Elijah Duval
Southern Utah · 2025–26 · 29 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
780:23 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 29
- Minutes per game
- 26:55
- Points per game
- 15.6
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 4.0 / 3.5
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 15.6 | 4.0 | 3.5 | 1.2 | 0.2 | 3.8 | 3.1 |
| Per 40 minutes | 23.1 | 6.0 | 5.2 | 1.7 | 0.4 | 5.6 | 4.7 |
| Season totals | 451 | 117 | 102 | 34 | 7 | 109 | 91 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 169–367 | 46.0% | 12.7 | 18.8 |
| 2P | 140–274 | 51.1% | 9.4 | 14.0 |
| 3P | 29–93 | 31.2% | 3.2 | 4.8 |
| FT | 84–135 | 62.2% | 4.7 | 6.9 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50.0% | 52.9% | 25.3% | 36.8% | 0.94 |
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
Southern Utah · 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
- $9K
- 80% range $1K to $45K
- Median share of team pool
- 7.3%
- team pool $205K, 80% range $76K to $540K
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $9K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $1K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 67.7%
- 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.
Southern Utah: 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 | Southern Utah | $9Kspeculative | $1K to $45K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | -1.8 | -3.0 to -0.6 | Sufficient evidence | +0.2 | -2.1 | +2.6range +2.2 to +3.0 | 2,505 | 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 | 26:46 | 26:55 | 18:19–38:17 | |
| Points | 20.2 | 15.6 | 3.0–30.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 59.4% | 49.6% | 30.0%–88.5% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-12 | UT Arlington | L 63–69 | 24:29 | 17 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 8-18 | 1-7 | 0-0 | 47.2% |
| 2026-03-07 | California Baptist | L 75–82 | 35:53 | 30 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 11-17 | 2-5 | 6-8 | 70.6% |
| 2026-03-05 | Utah Valley | L 88–92 | 27:18 | 20 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 8-12 | 1-3 | 3-6 | 70.8% |
| 2026-02-28 | Utah Tech | W 81–67 | 18:19 | 15 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6-14 | 0-3 | 3-5 | 42.9% |
| 2026-02-21 | Abilene Christian | L 83–87 | 27:49 | 19 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 4 | 8-13 | 1-3 | 2-4 | 65.4% |
| 2026-02-19 | Tarleton St. | L 74–78 | 36:00 | 23 | 7 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 7-20 | 2-4 | 7-9 | 40.0% |
| 2026-02-14 | UT Arlington | W 78–73 | 22:47 | 20 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 7-12 | 2-3 | 4-4 | 66.7% |
| 2026-02-12 | California Baptist | L 66–83 | 24:48 | 14 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 6-15 | 1-4 | 1-4 | 43.3% |
| 2026-02-07 | Tarleton St. | L 59–62 | 34:46 | 18 | 4 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 7 | 2 | 6-17 | 3-7 | 3-4 | 44.1% |
| 2026-01-31 | Abilene Christian | W 79–76 | 38:17 | 27 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 11-13 | 1-1 | 4-5 | 88.5% |
| 2026-01-29 | UT Arlington | L 61–80 | 19:30 | 14 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 5-14 | 1-3 | 3-3 | 39.3% |
| 2026-01-24 | Utah Tech | L 91–102 | 31:19 | 28 | 7 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 8-17 | 1-2 | 11-15 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-21 | Utah Valley | W 84–70 | 23:43 | 14 | 5 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 3-5 | 0-1 | 8-10 | 60.0% |
| 2026-01-17 · NCAA | Abilene Christian | W 74–52 | 20:36 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 1-3 | 0-1 | 1-2 | 33.3% |
| 2026-01-15 | Tarleton St. | W 106–105 | 27:24 | 9 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 3-10 | 0-2 | 3-9 | 30.0% |
| 2026-01-10 | California Baptist | L 55–58 | 29:52 | 8 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 3-11 | 2-4 | 0-1 | 36.4% |
| 2026-01-08 | Utah Valley | L 72–89 | 20:24 | 10 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 3-7 | 2-3 | 2-5 | 57.1% |
| 2026-01-03 | UT Arlington | L 77–86 | 27:25 | 13 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 5-10 | 1-2 | 2-3 | 55.0% |
| 2025-12-29 | Utah Tech | L 66–80 | 24:25 | 11 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 4-11 | 0-0 | 3-5 | 36.4% |
| 2025-12-18 | Northern Ariz. | L 57–65 | 18:34 | 7 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 4 | 3-10 | 1-2 | 0-1 | 35.0% |
| 2025-12-13 | Washington | L 69–105 | 35:35 | 18 | 9 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 8-19 | 1-5 | 1-4 | 44.7% |
| 2025-12-06 | Oregon St. | L 70–81 | 28:10 | 11 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 4-13 | 0-3 | 3-7 | 30.8% |
| 2025-11-29 | Stetson | W 70–68 | 33:08 | 26 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 9-13 | 1-2 | 7-8 | 73.1% |
| 2025-11-28 | Robert Morris | L 54–61 | 27:13 | 13 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6-17 | 1-4 | 0-1 | 38.2% |
| 2025-11-19 | Washington St. | L 74–98 | 19:40 | 7 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 2-5 | 0-0 | 3-3 | 40.0% |
| 2025-11-17 | Gonzaga | L 50–122 | 23:31 | 10 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 7 | 1 | 4-12 | 0-4 | 2-2 | 33.3% |
| 2025-11-15 | Omaha | L 85–90 | 26:46 | 20 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 9-17 | 1-7 | 1-5 | 55.9% |
| 2025-11-08 | UTRGV | L 72–95 | 22:33 | 9 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 3-8 | 2-4 | 1-2 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-04 | Arizona St. | L 64–81 | 30:09 | 17 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 8-14 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 60.7% |