Caleb Wilson
North Carolina · 2025–26 · 24 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
752:36 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 24
- Minutes per game
- 31:21
- Points per game
- 19.8
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 9.4 / 2.7
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 19.8 | 9.4 | 2.7 | 1.5 | 1.4 | 2.0 | 1.9 |
| Per 40 minutes | 25.3 | 12.0 | 3.4 | 1.9 | 1.8 | 2.5 | 2.4 |
| Season totals | 476 | 226 | 64 | 36 | 33 | 47 | 46 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 170–294 | 57.8% | 12.3 | 15.6 |
| 2P | 163–267 | 61.0% | 11.1 | 14.2 |
| 3P | 7–27 | 25.9%† | 1.1 | 1.4 |
| FT | 129–181 | 71.3% | 7.5 | 9.6 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 59.0% | 63.7% | 9.2% | 61.6% | 1.36 |
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
North Carolina · 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
- $495K
- 80% range $320K to $750K
- Median share of team pool
- 13.6%
- team pool $3.60M, 80% range $2.60M to $5.00M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $495K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $22K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 59.1%
- 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.
North Carolina: 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 | North Carolina | $495Kspeculative | $320K to $750K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +4.7 | +3.6 to +5.9 | Sufficient evidence | +2.9 | +1.9 | +5.6range +5.0 to +6.1 | 2,519 | 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 | 32:13 | 31:21 | 22:07–39:35 | |
| Points | 19.8 | 19.8 | 12.0–26.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 56.7% | 61.4% | 26.3%–93.8% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-02-10 | Miami (FL) | L 66–75 | 26:29 | 12 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 4-10 | 0-1 | 4-6 | 40.0% |
| 2026-02-07 | Duke | W 71–68 | 39:35 | 23 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 8-12 | 1-2 | 6-6 | 70.8% |
| 2026-02-02 | Syracuse | W 87–77 | 31:14 | 22 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 6-14 | 0-1 | 10-13 | 42.9% |
| 2026-01-31 | Georgia Tech | W 91–75 | 29:43 | 22 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9-15 | 1-3 | 3-3 | 63.3% |
| 2026-01-24 | Virginia | W 85–80 | 34:05 | 20 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 8-12 | 0-0 | 4-6 | 66.7% |
| 2026-01-21 | Notre Dame | W 91–69 | 29:32 | 22 | 7 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 8-11 | 1-3 | 5-8 | 77.3% |
| 2026-01-17 | California | L 78–84 | 33:34 | 17 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 6-12 | 0-1 | 5-6 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-14 | Stanford | L 90–95 | 36:02 | 26 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 11-16 | 0-0 | 4-7 | 68.8% |
| 2026-01-10 | Wake Forest | W 87–84 | 36:35 | 22 | 12 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 8-9 | 0-0 | 6-8 | 88.9% |
| 2026-01-03 | SMU | L 83–97 | 34:03 | 13 | 7 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 6-11 | 0-1 | 1-2 | 54.5% |
| 2025-12-30 | Florida St. | W 79–66 | 36:43 | 22 | 16 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 9-15 | 0-1 | 4-5 | 60.0% |
| 2025-12-22 | East Carolina | W 99–51 | 23:45 | 21 | 12 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 7-11 | 0-0 | 7-13 | 63.6% |
| 2025-12-20 | Ohio St. | W 71–70 | 34:21 | 20 | 15 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 9-16 | 0-0 | 2-5 | 56.3% |
| 2025-12-16 | ETSU | W 77–58 | 28:22 | 20 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 6-12 | 1-2 | 7-10 | 54.2% |
| 2025-12-13 | USC Upstate | W 80–62 | 31:42 | 20 | 11 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 6-7 | 1-1 | 7-13 | 92.9% |
| 2025-12-07 | Georgetown | W 81–61 | 34:56 | 20 | 14 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 7-12 | 0-1 | 6-6 | 58.3% |
| 2025-12-02 | Kentucky | W 67–64 | 34:42 | 15 | 12 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5-19 | 0-2 | 5-8 | 26.3% |
| 2025-11-27 | Michigan St. | L 58–74 | 32:26 | 18 | 7 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 6-13 | 0-3 | 6-7 | 46.2% |
| 2025-11-25 | St. Bonaventure | W 85–70 | 31:33 | 18 | 12 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4-12 | 0-0 | 10-10 | 33.3% |
| 2025-11-18 | Navy | W 73–61 | 26:43 | 23 | 12 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 9-13 | 0-1 | 5-7 | 69.2% |
| 2025-11-14 | N.C. Central | W 97–53 | 28:32 | 21 | 13 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 7-8 | 1-1 | 6-8 | 93.8% |
| 2025-11-11 | Radford | W 89–74 | 22:07 | 13 | 14 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4-13 | 0-1 | 5-9 | 30.8% |
| 2025-11-07 | Kansas | W 87–74 | 30:18 | 24 | 7 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 9-11 | 0-1 | 6-9 | 81.8% |
| 2025-11-03 | Central Ark. | W 94–54 | 25:34 | 22 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 8-10 | 1-1 | 5-6 | 85.0% |