Raysean Seamster
UT Arlington · 2025–26 · 30 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
908:48 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 30
- Minutes per game
- 30:18
- Points per game
- 11.8
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 6.3 / 1.9
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 11.8 | 6.3 | 1.9 | 1.3 | 0.7 | 2.2 | 2.4 |
| Per 40 minutes | 15.6 | 8.3 | 2.6 | 1.7 | 0.9 | 2.9 | 3.2 |
| Season totals | 354 | 188 | 58 | 39 | 21 | 65 | 73 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 141–296 | 47.6% | 9.9 | 13.0 |
| 2P | 127–242 | 52.5% | 8.1 | 10.7 |
| 3P | 14–54 | 25.9% | 1.8 | 2.4 |
| FT | 58–100 | 58.0% | 3.3 | 4.4 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50.0% | 52.1% | 18.2% | 33.8% | 0.89 |
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
UT Arlington · 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
- $34K
- 80% range $10K to $100K
- Median share of team pool
- 15.8%
- team pool $220K, 80% range $82K to $590K
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $32K to $37K
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $2K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 74.5%
- 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. 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.
UT Arlington: 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 | UT Arlington | $34Kspeculative | $10K to $100K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +1.1 | -0.2 to +2.2 | Sufficient evidence | +0.2 | +0.9 | +5.4range +4.7 to +6.0 | 2,821 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | UT Arlington | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | -0.7 | -1.8 to +0.4 | Sufficient evidence | +0.1 | -0.8 | +2.5range +2.1 to +3.1 | 2,169 | 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 | 26:57 | 30:18 | 16:12–44:09 | |
| Points | 8.4 | 11.8 | 3.0–25.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 35.8% | 49.8% | 16.7%–100.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-13 | Utah Valley | L 65–67 | 25:09 | 14 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 6-12 | 0-2 | 2-5 | 50.0% |
| 2026-03-12 | Southern Utah | W 69–63 | 27:26 | 12 | 12 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 6-14 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 42.9% |
| 2026-03-07 | Abilene Christian | W 64–57 | 34:21 | 7 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3-8 | 0-1 | 1-1 | 37.5% |
| 2026-03-05 | Tarleton St. | W 65–60 | 31:39 | 5 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1-5 | 0-2 | 3-4 | 20.0% |
| 2026-02-26 | California Baptist | L 56–68 | 16:12 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2-7 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 28.6% |
| 2026-02-21 | Utah Valley | L 54–66 | 25:31 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 1-6 | 0-2 | 2-6 | 16.7% |
| 2026-02-19 | Utah Tech | W 63–50 | 26:38 | 7 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3-7 | 0-0 | 1-2 | 42.9% |
| 2026-02-14 | Southern Utah | L 73–78 | 31:51 | 13 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 5-11 | 1-1 | 2-5 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-12 | Abilene Christian | L 63–67 | 23:29 | 11 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 5-5 | 0-0 | 1-2 | 100.0% |
| 2026-02-07 | Utah Valley | L 60–81 | 25:31 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 1-2 | 33.3% |
| 2026-02-05 | Utah Tech | L 84–87 | 44:09 | 25 | 10 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 11-19 | 1-3 | 2-4 | 60.5% |
| 2026-01-31 | California Baptist | L 77–87 | 35:02 | 9 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 4-10 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 45.0% |
| 2026-01-29 | Southern Utah | W 80–61 | 22:01 | 16 | 8 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6-11 | 1-2 | 3-4 | 59.1% |
| 2026-01-21 | Tarleton St. | W 71–64 | 31:38 | 23 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 7-8 | 1-1 | 8-12 | 93.8% |
| 2026-01-17 | Utah Valley | L 74–86 | 25:21 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 2-8 | 0-2 | 2-2 | 25.0% |
| 2026-01-15 | Utah Tech | W 56–52 | 31:48 | 14 | 8 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 7-17 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 41.2% |
| 2026-01-10 | Abilene Christian | W 82–72 | 35:15 | 10 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 5-11 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 45.5% |
| 2026-01-03 | Southern Utah | W 86–77 | 37:59 | 11 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2-4 | 0-0 | 7-9 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-01 | California Baptist | W 63–51 | 34:42 | 13 | 6 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 5-15 | 1-5 | 2-3 | 36.7% |
| 2025-12-29 | Tarleton St. | L 63–69 | 36:39 | 11 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 4-6 | 0-1 | 3-4 | 66.7% |
| 2025-12-22 | Oral Roberts | W 69–57 | 32:22 | 6 | 9 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 3-7 | 0-2 | 0-2 | 42.9% |
| 2025-12-17 | Stanford | L 60–76 | 29:30 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 2-7 | 0-0 | 3-5 | 28.6% |
| 2025-12-11 | UTRGV | W 58–50 | 35:14 | 12 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 5-7 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 78.6% |
| 2025-12-02 | Arkansas St. | L 63–83 | 27:51 | 11 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 5-10 | 0-0 | 1-2 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-29 | SFA | W 66–61 | 33:43 | 16 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 5-8 | 1-2 | 5-7 | 68.8% |
| 2025-11-22 | Weber St. | W 74–73 | 32:53 | 15 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 7-15 | 1-4 | 0-1 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-21 | Campbell | L 67–71 | 28:38 | 16 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 7-18 | 2-6 | 0-1 | 44.4% |
| 2025-11-18 | Evansville | W 84–76 | 28:37 | 19 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 8-13 | 2-4 | 1-1 | 69.2% |
| 2025-11-15 | Missouri St. | W 67–49 | 35:12 | 17 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 7-15 | 1-3 | 2-7 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-08 | New Mexico | L 56–74 | 22:27 | 17 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 6-9 | 0-3 | 5-6 | 66.7% |