Naithan George
Syracuse · 2025–26 · 32 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
1023:43 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 32
- Minutes per game
- 31:59
- Points per game
- 10.9
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 3.0 / 5.4
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 10.9 | 3.0 | 5.4 | 1.5 | 0.3 | 3.1 | 2.1 |
| Per 40 minutes | 13.6 | 3.8 | 6.8 | 1.8 | 0.4 | 3.8 | 2.6 |
| Season totals | 348 | 96 | 174 | 47 | 10 | 98 | 66 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 111–274 | 40.5% | 8.6 | 10.7 |
| 2P | 75–151 | 49.7% | 4.7 | 5.9 |
| 3P | 36–123 | 29.3% | 3.8 | 4.8 |
| FT | 90–108 | 83.3% | 3.4 | 4.2 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 47.1% | 54.1% | 44.9% | 39.4% | 1.78 |
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
- $750K
- 80% range $470K to $1.30M
- Median share of team pool
- 20.2%
- team pool $3.55M, 80% range $2.55M to $4.90M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $750K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $25K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 79.2%
- 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 | $750Kspeculative | $470K to $1.30M | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +2.6 | +1.5 to +3.7 | Sufficient evidence | +2.2 | +0.3 | +5.6range +5.0 to +6.2 | 3,293 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | Georgia Tech | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +1.2 | +0.3 to +1.9 | Sufficient evidence | +0.3 | +0.9 | +4.5range +3.9 to +5.0 | 3,637 | Season detail | |
| 2024 | Georgia Tech | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +0.9 | -0.1 to +1.7 | Sufficient evidence | +1.0 | -0.1 | +2.7range +2.3 to +3.1 | 2,419 | 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 | 37:07 | 31:59 | 21:07–41:03 | |
| Points | 13.6 | 10.9 | 0.0–26.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 39.0% | 47.4% | 0.0%–100.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-10 | SMU | L 69–86 | 37:51 | 6 | 3 | 11 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 2-13 | 0-9 | 2-3 | 15.4% |
| 2026-03-07 | Pittsburgh | L 69–71 | 40:04 | 26 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 8-17 | 4-10 | 6-6 | 58.8% |
| 2026-03-03 | Louisville | L 62–77 | 36:15 | 16 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 5-13 | 2-8 | 4-4 | 46.2% |
| 2026-02-28 | Wake Forest | L 83–88 | 36:46 | 13 | 3 | 10 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 4-8 | 1-3 | 4-4 | 56.3% |
| 2026-02-21 | North Carolina | L 64–77 | 34:40 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 2-11 | 0-5 | 3-4 | 18.2% |
| 2026-02-16 | Duke | L 64–101 | 32:49 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 3-4 | 2-2 | 0-0 | 100.0% |
| 2026-02-14 | SMU | W 79–78 | 36:43 | 16 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 5-9 | 2-5 | 4-4 | 66.7% |
| 2026-02-11 | California | W 107–100 | 41:03 | 14 | 4 | 10 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 3-10 | 1-5 | 7-8 | 35.0% |
| 2026-02-07 | Virginia | L 59–72 | 34:56 | 19 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 4 | 8-9 | 0-0 | 3-3 | 88.9% |
| 2026-02-02 | North Carolina | L 77–87 | 30:02 | 15 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6-12 | 2-5 | 1-2 | 58.3% |
| 2026-01-31 | Notre Dame | W 86–72 | 29:26 | 4 | 4 | 10 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2-6 | 0-2 | 0-1 | 33.3% |
| 2026-01-27 | NC State | L 68–88 | 26:31 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 2-12 | 0-4 | 0-0 | 16.7% |
| 2026-01-24 | Miami (FL) | L 76–85 | 31:00 | 13 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 4-11 | 2-6 | 3-4 | 45.5% |
| 2026-01-21 | Virginia Tech | L 74–76 | 23:17 | 6 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2-4 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 62.5% |
| 2026-01-17 | Boston College | L 73–81 | 31:09 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 3 | 2-8 | 2-4 | 0-0 | 37.5% |
| 2026-01-13 | Florida St. | W 94–86 | 29:10 | 8 | 4 | 13 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 3-6 | 2-5 | 0-1 | 66.7% |
| 2026-01-10 | Pittsburgh | W 83–72 | 37:43 | 5 | 2 | 11 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 1-6 | 0-3 | 3-4 | 16.7% |
| 2026-01-06 | Georgia Tech | W 82–72 | 34:09 | 17 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 3-5 | 1-1 | 10-10 | 70.0% |
| 2025-12-31 | Clemson | L 61–64 | 30:30 | 10 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 2-9 | 1-3 | 5-6 | 27.8% |
| 2025-12-22 | Stonehill | W 77–48 | 29:01 | 22 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 7-12 | 3-5 | 5-7 | 70.8% |
| 2025-12-20 | Northeastern | W 91–83 | 34:31 | 22 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 5-8 | 0-1 | 12-14 | 62.5% |
| 2025-12-17 | Mercyhurst | W 76–62 | 33:10 | 12 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 3-7 | 1-3 | 5-5 | 50.0% |
| 2025-12-13 | Hofstra | L 69–70 | 21:07 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0-4 | 0-3 | 0-0 | 0.0% |
| 2025-12-11 | Saint Joseph's | W 71–63 | 26:24 | 10 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 4-6 | 0-0 | 2-2 | 66.7% |
| 2025-12-02 | Tennessee | W 62–60 | 35:03 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 1-7 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 14.3% |
| 2025-11-26 | Iowa St. | L 64–95 | 28:10 | 5 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 1-5 | 1-5 | 2-2 | 30.0% |
| 2025-11-25 | Kansas | L 60–71 | 32:42 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1-4 | 0-2 | 3-4 | 25.0% |
| 2025-11-24 | Houston | L 74–78 | 38:22 | 11 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 4 | 4-13 | 2-7 | 1-2 | 38.5% |
| 2025-11-18 | Monmouth | W 78–73 | 32:51 | 12 | 6 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4-7 | 2-3 | 2-4 | 71.4% |
| 2025-11-15 | Drexel | W 80–50 | 30:17 | 13 | 4 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 6-12 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 54.2% |
| 2025-11-08 | Delaware St. | W 83–43 | 24:55 | 7 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 2-7 | 1-3 | 2-2 | 35.7% |
| 2025-11-03 | Binghamton | W 85–47 | 23:06 | 14 | 4 | 8 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 6-9 | 2-4 | 0-0 | 77.8% |