Isaac Johnson
Hawaii · 2025–26 · 31 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
665:54 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 31
- Minutes per game
- 21:29
- Points per game
- 14.3
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 5.9 / 1.1
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 14.3 | 5.9 | 1.1 | 0.6 | 1.1 | 1.9 | 2.6 |
| Per 40 minutes | 26.7 | 10.9 | 2.0 | 1.1 | 2.0 | 3.5 | 4.9 |
| Season totals | 444 | 182 | 34 | 18 | 33 | 58 | 82 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 147–296 | 49.7% | 9.5 | 17.8 |
| 2P | 110–182 | 60.4% | 5.9 | 10.9 |
| 3P | 37–114 | 32.5% | 3.7 | 6.8 |
| FT | 113–129 | 87.6% | 4.2 | 7.7 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 55.9% | 62.9% | 38.5% | 43.6% | 0.59 |
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
Hawaii · 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
- $59K
- 80% range $20K to $190K
- Median share of team pool
- 16.4%
- team pool $340K, 80% range $125K to $905K
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $48K to $65K
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $3K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 54.7%
- 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.
Hawaii: 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 | Hawaii | $59Kspeculative | $20K to $190K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +3.7 | +2.4 to +4.8 | Sufficient evidence | +1.7 | +2.0 | +4.8range +4.2 to +5.3 | 1,270 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | Utah St | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +1.3 | +0.6 to +2.0 | Sufficient evidence | +0.3 | +1.0 | +1.2range +1.1 to +1.4 | 846 | Season detail | |
| 2024 | Utah St | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +1.4 | +0.6 to +2.3 | Sufficient evidence | +1.1 | +0.3 | +1.8range +1.5 to +2.1 | 1,198 | 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 | 21:54 | 21:29 | 12:22–31:49 | |
| Points | 16.6 | 14.3 | 4.0–25.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 60.4% | 54.8% | 0.0%–90.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-19 | Arkansas | L 78–97 | 23:49 | 15 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 6-13 | 3-7 | 0-0 | 57.7% |
| 2026-03-14 | UC Irvine | W 71–64 | 24:41 | 22 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 10-18 | 2-8 | 0-0 | 61.1% |
| 2026-03-13 | Cal St. Fullerton | W 78–63 | 21:05 | 19 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6-15 | 1-6 | 6-6 | 43.3% |
| 2026-03-08 | Long Beach St. | L 75–84 | 26:12 | 16 | 8 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 7-14 | 0-5 | 2-2 | 50.0% |
| 2026-03-06 | UC Riverside | W 93–74 | 13:42 | 11 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 4-5 | 1-1 | 2-2 | 90.0% |
| 2026-02-28 | Cal St. Fullerton | W 87–85 | 23:37 | 22 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 5-11 | 3-8 | 9-10 | 59.1% |
| 2026-02-26 | UC Davis | W 77–73 | 16:24 | 16 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 5-9 | 3-5 | 3-3 | 72.2% |
| 2026-02-21 | UC Santa Barbara | W 78–75 | 24:01 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0-5 | 0-2 | 5-6 | 0.0% |
| 2026-02-20 | Cal Poly | L 75–86 | 18:38 | 18 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4-8 | 0-2 | 10-10 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-14 | CSUN | L 60–84 | 16:52 | 9 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3-7 | 1-1 | 2-2 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-12 | CSU Bakersfield | W 89–74 | 24:31 | 17 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 7-10 | 0-2 | 3-4 | 70.0% |
| 2026-02-08 | UC San Diego | W 72–67 | 30:25 | 20 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 8-14 | 2-4 | 2-4 | 64.3% |
| 2026-01-31 | Long Beach St. | W 89–82 | 28:44 | 14 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2-6 | 1-2 | 9-10 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-29 | UC Irvine | L 76–87 | 25:51 | 17 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 5-13 | 3-8 | 4-5 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-25 | CSUN | W 89–68 | 15:57 | 18 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 7-10 | 3-4 | 1-3 | 85.0% |
| 2026-01-23 | CSU Bakersfield | W 98–71 | 15:18 | 12 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 4-8 | 0-3 | 4-4 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-17 | UC Santa Barbara | L 62–77 | 20:33 | 10 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 3-8 | 1-5 | 3-4 | 43.8% |
| 2026-01-15 | Cal Poly | W 86–66 | 19:49 | 11 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 4-10 | 0-2 | 3-3 | 40.0% |
| 2026-01-11 | UC Irvine | W 67–66 | 12:55 | 15 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5-10 | 2-6 | 3-3 | 60.0% |
| 2026-01-03 | UC San Diego | L 73–83 | 21:45 | 10 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 5-11 | 0-4 | 0-0 | 45.5% |
| 2026-01-01 | UC Riverside | W 88–45 | 21:46 | 18 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 7-10 | 3-4 | 1-2 | 85.0% |
| 2025-12-14 | UTEP | W 66–61 | 19:28 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2-5 | 0-1 | 2-3 | 40.0% |
| 2025-12-07 | Cal St. Fullerton | W 69–59 | 23:15 | 8 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 3-11 | 1-7 | 1-2 | 31.8% |
| 2025-12-05 | UC Davis | W 75–69 | 19:18 | 4 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2-6 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 33.3% |
| 2025-11-29 | North Dakota | W 92–55 | 20:46 | 14 | 6 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5-9 | 0-2 | 4-4 | 55.6% |
| 2025-11-21 | Arizona St. | L 76–83 | 31:49 | 23 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 6-11 | 2-4 | 9-9 | 63.6% |
| 2025-11-16 | Utah Tech | W 68–62 | 25:58 | 14 | 11 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 4-6 | 0-2 | 6-6 | 66.7% |
| 2025-11-15 | Manhattan | W 86–56 | 24:46 | 25 | 11 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 9-14 | 4-5 | 3-3 | 78.6% |
| 2025-11-13 | Mississippi Val. | W 88–56 | 17:25 | 9 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2-3 | 0-0 | 5-5 | 66.7% |
| 2025-11-10 | East Texas A&M | W 100–74 | 24:12 | 13 | 11 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3-7 | 0-1 | 7-10 | 42.9% |
| 2025-11-04 | Oregon | L 59–60 | 12:22 | 13 | 8 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 4-9 | 1-3 | 4-4 | 50.0% |