Takai Simpkins
Oregon · 2025–26 · 31 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
995:07 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 31
- Minutes per game
- 32:06
- Points per game
- 12.5
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 2.9 / 2.4
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 12.5 | 2.9 | 2.4 | 0.9 | 0.2 | 2.1 | 1.5 |
| Per 40 minutes | 15.6 | 3.7 | 2.9 | 1.1 | 0.2 | 2.6 | 1.8 |
| Season totals | 388 | 91 | 73 | 28 | 6 | 64 | 46 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 127–298 | 42.6% | 9.6 | 12.0 |
| 2P | 77–158 | 48.7% | 5.1 | 6.4 |
| 3P | 50–140 | 35.7% | 4.5 | 5.6 |
| FT | 84–99 | 84.8% | 3.2 | 4.0 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 51.0% | 56.8% | 47.0% | 33.2% | 1.14 |
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
Oregon · 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
- $425K
- 80% range $77K to $705K
- Median share of team pool
- 12.9%
- team pool $3.55M, 80% range $2.55M to $4.95M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $425K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $23K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 78.1%
- 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.
Oregon: 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 | Oregon | $425Kspeculative | $77K to $705K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +0.8 | -0.7 to +1.9 | Sufficient evidence | +0.6 | +0.2 | +4.7range +4.0 to +5.2 | 3,232 | 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 | 33:37 | 32:06 | 25:50–38:41 | |
| Points | 13.0 | 12.5 | 0.0–22.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 46.8% | 50.4% | 0.0%–106.3% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-10 | Maryland | L 60–70 | 27:12 | 10 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2-7 | 0-2 | 6-6 | 28.6% |
| 2026-03-07 | Washington | W 85–79 | 36:05 | 18 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7-12 | 2-4 | 2-2 | 66.7% |
| 2026-03-03 | Illinois | L 54–80 | 33:27 | 9 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4-12 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 37.5% |
| 2026-02-28 | Northwestern | L 62–63 | 36:04 | 11 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5-12 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 45.8% |
| 2026-02-25 | Wisconsin | W 85–71 | 35:16 | 17 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4-9 | 2-3 | 7-7 | 55.6% |
| 2026-02-21 | Southern California | W 71–70 | 35:32 | 12 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 5-11 | 0-2 | 2-2 | 45.5% |
| 2026-02-17 | Minnesota | L 44–61 | 33:07 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 0-10 | 0-5 | 0-0 | 0.0% |
| 2026-02-14 | Penn St. | W 83–72 | 34:43 | 22 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 5-9 | 4-5 | 8-8 | 77.8% |
| 2026-02-09 | Indiana | L 74–92 | 33:04 | 11 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3-8 | 0-2 | 5-6 | 37.5% |
| 2026-02-07 | Purdue | L 64–68 | 36:02 | 14 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 6-13 | 2-7 | 0-0 | 53.8% |
| 2026-02-01 | Iowa | L 66–84 | 31:00 | 16 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5-11 | 1-3 | 5-5 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-25 | Washington | L 57–72 | 29:21 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 1-5 | 0-1 | 6-6 | 20.0% |
| 2026-01-20 | Michigan St. | L 52–68 | 32:29 | 15 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5-10 | 2-4 | 3-5 | 60.0% |
| 2026-01-17 | Michigan | L 71–81 | 38:41 | 12 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 6-16 | 0-4 | 0-0 | 37.5% |
| 2026-01-13 | Nebraska | L 55–90 | 29:38 | 12 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 5-12 | 0-4 | 2-3 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-08 | Ohio St. | L 62–72 | 33:54 | 12 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2-9 | 0-5 | 8-9 | 22.2% |
| 2026-01-05 | Rutgers | L 85–88 | 28:18 | 7 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 2-7 | 1-3 | 2-2 | 35.7% |
| 2026-01-02 | Maryland | W 64–54 | 31:04 | 16 | 7 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 5-10 | 1-4 | 5-6 | 55.0% |
| 2025-12-28 | Omaha | W 80–57 | 32:29 | 15 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6-9 | 3-5 | 0-2 | 83.3% |
| 2025-12-21 | Gonzaga | L 82–91 | 33:23 | 13 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 4-8 | 3-6 | 2-2 | 68.8% |
| 2025-12-17 | Portland | W 94–69 | 27:17 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1-5 | 1-5 | 0-0 | 30.0% |
| 2025-12-13 | UC Davis | W 104–62 | 26:19 | 18 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 7-8 | 3-4 | 1-2 | 106.3% |
| 2025-12-06 | UCLA | L 63–74 | 32:26 | 14 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 4-8 | 3-7 | 3-3 | 68.8% |
| 2025-12-02 | Southern California | L 77–82 | 31:14 | 17 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 5-9 | 4-6 | 3-5 | 77.8% |
| 2025-11-27 | Creighton | L 66–76 | 34:27 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2-10 | 0-3 | 1-1 | 20.0% |
| 2025-11-25 | San Diego St. | L 80–97 | 25:50 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1-5 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 30.0% |
| 2025-11-24 | Auburn | L 73–84 | 28:43 | 22 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 5-9 | 5-8 | 7-7 | 83.3% |
| 2025-11-17 | Oregon St. | W 87–75 | 33:13 | 13 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5-11 | 3-7 | 0-0 | 59.1% |
| 2025-11-12 | South Dakota St. | W 83–69 | 26:36 | 20 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 6-11 | 5-10 | 3-4 | 77.3% |
| 2025-11-07 | Rice | W 67–63 | 32:52 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 2-10 | 1-7 | 0-0 | 25.0% |
| 2025-11-04 | Hawaii | W 60–59 | 35:21 | 18 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7-12 | 1-6 | 3-6 | 62.5% |