Keith Palek III
Missouri St. · 2025–26 · 31 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
1028:04 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 31
- Minutes per game
- 33:10
- Points per game
- 17.0
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 6.2 / 3.4
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 17.0 | 6.2 | 3.4 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 2.7 | 2.5 |
| Per 40 minutes | 20.5 | 7.5 | 4.1 | 1.2 | 0.4 | 3.3 | 3.0 |
| Season totals | 526 | 192 | 105 | 31 | 10 | 85 | 76 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 170–418 | 40.7% | 13.5 | 16.3 |
| 2P | 136–276 | 49.3% | 8.9 | 10.7 |
| 3P | 34–142 | 23.9% | 4.6 | 5.5 |
| FT | 152–213 | 71.4% | 6.9 | 8.3 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 44.7% | 51.4% | 34.0% | 51.0% | 1.24 |
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
Missouri St · Low and other · 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
- $25K
- 80% range $3K to $89K
- Median share of team pool
- 12.8%
- team pool $260K, 80% range $94K to $755K
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $24K to $28K
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $2K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 81.9%
- 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. Tier prior from anonymous surveys and sources, scaled so that all non-Power budgets sum to the national total the College Sports Commission reported paid for 2025-26 ($1,770,453,776 over 307 schools) less the Power 4 total, times a men's basketball share; weak anchor.
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.
Missouri 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 | Missouri St | $25Kspeculative | $3K to $89K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | -0.1 | -1.2 to +1.0 | Sufficient evidence | +0.9 | -1.0 | +5.5range +4.9 to +6.2 | 3,317 | 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 | 30:30 | 33:10 | 21:20–45:09 | |
| Points | 12.4 | 17.0 | 4.0–29.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 46.8% | 43.9% | 12.5%–71.4% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-13 | Louisiana Tech | L 66–69 | 29:34 | 15 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 7-13 | 0-3 | 1-2 | 53.8% |
| 2026-03-11 | Liberty | W 77–69 | 28:44 | 6 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 2-9 | 1-4 | 1-2 | 27.8% |
| 2026-03-10 | FIU | W 75–72 | 34:49 | 13 | 4 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4-11 | 1-6 | 4-10 | 40.9% |
| 2026-03-07 | Middle Tenn. | L 63–75 | 32:59 | 10 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 4-10 | 0-2 | 2-2 | 40.0% |
| 2026-03-05 | Western Ky. | W 87–74 | 26:22 | 18 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4-7 | 2-3 | 8-10 | 71.4% |
| 2026-02-28 | Sam Houston | L 81–86 | 37:33 | 21 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 7-16 | 1-5 | 6-7 | 46.9% |
| 2026-02-26 | Louisiana Tech | L 70–72 | 35:00 | 29 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 10-19 | 2-5 | 7-8 | 57.9% |
| 2026-02-21 | FIU | L 67–70 | 28:44 | 8 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 2-11 | 0-5 | 4-6 | 18.2% |
| 2026-02-18 | Kennesaw St. | L 87–91 | 37:37 | 20 | 6 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4-12 | 1-3 | 11-15 | 37.5% |
| 2026-02-14 | Delaware | L 67–76 | 28:00 | 11 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3-13 | 1-5 | 4-4 | 26.9% |
| 2026-02-12 | Louisiana Tech | L 78–79 | 45:09 | 18 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 6-17 | 0-3 | 6-6 | 35.3% |
| 2026-02-07 | Liberty | L 76–79 | 28:52 | 25 | 9 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 9-17 | 3-4 | 4-4 | 61.8% |
| 2026-01-31 | Jacksonville St. | W 74–67 | 38:21 | 18 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6-14 | 1-4 | 5-6 | 46.4% |
| 2026-01-28 | Sam Houston | L 71–80 | 32:33 | 17 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 7-16 | 2-5 | 1-5 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-24 | UTEP | W 62–57 | 33:36 | 8 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 3-9 | 0-2 | 2-2 | 33.3% |
| 2026-01-22 | New Mexico St. | W 84–75 | 33:14 | 26 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 6-11 | 2-5 | 12-14 | 63.6% |
| 2026-01-17 | Middle Tenn. | L 87–90 | 42:46 | 20 | 8 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6-17 | 2-5 | 6-9 | 41.2% |
| 2026-01-14 | Western Ky. | L 72–87 | 34:21 | 24 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 9-17 | 1-5 | 5-7 | 55.9% |
| 2026-01-10 | FIU | W 79–71 | 36:30 | 22 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 8-16 | 1-6 | 5-7 | 53.1% |
| 2026-01-07 | Kennesaw St. | L 80–90 | 33:31 | 17 | 10 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 5-14 | 1-5 | 6-9 | 39.3% |
| 2026-01-04 | New Mexico St. | W 89–82 | 36:50 | 16 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4-9 | 0-1 | 8-12 | 44.4% |
| 2026-01-02 | UTEP | W 79–55 | 30:37 | 13 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 5-11 | 0-3 | 3-4 | 45.5% |
| 2025-12-29 | Delaware | W 61–43 | 31:02 | 14 | 8 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 4-12 | 1-6 | 5-6 | 37.5% |
| 2025-12-23 | Lindenwood | W 70–65 | 37:05 | 14 | 8 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4-18 | 1-9 | 5-11 | 25.0% |
| 2025-12-16 | Oral Roberts | W 63–62 | 34:33 | 27 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 10-18 | 2-6 | 5-9 | 61.1% |
| 2025-12-12 | Xavier | L 57–75 | 35:09 | 23 | 11 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 9-22 | 1-6 | 4-5 | 43.2% |
| 2025-12-06 | Tulsa | L 74–98 | 24:05 | 15 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 5-13 | 1-4 | 4-6 | 42.3% |
| 2025-11-24 | LIU | L 61–75 | 33:13 | 13 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 5-13 | 1-5 | 2-7 | 42.3% |
| 2025-11-22 | UTRGV | W 74–67 | 33:54 | 28 | 9 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 6-14 | 4-9 | 12-14 | 57.1% |
| 2025-11-15 | UT Arlington | L 49–67 | 32:01 | 4 | 11 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 1-8 | 0-3 | 2-2 | 12.5% |
| 2025-11-11 | Arkansas St. | L 85–86 | 21:20 | 13 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 5-11 | 1-5 | 2-2 | 50.0% |