Joshua Phillips

Only corroborated player-season records; not complete career coverage.

Observed career performance

469:22 minutes logged

Games logged: 34
Minutes per game: 13:48
Points per game: 4.5
Rebounds / assists per game: 3.5 / 0.2

Box line on three bases
Basis	Pts	Reb	Ast	Stl	Blk	TO	PF
Per game	4.5	3.5	0.2	0.3	0.3	1.1	1.6
Per 40 minutes	13.0	10.1	0.5	0.8	0.9	3.3	4.8
Season totals	153	119	6	9	11	39	56

Shooting with attempts
Shot	Made–att.	Pct	Att/G	Att/40
FG	62–119	52.1%	3.5	10.1
2P	62–118	52.5%	3.5	10.1
3P	0–1	0.0%†	0.0	0.1
FT	29–58	50.0%	1.7	4.9

Derived rates (computed here from the box line, not published statistics)
eFG%	Estimated TS%	3PA / FGA	FTA / FGA	AST / TO
52.1%	52.9%	0.8%	48.7%	0.15

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

Linked seasons, per-game and shooting rates. † marks a rate on fewer attempts than the declared floor.
Season	Team	G	MPG	Pts	Reb	Ast	Pts/40	3P%	FT%	TS%
2016 Joshua Phillips	MTSU	20	5:16	0.8	1.3	0.0	6.5	0.0%†	11.1%†	40.6%†
2018 Joshua Phillips	Chattanooga	14	26:00	9.7	6.7	0.4	14.9	—	57.1%	55.0%

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

Net points per 100 possessions by season, newest first. The speculative compensation best guess for 2025–26 only sits right after the team, so it is the first figure after the season. Ordered by season, not by value or dollars. Compensation is a best guess of a share of the school’s own revenue-sharing budget, not observed pay.
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
2018	Chattanooga	None: no budget that season	—	training: in model fit	-0.8	-2.0 to +0.4	Sufficient evidence		-0.4	-0.4	Not computed for this season	1,221
2016	Not applicable	None: no budget that season	—	training: in model fit	A point value exists for this season but no range is published, so none is shown.							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; this identity has such a value in 2016. Compensation exists for 2025–26 only; earlier rows say that no budget existed. NIL methodology · Compensation methodology