Algosys College Basketball

Search teams and players

Type a team or player name. Results are alphabetical; players show their 2026 team. Up and Down move, Enter opens the highlighted result or the first one, Esc closes.

Lucas Mari

Vermont · 2025–26 · 28 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance

Logged performance

550:28 minutes logged

Games logged
28
Minutes per game
19:40
Points per game
4.4
Rebounds / assists per game
3.6 / 1.4
Box line on three bases
BasisPtsRebAstStlBlkTOPF
Per game4.43.61.40.40.21.11.8
Per 40 minutes9.07.32.90.70.42.23.6
Season totals124101401063049
Shooting with attempts
ShotMade–att.PctAtt/GAtt/40
FG42–11735.9%4.28.5
2P26–4656.5%†1.63.3
3P16–7122.5%2.55.2
FT24–3275.0%1.12.3
Derived rates (computed here from the box line, not published statistics)
eFG%Estimated TS%3PA / FGAFTA / FGAAST / TO
42.7%47.3%60.7%27.4%1.33

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

Vermont · 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
$14K
80% range $3K to $46K
Median share of team pool
6.9%
team pool $250K, 80% range $93K to $670K
Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
$14K to $15K
the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
Floor part
$2K
shared by every player with possessions
Possession share
42.5%
Sufficient evidence
Point and 80% range on the team table's axis. Open circle: limited evidence or floor only.
  • 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.

Vermont: 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

Net points per 100 possessions by season, newest first. The speculative compensation best guess for 2025–26 only sits right after the team, so it is the first figure after the season. Ordered by season, not by value or dollars. Compensation is a best guess of a share of the school’s own revenue-sharing budget, not observed pay.
SeasonTeamSpeculative compensation (best guess)Compensation 80% rangeSplit roleNetRangeEvidenceRange graphic. Position on one axisOffenseDefenseWins above replacementOn-court possessionsSample and flags
2026Vermont$14Kspeculative$3K to $46Kdescriptive: not used in fit or gates+0.3-0.8 to +1.5Sufficient evidence-0.3+0.6+3.0range +2.6 to +3.41,611Season 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

Game log, box line per game. eFG% is computed for the game from field goals and three-pointers; it is blank without a field-goal attempt.
DateOpponentResultMinPtsRebAstStlBlkTOPFFG3PFTeFG
2026-03-14UMBCL 59–7426:5268101132-61-41-241.7%
2026-03-10NJITW 63–5421:2045102011-60-42-216.7%
2026-03-07BryantW 77–5718:2622010131-10-00-0100.0%
2026-03-03UAlbanyW 69–5616:0322000021-30-20-033.3%
2026-02-26UMass LowellW 66–6416:5034100011-50-31-120.0%
2026-02-21NJITW 70–6412:5600100120-10-10-00.0%
2026-02-19UMBCL 62–7531:5102300230-20-20-00.0%
2026-02-14BryantW 90–6316:4302200330-10-00-00.0%
2026-02-12BinghamtonW 73–6529:0092020023-71-42-450.0%
2026-02-07New HampshireW 80–5719:0828310230-40-32-20.0%
2026-01-31NJITL 77–793:3001100100-10-00-00.0%
2026-01-29UMBCW 64–5522:27166100004-83-75-668.8%
2026-01-24BryantW 62–5222:3657100212-41-20-062.5%
2026-01-22UMass LowellW 77–6822:5998131034-61-20-175.0%
2026-01-19UAlbanyL 68–7515:1650001312-51-30-050.0%
2026-01-15MaineW 67–6222:3137100021-20-01-250.0%
2026-01-08BinghamtonW 60–5919:4873000122-41-22-462.5%
2026-01-03New HampshireW 80–617:0201000130-10-00-00.0%
2025-12-30PrincetonL 69–7534:3466200122-70-22-228.6%
2025-12-20IonaL 78–838:1920100001-30-10-033.3%
2025-12-17SienaW 83–6913:0742300112-40-20-050.0%
2025-12-14MerrimackW 66–599:5523000120-10-12-20.0%
2025-11-26PrincetonW 79–7420:3940210002-50-30-040.0%
2025-11-25Rhode IslandL 65–8019:4382201232-62-62-250.0%
2025-11-24LibertyL 73–7926:251011300214-82-50-062.5%
2025-11-18BuffaloL 90–9418:4983410232-52-42-260.0%
2025-11-15NortheasternW 85–7414:2651310112-31-20-083.3%
2025-11-09BrownW 89–8439:1325300211-80-60-012.5%