Keaton Wagler
Illinois · 2025–26 · 36 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
1221:40 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 36
- Minutes per game
- 33:56
- Points per game
- 17.8
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 5.0 / 4.3
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 17.8 | 5.0 | 4.3 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 1.8 | 2.0 |
| Per 40 minutes | 21.0 | 5.9 | 5.0 | 1.1 | 0.5 | 2.2 | 2.4 |
| Season totals | 641 | 181 | 154 | 34 | 14 | 66 | 72 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 195–445 | 43.8% | 12.4 | 14.6 |
| 2P | 109–229 | 47.6% | 6.4 | 7.5 |
| 3P | 86–216 | 39.8% | 6.0 | 7.1 |
| FT | 165–209 | 78.9% | 5.8 | 6.8 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 53.5% | 59.7% | 48.5% | 47.0% | 2.33 |
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
Illinois · 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
- $780K
- 80% range $525K to $1.20M
- Median share of team pool
- 21.1%
- team pool $3.55M, 80% range $2.55M to $4.95M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $780K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $27K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 85.6%
- 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.
Illinois: 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 | Illinois | $780Kspeculative | $525K to $1.20M | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +6.4 | +5.0 to +7.8 | Sufficient evidence | +4.6 | +1.8 | +9.1range +8.1 to +10.1 | 3,853 | 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 | 35:05 | 33:56 | 13:22–43:57 | |
| Points | 18.0 | 17.8 | 3.0–46.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 53.3% | 53.1% | 18.8%–102.9% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-04 | UConn | L 62–71 | 36:45 | 20 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 7-16 | 2-10 | 4-5 | 50.0% |
| 2026-03-28 | Iowa | W 71–59 | 37:29 | 25 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 8-17 | 2-7 | 7-7 | 52.9% |
| 2026-03-26 | Houston | W 65–55 | 37:40 | 13 | 12 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4-14 | 3-6 | 2-5 | 39.3% |
| 2026-03-21 | VCU | W 76–55 | 32:23 | 14 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5-10 | 2-5 | 2-4 | 60.0% |
| 2026-03-19 | Penn | W 105–70 | 31:09 | 18 | 7 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 7-14 | 4-7 | 0-0 | 64.3% |
| 2026-03-13 | Wisconsin | L 88–91 | 42:32 | 19 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 8-18 | 1-6 | 2-3 | 47.2% |
| 2026-03-08 | Maryland | W 78–72 | 33:53 | 11 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3-10 | 0-4 | 5-7 | 30.0% |
| 2026-03-03 | Oregon | W 80–54 | 34:41 | 11 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4-11 | 2-6 | 1-2 | 45.5% |
| 2026-02-27 | Michigan | L 70–84 | 36:58 | 23 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 7-17 | 3-6 | 6-7 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-21 | UCLA | L 94–95 | 38:50 | 19 | 8 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 5-15 | 1-6 | 8-8 | 36.7% |
| 2026-02-18 | Southern California | W 101–65 | 28:38 | 10 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3-8 | 0-1 | 4-4 | 37.5% |
| 2026-02-15 | Indiana | W 71–51 | 38:13 | 18 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 7-15 | 1-4 | 3-4 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-10 | Wisconsin | L 90–92 | 43:57 | 34 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 12-23 | 5-10 | 5-8 | 63.0% |
| 2026-02-07 | Michigan St. | L 82–85 | 41:13 | 16 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2-16 | 2-8 | 10-12 | 18.8% |
| 2026-02-04 | Northwestern | W 84–44 | 28:57 | 13 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4-8 | 3-5 | 2-4 | 68.8% |
| 2026-02-01 | Nebraska | W 78–69 | 37:49 | 28 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 7-15 | 4-9 | 10-12 | 60.0% |
| 2026-01-29 | Washington | W 75–66 | 37:53 | 22 | 5 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7-13 | 2-4 | 6-9 | 61.5% |
| 2026-01-24 | Purdue | W 88–82 | 39:05 | 46 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 13-17 | 9-11 | 11-13 | 102.9% |
| 2026-01-21 | Maryland | W 89–70 | 32:19 | 13 | 7 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4-12 | 1-9 | 4-6 | 37.5% |
| 2026-01-17 | Minnesota | W 77–67 | 37:40 | 17 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 5-12 | 4-8 | 3-4 | 58.3% |
| 2026-01-14 | Northwestern | W 79–68 | 32:37 | 22 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 8-17 | 3-7 | 3-3 | 55.9% |
| 2026-01-11 | Iowa | W 75–69 | 34:11 | 19 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 5-9 | 4-7 | 5-6 | 77.8% |
| 2026-01-08 | Rutgers | W 81–55 | 32:24 | 17 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 5-12 | 1-4 | 6-7 | 45.8% |
| 2026-01-03 | Penn St. | W 73–65 | 18:55 | 16 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 4-9 | 1-5 | 7-8 | 50.0% |
| 2025-12-29 | Southern U. | W 90–55 | 26:09 | 11 | 7 | 10 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4-8 | 1-4 | 2-3 | 56.3% |
| 2025-12-22 | Missouri | W 91–48 | 34:14 | 22 | 8 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 7-11 | 5-6 | 3-4 | 86.4% |
| 2025-12-13 | Nebraska | L 80–83 | 39:59 | 19 | 1 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 6-13 | 4-8 | 3-3 | 61.5% |
| 2025-12-09 | Ohio St. | W 88–80 | 38:45 | 23 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 6-11 | 3-5 | 8-9 | 68.2% |
| 2025-12-06 | Tennessee | W 75–62 | 33:47 | 16 | 8 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5-13 | 4-11 | 2-2 | 53.8% |
| 2025-11-28 | UConn | L 61–74 | 13:22 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 1-3 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-24 | UTRGV | W 87–73 | 30:27 | 8 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2-11 | 1-6 | 3-5 | 22.7% |
| 2025-11-22 | LIU | W 98–58 | 27:55 | 19 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 7-10 | 2-4 | 3-3 | 80.0% |
| 2025-11-19 | Alabama | L 86–90 | 35:50 | 8 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 2-9 | 1-4 | 3-5 | 27.8% |
| 2025-11-14 | Colgate | W 84–65 | 33:38 | 19 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4-11 | 2-6 | 9-11 | 45.5% |
| 2025-11-11 | Texas Tech | W 81–77 | 34:34 | 11 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3-9 | 0-3 | 5-6 | 33.3% |
| 2025-11-03 | Jackson St. | W 113–55 | 26:49 | 18 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 4-8 | 2-2 | 8-10 | 62.5% |