Jarin Stevenson
North Carolina · 2025–26 · 33 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
847:52 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 33
- Minutes per game
- 25:42
- Points per game
- 8.1
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 4.4 / 0.9
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 8.1 | 4.4 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 1.9 |
| Per 40 minutes | 12.5 | 6.9 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 3.0 |
| Season totals | 266 | 146 | 29 | 19 | 22 | 27 | 64 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 87–185 | 47.0% | 5.6 | 8.7 |
| 2P | 61–97 | 62.9%† | 2.9 | 4.6 |
| 3P | 26–88 | 29.5% | 2.7 | 4.2 |
| FT | 66–89 | 74.2% | 2.7 | 4.2 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 54.1% | 59.3% | 47.6% | 48.1% | 1.07 |
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
North Carolina · 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 $170K to $605K
- Median share of team pool
- 11.3%
- team pool $3.60M, 80% range $2.60M to $5.00M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $390K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $22K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 63.7%
- 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.
North Carolina: 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 | North Carolina | $390Kspeculative | $170K to $605K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +3.0 | +1.5 to +4.3 | Sufficient evidence | +1.7 | +1.3 | +5.3range +4.5 to +6.0 | 2,717 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | Alabama | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +2.6 | +1.1 to +4.0 | Sufficient evidence | +0.9 | +1.7 | +3.5range +2.9 to +4.1 | 2,532 | Season detail | |
| 2024 | Alabama | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +0.9 | -0.6 to +2.2 | Sufficient evidence | +0.7 | +0.2 | +2.2range +1.6 to +2.7 | 2,097 | 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 | 31:54 | 25:42 | 11:20–35:50 | |
| Points | 9.2 | 8.1 | 0.0–19.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 58.0% | 56.4% | 0.0%–150.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-19 | VCU | L 78–82 | 31:10 | 11 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 4-9 | 1-3 | 2-3 | 50.0% |
| 2026-03-12 | Clemson | L 79–80 | 34:37 | 12 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4-11 | 2-6 | 2-3 | 45.5% |
| 2026-03-07 | Duke | L 61–76 | 33:50 | 10 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 4-9 | 0-3 | 2-2 | 44.4% |
| 2026-03-03 | Clemson | W 67–63 | 34:56 | 9 | 10 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2-3 | 1-2 | 4-5 | 83.3% |
| 2026-02-28 | Virginia Tech | W 89–82 | 24:58 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 2-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 66.7% |
| 2026-02-23 | Louisville | W 77–74 | 33:50 | 9 | 7 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3-6 | 2-4 | 1-4 | 66.7% |
| 2026-02-21 | Syracuse | W 77–64 | 31:26 | 7 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2-7 | 0-2 | 3-6 | 28.6% |
| 2026-02-17 | NC State | L 58–82 | 34:18 | 13 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4-7 | 0-3 | 5-5 | 57.1% |
| 2026-02-14 | Pittsburgh | W 79–65 | 35:50 | 19 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6-7 | 3-4 | 4-4 | 107.1% |
| 2026-02-10 | Miami (FL) | L 66–75 | 25:17 | 13 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 6-10 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 65.0% |
| 2026-02-07 | Duke | W 71–68 | 24:29 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2-6 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 41.7% |
| 2026-02-02 | Syracuse | W 87–77 | 21:25 | 7 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2-6 | 1-3 | 2-4 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-31 | Georgia Tech | W 91–75 | 22:37 | 7 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3-6 | 0-1 | 1-2 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-24 | Virginia | W 85–80 | 15:52 | 17 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 6-9 | 2-4 | 3-3 | 77.8% |
| 2026-01-21 | Notre Dame | W 91–69 | 16:13 | 8 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2-3 | 2-2 | 2-2 | 100.0% |
| 2026-01-17 | California | L 78–84 | 11:20 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0-1 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0.0% |
| 2026-01-14 | Stanford | L 90–95 | 26:40 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1-1 | 1-1 | 4-6 | 150.0% |
| 2026-01-10 | Wake Forest | W 87–84 | 19:48 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1-6 | 0-2 | 2-2 | 16.7% |
| 2026-01-03 | SMU | L 83–97 | 21:03 | 16 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5-6 | 3-4 | 3-4 | 108.3% |
| 2025-12-30 | Florida St. | W 79–66 | 14:41 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1-4 | 0-3 | 2-2 | 25.0% |
| 2025-12-22 | East Carolina | W 99–51 | 16:57 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 4-4 | 100.0% |
| 2025-12-20 | Ohio St. | W 71–70 | 26:29 | 6 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3-7 | 0-4 | 0-0 | 42.9% |
| 2025-12-16 | ETSU | W 77–58 | 22:30 | 6 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3-5 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 60.0% |
| 2025-12-13 | USC Upstate | W 80–62 | 23:11 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1-3 | 0-1 | 2-2 | 33.3% |
| 2025-12-07 | Georgetown | W 81–61 | 31:08 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1-6 | 1-5 | 0-0 | 25.0% |
| 2025-12-02 | Kentucky | W 67–64 | 34:31 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2-5 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 40.0% |
| 2025-11-27 | Michigan St. | L 58–74 | 27:56 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2-5 | 1-3 | 2-4 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-25 | St. Bonaventure | W 85–70 | 29:55 | 9 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4-8 | 0-3 | 1-3 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-18 | Navy | W 73–61 | 33:12 | 11 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4-6 | 1-1 | 2-2 | 75.0% |
| 2025-11-14 | N.C. Central | W 97–53 | 21:12 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 2-6 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 41.7% |
| 2025-11-11 | Radford | W 89–74 | 25:03 | 15 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2-6 | 1-5 | 10-12 | 41.7% |
| 2025-11-07 | Kansas | W 87–74 | 23:25 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1-3 | 1-3 | 0-1 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-03 | Central Ark. | W 94–54 | 18:03 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1-4 | 0-1 | 3-4 | 25.0% |