Jamil Muttilib
Grambling · 2025–26 · 31 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
856:14 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 31
- Minutes per game
- 27:37
- Points per game
- 12.4
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 3.5 / 0.5
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 12.4 | 3.5 | 0.5 | 1.4 | 0.5 | 1.2 | 2.1 |
| Per 40 minutes | 17.9 | 5.0 | 0.7 | 2.0 | 0.7 | 1.8 | 3.0 |
| Season totals | 384 | 107 | 16 | 42 | 15 | 38 | 64 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 129–294 | 43.9% | 9.5 | 13.7 |
| 2P | 76–129 | 58.9% | 4.2 | 6.0 |
| 3P | 53–165 | 32.1% | 5.3 | 7.7 |
| FT | 73–89 | 82.0% | 2.9 | 4.2 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 52.9% | 57.6% | 56.1% | 30.3% | 0.42 |
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
Grambling · 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
- $7K
- 80% range $1K to $37K
- Median share of team pool
- 5.6%
- team pool $180K, 80% range $69K to $485K
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $7K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $1K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 70.2%
- 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.
Grambling: 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 | Grambling | $7Kspeculative | $1K to $37K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | -1.9 | -3.4 to -0.5 | Sufficient evidence | -0.7 | -1.1 | +3.6range +2.8 to +4.4 | 2,622 | 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 | 32:41 | 27:37 | 15:17–39:16 | |
| Points | 17.0 | 12.4 | 2.0–27.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 54.6% | 52.4% | 0.0%–107.1% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-10 | Jackson St. | L 65–68 | 38:56 | 10 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3-16 | 1-8 | 3-4 | 21.9% |
| 2026-03-09 | Mississippi Val. | W 77–52 | 32:51 | 22 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 6-12 | 5-8 | 5-7 | 70.8% |
| 2026-03-05 | Alabama St. | W 65–63 | 39:16 | 27 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 9-20 | 2-10 | 7-7 | 50.0% |
| 2026-03-03 | Alabama A&M | L 63–77 | 32:32 | 16 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6-11 | 2-5 | 2-3 | 63.6% |
| 2026-02-28 | Florida A&M | L 59–66 | 19:48 | 10 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3-6 | 2-4 | 2-2 | 66.7% |
| 2026-02-26 | Bethune-Cookman | L 71–76 | 26:41 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3-6 | 1-3 | 2-2 | 58.3% |
| 2026-02-23 | Mississippi Val. | W 83–62 | 19:35 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3-8 | 0-3 | 3-3 | 37.5% |
| 2026-02-21 | Southern U. | L 73–87 | 30:29 | 17 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 6-10 | 2-4 | 3-5 | 70.0% |
| 2026-02-16 | Prairie View | L 63–68 | 38:17 | 25 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 8-18 | 3-6 | 6-6 | 52.8% |
| 2026-02-14 | Texas Southern | L 79–82 | 36:45 | 26 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 8-18 | 3-12 | 7-8 | 52.8% |
| 2026-02-09 | Alabama A&M | L 58–66 | 33:22 | 12 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 5-12 | 1-5 | 1-1 | 45.8% |
| 2026-02-07 | Alabama St. | W 57–47 | 36:54 | 2 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1-7 | 0-5 | 0-1 | 14.3% |
| 2026-02-04 | Ark.-Pine Bluff | L 64–67 | 22:46 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1-7 | 0-4 | 0-0 | 14.3% |
| 2026-02-02 | Alcorn | W 74–50 | 23:43 | 15 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6-11 | 3-6 | 0-0 | 68.2% |
| 2026-01-31 | Jackson St. | W 69–66 | 22:49 | 14 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 4-8 | 2-6 | 4-4 | 62.5% |
| 2026-01-17 | Southern U. | L 53–71 | 29:05 | 10 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1-7 | 0-4 | 8-12 | 14.3% |
| 2026-01-12 | Florida A&M | L 84–91 | 35:20 | 22 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 9-18 | 2-8 | 2-2 | 55.6% |
| 2026-01-10 | Bethune-Cookman | L 65–74 | 26:51 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2-6 | 1-4 | 2-2 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-05 | Texas Southern | W 84–67 | 20:17 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2-6 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-03 | Prairie View | W 76–72 | 20:02 | 8 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3-7 | 1-3 | 1-2 | 50.0% |
| 2025-12-23 | Ohio St. | L 63–89 | 22:03 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4-8 | 2-5 | 0-0 | 62.5% |
| 2025-12-19 | Hampton | W 81–72 | 27:57 | 19 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 7-7 | 1-1 | 4-4 | 107.1% |
| 2025-12-18 | Norfolk St. | W 80–68 | 20:42 | 13 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4-11 | 2-8 | 3-3 | 45.5% |
| 2025-12-08 | Southern Miss. | L 60–68 | 22:11 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1-3 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2025-12-02 | Tulane | L 63–65 | 15:17 | 11 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3-8 | 2-7 | 3-4 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-24 | UC Riverside | L 74–83 | 34:20 | 6 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 2-10 | 1-7 | 1-3 | 25.0% |
| 2025-11-21 | California Baptist | L 59–72 | 27:07 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0-3 | 0-2 | 2-2 | 0.0% |
| 2025-11-18 | San Diego | L 68–78 | 26:33 | 9 | 7 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 4-9 | 1-5 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-13 | Southern Miss. | W 75–70 | 31:04 | 15 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 5-8 | 5-8 | 0-0 | 93.8% |
| 2025-11-09 · NCAA | Howard | W 73–70 | 25:42 | 21 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 8-10 | 5-7 | 0-0 | 105.0% |
| 2025-11-06 | Iowa St. | L 62–102 | 16:59 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2-3 | 1-2 | 2-2 | 83.3% |