Logan Kinsey
Denver · 2025–26 · 29 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
861:04 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 29
- Minutes per game
- 29:42
- Points per game
- 11.1
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 4.1 / 1.0
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 11.1 | 4.1 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| Per 40 minutes | 14.9 | 5.5 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 1.3 | 4.0 |
| Season totals | 321 | 119 | 29 | 22 | 7 | 28 | 86 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 121–224 | 54.0% | 7.7 | 10.4 |
| 2P | 108–182 | 59.3% | 6.3 | 8.5 |
| 3P | 13–42 | 31.0%† | 1.4 | 2.0 |
| FT | 66–85 | 77.6% | 2.9 | 3.9 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 56.9% | 61.4% | 18.8% | 37.9% | 1.04 |
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
Denver · 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
- $29K
- 80% range $3K to $105K
- Median share of team pool
- 11.6%
- team pool $345K, 80% range $130K to $940K
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $25K to $31K
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $3K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 75.0%
- 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.
Denver: 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 | Denver | $29Kspeculative | $3K to $105K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | -0.5 | -2.0 to +0.6 | Sufficient evidence | +1.3 | -1.8 | +3.7range +3.1 to +4.3 | 2,606 | 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 | 28:07 | 29:42 | 17:18–40:00 | |
| Points | 10.8 | 11.1 | 3.0–23.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 49.5% | 56.2% | 20.0%–100.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-06 | North Dakota | L 67–83 | 24:54 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 1-2 | 0-1 | 4-4 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-26 | Oral Roberts | L 80–102 | 21:50 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1-5 | 0-1 | 1-2 | 20.0% |
| 2026-02-21 | St. Thomas (MN) | W 82–80 | 36:45 | 7 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2-5 | 0-1 | 3-4 | 40.0% |
| 2026-02-19 | South Dakota | W 90–70 | 24:33 | 16 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 7-8 | 0-1 | 2-2 | 87.5% |
| 2026-02-15 | Omaha | L 76–83 | 32:34 | 22 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 9-18 | 0-3 | 4-5 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-12 | South Dakota St. | W 79–61 | 27:17 | 9 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4-7 | 1-2 | 0-3 | 64.3% |
| 2026-02-07 | North Dakota | W 98–79 | 35:17 | 20 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 8-11 | 0-1 | 4-4 | 72.7% |
| 2026-02-05 | North Dakota St. | W 78–71 | 27:02 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4-7 | 0-2 | 1-1 | 57.1% |
| 2026-01-31 | Omaha | L 82–84 | 35:27 | 18 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 7-11 | 1-1 | 3-5 | 68.2% |
| 2026-01-28 | Kansas City | W 69–61 | 32:40 | 14 | 13 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5-12 | 0-1 | 4-5 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-24 | North Dakota | L 86–93 | 24:22 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 2-4 | 0-0 | 2-4 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-22 | North Dakota St. | L 77–82 | 30:18 | 10 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4-5 | 2-3 | 0-0 | 100.0% |
| 2026-01-14 | Oral Roberts | W 98–87 | 34:32 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1-5 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 30.0% |
| 2026-01-10 | South Dakota | L 72–82 | 34:21 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3-7 | 0-2 | 1-2 | 42.9% |
| 2026-01-08 | South Dakota St. | L 79–87 | 36:02 | 12 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5-9 | 0-0 | 2-2 | 55.6% |
| 2026-01-04 | St. Thomas (MN) | L 88–92 | 29:46 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 2-6 | 0-1 | 2-2 | 33.3% |
| 2025-12-31 · NCAA | Kansas City | W 87–74 | 17:48 | 9 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3-5 | 0-1 | 3-5 | 60.0% |
| 2025-12-22 | Tulsa | L 85–90 | 31:21 | 15 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 4-6 | 0-0 | 7-7 | 66.7% |
| 2025-12-20 | Northern Colo. | W 86–79 | 27:15 | 14 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 6-6 | 0-0 | 2-2 | 100.0% |
| 2025-12-13 | Cal St. Fullerton | L 86–105 | 17:18 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2-5 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 40.0% |
| 2025-12-06 | Idaho St. | L 79–93 | 36:31 | 21 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 6-9 | 1-2 | 8-8 | 72.2% |
| 2025-12-03 | Eastern Wash. | W 93–89 | 32:41 | 11 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3-8 | 1-3 | 4-5 | 43.8% |
| 2025-11-26 | Wyoming | L 59–101 | 29:32 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3-12 | 0-4 | 0-0 | 25.0% |
| 2025-11-24 | Arizona | L 73–103 | 27:22 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2-6 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 33.3% |
| 2025-11-21 | Colorado St. | W 83–81 | 21:41 | 11 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5-10 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 55.0% |
| 2025-11-15 | UTSA | L 79–84 | 31:26 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2-5 | 1-1 | 0-1 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-09 | Montana St. | W 75–73 | 40:00 | 15 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7-11 | 0-0 | 1-1 | 63.6% |
| 2025-11-06 | Washington | L 70–84 | 33:10 | 23 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 8-12 | 3-5 | 4-6 | 79.2% |
| 2025-11-03 | Seattle U | L 73–84 | 27:19 | 15 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5-7 | 1-1 | 4-5 | 78.6% |