidence
Tanner Davis	62.8%	-0.4range -1.4 to +0.5Sufficient evidence
Britton Berrett	57.2%	+0.7range -0.6 to +1.8Sufficient evidence
Samuel Ariyibi	23.5%	-1.6range -2.8 to -0.5Sufficient evidence
Madiba Owona	22.7%	-0.2range -0.7 to +0.3Sufficient evidence
Dario Domingos	10.9%	+0.1range -0.7 to +0.7Limited evidence
Boston Harker	1.3%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Dallin Grant	0.9%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Preston Vandermyde	0.3%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence

Team Aggregate of Player Values, 2026β

Summary of the player values below. Split role: descriptive: not used in fit or gates. Model nil-value-v3. Definitions · NIL Methodology

Average value over five on-court slots, net points per 100 possessions: +9.4range +8.6 to +10.3Sufficient evidence

200 joint draws. The range is the 10th to 90th percentile. Player ranges cannot be added.

9 valued players hold 99.5% of on-court time. 3 without a value (under 300 possessions) hold 0.5%, counted at replacement level -9.5. Limited-evidence players hold 2.2%.

NIL Methodology · Scheduling and Model-Implied Value