Ziare Wells
Oakland · 2025–26 · 31 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
830:03 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 31
- Minutes per game
- 26:47
- Points per game
- 9.8
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 4.5 / 1.7
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 9.8 | 4.5 | 1.7 | 1.3 | 0.3 | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Per 40 minutes | 14.6 | 6.7 | 2.6 | 2.0 | 0.4 | 1.7 | 1.7 |
| Season totals | 303 | 138 | 53 | 41 | 9 | 36 | 36 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 121–249 | 48.6% | 8.0 | 12.0 |
| 2P | 98–189 | 51.9% | 6.1 | 9.1 |
| 3P | 23–60 | 38.3% | 1.9 | 2.9 |
| FT | 38–54 | 70.4% | 1.7 | 2.6 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 53.2% | 55.5% | 24.1% | 21.7% | 1.47 |
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
Oakland · Low and other · 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
- $27K
- 80% range $7K to $80K
- Median share of team pool
- 13.2%
- team pool $215K, 80% range $78K to $575K
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $25K to $32K
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $2K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 66.6%
- 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. Tier prior from anonymous surveys and sources, scaled so that all non-Power budgets sum to the national total the College Sports Commission reported paid for 2025-26 ($1,770,453,776 over 307 schools) less the Power 4 total, times a men's basketball share; weak anchor.
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.
Oakland: 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 | Oakland | $27Kspeculative | $7K to $80K | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +0.8 | -0.2 to +1.8 | Sufficient evidence | +1.0 | -0.1 | +4.6range +4.1 to +5.1 | 2,845 | 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 | 29:09 | 26:47 | 13:18–38:01 | |
| Points | 7.8 | 9.8 | 2.0–24.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 44.5% | 50.5% | 0.0%–108.3% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-04 | Northern Ky. | L 84–85 | 22:57 | 2 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1-8 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 12.5% |
| 2026-02-28 | Detroit Mercy | L 89–95 | 26:49 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 1-5 | 1-2 | 0-2 | 30.0% |
| 2026-02-25 | IU Indy | W 86–74 | 33:05 | 14 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 7-15 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 46.7% |
| 2026-02-22 | Milwaukee | W 81–70 | 28:47 | 13 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 5-6 | 3-3 | 0-0 | 108.3% |
| 2026-02-20 | Green Bay | L 68–73 | 34:05 | 7 | 8 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3-14 | 1-7 | 0-0 | 25.0% |
| 2026-02-15 | Robert Morris | L 69–93 | 38:01 | 19 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 7-10 | 1-2 | 4-4 | 75.0% |
| 2026-02-12 | Youngstown St. | L 82–86 | 32:28 | 8 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3-6 | 1-3 | 1-1 | 58.3% |
| 2026-02-04 | Cleveland St. | L 78–91 | 16:56 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2-7 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 35.7% |
| 2026-02-01 | Northern Ky. | W 76–65 | 33:03 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 2-4 | 0-0 | 3-6 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-28 | Purdue Fort Wayne | W 74–65 | 30:08 | 8 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3-7 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-24 | Detroit Mercy | W 95–87 | 34:21 | 24 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11-13 | 1-1 | 1-1 | 88.5% |
| 2026-01-21 | IU Indy | L 85–103 | 20:41 | 11 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3-8 | 2-3 | 3-6 | 50.0% |
| 2026-01-18 | Green Bay | W 88–63 | 30:30 | 14 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 6-7 | 2-2 | 0-0 | 100.0% |
| 2026-01-15 | Milwaukee | W 73–60 | 21:30 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2-6 | 0-3 | 0-0 | 33.3% |
| 2026-01-11 | Wright St. | L 84–94 | 17:04 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1-5 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 20.0% |
| 2026-01-09 | Cleveland St. | W 97–74 | 28:40 | 23 | 8 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 10-17 | 1-5 | 2-2 | 61.8% |
| 2026-01-04 | Robert Morris | W 96–73 | 27:30 | 6 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2-5 | 0-1 | 2-3 | 40.0% |
| 2026-01-01 | Youngstown St. | W 85–83 | 18:09 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2-4 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2025-12-29 | Wright St. | L 73–88 | 28:45 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1-3 | 0-1 | 2-2 | 33.3% |
| 2025-12-20 | Michigan St. | L 70–79 | 31:59 | 17 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 6-10 | 3-3 | 2-2 | 75.0% |
| 2025-12-17 | Northern Ky. | W 82–77 | 31:05 | 10 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4-8 | 1-1 | 1-2 | 56.3% |
| 2025-12-13 | UNI | L 63–75 | 35:07 | 11 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3-10 | 1-3 | 4-4 | 35.0% |
| 2025-12-06 | Toledo | W 98–97 | 23:34 | 21 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9-14 | 0-1 | 3-3 | 64.3% |
| 2025-12-03 | Purdue Fort Wayne | W 101–92 | 16:40 | 9 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4-6 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 75.0% |
| 2025-11-25 | Montana | W 95–87 | 17:28 | 10 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4-5 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 90.0% |
| 2025-11-24 | Lamar University | W 83–68 | 13:18 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0-2 | 0-1 | 2-4 | 0.0% |
| 2025-11-21 | Eastern Mich. | L 91–97 | 18:28 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2-4 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-17 | UCF | L 83–87 | 19:05 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 25.0% |
| 2025-11-12 | Houston | L 45–78 | 30:34 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2-7 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 28.6% |
| 2025-11-07 | Purdue | L 77–87 | 36:44 | 21 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 9-16 | 0-1 | 3-3 | 56.3% |
| 2025-11-03 | Michigan | L 78–121 | 32:32 | 14 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5-13 | 1-3 | 3-4 | 42.3% |