Tyler Bilodeau
UCLA · 2025–26 · 31 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
940:49 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 31
- Minutes per game
- 30:21
- Points per game
- 17.6
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 5.6 / 1.1
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 17.6 | 5.6 | 1.1 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 1.3 | 2.5 |
| Per 40 minutes | 23.3 | 7.4 | 1.4 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 1.7 | 3.4 |
| Season totals | 547 | 174 | 33 | 15 | 11 | 40 | 79 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 183–353 | 51.8% | 11.4 | 15.0 |
| 2P | 119–215 | 55.3% | 6.9 | 9.1 |
| 3P | 64–138 | 46.4% | 4.5 | 5.9 |
| FT | 117–134 | 87.3% | 4.3 | 5.7 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 60.9% | 66.4% | 39.1% | 38.0% | 0.82 |
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
UCLA · 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
- $655K
- 80% range $425K to $1.15M
- Median share of team pool
- 17.6%
- team pool $3.60M, 80% range $2.60M to $4.95M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $655K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $27K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 66.9%
- 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.
UCLA: 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 | UCLA | $655Kspeculative | $425K to $1.15M | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +4.2 | +2.9 to +5.4 | Sufficient evidence | +2.7 | +1.4 | +5.8range +5.1 to +6.4 | 3,019 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | UCLA | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +3.1 | +2.1 to +4.1 | Sufficient evidence | +1.3 | +1.8 | +4.5range +3.9 to +5.2 | 2,696 | Season detail | |
| 2024 | Oregon St | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | -0.0 | -1.3 to +0.9 | Sufficient evidence | +0.8 | -0.8 | +2.6range +2.0 to +3.1 | 3,033 | Season detail | |
| 2023 | Oregon St | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +0.0 | -1.3 to +1.4 | Sufficient evidence | -0.9 | +0.9 | +1.6range +1.2 to +1.9 | 1,753 | 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 | 26:43 | 30:21 | 10:38–39:54 | |
| Points | 16.4 | 17.6 | 5.0–34.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 76.0% | 61.3% | 20.0%–125.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-13 | Michigan St. | W 88–84 | 10:38 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2-2 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 125.0% |
| 2026-03-12 | Rutgers | W 72–59 | 28:34 | 21 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 5-11 | 3-7 | 8-8 | 59.1% |
| 2026-03-07 | Southern California | W 89–68 | 29:09 | 16 | 8 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 7-10 | 2-2 | 0-0 | 80.0% |
| 2026-03-03 | Nebraska | W 72–52 | 28:53 | 8 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3-9 | 2-5 | 0-0 | 44.4% |
| 2026-02-28 | Minnesota | L 73–78 | 36:23 | 32 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 13-21 | 4-7 | 2-2 | 71.4% |
| 2026-02-24 | Southern California | W 81–62 | 27:26 | 13 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 6-14 | 0-2 | 1-1 | 42.9% |
| 2026-02-21 | Illinois | W 95–94 | 35:18 | 18 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 6-11 | 2-5 | 4-4 | 63.6% |
| 2026-02-17 | Michigan St. | L 59–82 | 31:54 | 22 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 8-16 | 3-5 | 3-3 | 59.4% |
| 2026-02-14 | Michigan | L 56–86 | 35:01 | 10 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4-12 | 2-4 | 0-0 | 41.7% |
| 2026-02-07 | Washington | W 77–73 | 23:30 | 19 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 7-12 | 3-6 | 2-4 | 70.8% |
| 2026-02-03 | Rutgers | W 98–66 | 29:15 | 19 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6-11 | 3-6 | 4-4 | 68.2% |
| 2026-01-31 | Indiana | L 97–98 | 39:54 | 18 | 11 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 5-12 | 1-3 | 7-8 | 45.8% |
| 2026-01-28 | Oregon | W 73–57 | 31:53 | 18 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4-9 | 1-2 | 9-11 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-24 | Northwestern | W 71–64 | 31:16 | 18 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 7-11 | 4-8 | 0-0 | 81.8% |
| 2026-01-20 | Purdue | W 69–67 | 34:18 | 14 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5-9 | 4-8 | 0-0 | 77.8% |
| 2026-01-17 | Ohio St. | L 74–86 | 38:00 | 30 | 8 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 9-19 | 4-7 | 8-8 | 57.9% |
| 2026-01-14 | Penn St. | W 71–60 | 32:39 | 21 | 9 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 7-13 | 4-7 | 3-3 | 69.2% |
| 2026-01-10 | Maryland | W 67–55 | 24:16 | 10 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 2-5 | 0-2 | 6-9 | 40.0% |
| 2026-01-06 | Wisconsin | L 72–80 | 30:14 | 16 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 6-12 | 0-2 | 4-8 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-03 | Iowa | L 61–74 | 33:06 | 10 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 3-10 | 0-4 | 4-5 | 30.0% |
| 2025-12-23 | UC Riverside | W 97–65 | 29:55 | 34 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 12-19 | 4-7 | 6-6 | 73.7% |
| 2025-12-19 | Cal Poly | W 108–87 | 31:06 | 24 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 7-9 | 2-2 | 8-8 | 88.9% |
| 2025-12-17 | Arizona St. | W 90–77 | 31:22 | 18 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 4-10 | 2-4 | 8-8 | 50.0% |
| 2025-12-13 | Gonzaga | L 72–82 | 33:14 | 24 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 7-13 | 4-6 | 6-7 | 69.2% |
| 2025-12-06 | Oregon | W 74–63 | 33:18 | 14 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4-7 | 1-3 | 5-5 | 64.3% |
| 2025-12-03 | Washington | W 82–80 | 31:01 | 21 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 7-14 | 1-6 | 6-7 | 53.6% |
| 2025-11-18 | Sacramento St. | W 79–48 | 18:02 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 1-5 | 0-1 | 4-4 | 20.0% |
| 2025-11-14 | Arizona | L 65–69 | 32:29 | 19 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 7-10 | 3-4 | 2-3 | 85.0% |
| 2025-11-10 | West Ga. | W 83–62 | 28:14 | 21 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 7-12 | 1-2 | 6-6 | 62.5% |
| 2025-11-07 | Pepperdine | W 74–63 | 28:45 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 4-9 | 0-4 | 1-2 | 44.4% |
| 2025-11-03 | Eastern Wash. | W 80–74 | 31:46 | 19 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 8-16 | 3-6 | 0-0 | 59.4% |