Jalen Smith
Rice · 2025–26 · 29 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
941:35 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 29
- Minutes per game
- 32:28
- Points per game
- 12.1
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 2.9 / 2.3
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 12.1 | 2.9 | 2.3 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 2.1 | 1.4 |
| Per 40 minutes | 14.9 | 3.6 | 2.8 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 2.6 | 1.7 |
| Season totals | 351 | 84 | 66 | 27 | 8 | 62 | 40 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 120–307 | 39.1% | 10.6 | 13.0 |
| 2P | 47–110 | 42.7% | 3.8 | 4.7 |
| 3P | 73–197 | 37.1% | 6.8 | 8.4 |
| FT | 38–56 | 67.9% | 1.9 | 2.4 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 51.0% | 52.9% | 64.2% | 18.2% | 1.06 |
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
Rice · Mid and high major · 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
- $25K
- 80% range $4K to $165K
- Median share of team pool
- 3.2%
- team pool $960K, 80% range $415K to $2.15M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $20K to $27K
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $6K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 80.0%
- 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.
Rice: 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 | Rice | $25Kspeculative | $4K to $165K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | -2.5 | -3.5 to -1.4 | Sufficient evidence | -0.4 | -2.1 | +3.2range +2.7 to +3.8 | 3,151 | Season detail | |
| 2024 | SMU | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | -1.4 | -2.7 to -0.3 | Sufficient evidence | -0.0 | -1.4 | +1.5range +1.0 to +2.1 | 1,663 | Season detail | |
| 2023 | SMU | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | -1.8 | -3.3 to -0.5 | Sufficient evidence | -1.0 | -0.9 | +1.6range +1.0 to +2.1 | 2,532 | Season detail | |
| 2022 | SMU | None: no budget that season | — | development: in model selection | +0.1 | -0.7 to +0.9 | Sufficient evidence | -0.1 | +0.2 | Not computed for this season | 917 |
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 | 33:00 | 32:28 | 20:05–40:20 | |
| Points | 15.2 | 12.1 | 3.0–25.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 55.3% | 49.7% | 20.0%–77.3% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-08 | UTSA | W 80–71 | 32:20 | 25 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 10-25 | 5-17 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2026-03-04 | North Texas | L 58–62 | 31:13 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 6-15 | 5-11 | 1-3 | 56.7% |
| 2026-03-01 | Temple | W 80–74 | 37:00 | 15 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 4-8 | 4-5 | 3-4 | 75.0% |
| 2026-02-25 | South Fla. | L 56–75 | 29:42 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 3-10 | 3-8 | 0-0 | 45.0% |
| 2026-02-22 | Tulane | L 75–81 | 34:47 | 9 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3-8 | 2-6 | 1-1 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-14 | East Carolina | L 75–85 | 33:23 | 6 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2-10 | 1-6 | 1-2 | 25.0% |
| 2026-02-11 | Fla. Atlantic | W 81–73 | 34:25 | 16 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6-13 | 2-6 | 2-4 | 53.8% |
| 2026-02-08 | UAB | L 65–71 | 35:04 | 8 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2-9 | 2-7 | 2-2 | 33.3% |
| 2026-02-04 | North Texas | W 86–83 | 40:20 | 13 | 10 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 5-14 | 3-9 | 0-0 | 46.4% |
| 2026-01-30 | Charlotte | L 70–80 | 35:40 | 11 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 4-13 | 3-10 | 0-0 | 42.3% |
| 2026-01-28 | East Carolina | W 83–77 | 35:11 | 21 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 8-16 | 5-11 | 0-0 | 65.6% |
| 2026-01-24 | Tulsa | L 81–87 | 32:34 | 24 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 9-15 | 5-10 | 1-2 | 76.7% |
| 2026-01-21 | Temple | L 65–69 | 20:05 | 10 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4-7 | 0-2 | 2-2 | 57.1% |
| 2026-01-14 | UTSA | W 89–73 | 35:02 | 18 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 6-13 | 5-11 | 1-2 | 65.4% |
| 2026-01-11 | Charlotte | L 73–74 | 20:12 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 1-4 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 37.5% |
| 2026-01-07 | Wichita St. | W 66–64 | 36:54 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4-13 | 1-8 | 0-0 | 34.6% |
| 2026-01-03 | Memphis | L 70–76 | 30:52 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2-5 | 2-4 | 0-0 | 60.0% |
| 2025-12-31 | Tulsa | L 48–97 | 28:30 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1-6 | 1-4 | 1-2 | 25.0% |
| 2025-12-20 | Pepperdine | L 62–84 | 31:50 | 8 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2-7 | 1-5 | 3-4 | 35.7% |
| 2025-12-13 | Arkansas St. | W 77–76 | 32:21 | 13 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5-9 | 3-5 | 0-1 | 72.2% |
| 2025-12-03 | Texas St. | W 77–72 | 30:49 | 11 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 3-7 | 2-5 | 3-4 | 57.1% |
| 2025-11-26 | Oral Roberts | W 81–62 | 29:20 | 17 | 10 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 7-11 | 3-7 | 0-0 | 77.3% |
| 2025-11-25 | FGCU | L 63–78 | 36:50 | 8 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3-8 | 2-5 | 0-2 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-24 | Kennesaw St. | L 84–89 | 39:14 | 11 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 2-12 | 1-4 | 6-8 | 20.8% |
| 2025-11-20 | Tarleton St. | L 74–90 | 33:07 | 13 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4-11 | 3-9 | 2-3 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-17 | Tennessee | L 66–91 | 26:44 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3-9 | 2-6 | 2-2 | 44.4% |
| 2025-11-14 | East Texas A&M | W 71–64 | 33:39 | 18 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 5-9 | 2-3 | 6-6 | 66.7% |
| 2025-11-11 | SFA | L 69–81 | 29:00 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1-5 | 0-1 | 1-2 | 20.0% |
| 2025-11-07 | Oregon | L 63–67 | 35:27 | 14 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 5-15 | 4-10 | 0-0 | 46.7% |