Vyctorius Miller
Oklahoma St. · 2025–26 · 32 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
812:10 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 32
- Minutes per game
- 25:23
- Points per game
- 10.8
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 2.7 / 1.8
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 10.8 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 1.1 | 0.2 | 1.6 | 2.5 |
| Per 40 minutes | 17.0 | 4.3 | 2.8 | 1.7 | 0.3 | 2.5 | 4.0 |
| Season totals | 345 | 87 | 56 | 35 | 7 | 50 | 81 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 105–251 | 41.8% | 7.8 | 12.4 |
| 2P | 60–131 | 45.8% | 4.1 | 6.5 |
| 3P | 45–120 | 37.5% | 3.8 | 5.9 |
| FT | 90–105 | 85.7% | 3.3 | 5.2 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50.8% | 58.0% | 47.8% | 41.8% | 1.12 |
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
Oklahoma St · 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
- $280K
- 80% range $33K to $500K
- Median share of team pool
- 8.4%
- team pool $3.55M, 80% range $2.55M to $4.95M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $280K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $23K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 56.5%
- 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. 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.
Oklahoma 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 | Oklahoma St | $280Kspeculative | $33K to $500K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +0.4 | -1.3 to +2.0 | Sufficient evidence | +1.1 | -0.7 | +3.9range +3.2 to +4.6 | 2,780 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | LSU | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +0.5 | -0.6 to +1.7 | Sufficient evidence | +1.0 | -0.5 | +1.5range +1.2 to +1.7 | 1,358 | 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 | 20:25 | 25:23 | 9:10–35:03 | |
| Points | 5.0 | 10.8 | 2.0–30.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 29.7% | 48.3% | 0.0%–88.9% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-22 | Wichita St. | L 70–96 | 25:35 | 8 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3-6 | 2-2 | 0-0 | 66.7% |
| 2026-03-11 | TCU | L 88–95 | 20:09 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0-5 | 0-3 | 2-2 | 0.0% |
| 2026-03-10 | Colorado | W 92–83 | 28:57 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1-6 | 0-2 | 7-7 | 16.7% |
| 2026-03-07 | Houston | L 75–82 | 17:26 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1-4 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 25.0% |
| 2026-03-03 | UCF | W 111–104 | 9:56 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2-5 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 40.0% |
| 2026-02-28 | Cincinnati | L 68–91 | 23:21 | 15 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 5-9 | 3-5 | 2-2 | 72.2% |
| 2026-02-24 | West Virginia | W 91–84 | 18:59 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2-7 | 1-3 | 1-1 | 35.7% |
| 2026-02-21 | Colorado | L 69–83 | 31:55 | 11 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 2-9 | 2-6 | 5-5 | 33.3% |
| 2026-02-18 | Kansas | L 69–81 | 30:12 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3-8 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 43.8% |
| 2026-02-14 | TCU | L 92–95 | 24:27 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 1-2 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-10 | Arizona St. | L 76–85 | 23:50 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 3-7 | 1-4 | 3-3 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-07 | Arizona | L 47–84 | 20:40 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1-10 | 1-6 | 2-2 | 15.0% |
| 2026-02-04 | BYU | W 99–92 | 17:21 | 14 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 5-7 | 1-1 | 3-4 | 78.6% |
| 2026-01-31 | Utah | W 81–69 | 31:55 | 10 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5-10 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-24 | Iowa St. | L 71–84 | 23:47 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 0-5 | 0-5 | 2-2 | 0.0% |
| 2026-01-20 | TCU | L 65–68 | 28:14 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2-6 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-17 | Kansas St. | W 84–83 | 32:27 | 9 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2-13 | 1-6 | 4-5 | 19.2% |
| 2026-01-13 | Baylor | L 79–94 | 31:06 | 14 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 4-8 | 3-5 | 3-4 | 68.8% |
| 2026-01-06 | UCF | W 87–76 | 30:16 | 13 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2-6 | 2-2 | 7-9 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-03 | Texas Tech | L 80–102 | 32:33 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 2-8 | 0-5 | 1-1 | 25.0% |
| 2025-12-29 | Bethune-Cookman | W 103–77 | 25:29 | 18 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 5-8 | 2-3 | 6-7 | 75.0% |
| 2025-12-21 | Cal St. Fullerton | W 94–89 | 24:57 | 20 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6-9 | 4-6 | 4-7 | 88.9% |
| 2025-12-18 · NCAA | Kansas City | W 91–79 | 32:54 | 13 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 5-12 | 1-5 | 2-3 | 45.8% |
| 2025-12-13 | Oklahoma | L 76–85 | 35:03 | 13 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4-12 | 3-6 | 2-2 | 45.8% |
| 2025-12-02 | Sam Houston | W 93–83 | 9:10 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2-5 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-27 | Northwestern | W 86–81 | 27:21 | 17 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 5-9 | 3-5 | 4-4 | 72.2% |
| 2025-11-22 | Nicholls | W 95–81 | 24:48 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1-5 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 20.0% |
| 2025-11-19 | South Fla. | W 103–95 | 33:40 | 24 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 7-11 | 4-4 | 6-7 | 81.8% |
| 2025-11-16 | A&M-Corpus Christi | W 85–69 | 17:01 | 13 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 5-7 | 1-3 | 2-2 | 78.6% |
| 2025-11-12 | Prairie View | W 94–67 | 28:15 | 30 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 8-12 | 5-8 | 9-11 | 87.5% |
| 2025-11-09 | Texas A&M | W 87–63 | 22:43 | 15 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 5-9 | 0-3 | 5-5 | 55.6% |
| 2025-11-04 | Oral Roberts | W 95–71 | 27:43 | 21 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 6-11 | 2-5 | 7-8 | 63.6% |