CBB Matchups
Every D1 game with tempo-free ratings, four factors and market lines, one place.
College basketball is being built for the 2026-27 season (tip-off Nov 3). What's here fills in as games are played.
Non-conferenceStephen C. O'Connell Center, Gainesville, FL
Vermont
Efficiency #199
2025-26: 22-12 · 14-5 conf
@
Florida
Efficiency #5
2025-26: 27-8 · 17-3 conf
Sun, Dec 6 · TBD
64.8
win 5%
Projected
84.2
win 95%
No line posted yet.
Model: FLA −19.4 · total 149.0 · ratings as of Sat, Oct 3
Preseason ratings start from 2025-26's final adjusted ratings, regressed toward the D1 average. The stats below are 2025-26's too; both update once 2026-27 games are played.
How the projection is built
each step, from an average D-I game to this oneProjected total
Average D-I game
148.2
PaceAdjusted tempo: Florida 70.2, Vermont 66.5 → 68.5 possessions
+0.3
Florida offense vs Vermont defense
+8.0
Vermont offense vs Florida defense
−7.5
Projected total
149.0
Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Florida offense vs Vermont defense
+8.0
Vermont offense vs Florida defense
+7.5
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.9
Florida by 19.4
19.4
Vermont side ◂▸ Florida side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Florida.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 68.5, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Florida is the faster team (72.0, #23 of 365) and Vermont the slower (64.4, #346). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
68.5
per team, 40 min
Projected total
149.0
model
Projected team totals
64.8 / 84.2
Vermont / Florida
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
66.5#317
Vermont
70.2#35
Florida
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetPace
Tempo tug-of-war
Florida averages 72.0 possessions per 40, Vermont 64.4. Slower teams pull the pace toward themselves more than fast teams push it (0.80 vs 0.66 in five seasons of games), so expect about 68 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
AdvantageVermont
Where Vermont struggles: the offensive glass
Vermont rebounds 26.2% of its own misses (#318); Florida lets opponents grab 24.8% of their own misses (#7). Expect about 24.8%, 5.6 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.4 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageFlorida
Where Florida scores: the offensive glass
Florida rebounds 43.3% of its own misses (#2); Vermont lets opponents grab 23.0% of their own misses (#2). Expect about 35.8%, 5.4 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.3 points per 100 possessions.
TurnoversVermont
Vermont protects the ball
Projected turnover rate of 14.4% is worth roughly +2.9 points per 100 possessions for Vermont's offense.
ClashFlorida
Strength vs strength: 2-point shooting
Florida (#17 in 2-point shooting) against Vermont (#54 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 54.1%. Historically Florida's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.61 vs 0.55).
ClashVermont
Style match: ball movement
Vermont creates off the dribble (assists on 47.9% of its baskets); Florida breaks up passing offenses (assists on 44.6% allowed) (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 44.5% — both habits push the same way.
Vermont has the ball
OffenseFlorida allowsvs D1 avg
53.1% #95
46.1% #10
-2.2 pt/100
14.3% #35
15.3% #269
+2.9 pt/100
26.2% #318
24.8% #7
-3.4 pt/100
31.1% #279
34.0% #153
-0.3 pt/100
71.9% #213
—
-0.0 pt/100
Vermont net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -3.1 pts/100
Florida has the ball
OffenseVermont allowsvs D1 avg
54.1% #63
50.4% #121
+1.7 pt/100
16.3% #160
14.8% #305
+1.9 pt/100
43.3% #2
23.0% #2
+3.3 pt/100
39.0% #80
36.4% #226
+0.3 pt/100
71.2% #232
—
-0.1 pt/100
Florida net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +7.2 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersVermontoffense vsFloridadefense
Share of shots by zone
Vermont shoots
36.8
5.9
12.8
44.5
Florida allows
38.8
7.9
20.9
32.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 62.5%#61 | 50.6%#5 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 48.0%#23 | 34.8%#53 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 40.3%#104 | 34.9%#73 | 38.0% |
| Three | 33.3%#208 | 32.1%#66 | 33.7% |
Floridaoffense vsVermontdefense
Share of shots by zone
Florida shoots
44.2
7.3
10.3
38.2
Vermont allows
33.7
7.7
18.0
40.7
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 64.9%#24 | 57.1%#118 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 45.9%#52 | 41.9%#230 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 40.4%#97 | 35.1%#80 | 38.0% |
| Three | 31.2%#315 | 35.3%#267 | 33.7% |
RimShort 2 (≤9 ft)Mid 2 (10 ft+)Three
Zones from play-by-play shot descriptions; garbage time removed. Bars show the share of field-goal attempts in each zone; where a slice is too thin for its number, the shares are listed under the bar. FG% ranks: #1 = best for that side (most accurate shooting, stingiest defense).
Shot volume
Extra scoring chances from rebounds, turnovers and the foul line · 2025-26 numbersVermont
+0.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#174 of 365
Off reb %
26.2%
#318
Def reb %
77.0%
#2
Turnover %
14.3%
#35
Forced TO %
14.8%
#305
FT rate
31.1%
#279
FT allowed
36.4%
#226
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.4
Defensive rebounding+2.5
Ball security+1.7
Forcing turnovers−1.3
Foul shots drawn−1.0
Foul shots allowed−0.3
Florida
+6.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#8 of 365
Off reb %
43.3%
#2
Def reb %
75.2%
#7
Turnover %
16.3%
#160
Forced TO %
15.3%
#269
FT rate
39.0%
#80
FT allowed
34.0%
#153
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+4.2
Defensive rebounding+1.9
Ball security+0.3
Forcing turnovers−1.0
Foul shots drawn+1.0
Foul shots allowed+0.3
Florida has more extra scoring chances per game: +6.7 (#8 of 365) to Vermont’s +0.2 (#174).
Grade = extra shots and foul-line trips per game compared with a D-I average team, built from six season rates. Cell shading is the national rank for each rate (greener = better for that team).
Rotation
Vermont2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | TJ Hurley | G | Sr | 6'5" | 34-34 | 30.9 | 15.0 | 3.5 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 58.1% | 38.5% | 6.0 | 87.3% | 25.8% | |
| 20 | TJ Long | G | Sr | 6'4" | 29-17 | 29.6 | 12.1 | 4.8 | 1.1 | 1.1 | 48.2% | 31.4% | 6.5 | 79.7% | 26.7% | |
| 19 | Gus Yalden | F | So | 6'9" | 31-30 | 25.5 | 16.1 | 5.8 | 2.1 | 1.7 | 56.1% | 34.7% | 3.8 | 67.3% | 37.9% | |
| 34 | Noah Barnett | F | So | 6'9" | 31-25 | 22.3 | 5.8 | 3.6 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 66.8% | 50.0% | 0.1 | 64.1% | 13.3% | |
| 24 | Ben Johnson | G | Sr | 6'3" | 34-17 | 18.2 | 5.4 | 2.1 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 59.7% | 42.2% | 3.2 | 72.2% | 16.2% | |
| 21 | Lucas Mari | G | Fr | 6'6" | 30-8 | 20.0 | 4.9 | 4.0 | 1.7 | 1.2 | 46.5% | 26.3% | 2.5 | 70.0% | 18.8% | |
| 2 | Ben Michaels | F | So | 6'8" | 31-11 | 13.1 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 38.3% | 9.1% | 0.7 | 62.5% | 13.2% | |
| 1 | Momo Nkugwa | G | Fr | 6'3" | 29-0 | 13.1 | 3.0 | 2.3 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 54.9% | 25.0% | 1.1 | 47.4% | 15.0% | |
| 4 | Jackson Skipper | F | Sr | 6'7" | 29-1 | 8.5 | 1.8 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 43.9% | 27.3% | 1.1 | 76.9% | 17.6% | |
| 0 | David Simon | F | So | 6'11" | 18-0 | 10.6 | 3.4 | 2.2 | 0.3 | 0.6 | 70.7% | 57.1% | 0.4 | 36.4% | 18.6% | |
| 32 | Trey Woodyard | F | Sr | 6'6" | 4-0 | 8.0 | 1.5 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 42.9% | 40.0% | 1.3 | — | 13.6% | |
| 12 | Ben Wesson | G | Fr | 6'4" | 7-0 | 2.3 | 1.9 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 85.7% | 66.7% | 0.4 | 50.0% | 32.4% | |
| 25 | Sincere Clemons | G | Fr | 6'2" | 6-0 | 2.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | 50.0% | 26.3% | |
| 15 | Drew Bessette | F | Fr | 6'8" | 5-0 | 2.4 | 0.4 | 1.4 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 25.0% | 0.0% | 0.6 | — | 19.0% | |
| 13 | Chris Kuzemka | G | Sr | 6'0" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Florida2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | Thomas Haugh | F | Sr | 6'9" | 34-34 | 33.3 | 17.1 | 6.1 | 2.1 | 1.5 | 53.3% | 32.6% | 5.2 | 77.4% | 26.9% | |
| 1 | Denzel Aberdeenat Kentucky | G | Sr | 6'5" | 36-35 | 30.6 | 13.5 | 2.5 | 3.4 | 1.3 | 51.6% | 36.3% | 4.8 | 79.8% | 25.1% | |
| 0 | Boogie Fland | G | Jr | 6'3" | 35-35 | 30.0 | 11.6 | 2.5 | 3.5 | 1.6 | 49.2% | 24.0% | 3.6 | 72.6% | 23.3% | |
| 21 | Alex Condon | F | Sr | 6'11" | 34-34 | 30.5 | 15.1 | 7.5 | 3.6 | 2.4 | 56.9% | 17.0% | 1.6 | 64.9% | 27.8% | |
| 9 | Rueben Chinyelu | C | Sr | 6'10" | 35-35 | 24.5 | 10.9 | 11.2 | 0.7 | 1.5 | 58.4% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 69.5% | 23.8% | |
| 7 | Urban Klavzar | G | Sr | 6'1" | 35-0 | 20.7 | 9.6 | 1.5 | 1.3 | 0.8 | 59.6% | 40.6% | 5.0 | 90.3% | 22.4% | |
| 20 | Isaiah Brown | G | Jr | 6'4" | 32-0 | 13.3 | 5.7 | 2.6 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 54.0% | 34.6% | 1.6 | 73.3% | 22.9% | |
| 11 | CJ Ingram | G | So | 6'6" | 20-0 | 5.7 | 2.3 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 57.1% | 50.0% | 0.8 | 50.0% | 23.7% | |
| 4 | Alex Lloyd | G | So | 6'3" | 17-0 | 4.8 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 38.5% | 21.1% | 1.1 | 20.0% | 23.2% | |
| 8 | Alex Kovatchev | G | Sr | 6'5" | 15-0 | 3.4 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 33.3% | 22.2% | 0.6 | — | 14.5% | |
| 12 | Viktor Mikic | C | Jr | 6'11" | 15-0 | 3.3 | 1.5 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 32.6% | 25.0% | 0.3 | 53.8% | 39.7% | |
| 3 | AJ Brown | G | Sr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 25 | Arturas Butajevas | F | Fr | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 19 | Domen Petrovic | F | Jr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 13 | Jones Lay | C | Fr | 6'11" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Transfers in: Denzel Aberdeen (from Kentucky)
Vermont2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | TJ Hurley | G | Sr | 6'5" | 34-34 | 30.9 | 15.0 | 3.5 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 58.1% | 38.5% | 6.0 | 87.3% | 25.8% | |
| 20 | TJ Long | G | Sr | 6'4" | 29-17 | 29.6 | 12.1 | 4.8 | 1.1 | 1.1 | 48.2% | 31.4% | 6.5 | 79.7% | 26.7% | |
| 19 | Gus Yalden | F | So | 6'9" | 31-30 | 25.5 | 16.1 | 5.8 | 2.1 | 1.7 | 56.1% | 34.7% | 3.8 | 67.3% | 37.9% | |
| 34 | Noah Barnett | F | So | 6'9" | 31-25 | 22.3 | 5.8 | 3.6 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 66.8% | 50.0% | 0.1 | 64.1% | 13.3% | |
| 24 | Ben Johnson | G | Sr | 6'3" | 34-17 | 18.2 | 5.4 | 2.1 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 59.7% | 42.2% | 3.2 | 72.2% | 16.2% | |
| 21 | Lucas Mari | G | Fr | 6'6" | 30-8 | 20.0 | 4.9 | 4.0 | 1.7 | 1.2 | 46.5% | 26.3% | 2.5 | 70.0% | 18.8% | |
| 2 | Ben Michaels | F | So | 6'8" | 31-11 | 13.1 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 38.3% | 9.1% | 0.7 | 62.5% | 13.2% | |
| 1 | Momo Nkugwa | G | Fr | 6'3" | 29-0 | 13.1 | 3.0 | 2.3 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 54.9% | 25.0% | 1.1 | 47.4% | 15.0% | |
| 4 | Jackson Skipper | F | Sr | 6'7" | 29-1 | 8.5 | 1.8 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 43.9% | 27.3% | 1.1 | 76.9% | 17.6% | |
| 0 | David Simon | F | So | 6'11" | 18-0 | 10.6 | 3.4 | 2.2 | 0.3 | 0.6 | 70.7% | 57.1% | 0.4 | 36.4% | 18.6% | |
| 32 | Trey Woodyard | F | Sr | 6'6" | 4-0 | 8.0 | 1.5 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 42.9% | 40.0% | 1.3 | — | 13.6% | |
| 12 | Ben Wesson | G | Fr | 6'4" | 7-0 | 2.3 | 1.9 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 85.7% | 66.7% | 0.4 | 50.0% | 32.4% | |
| 25 | Sincere Clemons | G | Fr | 6'2" | 6-0 | 2.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | 50.0% | 26.3% | |
| 15 | Drew Bessette | F | Fr | 6'8" | 5-0 | 2.4 | 0.4 | 1.4 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 25.0% | 0.0% | 0.6 | — | 19.0% | |
| 13 | Chris Kuzemka | G | Sr | 6'0" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26Vermont
Against the spread
Season
14-18
Home
8-6
Road
5-10
Last 10
4-6
avg cover −0.2
Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 4 of 9 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 5 with a line of 10+
Over / under
Season
17-15
Home
6-8
Road
8-7
Last 10
3-7
avg vs total −3.8
Under 2 straightOver in 3 of 9 as a favoriteOver in 3 of 5 with a line of 10+
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 14 | UMBC | A | L 59–74 | +1.5 | L−13.5 | 134.5 | U133 | 92.1 | 115.5 | 64.0 |
| Mar 10 | NJIT | H | W 63–54 | −11.5 | L−2.5 | 135.0 | U117 | 99.6 | 85.4 | 63.2 |
| Mar 7 | Bryant | H | W 77–57 | −12.0 | W+8.0 | 131.5 | O134 | 129.5 | 95.9 | 59.5 |
| Mar 3 | UAlbany | H | W 69–56 | −9.0 | W+4.0 | 137.0 | U125 | 112.9 | 91.7 | 61.1 |
| Feb 26 | UMass Lowell | H | W 66–64 | −9.0 | L−7.0 | 146.5 | U130 | 101.5 | 98.4 | 65.0 |
| Feb 21 | NJIT | A | W 70–64 | −6.5 | L−0.5 | 142.0 | U134 | 110.2 | 100.8 | 63.5 |
| Feb 19 | UMBC | A | L 62–75 | −2.0 | L−15.0 | 142.0 | U137 | 92.1 | 111.4 | 67.3 |
| Feb 14 | Bryant | H | W 90–63 | −12.5 | W+14.5 | 133.0 | O153 | 134.8 | 94.4 | 66.8 |
| Feb 12 | Binghamton | A | W 73–65 | −11.0 | L−3.0 | 136.0 | O138 | 111.3 | 99.1 | 65.6 |
| Feb 7 | New Hampshire | H | W 80–57 | −10.0 | W+13.0 | 138.0 | U137 | 117.9 | 84.0 | 67.8 |
Florida
Against the spread
Season
19-16
Home
7-8
Road
9-1
Last 10
6-4
avg cover +2.8
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 6 of 10 as a favoriteCovered 4 of 7 with a line of 10+
Over / under
Season
14-20-1
Home
6-9
Road
3-7
Last 10
5-4-1
avg vs total +3.0
Over in 5 of 10 as a favorite, 1 pushOver in 4 of 7 with a line of 10+, 1 push
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22 | #9Iowa | N | L 72–73 | −10.0 | L−11.0 | 145.0 | P145 | 117.8 | 119.4 | 61.1 |
| Mar 20 | #16Prairie View | N | W 114–55 | −35.0 | W+24.0 | 154.0 | O169 | 164.5 | 79.4 | 69.3 |
| Mar 14 | #22Vanderbilt | N | L 74–91 | −7.0 | L−24.0 | 160.0 | O165 | 115.8 | 142.4 | 63.9 |
| Mar 13 | Kentucky | N | W 71–63 | −10.0 | L−2.0 | 160.5 | U134 | 97.1 | 86.2 | 73.1 |
| Mar 7 | Kentucky | A | W 84–77 | −5.5 | W+1.5 | 162.0 | U161 | 117.3 | 107.6 | 71.6 |
| Mar 3 | Mississippi St | H | W 108–74 | −21.0 | W+13.0 | 160.5 | O182 | 143.9 | 98.6 | 75.1 |
| Feb 28 | #20Arkansas | H | W 111–77 | −10.5 | W+23.5 | 170.0 | O188 | 137.4 | 95.3 | 80.8 |
| Feb 25 | Texas | A | W 84–71 | −7.0 | W+6.0 | 158.5 | U155 | 130.1 | 110.0 | 64.5 |
| Feb 21 | Ole Miss | A | W 94–75 | −13.5 | W+5.5 | 150.5 | O169 | 122.2 | 97.5 | 76.9 |
| Feb 17 | South Carolina | H | W 76–62 | −23.0 | L−9.0 | 155.0 | U138 | 113.4 | 92.5 | 67.0 |
Records vs the closing line describe the past; ten games is a small sample.
Tale of the tape
national rank toned left for away, right for homeVermontFlorida
Efficiency
108.2
119.2
109.4
97.9
66.5
70.2
—
—
Shooting
53.1%
54.1%
55.7%
58.5%
33.3%
31.2%
71.9%
71.2%
31.1%
39.0%
Ball control & glass
14.3%
16.3%
14.8%
15.3%
26.2%
43.3%
23.0%
24.8%
8.3%
9.0%
8.3%
7.0%
Style
44.6%
37.0%
41.8%
50.2%
5.5%
18.2%
47.9%
55.0%
34.4%
27.5%
Roster
2.78
3.71
6'6.1"
6'6.5"
85.8%
78.8%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputVermont
Returning minutes: 85.8%Returning production: 85.6%
Lost
- Sean Blake 28.6 mpg, 9.9 ppg · transferred to Ball State
Added
- Chris Kuzemka no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 86% of last season's minutes; lost 1 of its top 5 (1 transferred). Teams returning at least 65% of last season's minutes have historically gained about 2.2 points of AdjEM (n=156 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
Florida
Returning minutes: 78.8%Returning production: 79.0%
Lost
- Xaivian Lee 27.4 mpg, 11.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Micah Handlogten 14.4 mpg, 4.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Olivier Rioux 0.5 mpg, 0.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Cooper Josefsberg 0.1 mpg, 0.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Denzel Aberdeen from Kentucky · 30.6 mpg, 13.5 ppg last season
- Jones Lay no D1 minutes last season
- Arturas Butajevas no D1 minutes last season
- AJ Brown no D1 minutes last season
- Domen Petrovic no D1 minutes last season
Returns 79% of last season's minutes; lost 1 of its top 5. Teams returning at least 65% of last season's minutes have historically gained about 2.2 points of AdjEM (n=156 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
Head-to-head
this season and lastNo meetings the last two seasons.
The CBB Matchups tab lays out the day's Division I slate: matchup, tip time, records and rank, and — once posted — Pinnacle's spread and total (the median across books when Pinnacle has no line). Three views switch the table between projected scores, pace and totals, and each team's offensive and defensive tendencies. Each game opens into opponent-adjusted possessions, efficiency and four-factor tendencies for both teams, plus recent form, rotation and head-to-head history. Every game also carries our projected score, spread and total, built bottom-up from those same numbers: expected possessions times each side's opponent-adjusted points per possession, plus home court.
What these numbers mean: line shopping.