Cade Norris
Samford · 2025–26 · 30 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
933:23 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 30
- Minutes per game
- 31:07
- Points per game
- 8.9
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 4.4 / 2.0
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 8.9 | 4.4 | 2.0 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 0.9 | 2.3 |
| Per 40 minutes | 11.5 | 5.6 | 2.6 | 0.7 | 0.1 | 1.1 | 2.9 |
| Season totals | 268 | 131 | 61 | 17 | 3 | 26 | 68 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 85–188 | 45.2% | 6.3 | 8.1 |
| 2P | 44–86 | 51.2%† | 2.9 | 3.7 |
| 3P | 41–102 | 40.2% | 3.4 | 4.4 |
| FT | 57–74 | 77.0% | 2.5 | 3.2 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 56.1% | 60.8% | 54.3% | 39.4% | 2.35 |
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
Samford · 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
- $19K
- 80% range $2K to $72K
- Median share of team pool
- 10.5%
- team pool $250K, 80% range $93K to $665K
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $19K to $23K
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $2K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 77.3%
- 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.
Samford: 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 | Samford | $19Kspeculative | $2K to $72K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | -0.2 | -1.7 to +1.6 | Sufficient evidence | +0.6 | -0.7 | +4.7range +3.9 to +5.5 | 3,000 | 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 | 36:04 | 31:07 | 19:33–43:52 | |
| Points | 11.2 | 8.9 | 0.0–19.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 64.2% | 56.8% | 0.0%–100.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-07 | Furman | L 81–86 | 35:20 | 11 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4-6 | 3-4 | 0-0 | 91.7% |
| 2026-02-28 | UNC Greensboro | W 87–78 | 30:56 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2-5 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-26 | VMI | W 80–61 | 36:48 | 12 | 7 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4-10 | 2-6 | 2-2 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-21 | Mercer | L 86–89 | 39:58 | 9 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3-10 | 1-3 | 2-2 | 35.0% |
| 2026-02-19 | The Citadel | W 78–75 | 37:18 | 19 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 7-9 | 3-5 | 2-2 | 94.4% |
| 2026-02-14 | ETSU | W 82–72 | 43:52 | 14 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 2-4 | 1-3 | 9-10 | 62.5% |
| 2026-02-11 · NCAA | Wofford | W 97–80 | 34:00 | 17 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 7-10 | 3-4 | 0-0 | 85.0% |
| 2026-02-07 | Mercer | W 69–49 | 29:51 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2-4 | 2-3 | 0-1 | 75.0% |
| 2026-02-05 | The Citadel | W 78–64 | 28:09 | 7 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2-3 | 1-2 | 2-2 | 83.3% |
| 2026-02-01 | Western Caro. | W 88–74 | 31:05 | 10 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 2-6 | 1-4 | 5-8 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-29 | Furman | L 73–78 | 19:33 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2-6 | 1-4 | 1-3 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-24 | Chattanooga | W 75–64 | 34:01 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3-8 | 2-4 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-21 · NCAA | Wofford | L 78–88 | 25:18 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1-4 | 1-4 | 2-2 | 37.5% |
| 2026-01-17 | ETSU | L 75–76 | 30:09 | 16 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6-11 | 3-6 | 1-2 | 68.2% |
| 2026-01-14 | Furman | L 73–77 | 29:00 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2-6 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-10 | Chattanooga | L 79–88 | 27:05 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1-5 | 1-3 | 3-6 | 30.0% |
| 2026-01-07 | Western Caro. | W 82–77 | 33:44 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1-5 | 1-3 | 4-4 | 30.0% |
| 2026-01-03 | UNC Greensboro | L 82–89 | 28:38 | 4 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 100.0% |
| 2026-01-01 | VMI | W 78–58 | 29:55 | 7 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2-3 | 2-3 | 1-2 | 100.0% |
| 2025-12-07 | Cornell | W 93–90 | 24:54 | 13 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 5-7 | 1-2 | 2-3 | 78.6% |
| 2025-12-05 | VCU | L 57–83 | 26:48 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 2-6 | 0-2 | 2-2 | 33.3% |
| 2025-11-26 | Utah Valley | L 45–89 | 35:46 | 10 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 4-12 | 2-7 | 0-0 | 41.7% |
| 2025-11-25 | Georgia St. | W 78–63 | 38:10 | 13 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3-6 | 2-4 | 5-6 | 66.7% |
| 2025-11-21 | New Mexico St. | L 72–81 | 26:30 | 8 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3-7 | 1-3 | 1-1 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-19 | FGCU | L 62–77 | 24:12 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0-4 | 0-3 | 0-0 | 0.0% |
| 2025-11-16 | Central Ark. | W 84–77 | 35:48 | 12 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3-8 | 1-5 | 5-5 | 43.8% |
| 2025-11-14 | Arkansas | L 75–79 | 30:55 | 15 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 6-8 | 3-5 | 0-0 | 93.8% |
| 2025-11-12 | Texas Southern | W 93–90 | 35:54 | 11 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2-4 | 1-2 | 6-7 | 62.5% |
| 2025-11-07 | South Carolina St. | W 82–72 | 21:39 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0-6 | 0-3 | 2-2 | 0.0% |
| 2025-11-03 | Tulane | L 72–85 | 28:07 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2-3 | 0-0 | 0-2 | 66.7% |