Andre Mills
Maryland · 2025–26 · 32 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
857:10 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 32
- Minutes per game
- 26:47
- Points per game
- 12.4
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 4.2 / 1.7
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 12.4 | 4.2 | 1.7 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 1.7 | 2.7 |
| Per 40 minutes | 18.6 | 6.3 | 2.5 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 2.6 | 4.0 |
| Season totals | 398 | 134 | 54 | 17 | 9 | 55 | 85 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 134–327 | 41.0% | 10.2 | 15.3 |
| 2P | 80–171 | 46.8% | 5.3 | 8.0 |
| 3P | 54–156 | 34.6% | 4.9 | 7.3 |
| FT | 76–97 | 78.4% | 3.0 | 4.5 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 49.2% | 53.8% | 47.7% | 29.7% | 0.98 |
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
Maryland · 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
- $455K
- 80% range $50K to $940K
- Median share of team pool
- 13.1%
- team pool $3.60M, 80% range $2.60M to $4.95M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $455K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $29K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 66.6%
- 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. 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.
Maryland: 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 | Maryland | $455Kspeculative | $50K to $940K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +0.1 | -1.3 to +1.5 | Sufficient evidence | +1.2 | -1.2 | +2.9range +2.4 to +3.3 | 2,365 | 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 | 28:55 | 26:47 | 13:52–39:35 | |
| Points | 16.0 | 12.4 | 2.0–39.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 41.0% | 49.0% | 0.0%–88.9% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-11 | Iowa | L 64–75 | 24:17 | 9 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 1-13 | 1-5 | 6-8 | 11.5% |
| 2026-03-10 | Oregon | W 70–60 | 28:27 | 12 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 3-13 | 1-5 | 5-5 | 26.9% |
| 2026-03-08 | Illinois | L 72–78 | 33:56 | 30 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 10-18 | 2-8 | 8-10 | 61.1% |
| 2026-03-04 | Wisconsin | L 45–78 | 23:53 | 14 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5-12 | 4-7 | 0-0 | 58.3% |
| 2026-03-01 | Rutgers | L 65–69 | 34:04 | 15 | 10 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 6-16 | 3-10 | 0-0 | 46.9% |
| 2026-02-25 | Nebraska | L 61–74 | 31:58 | 19 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 7-15 | 3-9 | 2-2 | 56.7% |
| 2026-02-21 | Washington | W 64–60 | 38:53 | 21 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 7-18 | 3-6 | 4-4 | 47.2% |
| 2026-02-18 | Northwestern | L 74–78 | 32:27 | 39 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 12-17 | 6-9 | 9-9 | 88.2% |
| 2026-02-15 | Rutgers | L 57–68 | 33:15 | 9 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 3-14 | 1-6 | 2-2 | 25.0% |
| 2026-02-11 | Iowa | W 77–70 | 39:35 | 24 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 9-14 | 3-6 | 3-5 | 75.0% |
| 2026-02-08 | Minnesota | W 67–62 | 21:58 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5-8 | 1-3 | 1-2 | 68.8% |
| 2026-02-05 | Ohio St. | L 62–82 | 33:39 | 11 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 4-8 | 2-5 | 1-2 | 62.5% |
| 2026-02-01 | Purdue | L 63–93 | 28:43 | 18 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 5-10 | 2-4 | 6-8 | 60.0% |
| 2026-01-24 | Michigan St. | L 48–91 | 15:04 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1-8 | 0-4 | 3-4 | 12.5% |
| 2026-01-21 | Illinois | L 70–89 | 15:47 | 16 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 6-9 | 4-5 | 0-1 | 88.9% |
| 2026-01-18 | Penn St. | W 96–73 | 21:01 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3-6 | 2-3 | 1-2 | 66.7% |
| 2026-01-13 | Southern California | L 71–88 | 13:52 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1-4 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 37.5% |
| 2026-01-10 | UCLA | L 55–67 | 20:20 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 2-4 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-07 | Indiana | L 66–84 | 32:42 | 10 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 4-8 | 1-3 | 1-3 | 56.3% |
| 2026-01-02 | Oregon | L 54–64 | 26:11 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1-10 | 0-4 | 2-2 | 10.0% |
| 2025-12-28 | Old Dominion | W 73–58 | 26:49 | 11 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4-10 | 3-5 | 0-0 | 55.0% |
| 2025-12-20 | Virginia | L 72–80 | 22:30 | 8 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3-6 | 2-4 | 0-1 | 66.7% |
| 2025-12-13 | Michigan | L 83–101 | 22:47 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 2-6 | 0-3 | 0-0 | 33.3% |
| 2025-12-06 | Iowa | L 64–83 | 21:16 | 11 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3-6 | 1-3 | 4-4 | 58.3% |
| 2025-12-02 · NCAA | Wagner | W 89–63 | 18:54 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0-9 | 0-5 | 2-2 | 0.0% |
| 2025-11-27 | Alabama | L 72–105 | 31:50 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3-11 | 0-5 | 0-0 | 27.3% |
| 2025-11-25 | UNLV | W 74–67 | 26:51 | 9 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3-7 | 1-4 | 2-2 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-25 | Gonzaga | L 61–100 | 21:27 | 11 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4-8 | 1-1 | 2-2 | 56.3% |
| 2025-11-19 | Mount St. Mary's | W 95–90 | 35:53 | 12 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4-12 | 0-3 | 4-8 | 33.3% |
| 2025-11-15 | Marquette | W 89–82 | 21:27 | 11 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 3-9 | 0-3 | 5-5 | 33.3% |
| 2025-11-11 · NCAA | Alcorn | W 84–64 | 27:12 | 16 | 8 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 6-10 | 3-6 | 1-2 | 75.0% |
| 2025-11-03 · NCAA | Coppin St. | W 83–61 | 30:12 | 13 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4-8 | 3-7 | 2-2 | 68.8% |