Xavier Edmonds
TCU · 2025–26 · 35 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
805:33 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 35
- Minutes per game
- 23:01
- Points per game
- 12.7
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 6.5 / 1.2
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 12.7 | 6.5 | 1.2 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 1.9 | 3.2 |
| Per 40 minutes | 22.1 | 11.4 | 2.0 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 3.2 | 5.6 |
| Season totals | 445 | 229 | 41 | 34 | 31 | 65 | 113 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 158–277 | 57.0% | 7.9 | 13.8 |
| 2P | 134–222 | 60.4% | 6.3 | 11.0 |
| 3P | 24–55 | 43.6% | 1.6 | 2.7 |
| FT | 105–163 | 64.4% | 4.7 | 8.1 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 61.4% | 63.8% | 19.9% | 58.8% | 0.63 |
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
TCU · 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
- $550K
- 80% range $345K to $995K
- Median share of team pool
- 14.9%
- team pool $3.60M, 80% range $2.60M to $4.90M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $550K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $23K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 57.7%
- 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.
TCU: 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 | TCU | $550Kspeculative | $345K to $995K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +4.4 | +2.7 to +5.7 | Sufficient evidence | +1.6 | +2.8 | +5.1range +4.5 to +5.7 | 2,498 | 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 | 23:57 | 23:01 | 7:43–32:09 | |
| Points | 11.2 | 12.7 | 2.0–26.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 59.5% | 60.6% | 33.3%–95.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-21 | Duke | L 58–81 | 19:57 | 12 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 5-8 | 1-1 | 1-2 | 68.8% |
| 2026-03-19 | Ohio St. | W 66–64 | 24:56 | 16 | 8 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 6-12 | 2-3 | 2-4 | 58.3% |
| 2026-03-12 | Kansas | L 73–78 | 22:01 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 2-7 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 35.7% |
| 2026-03-11 | Oklahoma St. | W 95–88 | 28:27 | 14 | 11 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 5-7 | 1-2 | 3-7 | 78.6% |
| 2026-03-07 | Cincinnati | W 73–63 | 24:26 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 4-8 | 1-2 | 0-1 | 56.3% |
| 2026-03-03 | Texas Tech | W 73–65 | 29:41 | 20 | 12 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 6-10 | 2-4 | 6-8 | 70.0% |
| 2026-02-28 | Kansas St. | W 77–68 | 32:09 | 15 | 13 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 5-8 | 1-4 | 4-8 | 68.8% |
| 2026-02-24 | Arizona St. | W 90–78 | 17:21 | 17 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 6-9 | 3-4 | 2-5 | 83.3% |
| 2026-02-21 | West Virginia | W 60–54 | 26:08 | 14 | 13 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 4-8 | 1-2 | 5-10 | 56.3% |
| 2026-02-17 | UCF | L 71–82 | 25:20 | 12 | 10 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 2-6 | 0-3 | 8-12 | 33.3% |
| 2026-02-14 | Oklahoma St. | W 95–92 | 29:51 | 15 | 10 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 7-13 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 57.7% |
| 2026-02-10 | Iowa St. | W 62–55 | 27:44 | 5 | 7 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2-6 | 0-1 | 1-2 | 33.3% |
| 2026-02-07 | Kansas St. | W 84–82 | 30:42 | 26 | 10 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 9-10 | 1-1 | 7-13 | 95.0% |
| 2026-02-01 | Colorado | L 61–87 | 20:49 | 13 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3-7 | 0-1 | 7-8 | 42.9% |
| 2026-01-28 | Houston | L 70–79 | 28:18 | 18 | 10 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 7-10 | 0-0 | 4-7 | 70.0% |
| 2026-01-24 | Baylor | W 97–90 | 24:55 | 23 | 10 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 6-11 | 0-1 | 11-13 | 54.5% |
| 2026-01-20 | Oklahoma St. | W 68–65 | 28:49 | 18 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 9-14 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 64.3% |
| 2026-01-17 | Utah | L 79–82 | 21:29 | 8 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3-5 | 0-0 | 2-5 | 60.0% |
| 2026-01-14 | BYU | L 70–76 | 27:10 | 19 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 6-14 | 2-4 | 5-6 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-10 | Arizona | L 73–86 | 22:45 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 2-6 | 1-3 | 2-3 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-06 | Kansas | L 100–104 | 19:26 | 11 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 5-10 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 55.0% |
| 2026-01-03 | Baylor | W 69–63 | 20:04 | 12 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4-6 | 1-1 | 3-5 | 75.0% |
| 2025-12-29 | Jackson St. | W 115–64 | 20:58 | 16 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 7-10 | 1-1 | 1-1 | 75.0% |
| 2025-12-21 | Florida A&M | W 80–56 | 19:32 | 21 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 7-9 | 1-1 | 6-7 | 83.3% |
| 2025-12-18 | Oral Roberts | W 72–53 | 21:08 | 8 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3-8 | 0-1 | 2-3 | 37.5% |
| 2025-12-15 | UIW | W 69–65 | 27:21 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3-7 | 0-1 | 2-4 | 42.9% |
| 2025-12-07 | North Texas | W 65–55 | 24:29 | 16 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 7-9 | 1-1 | 1-2 | 83.3% |
| 2025-12-05 | Notre Dame | L 85–87 | 18:12 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 2-3 | 1-2 | 0-1 | 83.3% |
| 2025-11-28 | Wisconsin | W 74–63 | 18:14 | 12 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6-8 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 75.0% |
| 2025-11-27 | Florida | W 84–80 | 7:43 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-19 | Kansas City | W 81–45 | 15:36 | 9 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 4-8 | 0-0 | 1-2 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-14 | Michigan | L 63–67 | 20:20 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 2-6 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 33.3% |
| 2025-11-10 | Lamar University | W 78–65 | 20:16 | 12 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3-4 | 0-0 | 6-6 | 75.0% |
| 2025-11-06 | Saint Francis | W 104–63 | 17:15 | 12 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2-4 | 0-1 | 8-9 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-03 | LSU New Orleans | L 74–78 | 22:01 | 11 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 3-4 | 0-0 | 5-9 | 75.0% |