Josh Ward
Cal St. Fullerton · 2025–26 · 32 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season
Logged performance
997:37 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 32
- Minutes per game
- 31:11
- Points per game
- 14.6
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 4.5 / 3.5
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 14.6 | 4.5 | 3.5 | 1.7 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2.5 |
| Per 40 minutes | 18.7 | 5.8 | 4.5 | 2.2 | 0.6 | 2.6 | 3.2 |
| Season totals | 466 | 145 | 113 | 54 | 16 | 64 | 81 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 150–347 | 43.2% | 10.8 | 13.9 |
| 2P | 107–207 | 51.7% | 6.5 | 8.3 |
| 3P | 43–140 | 30.7% | 4.4 | 5.6 |
| FT | 123–164 | 75.0% | 5.1 | 6.6 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 49.4% | 55.6% | 40.3% | 47.3% | 1.77 |
Accepted logged appearances only; absent games are not zeroes. † 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
Speculative compensation · 2025–26β
CS Fullerton · Low and other · 2025–26 · a best guess at this player's part of the school's own revenue-sharing budget for men's basketball.
- Speculative best guess
- $48K
- 80% range $14K to $150K
- Median share of team pool
- 18.4%
- team pool $245K, 80% range $90K to $650K
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $45K to $50K
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $2K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 77.6%
- Sufficient evidence
- Range driven by assumption, not data
Speculative best guess, not observed pay. It is not a contract, not an offer and not a market price, and it is unvalidated: no pay is held to check it against. Point is the median and the range is the 10th to 90th percentile of 4,000 joint draws of budget and player value; a mixture of assumptions, not a calibrated interval.
Budget anchor. Tier prior from anonymous surveys and sources, scaled so that all non-Power budgets sum to the national total the College Sports Commission reported paid for 2025-26 ($1,770,453,776 over 307 schools) less the Power 4 total, times a men's basketball share; weak anchor.
Assumptions. modelled pool; split by possession share times value over replacement; convexity; shared floor; replacement level; four elasticity scenarios; closure to the national total; opt-out list; exclusions. Each is a declared judgement, not an estimate. Numbers, anchors and checks
Not included. Third-party and collective NIL deals, including deals cleared through NIL Go. Non-cash benefits such as scholarship, cost of attendance, Alston awards and housing. Bonuses and incentive terms. Anything outside the school's own revenue-sharing channel.
CS Fullerton: whole-roster table and pool · School finances (school-reported) · What-if calculator for this player
No revenue-sharing budget existed before the 2025–26 season, so no compensation figure is modelled for earlier seasons.
What-If Calculator · Speculativeβ
Re-runs the 4,000 joint draws with your inputs. The address saves your inputs.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | CS Fullerton | $48Kspeculative | $14K to $150K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +1.3 | -0.0 to +3.0 | Sufficient evidence | +1.0 | +0.3 | +5.8range +5.1 to +6.6 | 3,284 | Prior built from the box-score line only, without a prior-season value. Season detail |
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
Game log
| Measure | Graphic | Last five | Listed games | Range |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Minutes | 28:20 | 31:11 | 13:10–38:02 | |
| Points | 13.6 | 14.6 | 2.0–31.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 41.4% | 50.0% | 18.2%–100.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-13 | Hawaii | L 63–78 | 28:37 | 6 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2-11 | 0-5 | 2-4 | 18.2% |
| 2026-03-12 | UC Davis | W 82–70 | 28:44 | 24 | 10 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3-11 | 1-3 | 17-19 | 31.8% |
| 2026-03-07 | CSUN | W 90–77 | 13:10 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1-3 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 33.3% |
| 2026-03-05 | UC San Diego | W 75–71 | 33:57 | 20 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 7-14 | 2-8 | 4-4 | 57.1% |
| 2026-02-28 | Hawaii | L 85–87 | 37:12 | 16 | 4 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 6-9 | 0-0 | 4-9 | 66.7% |
| 2026-02-21 | CSU Bakersfield | W 88–80 | 34:41 | 21 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 7-11 | 4-6 | 3-4 | 81.8% |
| 2026-02-19 | UC Davis | W 93–92 | 31:09 | 18 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 7-13 | 0-4 | 4-4 | 53.8% |
| 2026-02-14 | UC Irvine | L 65–86 | 24:21 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2-10 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 25.0% |
| 2026-02-12 | Long Beach St. | W 86–82 | 33:13 | 22 | 5 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 7-17 | 1-5 | 7-7 | 44.1% |
| 2026-02-07 | CSU Bakersfield | W 82–66 | 24:02 | 9 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3-7 | 0-2 | 3-4 | 42.9% |
| 2026-02-05 | UC Riverside | W 78–72 | 35:07 | 18 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5-9 | 1-4 | 7-8 | 61.1% |
| 2026-01-31 · NCAA | UC Santa Barbara | L 69–83 | 26:36 | 10 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3-8 | 1-2 | 3-4 | 43.8% |
| 2026-01-24 | Cal Poly | W 93–78 | 34:33 | 18 | 8 | 7 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 6-11 | 2-6 | 4-5 | 63.6% |
| 2026-01-22 | Long Beach St. | W 71–61 | 38:02 | 21 | 9 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 7-11 | 1-4 | 6-6 | 68.2% |
| 2026-01-17 | UC Riverside | L 72–81 | 27:37 | 10 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 5-10 | 0-4 | 0-1 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-15 | UC Davis | L 69–74 | 37:08 | 19 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 7-16 | 3-8 | 2-6 | 53.1% |
| 2026-01-10 | CSUN | W 86–79 | 29:08 | 9 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2-8 | 1-3 | 4-6 | 31.3% |
| 2026-01-08 | UC San Diego | W 88–71 | 32:13 | 12 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 3-6 | 2-4 | 4-6 | 66.7% |
| 2026-01-03 | UC Irvine | L 64–86 | 33:37 | 10 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3-16 | 2-6 | 2-2 | 25.0% |
| 2026-01-01 · NCAA | UC Santa Barbara | W 95–84 | 37:30 | 11 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 4-8 | 1-3 | 2-2 | 56.3% |
| 2025-12-28 | SMU | L 63–110 | 30:07 | 16 | 4 | 7 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 4-13 | 2-6 | 6-8 | 38.5% |
| 2025-12-21 | Oklahoma St. | L 89–94 | 34:59 | 14 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 3-7 | 3-3 | 5-11 | 64.3% |
| 2025-12-13 | Denver | W 105–86 | 22:59 | 20 | 6 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6-8 | 4-5 | 4-4 | 100.0% |
| 2025-12-07 | Hawaii | L 59–69 | 34:39 | 7 | 7 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3-14 | 0-4 | 1-3 | 21.4% |
| 2025-12-04 | Cal Poly | L 91–94 | 33:20 | 10 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 3-9 | 1-2 | 3-5 | 38.9% |
| 2025-11-29 | Pepperdine | W 83–69 | 37:00 | 19 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 9-20 | 1-8 | 0-0 | 47.5% |
| 2025-11-23 | Northern Colo. | L 93–97 | 37:57 | 31 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 11-17 | 4-8 | 5-5 | 76.5% |
| 2025-11-22 | St. Thomas (MN) | W 88–80 | 32:21 | 20 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5-12 | 0-4 | 10-10 | 41.7% |
| 2025-11-21 | Portland | L 85–103 | 26:18 | 17 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 5-11 | 3-5 | 4-6 | 59.1% |
| 2025-11-15 | Pacific | L 73–85 | 29:41 | 10 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4-12 | 1-7 | 1-1 | 37.5% |
| 2025-11-10 | California | L 65–93 | 30:45 | 12 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5-11 | 1-5 | 1-2 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-08 | Wyoming | L 82–92 | 26:54 | 9 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 2-4 | 0-1 | 5-8 | 50.0% |