Zach Riley
Only corroborated player-season records; not complete career coverage.
Observed career performance
911:16 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 76
- Minutes per game
- 11:59
- Points per game
- 2.3
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 1.9 / 0.8
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 2.3 | 1.9 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 0.9 |
| Per 40 minutes | 7.7 | 6.2 | 2.6 | 1.6 | 0.3 | 1.7 | 3.2 |
| Season totals | 175 | 141 | 59 | 36 | 7 | 38 | 72 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 59–146 | 40.4% | 1.9 | 6.4 |
| 2P | 31–54 | 57.4%† | 0.7 | 2.4 |
| 3P | 28–92 | 30.4% | 1.2 | 4.0 |
| FT | 29–42 | 69.0% | 0.6 | 1.8 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50.0% | 53.2% | 63.0% | 28.8% | 1.55 |
Combined corroborated seasons only; not complete career coverage. † marks a rate on fewer attempts than the floor (field goal 100, three-point 50, free throw 25). Floors are descriptive, not model output. Definitions
Linked seasons
| Season | Team | G | MPG | Pts | Reb | Ast | Pts/40 | 3P% | FT% | TS% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 Zach Riley | Fordham | 7Few games | 8:51 | 3.1 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 14.2 | 66.7%† | 66.7%† | 75.1%† |
| 2023 Zach Riley | Fordham | 23 | 8:29 | 2.3 | 1.3 | 0.5 | 10.9 | 40.0%† | 87.5%† | 62.3%† |
| 2024 Zach Riley | Fordham | 18 | 9:07 | 2.3 | 1.3 | 0.6 | 10.2 | 25.0%† | 70.0%† | 53.3%† |
| 2025 Zach Riley | Fordham | 28 | 17:30 | 2.1 | 3.0 | 1.3 | 4.7 | 22.0%† | 61.1%† | 42.7%† |
Career identity corroborated by repeated game, team and individual-statistic matches. Unlinked seasons are excluded.
Speculative compensation · 2025–26β
No speculative compensation is published for this player: there is no current-season team to read a pool from.
No revenue-sharing budget existed before the 2025–26 season, so no compensation figure is modelled for earlier seasons.
Model-implied value and speculative compensation by seasonβ
| Season | Team | Speculative compensation (best guess) | Compensation 80% range | Split role | Net | Range | Evidence | Range graphic. Position on one axis | Offense | Defense | Wins above replacement | On-court possessions | Sample and flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Fordham | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | -1.4 | -2.9 to -0.0 | Sufficient evidence | -0.7 | -0.7 | +1.6range +1.1 to +2.1 | 1,683 | Season detail | |
| 2024 | Fordham | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +0.2 | -0.5 to +0.9 | Limited evidence | +0.2 | +0.0 | +0.7range +0.6 to +0.9 | 586 | Limited evidence: 300 to 599 on-court possessions. Season detail | |
| 2023 | Fordham | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +1.0 | +0.1 to +2.0 | Sufficient evidence | +1.2 | -0.1 | +0.9range +0.7 to +1.1 | 689 | Season detail | |
| 2022 | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — | development: in model selection | No model-implied value is published: fewer than 300 on-court possessions, or the team’s games were outside the lineup audit. | Not applicable | |||||||
Open circle: limited evidence. Filled circle: sufficient evidence. Vertical line: zero. This table makes no claim about change over time, so it has no change column or trend. Seasons 2011 to 2017 have a point value but no range, so none is shown. Compensation exists for 2025–26 only; earlier rows say that no budget existed. NIL methodology · Compensation methodology