Solomon Washington
Maryland · 2025–26 · 25 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
794:36 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 25
- Minutes per game
- 31:47
- Points per game
- 9.8
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 9.2 / 1.0
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 9.8 | 9.2 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 1.8 | 3.0 |
| Per 40 minutes | 12.4 | 11.6 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.0 | 2.3 | 3.8 |
| Season totals | 246 | 230 | 25 | 28 | 20 | 46 | 76 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 84–191 | 44.0% | 7.6 | 9.6 |
| 2P | 75–154 | 48.7% | 6.2 | 7.8 |
| 3P | 9–37 | 24.3%† | 1.5 | 1.9 |
| FT | 69–109 | 63.3% | 4.4 | 5.5 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 46.3% | 51.5% | 19.4% | 57.1% | 0.54 |
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
- $700K
- 80% range $350K to $1.80M
- Median share of team pool
- 18.1%
- team pool $3.60M, 80% range $2.60M to $4.95M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $700K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $29K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 70.2%
- 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.
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 | $700Kspeculative | $350K to $1.80M | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +1.0 | -0.4 to +2.3 | Sufficient evidence | -0.5 | +1.5 | +3.3range +2.8 to +3.7 | 2,495 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | Texas A&M | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +3.2 | +1.9 to +4.8 | Sufficient evidence | -0.4 | +3.6 | +4.1range +3.6 to +4.7 | 2,235 | Season detail | |
| 2024 | Texas A&M | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +3.3 | +2.1 to +4.2 | Sufficient evidence | +1.4 | +1.9 | +3.8range +3.2 to +4.4 | 2,458 | Season detail | |
| 2023 | Texas A&M | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +0.0 | -0.7 to +0.7 | Limited evidence | +0.0 | -0.0 | +1.1range +0.9 to +1.3 | 520 | Limited evidence: 300 to 599 on-court possessions. 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 | 31:19 | 31:47 | 10:47–38:45 | |
| Points | 7.6 | 9.8 | 2.0–17.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 46.1% | 47.7% | 20.0%–83.3% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-11 | Iowa | L 64–75 | 38:17 | 4 | 13 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 2-6 | 25.0% |
| 2026-03-10 | Oregon | W 70–60 | 36:30 | 12 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 6-9 | 0-1 | 0-1 | 66.7% |
| 2026-03-08 | Illinois | L 72–78 | 20:28 | 5 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 2-3 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 83.3% |
| 2026-03-04 | Wisconsin | L 45–78 | 32:38 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1-5 | 0-1 | 0-2 | 20.0% |
| 2026-03-01 | Rutgers | L 65–69 | 28:42 | 15 | 7 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5-14 | 0-1 | 5-5 | 35.7% |
| 2026-02-25 | Nebraska | L 61–74 | 32:27 | 13 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 4-7 | 1-2 | 4-4 | 64.3% |
| 2026-02-21 | Washington | W 64–60 | 30:24 | 11 | 14 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 5-9 | 0-0 | 1-4 | 55.6% |
| 2026-02-18 | Northwestern | L 74–78 | 38:45 | 11 | 14 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3-7 | 0-0 | 5-6 | 42.9% |
| 2026-02-15 | Rutgers | L 57–68 | 36:42 | 11 | 14 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 4-7 | 0-1 | 3-6 | 57.1% |
| 2026-02-11 | Iowa | W 77–70 | 28:20 | 10 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3-5 | 0-1 | 4-7 | 60.0% |
| 2026-02-08 | Minnesota | W 67–62 | 37:02 | 9 | 10 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3-5 | 1-3 | 2-4 | 70.0% |
| 2026-02-05 | Ohio St. | L 62–82 | 37:24 | 13 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 4-10 | 0-3 | 5-7 | 40.0% |
| 2026-02-01 | Purdue | L 63–93 | 36:11 | 14 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4-9 | 1-2 | 5-6 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-24 | Michigan St. | L 48–91 | 37:20 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3-8 | 1-1 | 1-2 | 43.8% |
| 2026-01-21 | Illinois | L 70–89 | 24:20 | 13 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5-9 | 0-1 | 3-8 | 55.6% |
| 2026-01-18 | Penn St. | W 96–73 | 27:43 | 6 | 11 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 3-5 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 60.0% |
| 2026-01-13 | Southern California | L 71–88 | 22:34 | 11 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 3-10 | 1-2 | 4-6 | 35.0% |
| 2026-01-10 | UCLA | L 55–67 | 37:23 | 4 | 12 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 2-7 | 0-3 | 0-1 | 28.6% |
| 2026-01-07 | Indiana | L 66–84 | 37:39 | 14 | 9 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5-12 | 0-1 | 4-4 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-02 | Oregon | L 54–64 | 37:46 | 17 | 12 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 6-14 | 1-4 | 4-5 | 46.4% |
| 2025-12-28 | Old Dominion | W 73–58 | 32:33 | 13 | 13 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4-8 | 0-1 | 5-6 | 50.0% |
| 2025-12-20 | Virginia | L 72–80 | 35:13 | 9 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 2-8 | 0-2 | 5-9 | 25.0% |
| 2025-12-13 | Michigan | L 83–101 | 10:47 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1-3 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2025-12-06 | Iowa | L 64–83 | 32:52 | 8 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2-7 | 1-3 | 3-4 | 35.7% |
| 2025-12-02 · NCAA | Wagner | W 89–63 | 24:36 | 10 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3-6 | 0-0 | 4-6 | 50.0% |