Latrell Wrightsell Jr.
Alabama · 2025–26 · 27 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
727:26 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 27
- Minutes per game
- 26:57
- Points per game
- 13.2
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 3.1 / 1.9
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 13.2 | 3.1 | 1.9 | 1.1 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 2.1 |
| Per 40 minutes | 19.6 | 4.6 | 2.8 | 1.6 | 0.1 | 1.3 | 3.1 |
| Season totals | 356 | 83 | 51 | 29 | 1 | 23 | 57 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 117–290 | 40.3% | 10.7 | 15.9 |
| 2P | 41–79 | 51.9%† | 2.9 | 4.3 |
| 3P | 76–211 | 36.0% | 7.8 | 11.6 |
| FT | 46–58 | 79.3% | 2.1 | 3.2 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 53.4% | 56.4% | 72.8% | 20.0% | 2.22 |
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
Alabama · Power 4 · 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
- $390K
- 80% range $240K to $605K
- Median share of team pool
- 11.1%
- team pool $3.55M, 80% range $2.55M to $4.95M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $390K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $19K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 54.6%
- Sufficient evidence
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. House-settlement $20.5M cap (College Sports Commission, 2026-10-01) times a modelled utilisation of about 97 percent times a men's basketball share of about 18 percent (school statements and an industry study); Power 4 schools are at or near the cap nationally.
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.
Alabama: 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 | Alabama | $390Kspeculative | $240K to $605K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +3.7 | +2.2 to +5.0 | Sufficient evidence | +2.8 | +0.9 | +5.2range +4.5 to +5.8 | 2,686 | Season detail | |
| 2024 | Alabama | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +5.8 | +3.9 to +7.4 | Sufficient evidence | +3.1 | +2.7 | +4.6range +3.7 to +5.3 | 2,521 | Season detail | |
| 2023 | CS Fullerton | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +1.4 | +0.3 to +2.3 | Sufficient evidence | +0.7 | +0.7 | +4.2range +3.4 to +4.8 | 2,484 | Season detail | |
| 2022 | CS Fullerton | None: no budget that season | — | development: in model selection | -0.8 | -2.1 to +0.3 | Sufficient evidence | -0.3 | -0.5 | Not computed for this season | 2,493 | ||
| 2021 | CS Fullerton | None: no budget that season | — | development: in model selection | -0.0 | -0.8 to +0.6 | Sufficient evidence | -0.1 | +0.1 | Not computed for this season | 885 | 2020-21 season, shortened by COVID-19 cancellations; kept in the model fit with this flag. |
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 | 28:12 | 26:57 | 10:40–36:30 | |
| Points | 11.6 | 13.2 | 0.0–25.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 46.6% | 53.0% | 0.0%–100.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-27 | Michigan | L 77–90 | 36:30 | 15 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 5-15 | 3-12 | 2-3 | 43.3% |
| 2026-03-22 | Texas Tech | W 90–65 | 25:43 | 24 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 7-10 | 6-9 | 4-5 | 100.0% |
| 2026-03-20 | Hofstra | W 90–70 | 29:54 | 11 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 4-11 | 2-8 | 1-2 | 45.5% |
| 2026-03-13 | Ole Miss | L 79–80 | 23:23 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0-5 | 0-4 | 0-0 | 0.0% |
| 2026-03-07 | Auburn | W 96–84 | 25:30 | 8 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4-9 | 0-5 | 0-0 | 44.4% |
| 2026-03-03 | Georgia | L 88–98 | 23:55 | 19 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 6-12 | 5-11 | 2-2 | 70.8% |
| 2026-02-28 | Tennessee | W 71–69 | 30:33 | 25 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8-12 | 6-9 | 3-4 | 91.7% |
| 2026-02-25 | Mississippi St. | W 100–75 | 25:56 | 18 | 6 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 5-13 | 4-10 | 4-4 | 53.8% |
| 2026-02-21 | LSU | W 90–83 | 28:23 | 14 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2-8 | 1-5 | 9-10 | 31.3% |
| 2026-02-18 | Arkansas | W 117–115 | 34:07 | 7 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2-7 | 1-5 | 2-4 | 35.7% |
| 2026-02-14 | South Carolina | W 89–75 | 26:58 | 19 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 6-11 | 3-7 | 4-6 | 68.2% |
| 2026-02-11 | Ole Miss | W 93–74 | 30:33 | 21 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 7-14 | 7-13 | 0-0 | 75.0% |
| 2026-02-07 | Auburn | W 96–92 | 10:40 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2-3 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 83.3% |
| 2026-02-04 | Texas A&M | W 100–97 | 33:28 | 16 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 6-14 | 4-11 | 0-0 | 57.1% |
| 2026-02-01 | Florida | L 77–100 | 27:51 | 11 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 3-7 | 3-7 | 2-3 | 64.3% |
| 2026-01-27 | Missouri | W 90–64 | 28:51 | 21 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 7-11 | 7-10 | 0-0 | 95.5% |
| 2026-01-24 | Tennessee | L 73–79 | 31:33 | 14 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 5-12 | 2-6 | 2-2 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-07 | Vanderbilt | L 90–96 | 30:52 | 13 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 4-12 | 3-9 | 2-2 | 45.8% |
| 2026-01-03 | Kentucky | W 89–74 | 33:03 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2-10 | 1-7 | 0-0 | 25.0% |
| 2025-12-29 | Yale | W 102–78 | 23:50 | 15 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 5-16 | 5-15 | 0-0 | 46.9% |
| 2025-12-21 | Kennesaw St. | W 92–81 | 20:39 | 6 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3-14 | 0-6 | 0-0 | 21.4% |
| 2025-12-17 | South Fla. | W 104–93 | 22:05 | 10 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 2-7 | 1-3 | 5-5 | 35.7% |
| 2025-12-13 | Arizona | L 75–96 | 25:13 | 21 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8-12 | 3-6 | 2-2 | 79.2% |
| 2025-12-07 | UTSA | W 97–55 | 20:52 | 10 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4-18 | 2-14 | 0-0 | 27.8% |
| 2025-11-19 | Illinois | W 90–86 | 25:18 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2-5 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-13 | Purdue | L 80–87 | 29:37 | 6 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2-9 | 1-6 | 1-1 | 27.8% |
| 2025-11-08 | St. John's (NY) | W 103–96 | 22:09 | 17 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6-13 | 4-8 | 1-3 | 61.5% |