Kylan Boswell
Illinois · 2025–26 · 29 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
876:54 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 29
- Minutes per game
- 30:14
- Points per game
- 11.6
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 3.8 / 3.0
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 11.6 | 3.8 | 3.0 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 2.0 |
| Per 40 minutes | 15.4 | 5.0 | 4.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 2.6 |
| Season totals | 337 | 110 | 87 | 22 | 0 | 32 | 58 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 114–262 | 43.5% | 9.0 | 12.0 |
| 2P | 83–155 | 53.5% | 5.3 | 7.1 |
| 3P | 31–107 | 29.0% | 3.7 | 4.9 |
| FT | 78–101 | 77.2% | 3.5 | 4.6 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 49.4% | 55.0% | 40.8% | 38.5% | 2.72 |
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
- $380K
- 80% range $220K to $580K
- Median share of team pool
- 11.0%
- team pool $3.55M, 80% range $2.55M to $4.95M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $380K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $27K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 59.7%
- 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 | $380Kspeculative | $220K to $580K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +4.3 | +2.8 to +5.6 | Sufficient evidence | +2.5 | +1.8 | +5.2range +4.6 to +5.9 | 2,687 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | Illinois | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +2.6 | +1.2 to +3.7 | Sufficient evidence | +2.4 | +0.1 | +5.4range +4.6 to +6.3 | 3,767 | Season detail | |
| 2024 | Arizona | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +1.4 | -0.6 to +3.2 | Sufficient evidence | +2.1 | -0.7 | +2.9range +2.1 to +3.9 | 3,568 | Season detail | |
| 2023 | Arizona | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +0.4 | -0.5 to +1.5 | Sufficient evidence | +1.3 | -0.9 | +1.4range +1.1 to +1.6 | 944 | 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 | 28:30 | 30:14 | 17:03–38:38 | |
| Points | 7.8 | 11.6 | 2.0–25.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 23.9% | 48.5% | 0.0%–90.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-04 | UConn | L 62–71 | 24:11 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1-6 | 0-1 | 4-4 | 16.7% |
| 2026-03-28 | Iowa | W 71–59 | 26:35 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0-2 | 0-1 | 2-2 | 0.0% |
| 2026-03-26 | Houston | W 65–55 | 30:12 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0-5 | 0-1 | 6-10 | 0.0% |
| 2026-03-21 | VCU | W 76–55 | 33:56 | 12 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4-12 | 2-5 | 2-4 | 41.7% |
| 2026-03-19 | Penn | W 105–70 | 27:36 | 13 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5-9 | 1-3 | 2-3 | 61.1% |
| 2026-03-13 | Wisconsin | L 88–91 | 17:03 | 9 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 4-5 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 90.0% |
| 2026-03-08 | Maryland | W 78–72 | 21:33 | 11 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 3-5 | 1-2 | 4-4 | 70.0% |
| 2026-03-03 | Oregon | W 80–54 | 21:43 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1-6 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 25.0% |
| 2026-02-27 | Michigan | L 70–84 | 34:37 | 15 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 6-14 | 1-6 | 2-4 | 46.4% |
| 2026-02-21 | UCLA | L 94–95 | 33:27 | 13 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4-9 | 2-4 | 3-4 | 55.6% |
| 2026-02-18 | Southern California | W 101–65 | 27:56 | 12 | 5 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5-13 | 1-6 | 1-2 | 42.3% |
| 2026-02-15 | Indiana | W 71–51 | 32:44 | 9 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4-10 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 45.0% |
| 2026-01-17 | Minnesota | W 77–67 | 30:53 | 9 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2-6 | 1-4 | 4-5 | 41.7% |
| 2026-01-14 | Northwestern | W 79–68 | 37:00 | 13 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 6-11 | 0-2 | 1-1 | 54.5% |
| 2026-01-11 | Iowa | W 75–69 | 37:37 | 17 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 7-13 | 1-5 | 2-2 | 57.7% |
| 2026-01-08 | Rutgers | W 81–55 | 29:37 | 9 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4-7 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 64.3% |
| 2026-01-03 | Penn St. | W 73–65 | 35:09 | 18 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 5-13 | 2-5 | 6-6 | 46.2% |
| 2025-12-29 | Southern U. | W 90–55 | 23:16 | 8 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3-5 | 2-3 | 0-0 | 80.0% |
| 2025-12-22 | Missouri | W 91–48 | 23:15 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3-8 | 0-3 | 0-0 | 37.5% |
| 2025-12-13 | Nebraska | L 80–83 | 36:28 | 20 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5-9 | 3-6 | 7-9 | 72.2% |
| 2025-12-09 | Ohio St. | W 88–80 | 31:24 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1-4 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 37.5% |
| 2025-12-06 | Tennessee | W 75–62 | 35:54 | 15 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 6-11 | 0-3 | 3-6 | 54.5% |
| 2025-11-28 | UConn | L 61–74 | 38:38 | 25 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 8-16 | 2-8 | 7-7 | 56.3% |
| 2025-11-24 | UTRGV | W 87–73 | 25:36 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1-5 | 0-4 | 4-4 | 20.0% |
| 2025-11-22 | LIU | W 98–58 | 30:11 | 11 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4-5 | 1-2 | 2-2 | 90.0% |
| 2025-11-19 | Alabama | L 86–90 | 32:58 | 22 | 4 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 8-18 | 0-4 | 6-7 | 44.4% |
| 2025-11-14 | Colgate | W 84–65 | 30:38 | 11 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 5-16 | 1-6 | 0-0 | 34.4% |
| 2025-11-11 | Texas Tech | W 81–77 | 38:36 | 22 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 5-10 | 3-5 | 9-12 | 65.0% |
| 2025-11-03 | Jackson St. | W 113–55 | 28:11 | 10 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4-9 | 2-5 | 0-1 | 55.6% |