Tanner Toolson
Only corroborated player-season records; not complete career coverage.
Observed career performance
2275:40 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 92
- Minutes per game
- 24:44
- Points per game
- 9.4
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 3.5 / 1.3
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 9.4 | 3.5 | 1.3 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 1.0 | 1.5 |
| Per 40 minutes | 15.3 | 5.6 | 2.1 | 1.4 | 0.5 | 1.5 | 2.4 |
| Season totals | 868 | 319 | 117 | 79 | 26 | 88 | 139 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 282–715 | 39.4% | 7.8 | 12.6 |
| 2P | 163–337 | 48.4% | 3.7 | 5.9 |
| 3P | 119–378 | 31.5% | 4.1 | 6.6 |
| FT | 185–252 | 73.4% | 2.7 | 4.4 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 47.8% | 52.6% | 52.9% | 35.2% | 1.33 |
Combined corroborated seasons only; not complete career coverage. † 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
Linked seasons
| Season | Team | G | MPG | Pts | Reb | Ast | Pts/40 | 3P% | FT% | TS% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 Tanner Toolson | BYU | 4Few games | 5:17 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 7.6 | 0.0%† | — | 40.0%† |
| 2024 Tanner Toolson | Utah Valley | 26 | 27:46 | 8.7 | 3.7 | 1.5 | 12.6 | 30.2% | 66.2% | 47.3% |
| 2025 Tanner Toolson | Utah Valley | 27 | 29:40 | 13.6 | 4.1 | 1.7 | 18.4 | 34.7% | 79.8% | 59.5% |
| 2026 Tanner Toolson | TCU | 35 | 20:54 | 7.7 | 3.2 | 0.9 | 14.7 | 29.1% | 72.6% | 49.5% |
Career identity corroborated by repeated game, team and individual-statistic matches. Unlinked seasons are excluded.
Speculative compensation · 2025–26β
TCU · 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
- $140K
- 80% range $21K to $320K
- Median share of team pool
- 4.2%
- team pool $3.60M, 80% range $2.60M to $4.90M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $140K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $23K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 53.1%
- 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.
TCU: 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.
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 | TCU | $140Kspeculative | $21K to $320K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | -0.5 | -2.0 to +0.7 | Sufficient evidence | +1.7 | -2.2 | +3.1range +2.5 to +3.6 | 2,298 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | Utah Valley | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +2.7 | +1.6 to +3.9 | Sufficient evidence | +1.4 | +1.3 | +5.0range +4.4 to +5.8 | 2,678 | Season detail | |
| 2024 | Utah Valley | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | -0.2 | -1.3 to +1.0 | Sufficient evidence | -0.7 | +0.5 | +2.9range +2.3 to +3.5 | 2,423 | Season detail | |
| 2023 | Not applicable | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | No model-implied value is published: fewer than 300 on-court possessions, or the team’s games were outside the lineup audit. | Not applicable | |||||||
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