Adrian Wooley
Louisville · 2025–26 · 34 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
755:39 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 34
- Minutes per game
- 22:14
- Points per game
- 8.5
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 3.9 / 1.6
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 8.5 | 3.9 | 1.6 | 0.7 | 0.1 | 1.1 | 2.2 |
| Per 40 minutes | 15.2 | 7.0 | 3.0 | 1.3 | 0.1 | 2.1 | 3.9 |
| Season totals | 288 | 133 | 56 | 24 | 2 | 39 | 74 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 98–220 | 44.5% | 6.5 | 11.6 |
| 2P | 58–106 | 54.7% | 3.1 | 5.6 |
| 3P | 40–114 | 35.1% | 3.4 | 6.0 |
| FT | 52–66 | 78.8% | 1.9 | 3.5 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 53.6% | 57.8% | 51.8% | 30.0% | 1.44 |
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
Louisville · 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
- $400K
- 80% range $255K to $625K
- Median share of team pool
- 11.4%
- team pool $3.55M, 80% range $2.55M to $4.95M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $400K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $25K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 54.4%
- 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.
Louisville: 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 | Louisville | $400Kspeculative | $255K to $625K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +4.3 | +2.7 to +5.6 | Sufficient evidence | +1.9 | +2.4 | +4.8range +4.2 to +5.3 | 2,558 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | Kennesaw | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +2.8 | +1.7 to +3.9 | Sufficient evidence | +1.2 | +1.6 | +5.9range +5.3 to +6.6 | 3,498 | 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 | 29:58 | 22:14 | 10:19–36:06 | |
| Points | 9.6 | 8.5 | 0.0–21.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 49.5% | 55.8% | 0.0%–150.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-21 | Michigan St. | L 69–77 | 25:42 | 17 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7-10 | 3-6 | 0-0 | 85.0% |
| 2026-03-19 | South Fla. | W 83–79 | 29:57 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 1-5 | 1-3 | 1-4 | 30.0% |
| 2026-03-12 | Miami (FL) | L 73–78 | 33:13 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 4 | 2-5 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2026-03-11 | SMU | W 62–58 | 35:31 | 14 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3-9 | 1-5 | 7-8 | 38.9% |
| 2026-03-03 | Syracuse | W 77–62 | 25:27 | 8 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3-8 | 1-4 | 1-2 | 43.8% |
| 2026-02-28 | Clemson | L 75–80 | 23:35 | 17 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 7-12 | 3-6 | 0-0 | 70.8% |
| 2026-02-23 | North Carolina | L 74–77 | 12:20 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 75.0% |
| 2026-02-21 | Georgia Tech | W 87–70 | 14:06 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1-4 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 37.5% |
| 2026-02-17 | SMU | L 85–95 | 15:03 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3-5 | 2-3 | 0-0 | 80.0% |
| 2026-02-14 | Baylor | W 82–71 | 10:19 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3-4 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 87.5% |
| 2026-02-09 | NC State | W 118–77 | 10:19 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 2-2 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-07 | Wake Forest | W 88–80 | 23:14 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1-1 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 150.0% |
| 2026-02-04 | Notre Dame | W 76–65 | 17:53 | 6 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3-9 | 0-4 | 0-0 | 33.3% |
| 2026-01-31 | SMU | W 88–74 | 11:20 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-26 | Duke | L 52–83 | 23:34 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 1-5 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 30.0% |
| 2026-01-24 | Virginia Tech | W 85–71 | 20:47 | 6 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2-6 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-17 | Pittsburgh | W 100–59 | 25:51 | 12 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 3-5 | 2-4 | 4-4 | 80.0% |
| 2026-01-13 | Virginia | L 70–79 | 28:56 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1-9 | 0-4 | 3-3 | 11.1% |
| 2026-01-10 | Boston College | W 75–62 | 36:06 | 16 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5-12 | 0-4 | 6-8 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-06 | Duke | L 73–84 | 32:36 | 11 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5-11 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-02 | Stanford | L 76–80 | 15:52 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 1-5 | 0-1 | 1-2 | 20.0% |
| 2025-12-30 | California | W 90–70 | 27:13 | 21 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 9-14 | 3-7 | 0-0 | 75.0% |
| 2025-12-20 | Montana | W 94–54 | 25:03 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 1-4 | 1-3 | 3-4 | 37.5% |
| 2025-12-16 | Tennessee | L 62–83 | 33:19 | 19 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 6-13 | 2-8 | 5-6 | 53.8% |
| 2025-12-13 | Memphis | W 99–73 | 24:40 | 15 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 5-8 | 5-8 | 0-0 | 93.8% |
| 2025-12-06 | Indiana | W 87–78 | 18:24 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0.0% |
| 2025-12-03 | Arkansas | L 80–89 | 13:42 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 2-3 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 83.3% |
| 2025-11-26 | NJIT | W 104–47 | 22:01 | 15 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5-6 | 2-3 | 3-4 | 100.0% |
| 2025-11-24 | Eastern Mich. | W 87–46 | 24:26 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2-8 | 1-5 | 4-4 | 31.3% |
| 2025-11-21 | Cincinnati | W 74–64 | 20:08 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2-3 | 0-1 | 2-2 | 66.7% |
| 2025-11-15 | Ohio | W 106–81 | 23:55 | 11 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4-9 | 2-4 | 1-1 | 55.6% |
| 2025-11-11 | Kentucky | W 96–88 | 17:29 | 9 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3-11 | 2-7 | 1-2 | 36.4% |
| 2025-11-06 | Jackson St. | W 106–70 | 17:04 | 9 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 3-4 | 0-1 | 3-3 | 75.0% |
| 2025-11-03 | South Carolina St. | W 104–45 | 16:34 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1-3 | 0-2 | 3-3 | 33.3% |