Amare Bynum
Ohio St. · 2025–26 · 34 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
970:40 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 34
- Minutes per game
- 28:33
- Points per game
- 9.7
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 4.9 / 1.1
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 9.7 | 4.9 | 1.1 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 1.1 | 2.6 |
| Per 40 minutes | 13.6 | 6.9 | 1.5 | 0.9 | 1.2 | 1.6 | 3.6 |
| Season totals | 331 | 168 | 37 | 21 | 28 | 38 | 87 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 129–255 | 50.6% | 7.5 | 10.5 |
| 2P | 101–164 | 61.6% | 4.8 | 6.8 |
| 3P | 28–91 | 30.8% | 2.7 | 3.7 |
| FT | 45–62 | 72.6% | 1.8 | 2.6 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 56.1% | 58.6% | 35.7% | 24.3% | 0.97 |
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
Ohio St · 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
- $395K
- 80% range $180K to $615K
- Median share of team pool
- 11.9%
- team pool $3.60M, 80% range $2.55M to $4.95M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $395K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $26K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 71.3%
- 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.
Ohio St: 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 | Ohio St | $395Kspeculative | $180K to $615K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +2.3 | +1.1 to +3.4 | Sufficient evidence | +1.8 | +0.5 | +5.6range +5.0 to +6.1 | 3,171 | 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 | 32:56 | 28:33 | 12:06–38:41 | |
| Points | 12.0 | 9.7 | 0.0–20.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 63.1% | 57.5% | 0.0%–150.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-19 | TCU | L 64–66 | 34:42 | 12 | 9 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5-8 | 0-3 | 2-3 | 62.5% |
| 2026-03-13 | Michigan | L 67–71 | 33:32 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1-5 | 1-4 | 2-2 | 30.0% |
| 2026-03-12 | Iowa | W 72–69 | 37:09 | 11 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 5-10 | 0-3 | 1-2 | 50.0% |
| 2026-03-07 | Indiana | W 91–78 | 34:35 | 18 | 9 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 7-10 | 2-3 | 2-2 | 80.0% |
| 2026-03-04 | Penn St. | W 94–62 | 24:44 | 14 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 6-7 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 92.9% |
| 2026-03-01 | Purdue | W 82–74 | 27:07 | 14 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4-6 | 1-3 | 5-6 | 75.0% |
| 2026-02-25 | Iowa | L 57–74 | 26:23 | 8 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 3-8 | 2-3 | 0-1 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-22 | Michigan St. | L 60–66 | 28:47 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0-5 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 0.0% |
| 2026-02-17 | Wisconsin | W 86–69 | 34:11 | 13 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 5-6 | 3-4 | 0-0 | 108.3% |
| 2026-02-14 | Virginia | L 66–70 | 32:55 | 15 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 5-7 | 3-4 | 2-2 | 92.9% |
| 2026-02-11 | Southern California | W 89–82 | 30:13 | 11 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 5-12 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 45.8% |
| 2026-02-08 | Michigan | L 61–82 | 32:17 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2-4 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 62.5% |
| 2026-02-05 | Maryland | W 82–62 | 33:28 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2-3 | 0-1 | 1-4 | 66.7% |
| 2026-01-31 | Wisconsin | L 82–92 | 34:47 | 18 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 6-12 | 2-5 | 4-4 | 58.3% |
| 2026-01-26 | Penn St. | W 84–78 | 29:52 | 15 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 7-12 | 0-3 | 1-1 | 58.3% |
| 2026-01-23 | Michigan | L 62–74 | 27:52 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 2-5 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-20 | Minnesota | W 82–74 | 26:54 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0-1 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0.0% |
| 2026-01-17 | UCLA | W 86–74 | 31:58 | 7 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3-9 | 0-4 | 1-2 | 33.3% |
| 2026-01-11 | Washington | L 74–81 | 36:55 | 20 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 8-19 | 2-6 | 2-3 | 47.4% |
| 2026-01-08 | Oregon | W 72–62 | 26:22 | 10 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 4-10 | 0-3 | 2-3 | 40.0% |
| 2026-01-05 | Nebraska | L 69–72 | 35:08 | 9 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 4-9 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-02 | Rutgers | W 80–73 | 33:43 | 9 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2-7 | 0-3 | 5-6 | 28.6% |
| 2025-12-23 | Grambling | W 89–63 | 31:14 | 12 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 5-8 | 1-3 | 1-1 | 68.8% |
| 2025-12-20 | North Carolina | L 70–71 | 26:47 | 11 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 5-11 | 0-2 | 1-1 | 45.5% |
| 2025-12-13 | West Virginia | W 89–88 | 38:41 | 17 | 9 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 7-11 | 0-0 | 3-3 | 63.6% |
| 2025-12-09 | Illinois | L 80–88 | 20:26 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2025-12-06 | Northwestern | W 86–82 | 27:10 | 11 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 5-9 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 61.1% |
| 2025-11-28 | Pittsburgh | L 66–67 | 30:32 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3-5 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 70.0% |
| 2025-11-25 | Mount St. Mary's | W 113–60 | 21:52 | 8 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2-4 | 1-2 | 3-4 | 62.5% |
| 2025-11-20 | Western Mich. | W 91–58 | 18:42 | 12 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5-11 | 1-4 | 1-3 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-16 | Notre Dame | W 64–63 | 20:22 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2-5 | 0-2 | 0-1 | 40.0% |
| 2025-11-11 | App State | W 75–53 | 12:46 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3-8 | 0-3 | 2-2 | 37.5% |
| 2025-11-07 | Purdue Fort Wayne | W 94–68 | 16:28 | 9 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 2-2 | 2-2 | 3-4 | 150.0% |
| 2025-11-03 | IU Indy | W 118–102 | 12:06 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3-4 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 75.0% |