Sencire Harris
Cincinnati · 2025–26 · 31 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
522:40 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 31
- Minutes per game
- 16:52
- Points per game
- 5.7
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 2.7 / 1.5
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 5.7 | 2.7 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 2.1 |
| Per 40 minutes | 13.6 | 6.4 | 3.6 | 2.8 | 0.4 | 1.9 | 5.0 |
| Season totals | 178 | 83 | 47 | 36 | 5 | 25 | 65 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 61–158 | 38.6% | 5.1 | 12.1 |
| 2P | 55–125 | 44.0% | 4.0 | 9.6 |
| 3P | 6–33 | 18.2%† | 1.1 | 2.5 |
| FT | 50–80 | 62.5% | 2.6 | 6.1 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40.5% | 46.1% | 20.9% | 50.6% | 1.88 |
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
Cincinnati · 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
- $225K
- 80% range $105K to $365K
- Median share of team pool
- 6.7%
- team pool $3.55M, 80% range $2.50M to $5.00M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $225K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $26K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 38.4%
- Sufficient evidence
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.
Cincinnati: 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 | Cincinnati | $225Kspeculative | $105K to $365K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +2.0 | +0.8 to +3.3 | Sufficient evidence | -0.5 | +2.5 | +2.8range +2.5 to +3.2 | 1,650 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | West Virginia | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +1.9 | +0.3 to +3.3 | Sufficient evidence | -0.6 | +2.5 | +3.8range +3.0 to +4.5 | 2,771 | Season detail | |
| 2023 | Illinois | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +1.0 | -0.2 to +2.4 | Sufficient evidence | -0.2 | +1.2 | +1.8range +1.4 to +2.2 | 1,327 | 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 | 11:23 | 16:52 | 2:34–28:26 | |
| Points | 2.4 | 5.7 | 0.0–12.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 32.0% | 42.4% | 0.0%–150.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-11 | UCF | L 65–66 | 11:07 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 1-2 | 0.0% |
| 2026-03-10 | Utah | W 73–66 | 9:59 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2-2 | 0-0 | 1-2 | 100.0% |
| 2026-03-07 | TCU | L 63–73 | 13:50 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0-3 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0.0% |
| 2026-03-03 | BYU | W 90–68 | 12:58 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 3-5 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 60.0% |
| 2026-02-28 | Oklahoma St. | W 91–68 | 9:03 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0-2 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0.0% |
| 2026-02-24 | Texas Tech | L 68–80 | 9:25 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1-4 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 25.0% |
| 2026-02-21 | Kansas | W 84–68 | 8:29 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1-1 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 150.0% |
| 2026-02-15 | Utah | W 69–65 | 5:35 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0.0% |
| 2026-02-11 | Kansas St. | W 91–62 | 22:38 | 12 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4-9 | 1-4 | 3-3 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-08 | UCF | W 92–72 | 15:50 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3-5 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 70.0% |
| 2026-02-05 | West Virginia | L 54–59 | 9:03 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 1-1 | 33.3% |
| 2026-01-24 | Arizona St. | L 68–82 | 25:55 | 8 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3-6 | 0-0 | 2-3 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-21 | Arizona | L 51–77 | 13:38 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 0-4 | 0-1 | 1-2 | 0.0% |
| 2026-01-17 | Iowa St. | W 79–70 | 20:32 | 12 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3-8 | 0-2 | 6-8 | 37.5% |
| 2026-01-14 | Colorado | W 77–68 | 26:19 | 9 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 3-7 | 0-2 | 3-6 | 42.9% |
| 2026-01-11 | UCF | L 72–73 | 26:57 | 5 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2-8 | 0-3 | 1-2 | 25.0% |
| 2026-01-06 | West Virginia | L 60–62 | 16:37 | 7 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2-7 | 0-2 | 3-5 | 28.6% |
| 2026-01-03 | Houston | L 60–67 | 18:29 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1-7 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 14.3% |
| 2025-12-29 | Lipscomb | W 89–62 | 19:22 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3-5 | 0-0 | 1-1 | 60.0% |
| 2025-12-21 | Clemson | L 65–68 | 28:26 | 10 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4-9 | 1-1 | 1-3 | 50.0% |
| 2025-12-17 | Alabama St. | W 88–51 | 2:34 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | — |
| 2025-12-13 | Georgia | L 65–84 | 20:40 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2-6 | 0-0 | 2-4 | 33.3% |
| 2025-12-05 | Xavier | L 74–79 | 17:20 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0-6 | 0-1 | 2-4 | 0.0% |
| 2025-12-01 | Tarleton St. | W 76–58 | 25:44 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2-6 | 1-4 | 1-2 | 41.7% |
| 2025-11-26 | Eastern Mich. | L 56–64 | 27:33 | 12 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 5-10 | 0-1 | 2-3 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-24 | NJIT | W 94–67 | 20:30 | 12 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4-7 | 1-2 | 3-7 | 64.3% |
| 2025-11-21 | Louisville | L 64–74 | 19:18 | 9 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4-7 | 0-0 | 1-1 | 57.1% |
| 2025-11-16 | Mount St. Mary's | W 72–55 | 22:02 | 8 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3-8 | 0-1 | 2-4 | 37.5% |
| 2025-11-11 | Dayton | W 74–62 | 18:15 | 8 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 1-6 | 0-1 | 6-8 | 16.7% |
| 2025-11-07 | Georgia St. | W 74–64 | 15:12 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 3-4 | 0-1 | 3-3 | 75.0% |
| 2025-11-03 | Western Caro. | W 94–63 | 9:20 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 4-6 | 100.0% |