Seth Trimble
North Carolina · 2025–26 · 24 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
778:41 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 24
- Minutes per game
- 32:27
- Points per game
- 14.0
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 3.8 / 3.0
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 14.0 | 3.8 | 3.0 | 1.3 | 0.2 | 1.4 | 2.0 |
| Per 40 minutes | 17.3 | 4.7 | 3.6 | 1.6 | 0.3 | 1.7 | 2.5 |
| Season totals | 336 | 91 | 71 | 31 | 5 | 33 | 48 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 115–244 | 47.1% | 10.2 | 12.5 |
| 2P | 97–181 | 53.6% | 7.5 | 9.3 |
| 3P | 18–63 | 28.6% | 2.6 | 3.2 |
| FT | 88–132 | 66.7% | 5.5 | 6.8 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50.8% | 55.6% | 25.8% | 54.1% | 2.15 |
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
- $185K
- 80% range $31K to $365K
- Median share of team pool
- 5.4%
- team pool $3.60M, 80% range $2.60M to $5.00M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $185K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $22K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 57.5%
- 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. 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 | $185Kspeculative | $31K to $365K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +0.6 | -0.9 to +1.9 | Sufficient evidence | +2.4 | -1.7 | +3.8range +3.2 to +4.3 | 2,451 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | North Carolina | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +1.9 | +0.5 to +2.8 | Sufficient evidence | +1.5 | +0.3 | +4.2range +3.6 to +4.8 | 2,863 | Season detail | |
| 2024 | North Carolina | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +1.2 | -0.3 to +2.5 | Sufficient evidence | +0.6 | +0.6 | +2.1range +1.6 to +2.5 | 1,794 | Season detail | |
| 2023 | North Carolina | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | -0.5 | -1.5 to +0.5 | Sufficient evidence | -0.8 | +0.3 | +1.1range +0.8 to +1.3 | 978 | 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 | 37:13 | 32:27 | 20:33–43:04 | |
| Points | 13.4 | 14.0 | 4.0–30.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 47.5% | 50.1% | 0.0%–100.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-19 | VCU | L 78–82 | 43:04 | 15 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5-11 | 1-4 | 4-7 | 50.0% |
| 2026-03-12 | Clemson | L 79–80 | 31:25 | 13 | 3 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 6-11 | 0-2 | 1-3 | 54.5% |
| 2026-03-07 | Duke | L 61–76 | 38:11 | 10 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5-11 | 0-3 | 0-0 | 45.5% |
| 2026-03-03 | Clemson | W 67–63 | 38:01 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2-10 | 1-4 | 4-6 | 25.0% |
| 2026-02-28 | Virginia Tech | W 89–82 | 35:22 | 20 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 7-12 | 1-1 | 5-8 | 62.5% |
| 2026-02-23 | Louisville | W 77–74 | 36:53 | 30 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 11-16 | 1-3 | 7-11 | 71.9% |
| 2026-02-21 | Syracuse | W 77–64 | 30:05 | 13 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 5-7 | 0-0 | 3-7 | 71.4% |
| 2026-02-17 | NC State | L 58–82 | 26:39 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1-9 | 0-3 | 2-4 | 11.1% |
| 2026-02-14 | Pittsburgh | W 79–65 | 34:08 | 19 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 5-13 | 0-2 | 9-11 | 38.5% |
| 2026-02-10 | Miami (FL) | L 66–75 | 27:26 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0-5 | 0-3 | 4-4 | 0.0% |
| 2026-02-07 | Duke | W 71–68 | 31:41 | 16 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5-7 | 1-1 | 5-8 | 78.6% |
| 2026-02-02 | Syracuse | W 87–77 | 31:45 | 9 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2-7 | 1-2 | 4-6 | 35.7% |
| 2026-01-31 | Georgia Tech | W 91–75 | 29:42 | 18 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 8-14 | 1-2 | 1-1 | 60.7% |
| 2026-01-24 | Virginia | W 85–80 | 33:39 | 16 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5-6 | 2-2 | 4-6 | 100.0% |
| 2026-01-21 | Notre Dame | W 91–69 | 20:33 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2-4 | 0-1 | 1-2 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-17 | California | L 78–84 | 29:07 | 12 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2-6 | 1-2 | 7-8 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-14 | Stanford | L 90–95 | 36:15 | 13 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 5-9 | 1-3 | 2-4 | 61.1% |
| 2026-01-10 | Wake Forest | W 87–84 | 32:11 | 10 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 3-7 | 0-1 | 4-6 | 42.9% |
| 2026-01-03 | SMU | L 83–97 | 36:03 | 22 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 8-16 | 3-7 | 3-7 | 59.4% |
| 2025-12-30 | Florida St. | W 79–66 | 34:04 | 20 | 7 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6-13 | 0-2 | 8-11 | 46.2% |
| 2025-12-22 | East Carolina | W 99–51 | 26:01 | 12 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5-12 | 1-3 | 1-2 | 45.8% |
| 2025-12-20 | Ohio St. | W 71–70 | 36:04 | 17 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 6-13 | 3-5 | 2-3 | 57.7% |
| 2025-11-07 | Kansas | W 87–74 | 35:52 | 17 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 7-17 | 0-5 | 3-3 | 41.2% |
| 2025-11-03 | Central Ark. | W 94–54 | 24:30 | 12 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4-8 | 0-2 | 4-4 | 50.0% |