Tylik Weeks
Southern Miss. · 2025–26 · 33 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
1124:40 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 33
- Minutes per game
- 34:05
- Points per game
- 20.1
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 5.5 / 2.3
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 20.1 | 5.5 | 2.3 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 2.7 | 2.6 |
| Per 40 minutes | 23.6 | 6.5 | 2.7 | 1.1 | 0.4 | 3.2 | 3.1 |
| Season totals | 664 | 183 | 77 | 31 | 10 | 89 | 86 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 217–468 | 46.4% | 14.2 | 16.6 |
| 2P | 205–415 | 49.4% | 12.6 | 14.8 |
| 3P | 12–53 | 22.6% | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| FT | 218–265 | 82.3% | 8.0 | 9.4 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 47.6% | 56.8% | 11.3% | 56.6% | 0.87 |
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
Southern Miss · 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
- $51K
- 80% range $17K to $145K
- Median share of team pool
- 19.0%
- team pool $260K, 80% range $97K to $690K
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $46K to $53K
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $2K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 85.0%
- 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.
Southern Miss: 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 | Southern Miss | $51Kspeculative | $17K to $145K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +1.4 | +0.5 to +2.3 | Sufficient evidence | +0.4 | +0.9 | +6.8range +6.1 to +7.4 | 3,331 | 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 | 38:01 | 34:05 | 18:48–41:31 | |
| Points | 25.0 | 20.1 | 4.0–37.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 48.8% | 46.8% | 20.0%–77.8% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-08 | Troy | L 70–78 | 36:26 | 15 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 6-18 | 2-5 | 1-2 | 38.9% |
| 2026-03-07 | App State | W 86–73 | 37:58 | 28 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 10-24 | 1-4 | 7-8 | 43.8% |
| 2026-03-06 | Texas St. | W 81–77 | 36:14 | 32 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 9-18 | 0-1 | 14-14 | 50.0% |
| 2026-03-05 | James Madison | W 86–80 | 39:48 | 31 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 8-16 | 2-2 | 13-15 | 56.3% |
| 2026-02-27 | South Alabama | W 68–55 | 39:40 | 19 | 6 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 5-10 | 1-2 | 8-9 | 55.0% |
| 2026-02-24 | Arkansas St. | L 84–89 | 37:46 | 21 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 8-17 | 1-3 | 4-6 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-21 | Old Dominion | W 86–81 | 36:40 | 27 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 10-17 | 0-2 | 7-9 | 58.8% |
| 2026-02-14 | Troy | W 69–65 | 39:22 | 32 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 11-20 | 0-1 | 10-11 | 55.0% |
| 2026-02-12 | South Alabama | L 78–84 | 34:01 | 25 | 5 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 6-14 | 2-3 | 11-12 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-07 | Kent St. | W 66–65 | 31:43 | 15 | 11 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 3-15 | 1-3 | 8-10 | 23.3% |
| 2026-02-04 | Marshall | L 77–81 | 23:00 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 1-5 | 0-1 | 2-4 | 20.0% |
| 2026-01-31 | James Madison | W 73–65 | 35:38 | 28 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 7-13 | 0-1 | 14-18 | 53.8% |
| 2026-01-29 | App State | L 63–70 | 33:33 | 21 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6-13 | 0-0 | 9-11 | 46.2% |
| 2026-01-24 | Coastal Carolina | L 67–85 | 35:27 | 22 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 9-20 | 0-2 | 4-5 | 45.0% |
| 2026-01-22 | Georgia St. | L 62–69 | 18:48 | 10 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3-11 | 0-0 | 4-5 | 27.3% |
| 2026-01-17 | Texas St. | L 67–74 | 35:24 | 24 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 8-15 | 0-1 | 8-10 | 53.3% |
| 2026-01-14 | Troy | L 65–91 | 28:14 | 11 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 3-10 | 0-1 | 5-6 | 30.0% |
| 2026-01-10 · NCAA | ULM | W 70–60 | 36:42 | 20 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 7-15 | 0-1 | 6-8 | 46.7% |
| 2026-01-08 | Texas St. | W 80–70 | 41:31 | 25 | 7 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 10-21 | 0-2 | 5-7 | 47.6% |
| 2026-01-03 | Louisiana | W 74–67 | 28:23 | 12 | 7 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 3-9 | 0-1 | 6-6 | 33.3% |
| 2026-01-01 · NCAA | ULM | W 87–73 | 35:54 | 24 | 9 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 9-14 | 0-1 | 6-6 | 64.3% |
| 2025-12-29 | LSU | L 62–90 | 27:27 | 12 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 3-10 | 0-0 | 6-8 | 30.0% |
| 2025-12-20 | Arkansas St. | L 86–93 | 34:04 | 25 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 7-13 | 0-1 | 11-12 | 53.8% |
| 2025-12-18 | Louisiana | W 62–54 | 30:14 | 11 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 4-10 | 0-1 | 3-5 | 40.0% |
| 2025-12-13 | Ole Miss | L 67–71 | 37:58 | 18 | 10 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 8-19 | 0-2 | 2-5 | 42.1% |
| 2025-12-08 | Grambling | W 68–60 | 39:57 | 19 | 7 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 7-19 | 0-3 | 5-5 | 36.8% |
| 2025-12-06 | Miami (FL) | L 64–88 | 25:49 | 12 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 7 | 3 | 3-7 | 0-0 | 6-8 | 42.9% |
| 2025-12-03 | Radford | W 82–75 | 28:24 | 18 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5-12 | 0-1 | 8-9 | 41.7% |
| 2025-11-23 | UT Martin | W 70–60 | 34:13 | 14 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 7-9 | 0-0 | 0-2 | 77.8% |
| 2025-11-22 | North Florida | W 92–83 | 34:56 | 37 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 15-23 | 0-2 | 7-8 | 65.2% |
| 2025-11-13 | Grambling | L 70–75 | 36:17 | 19 | 8 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 6-9 | 2-2 | 5-7 | 77.8% |
| 2025-11-09 | South Carolina | L 79–83 | 37:47 | 20 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 7-13 | 0-1 | 6-7 | 53.8% |
| 2025-11-03 | Buffalo | L 79–85 | 35:22 | 13 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3-9 | 0-3 | 7-7 | 33.3% |