Algosys College Basketball

Search teams and players

Type a team or player name. Results are alphabetical; players show their 2026 team. Up and Down move, Enter opens the highlighted result or the first one, Esc closes.

Rankings / Athletes / Drew Pember

Drew Pember

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

Observed career performance

2175:18 minutes logged

Games logged
91
Minutes per game
23:54
Points per game
14.5
Rebounds / assists per game
5.8 / 1.7
Box line on three bases
BasisPtsRebAstStlBlkTOPF
Per game14.55.81.70.61.52.01.9
Per 40 minutes24.39.72.91.02.63.43.2
Season totals132053015753139185174
Shooting with attempts
ShotMade–att.PctAtt/GAtt/40
FG378–81846.2%9.015.0
2P265–51052.0%5.69.4
3P113–30836.7%3.45.7
FT451–52985.3%5.89.7
Derived rates (computed here from the box line, not published statistics)
eFG%Estimated TS%3PA / FGAFTA / FGAAST / TO
53.1%62.8%37.7%64.7%0.85

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.
SeasonTeamGMPGPtsRebAstPts/403P%FT%TS%
2020Tennessee 206:311.40.90.28.921.4%†71.4%†49.7%†
2021Tennessee 8Few games2:010.30.10.15.00.0%†—14.3%†
2022UNC Asheville 1828:4415.96.41.422.232.8%86.3%60.8%
2023UNC Asheville 2534:3321.59.02.424.937.5%84.7%63.1%
2024UNC Asheville 2032:2423.38.53.428.740.2%86.5%65.8%

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.
SeasonTeamSpeculative compensation (best guess)Compensation 80% rangeSplit roleNetRangeEvidencePosition on one axisOffenseDefenseWins above replacementOn-court possessionsSample and flags
2024UNC AshevilleNone: no budget that season—evaluation: examined, post hoc+5.1+3.9 to +6.2Sufficient evidence+3.2+1.9+6.0range +5.4 to +6.82,164Season detail
2023UNC AshevilleNone: no budget that season—evaluation: examined, post hoc+2.7+1.5 to +3.9Sufficient evidence+1.7+1.1+5.9range +5.0 to +6.82,877Season detail
2022UNC AshevilleNone: no budget that season—development: in model selection+0.6-0.5 to +1.8Sufficient evidence+0.9-0.2Not computed for this season1,659
2021None: no budget that season—development: in model selectionNo model-implied value is published: fewer than 300 on-court possessions, or the team’s games were outside the lineup audit.
2020TennesseeNone: no budget that season—development: in model selection-1.3-2.2 to -0.4Limited evidence-0.4-0.9Not computed for this season311Limited evidence: 300 to 599 on-court possessions.

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