Donnie Freeman
Syracuse · 2025–26 · 23 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
715:21 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 23
- Minutes per game
- 31:06
- Points per game
- 16.5
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 7.2 / 1.3
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 16.5 | 7.2 | 1.3 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 2.5 | 2.7 |
| Per 40 minutes | 21.2 | 9.3 | 1.7 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 3.2 | 3.5 |
| Season totals | 380 | 166 | 31 | 18 | 21 | 57 | 62 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 126–266 | 47.4% | 11.6 | 14.9 |
| 2P | 100–180 | 55.6% | 7.8 | 10.1 |
| 3P | 26–86 | 30.2% | 3.7 | 4.8 |
| FT | 102–133 | 76.7% | 5.8 | 7.4 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 52.3% | 58.5% | 32.3% | 50.0% | 0.54 |
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
Syracuse · 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
- $355K
- 80% range $165K to $585K
- Median share of team pool
- 10.4%
- team pool $3.55M, 80% range $2.55M to $4.90M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $355K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $25K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 54.0%
- 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.
Syracuse: 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 | Syracuse | $355Kspeculative | $165K to $585K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +1.3 | +0.2 to +2.3 | Sufficient evidence | +1.1 | +0.2 | +3.5range +3.1 to +3.9 | 2,244 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | Syracuse | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | -0.2 | -1.2 to +1.1 | Sufficient evidence | +0.7 | -0.9 | +1.4range +1.1 to +1.7 | 1,232 | 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 | 34:19 | 31:06 | 20:14–42:43 | |
| Points | 14.4 | 16.5 | 5.0–28.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 44.8% | 51.2% | 22.7%–84.6% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-10 | SMU | L 69–86 | 33:55 | 7 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 3-9 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 38.9% |
| 2026-03-07 | Pittsburgh | L 69–71 | 42:43 | 18 | 13 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 5-14 | 0-3 | 8-9 | 35.7% |
| 2026-03-03 | Louisville | L 62–77 | 32:07 | 10 | 11 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 3-11 | 0-3 | 4-5 | 27.3% |
| 2026-02-28 | Wake Forest | L 83–88 | 35:24 | 28 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 9-13 | 4-7 | 6-7 | 84.6% |
| 2026-02-21 | North Carolina | L 64–77 | 27:27 | 9 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 3-8 | 0-3 | 3-4 | 37.5% |
| 2026-02-16 | Duke | L 64–101 | 20:14 | 9 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 4-8 | 1-5 | 0-0 | 56.3% |
| 2026-02-14 | SMU | W 79–78 | 33:10 | 18 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 5-11 | 1-3 | 7-10 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-11 | California | W 107–100 | 33:51 | 16 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 6-12 | 1-5 | 3-8 | 54.2% |
| 2026-02-07 | Virginia | L 59–72 | 32:29 | 5 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 2-11 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 22.7% |
| 2026-02-02 | North Carolina | L 77–87 | 34:55 | 23 | 8 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 8-14 | 2-4 | 5-6 | 64.3% |
| 2026-01-31 | Notre Dame | W 86–72 | 21:53 | 7 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 1-4 | 0-2 | 5-9 | 25.0% |
| 2026-01-27 | NC State | L 68–88 | 34:01 | 24 | 10 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 9-18 | 2-4 | 4-4 | 55.6% |
| 2026-01-24 | Miami (FL) | L 76–85 | 31:53 | 14 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 7-11 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 63.6% |
| 2026-01-21 | Virginia Tech | L 74–76 | 31:48 | 10 | 9 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 3-14 | 2-6 | 2-2 | 28.6% |
| 2026-01-17 | Boston College | L 73–81 | 36:01 | 19 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 4 | 7-14 | 0-3 | 5-6 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-13 | Florida St. | W 94–86 | 33:47 | 25 | 8 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 9-12 | 1-3 | 6-7 | 79.2% |
| 2026-01-10 | Pittsburgh | W 83–72 | 29:53 | 22 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 8-13 | 3-6 | 3-3 | 73.1% |
| 2026-01-06 | Georgia Tech | W 82–72 | 33:41 | 27 | 9 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 9-18 | 2-4 | 7-11 | 55.6% |
| 2025-12-31 | Clemson | L 61–64 | 27:17 | 18 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 5-11 | 2-5 | 6-6 | 54.5% |
| 2025-11-18 | Monmouth | W 78–73 | 32:02 | 18 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 3-10 | 0-2 | 12-14 | 30.0% |
| 2025-11-15 | Drexel | W 80–50 | 28:04 | 13 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4-11 | 2-4 | 3-4 | 45.5% |
| 2025-11-08 | Delaware St. | W 83–43 | 23:52 | 20 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 6-8 | 1-3 | 7-10 | 81.3% |
| 2025-11-03 | Binghamton | W 85–47 | 24:54 | 20 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 7-11 | 0-2 | 6-8 | 63.6% |