Koa Peat
Arizona · 2025–26 · 35 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
975:20 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 35
- Minutes per game
- 27:52
- Points per game
- 14.2
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 5.7 / 2.6
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 14.2 | 5.7 | 2.6 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 1.6 | 2.2 |
| Per 40 minutes | 20.4 | 8.1 | 3.7 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 2.3 | 3.2 |
| Season totals | 498 | 198 | 90 | 22 | 25 | 55 | 77 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 197–374 | 52.7% | 10.7 | 15.3 |
| 2P | 190–354 | 53.7% | 10.1 | 14.5 |
| 3P | 7–20 | 35.0%† | 0.6 | 0.8 |
| FT | 97–156 | 62.2% | 4.5 | 6.4 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 53.6% | 56.3% | 5.3% | 41.7% | 1.64 |
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
Arizona · 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
- $450K
- 80% range $275K to $680K
- Median share of team pool
- 12.7%
- team pool $3.55M, 80% range $2.60M to $5.00M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $450K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $25K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 64.8%
- 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.
Arizona: 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 | Arizona | $450Kspeculative | $275K to $680K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +5.5 | +4.0 to +6.8 | Sufficient evidence | +2.3 | +3.2 | +6.2range +5.4 to +6.9 | 3,437 | 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 | 31:08 | 27:52 | 10:32–36:31 | |
| Points | 17.2 | 14.2 | 2.0–30.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 51.5% | 52.8% | 18.2%–85.7% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-04 | Michigan | L 73–91 | 32:04 | 16 | 11 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6-18 | 1-1 | 3-3 | 36.1% |
| 2026-03-28 | Purdue | W 79–64 | 33:40 | 20 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 9-18 | 0-0 | 2-4 | 50.0% |
| 2026-03-26 | Arkansas | W 109–88 | 30:13 | 21 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 8-11 | 0-0 | 5-6 | 72.7% |
| 2026-03-22 | Utah St. | W 78–66 | 32:00 | 14 | 10 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 4-7 | 0-0 | 6-9 | 57.1% |
| 2026-03-20 | LIU | W 92–58 | 27:45 | 15 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5-12 | 0-0 | 5-6 | 41.7% |
| 2026-03-14 | Houston | W 79–74 | 27:08 | 21 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 7-15 | 0-0 | 7-11 | 46.7% |
| 2026-03-13 | Iowa St. | W 82–80 | 25:23 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 2-4 | 0-0 | 0-2 | 50.0% |
| 2026-03-12 | UCF | W 81–59 | 29:36 | 12 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 5-13 | 0-0 | 2-3 | 38.5% |
| 2026-03-07 | Colorado | W 89–79 | 34:32 | 25 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 12-15 | 0-1 | 1-3 | 80.0% |
| 2026-03-02 | Iowa St. | W 73–57 | 28:44 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2-6 | 0-0 | 0-2 | 33.3% |
| 2026-02-28 | Kansas | W 84–61 | 23:42 | 12 | 7 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4-9 | 0-0 | 4-4 | 44.4% |
| 2026-02-14 | Texas Tech | L 75–78 | 10:32 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 2-4 | — |
| 2026-02-09 | Kansas | L 78–82 | 30:15 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2-11 | 0-1 | 2-4 | 18.2% |
| 2026-02-07 | Oklahoma St. | W 84–47 | 27:58 | 11 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4-12 | 0-0 | 3-4 | 33.3% |
| 2026-01-31 | Arizona St. | W 87–74 | 32:02 | 21 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 9-16 | 2-2 | 1-2 | 62.5% |
| 2026-01-26 | BYU | W 86–83 | 26:06 | 10 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 4-8 | 0-0 | 2-4 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-24 | West Virginia | W 88–53 | 30:47 | 17 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 7-9 | 1-1 | 2-4 | 83.3% |
| 2026-01-21 | Cincinnati | W 77–51 | 25:23 | 13 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5-8 | 0-0 | 3-7 | 62.5% |
| 2026-01-17 | UCF | W 84–77 | 19:58 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1-4 | 0-1 | 2-4 | 25.0% |
| 2026-01-14 | Arizona St. | W 89–82 | 34:23 | 24 | 10 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 9-15 | 0-0 | 6-8 | 60.0% |
| 2026-01-10 | TCU | W 86–73 | 31:16 | 20 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 10-17 | 0-2 | 0-1 | 58.8% |
| 2026-01-07 | Kansas St. | W 101–76 | 25:51 | 15 | 10 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 6-11 | 1-2 | 2-2 | 59.1% |
| 2026-01-03 | Utah | W 97–78 | 33:52 | 17 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 8-14 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 60.7% |
| 2025-12-29 | South Dakota St. | W 99–71 | 30:11 | 19 | 14 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 7-12 | 1-2 | 4-7 | 62.5% |
| 2025-12-22 | Bethune-Cookman | W 107–71 | 26:45 | 11 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 5-8 | 0-1 | 1-2 | 62.5% |
| 2025-12-20 | San Diego St. | W 68–45 | 22:59 | 11 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 5-9 | 0-1 | 1-2 | 55.6% |
| 2025-12-13 | Alabama | W 96–75 | 19:39 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2-5 | 0-0 | 2-5 | 40.0% |
| 2025-12-06 | Auburn | W 97–68 | 33:54 | 18 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 8-11 | 0-0 | 2-2 | 72.7% |
| 2025-11-29 | Norfolk St. | W 98–61 | 25:21 | 16 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 6-12 | 0-1 | 4-9 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-24 | Denver | W 103–73 | 20:41 | 12 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 6-10 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 60.0% |
| 2025-11-19 | UConn | W 71–67 | 36:31 | 16 | 12 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 7-14 | 0-0 | 2-4 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-14 | UCLA | W 69–65 | 20:24 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 4 | 2-5 | 0-1 | 3-4 | 40.0% |
| 2025-11-11 | Northern Ariz. | W 84–49 | 21:21 | 10 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3-10 | 0-0 | 4-4 | 30.0% |
| 2025-11-07 | Utah Tech | W 93–67 | 28:31 | 18 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 6-7 | 0-0 | 6-8 | 85.7% |
| 2025-11-03 | Florida | W 93–87 | 35:53 | 30 | 7 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 11-18 | 0-0 | 8-12 | 61.1% |