Martel Williams
California Baptist · 2025–26 · 33 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
1094:28 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 33
- Minutes per game
- 33:10
- Points per game
- 12.8
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 4.8 / 1.5
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 12.8 | 4.8 | 1.5 | 0.7 | 0.1 | 1.7 | 2.3 |
| Per 40 minutes | 15.4 | 5.8 | 1.8 | 0.9 | 0.1 | 2.1 | 2.7 |
| Season totals | 421 | 160 | 50 | 24 | 4 | 57 | 75 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 151–379 | 39.8% | 11.5 | 13.9 |
| 2P | 115–269 | 42.8% | 8.2 | 9.8 |
| 3P | 36–110 | 32.7% | 3.3 | 4.0 |
| FT | 83–107 | 77.6% | 3.2 | 3.9 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 44.6% | 49.4% | 29.0% | 28.2% | 0.88 |
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
Cal Baptist · 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
- $58K
- 80% range $20K to $170K
- Median share of team pool
- 18.6%
- team pool $300K, 80% range $110K to $820K
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $58K to $59K
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $2K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 80.3%
- 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.
Cal Baptist: 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 | Cal Baptist | $58Kspeculative | $20K to $170K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +2.0 | +0.9 to +3.0 | Sufficient evidence | +0.2 | +1.8 | +6.8range +5.8 to +7.5 | 3,400 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | Cal Baptist | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | -0.4 | -1.6 to +0.5 | Sufficient evidence | +0.5 | -1.0 | +2.4range +2.0 to +2.9 | 1,967 | 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 | 33:24 | 33:10 | 15:37–40:44 | |
| Points | 10.6 | 12.8 | 0.0–23.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 41.2% | 44.5% | 0.0%–90.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-20 | Kansas | L 60–68 | 38:59 | 15 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 7-16 | 0-2 | 1-1 | 43.8% |
| 2026-03-14 | Utah Valley | W 63–61 | 38:37 | 8 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 3-9 | 1-4 | 1-2 | 38.9% |
| 2026-03-13 | Utah Tech | W 86–72 | 38:26 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3-11 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 27.3% |
| 2026-03-07 | Southern Utah | W 82–75 | 28:42 | 14 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 6-13 | 0-3 | 2-3 | 46.2% |
| 2026-03-05 · NCAA | Abilene Christian | W 87–48 | 22:18 | 10 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4-8 | 0-1 | 2-2 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-28 | Tarleton St. | W 82–67 | 31:22 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 5-8 | 0-1 | 2-2 | 62.5% |
| 2026-02-26 | UT Arlington | W 68–56 | 34:56 | 11 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3-6 | 1-2 | 4-4 | 58.3% |
| 2026-02-19 | Utah Valley | L 46–65 | 25:54 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 1-7 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 21.4% |
| 2026-02-14 | Utah Tech | L 65–70 | 35:35 | 6 | 8 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1-12 | 1-7 | 3-4 | 12.5% |
| 2026-02-12 | Southern Utah | W 83–66 | 30:57 | 19 | 11 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8-18 | 3-5 | 0-0 | 52.8% |
| 2026-02-07 | Abilene Christian | W 65–63 | 35:35 | 12 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2-11 | 2-2 | 6-8 | 27.3% |
| 2026-02-05 | Tarleton St. | W 56–55 | 30:44 | 15 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3-10 | 1-4 | 8-10 | 35.0% |
| 2026-01-31 | UT Arlington | W 87–77 | 39:20 | 11 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 5-15 | 1-5 | 0-0 | 36.7% |
| 2026-01-24 | Utah Valley | W 78–71 | 40:44 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 2-8 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 31.3% |
| 2026-01-21 | Utah Tech | W 73–64 | 34:47 | 13 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 6-10 | 0-2 | 1-3 | 60.0% |
| 2026-01-15 · NCAA | Abilene Christian | W 74–58 | 32:30 | 23 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6-17 | 3-5 | 8-9 | 44.1% |
| 2026-01-08 | Utah Tech | W 84–72 | 31:14 | 17 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5-12 | 2-5 | 5-6 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-03 | Tarleton St. | L 76–81 | 15:37 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0-2 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0.0% |
| 2026-01-01 | UT Arlington | L 51–63 | 37:09 | 12 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3-8 | 0-3 | 6-7 | 37.5% |
| 2025-12-29 | Utah Valley | L 66–73 | 35:16 | 12 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 4-5 | 1-2 | 3-3 | 90.0% |
| 2025-12-20 | Sacramento St. | W 74–67 | 39:54 | 14 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 6-11 | 2-2 | 0-0 | 63.6% |
| 2025-12-16 | Southern U. | W 75–67 | 36:44 | 10 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2-9 | 1-6 | 5-6 | 27.8% |
| 2025-12-12 | Eastern Wash. | W 88–83 | 39:58 | 23 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 9-15 | 2-5 | 3-4 | 66.7% |
| 2025-12-06 | Utah | L 85–91 | 33:37 | 14 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 5-17 | 2-6 | 2-4 | 35.3% |
| 2025-12-03 | BYU | L 60–91 | 31:02 | 12 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 5-15 | 0-5 | 2-3 | 33.3% |
| 2025-12-01 | Colorado | L 70–78 | 37:07 | 14 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6-13 | 0-2 | 2-3 | 46.2% |
| 2025-11-29 | Oregon St. | W 75–69 | 36:25 | 19 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 7-14 | 3-5 | 2-3 | 60.7% |
| 2025-11-25 | San Diego | W 76–61 | 27:39 | 20 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 7-15 | 1-3 | 5-5 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-21 | Grambling | W 72–59 | 35:09 | 17 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 6-10 | 1-1 | 4-5 | 65.0% |
| 2025-11-18 | UC Riverside | W 80–57 | 30:39 | 12 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 6-15 | 0-3 | 0-4 | 40.0% |
| 2025-11-14 | Western Ill. | W 69–59 | 36:08 | 13 | 11 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5-17 | 1-7 | 2-2 | 32.4% |
| 2025-11-07 | UC Irvine | W 69–61 | 32:25 | 17 | 7 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6-15 | 3-4 | 2-2 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-03 | USC Upstate | W 87–75 | 18:59 | 12 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4-7 | 2-2 | 2-2 | 71.4% |