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.

Cameron Grant

Stanford · 2025–26 · 20 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance

Logged performance

209:08 minutes logged

Games logged
20
Minutes per game
10:27
Points per game
2.1
Rebounds / assists per game
1.3 / 0.4
Box line on three bases
BasisPtsRebAstStlBlkTOPF
Per game2.11.30.40.10.10.30.9
Per 40 minutes8.24.81.50.40.61.33.4
Season totals4325823718
Shooting with attempts
ShotMade–att.PctAtt/GAtt/40
FG14–5724.6%†2.910.9
2P1–425.0%†0.20.8
3P13–5324.5%2.610.1
FT2–2100.0%†0.10.4
Derived rates (computed here from the box line, not published statistics)
eFG%Estimated TS%3PA / FGAFTA / FGAAST / TO
36.0%†37.1%†93.0%†3.5%†1.14

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); the field-goal floor applies to the derived rates above. Floors are descriptive, not model output. Definitions

Speculative compensation · 2025–26β

Stanford · 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
$56K
80% range $19K to $110K
Median share of team pool
1.7%
team pool $3.60M, 80% range $2.55M to $4.95M
Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
$56K in all four
the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
Floor part
$23K
shared by every player with possessions
Possession share
15.0%
Sufficient evidence
Point and 80% range on the team table's axis. Open circle: limited evidence or floor only.

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.

Stanford: 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
2026Stanford$56Kspeculative$19K to $110Kdescriptive: not used in fit or gates-0.9-2.1 to +0.2Sufficient evidence-0.2-0.8+0.9range +0.8 to +1.1632Season 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
2026-02-28SMUW 95–750:4900000000-00-00-0—
2026-02-21CaliforniaL 66–721:1600000210-00-00-0—
2026-02-07Georgia TechW 95–721:3300000000-00-00-0—
2026-01-31Florida St.L 80–8820:5762100102-62-60-050.0%
2026-01-28Miami (FL)L 70–7922:1031000141-31-20-050.0%
2026-01-24CaliforniaL 66–7810:5702000000-20-10-00.0%
2026-01-17DukeL 50–8018:4331010111-81-70-018.8%
2026-01-14North CarolinaW 95–9015:4631100021-31-30-050.0%
2026-01-10VirginiaL 55–7018:1052101001-31-32-250.0%
2026-01-07Virginia TechW 69–683:1501110000-10-10-00.0%
2025-12-30Notre DameL 40–478:3732000011-61-60-025.0%
2025-12-13San Jose St.W 86–821:5201000000-00-00-0—
2025-12-01PortlandW 94–728:2502300120-20-20-00.0%
2025-11-28Saint LouisW 78–773:3800000010-00-00-0—
2025-11-27MinnesotaW 72–682:1800000000-00-00-0—
2025-11-21Seattle UL 69–778:5401000120-20-20-00.0%
2025-11-18LouisianaW 93–6620:13153000015-115-110-068.2%
2025-11-12Montana St.W 77–687:0501000010-30-30-00.0%
2025-11-08MontanaW 91–6821:2355002012-51-40-050.0%
2025-11-04Portland St.W 89–7913:0700100010-20-20-00.0%