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-conferenceSEC NetworkHumphrey Coliseum, Starkville, MSACC/SEC Men's Challenge
Georgia Tech
Efficiency #201
2025-26: 11-20 · 2-16 conf
@
Mississippi St
Efficiency #144
2025-26: 13-19 · 5-14 conf
Wed, Dec 2 · 9:15 PM ET
73.9
win 30%
Projected
80.1
win 70%
No line posted yet.
Model: MSST −6.2 · total 154.0 · 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: Mississippi St 69.8, Georgia Tech 70.6 → 72.1 possessions
+8.2
Mississippi St offense vs Georgia Tech defense
−0.2
Georgia Tech offense vs Mississippi St defense
−2.2
Projected total
154.0
Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Mississippi St offense vs Georgia Tech defense
−0.2
Georgia Tech offense vs Mississippi St defense
+2.2
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+4.1
Mississippi St by 6.2
6.2
Georgia Tech side ◂▸ Mississippi St side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the margin steps add to +6.1 against +6.2. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Mississippi St.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 72.1, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Georgia Tech is the faster team (71.6, #30 of 365) and Mississippi St the slower (71.5, #32). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
72.1
per team, 40 min
Projected total
154.0
model
Projected team totals
73.9 / 80.1
Georgia Tech / Mississippi St
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
70.6#23
Georgia Tech
69.8#66
Mississippi St
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetPace
Track meet
Mississippi St averages 71.5 possessions per 40, Georgia Tech 71.6. 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 73 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
AdvantageGeorgia Tech
Where Georgia Tech scores: ball control
Georgia Tech turns it over on 18.6% of possessions (#306); Mississippi St forces turnovers on 12.8% of opponent possessions (#358). Expect about 15.3%, 1.5 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +1.8 points per 100 possessions.
Georgia Tech has the ball
OffenseMississippi St allowsvs D1 avg
50.0% #234
50.9% #154
-1.3 pt/100
18.6% #306
12.8% #358
+1.8 pt/100
29.9% #203
30.7% #190
-0.1 pt/100
33.3% #229
32.3% #112
-0.3 pt/100
71.1% #235
—
-0.1 pt/100
Georgia Tech net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -0.0 pts/100
Mississippi St has the ball
OffenseGeorgia Tech allowsvs D1 avg
51.5% #172
49.9% #94
-0.8 pt/100
16.1% #146
15.6% #245
+1.4 pt/100
29.8% #210
30.7% #189
-0.2 pt/100
30.7% #288
34.2% #156
-0.3 pt/100
66.0% #353
—
-0.6 pt/100
Mississippi St net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -0.4 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersGeorgia Techoffense vsMississippi Stdefense
Share of shots by zone
Georgia Tech shoots
40.1
6.8
20.3
32.8
Mississippi St allows
32.7
5.5
22.0
39.8
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 57.1%#237 | 59.3%#207 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 33.3%#312 | 49.0%#348 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 35.6%#270 | 37.0%#131 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.1%#109 | 33.9%#179 | 33.7% |
Mississippi Stoffense vsGeorgia Techdefense
Share of shots by zone
Mississippi St shoots
32.8
7.7
20.2
39.3
Georgia Tech allows
33.7
5.6
16.9
43.8
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 63.2%#49 | 56.8%#108 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 46.3%#48 | 38.1%#140 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 38.1%#182 | 37.1%#133 | 38.0% |
| Three | 32.4%#262 | 33.1%#134 | 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 numbersGeorgia Tech
−2.4extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#280 of 365
Off reb %
29.9%
#203
Def reb %
69.3%
#189
Turnover %
18.6%
#306
Forced TO %
15.6%
#245
FT rate
33.3%
#229
FT allowed
34.2%
#156
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.1
Defensive rebounding0.0
Ball security−1.3
Forcing turnovers−0.8
Foul shots drawn−0.4
Foul shots allowed+0.3
Mississippi St
−2.8extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#294 of 365
Off reb %
29.8%
#210
Def reb %
69.3%
#190
Turnover %
16.1%
#146
Forced TO %
12.8%
#358
FT rate
30.7%
#288
FT allowed
32.3%
#112
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.2
Defensive rebounding0.0
Ball security+0.5
Forcing turnovers−2.7
Foul shots drawn−1.1
Foul shots allowed+0.8
Georgia Tech has more extra scoring chances per game: −2.4 (#280 of 365) to Mississippi St’s −2.8 (#294).
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
Georgia Tech2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | Nasir Whitlockat Lehigh | G | Sr | 6'2" | 35-35 | 35.0 | 20.5 | 3.5 | 3.3 | 2.7 | 54.2% | 43.3% | 5.1 | 78.8% | 34.4% | |
| 0 | Colby Garlandat San José St | G | Sr | 6'1" | 29-27 | 35.1 | 20.3 | 3.3 | 4.6 | 2.1 | 53.0% | 37.2% | 3.2 | 84.8% | 33.3% | |
| 12 | Kam Craft | G | Sr | 6'6" | 29-14 | 21.3 | 7.3 | 2.1 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 49.5% | 36.4% | 4.4 | 76.5% | 20.3% | |
| 8 | Cole Kirouac | C | So | 7'0" | 23-0 | 11.5 | 1.7 | 2.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 63.3% | — | 0.0 | 0.0% | 8.6% | |
| 30 | Courtland Muldrewat Washington | G | So | 6'3" | 18-1 | 14.1 | 3.6 | 2.1 | 1.6 | 0.4 | 45.8% | 21.1% | 1.1 | 55.0% | 17.9% | |
| 7 | Jackson Fieldsat West Virginia | F | Sr | 6'9" | 9-0 | 14.2 | 4.3 | 3.4 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 57.1% | 25.0% | 0.9 | 70.0% | 17.7% | |
| 14 | Jackson McVeyat Georgia | C | So | 7'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 10 | Tylis Jordanat Ole Miss | F | So | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 35 | Cody Cross | G | Fr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 9 | Haiden Harper | G | Fr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 6 | Ilja Kurucs | F | Fr | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 2 | Kaiden Bailey | G | Fr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Kayden Allen | G | Fr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 5 | Moustapha Diop | F | Fr | 6'11" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Vctor Valds | F | Sr | 6'7" | 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: Jackson Fields (from West Virginia), Colby Garland (from San José St), Tylis Jordan (from Ole Miss), Jackson McVey (from Georgia), Courtland Muldrew (from Washington), Nasir Whitlock (from Lehigh)
Mississippi St2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | Josh Hubbard | G | Sr | 6'0" | 32-32 | 33.4 | 22.1 | 2.5 | 3.6 | 2.4 | 50.6% | 34.7% | 8.6 | 75.0% | 37.8% | |
| 11 | RJ Johnsonat Kennesaw St | G | Sr | 6'4" | 34-22 | 28.1 | 14.5 | 3.1 | 4.0 | 1.9 | 52.7% | 42.3% | 3.8 | 63.4% | 29.9% | |
| 2 | Tajuan Simpkinsat Seton Hall | G | Sr | 6'4" | 33-2 | 25.1 | 9.7 | 2.8 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 47.9% | 37.0% | 3.0 | 77.5% | 24.0% | |
| 22 | ND Okaforat Washington St | C | Sr | 6'10" | 32-32 | 23.2 | 11.0 | 5.7 | 0.9 | 2.1 | 58.3% | — | 0.0 | 64.4% | 28.3% | |
| 13 | Kendyl Sandersat Utah | F | So | 6'8" | 32-0 | 20.1 | 5.2 | 3.1 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 55.4% | 40.3% | 2.4 | 38.7% | 15.9% | |
| 21 | Thomas Bassongat Florida St | F | So | 6'8" | 33-17 | 19.3 | 5.9 | 3.5 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 53.0% | 26.0% | 1.5 | 54.4% | 18.9% | |
| 24 | Ashton Mageeat Southern | G | So | 6'7" | 31-1 | 11.3 | 3.0 | 1.7 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 45.2% | 20.0% | 0.2 | 64.3% | 16.8% | |
| 1 | King Grace | G | So | 6'5" | 24-0 | 12.2 | 5.1 | 1.3 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 51.6% | 31.9% | 2.0 | 82.1% | 22.7% | |
| 8 | Cameren Paul | G | So | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 34 | Gai Chol | C | Sr | 7'0" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 3 | Tee Bartlett | C | So | 6'11" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 0 | Jalyn Collingwood | G | Fr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 9 | Trevor Reed | F | Sr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 33 | Tristan Reed | C | Fr | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 99 | Willie Burnett III | G | Fr | 6'5" | 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: Thomas Bassong (from Florida St), RJ Johnson (from Kennesaw St), Ashton Magee (from Southern), ND Okafor (from Washington St), Kendyl Sanders (from Utah), Tajuan Simpkins (from Seton Hall)
Georgia Tech2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | Nasir Whitlockat Lehigh | G | Sr | 6'2" | 35-35 | 35.0 | 20.5 | 3.5 | 3.3 | 2.7 | 54.2% | 43.3% | 5.1 | 78.8% | 34.4% | |
| 0 | Colby Garlandat San José St | G | Sr | 6'1" | 29-27 | 35.1 | 20.3 | 3.3 | 4.6 | 2.1 | 53.0% | 37.2% | 3.2 | 84.8% | 33.3% | |
| 12 | Kam Craft | G | Sr | 6'6" | 29-14 | 21.3 | 7.3 | 2.1 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 49.5% | 36.4% | 4.4 | 76.5% | 20.3% | |
| 8 | Cole Kirouac | C | So | 7'0" | 23-0 | 11.5 | 1.7 | 2.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 63.3% | — | 0.0 | 0.0% | 8.6% | |
| 30 | Courtland Muldrewat Washington | G | So | 6'3" | 18-1 | 14.1 | 3.6 | 2.1 | 1.6 | 0.4 | 45.8% | 21.1% | 1.1 | 55.0% | 17.9% | |
| 7 | Jackson Fieldsat West Virginia | F | Sr | 6'9" | 9-0 | 14.2 | 4.3 | 3.4 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 57.1% | 25.0% | 0.9 | 70.0% | 17.7% | |
| 14 | Jackson McVeyat Georgia | C | So | 7'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 10 | Tylis Jordanat Ole Miss | F | So | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 35 | Cody Cross | G | Fr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 9 | Haiden Harper | G | Fr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 6 | Ilja Kurucs | F | Fr | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 2 | Kaiden Bailey | G | Fr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Kayden Allen | G | Fr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 5 | Moustapha Diop | F | Fr | 6'11" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Vctor Valds | F | Sr | 6'7" | 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: Jackson Fields (from West Virginia), Colby Garland (from San José St), Tylis Jordan (from Ole Miss), Jackson McVey (from Georgia), Courtland Muldrew (from Washington), Nasir Whitlock (from Lehigh)
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26Georgia Tech
Against the spread
Season
13-18
Home
5-14
Road
8-2
Last 10
3-7
avg cover −4.2
Covered the last gameCovered 3 of 10 as an underdogCovered 2 of 4 with a line of 10+
Over / under
Season
18-13
Home
10-9
Road
7-3
Last 10
6-4
avg vs total +4.0
Over in the last gameOver in 6 of 10 as an underdogOver in 3 of 4 with a line of 10+
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7 | Clemson | A | L 76–79 | +17.5 | W+14.5 | 144.5 | O155 | 114.9 | 119.4 | 66.2 |
| Mar 4 | California | H | L 65–76 | +2.0 | L−9.0 | 156.0 | U141 | 86.5 | 101.1 | 75.2 |
| Feb 28 | Florida St | H | L 71–80 | +6.0 | L−3.0 | 159.5 | U151 | 109.8 | 123.7 | 64.7 |
| Feb 21 | #21Louisville | A | L 70–87 | +23.5 | W+6.5 | 166.5 | U157 | 95.1 | 118.2 | 73.6 |
| Feb 18 | #14Virginia | H | L 68–94 | +13.5 | L−12.5 | 149.5 | O162 | 86.0 | 118.8 | 79.1 |
| Feb 14 | Notre Dame | A | L 74–89 | +6.0 | L−9.0 | 150.0 | O163 | 107.5 | 129.3 | 68.8 |
| Feb 11 | Wake Forest | H | L 67–83 | +3.5 | L−12.5 | 158.0 | U150 | 102.5 | 127.0 | 65.4 |
| Feb 7 | Stanford | A | L 72–95 | +8.5 | L−14.5 | 151.5 | O167 | 99.2 | 130.9 | 72.6 |
| Feb 4 | California | A | L 85–90 | +8.5 | W+3.5 | 152.0 | O175 | 110.3 | 116.8 | 77.1 |
| Jan 31 | #16North Carolina | H | L 75–91 | +10.0 | L−6.0 | 160.0 | O166 | 104.3 | 126.6 | 71.9 |
Mississippi St
Against the spread
Season
10-22
Home
4-12
Road
5-5
Last 10
2-8
avg cover −5.7
Missed the spread 6 straightCovered 2 of 9 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
16-16
Home
5-11
Road
7-3
Last 10
5-5
avg vs total +9.3
Under in the last gameOver in 4 of 9 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 11 | Auburn | N | L 61–79 | +7.5 | L−10.5 | 159.0 | U140 | 85.6 | 110.8 | 71.3 |
| Mar 7 | Georgia | H | L 96–102 | +5.0 | L−1.0 | 164.5 | O198 | 121.1 | 128.7 | 79.3 |
| Mar 3 | #5Florida | A | L 74–108 | +21.0 | L−13.0 | 160.5 | O182 | 98.6 | 143.9 | 75.1 |
| Feb 28 | Missouri | H | L 64–88 | +1.0 | L−23.0 | 154.5 | U152 | 93.0 | 127.9 | 68.8 |
| Feb 25 | #17Alabama | A | L 75–100 | +12.5 | L−12.5 | 175.5 | U175 | 98.8 | 131.7 | 75.9 |
| Feb 21 | South Carolina | A | L 89–97 | −1.0 | L−9.0 | 152.0 | O186 | 122.7 | 133.7 | 72.5 |
| Feb 18 | Auburn | H | W 91–85 | +5.5 | W+11.5 | 155.0 | O176 | 135.0 | 126.1 | 67.4 |
| Feb 14 | Ole Miss | A | W 90–78 | +4.0 | W+16.0 | 145.0 | O168 | 127.3 | 110.3 | 70.7 |
| Feb 11 | Tennessee | H | L 64–73 | +7.5 | L−1.5 | 147.0 | U137 | 91.6 | 104.5 | 69.9 |
| Feb 7 | #21Arkansas | H | L 68–88 | +6.0 | L−14.0 | 164.0 | U156 | 96.9 | 125.4 | 70.2 |
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 homeGeorgia TechMississippi St
Efficiency
106.1
109.4
107.4
107.8
70.6
69.8
—
—
Shooting
50.0%
51.5%
48.7%
53.4%
35.1%
32.4%
71.1%
66.0%
33.3%
30.7%
Ball control & glass
18.6%
16.1%
15.6%
12.8%
29.9%
29.8%
30.7%
30.7%
11.3%
9.5%
10.8%
11.0%
Style
33.2%
40.1%
45.7%
44.5%
12.2%
14.1%
59.9%
45.1%
31.5%
37.3%
Roster
3.70
3.30
6'3.5"
6'5.2"
14.2%
21.0%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputGeorgia Tech
Returning minutes: 14.2%Returning production: 10.3%
Lost
- Kowacie Reeves Jr. 28.3 mpg, 14.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Lamar Washington 26.6 mpg, 8.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Jaeden Mustaf 26.0 mpg, 9.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Akai Fleming 24.7 mpg, 10.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Baye Ndongo 23.7 mpg, 10.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Chas Kelley III 16.1 mpg, 4.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Nasir Whitlock from Lehigh · 35.0 mpg, 20.5 ppg last season
- Colby Garland from San José St · 30.9 mpg, 17.8 ppg last season
- Courtland Muldrew from Washington · 7.7 mpg, 2.0 ppg last season
- Jackson Fields from West Virginia · 3.7 mpg, 1.1 ppg last season
- Haiden Harper no D1 minutes last season
- Vctor Valds no D1 minutes last season
Returns 14% of last season's minutes; lost 5 of its top 5. Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
Mississippi St
Returning minutes: 21.0%Returning production: 26.2%
Lost
- Jayden Epps 25.5 mpg, 12.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Shawn Jones Jr. 25.2 mpg, 5.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Ja'Borri McGhee 22.1 mpg, 8.4 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Jamarion Davis-Fleming 20.3 mpg, 3.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Quincy Ballard 20.2 mpg, 6.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Achor Achor 17.7 mpg, 6.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- RJ Johnson from Kennesaw St · 27.3 mpg, 14.1 ppg last season
- Tajuan Simpkins from Seton Hall · 25.1 mpg, 9.7 ppg last season
- ND Okafor from Washington St · 23.2 mpg, 11.0 ppg last season
- Kendyl Sanders from Utah · 20.1 mpg, 5.2 ppg last season
- Thomas Bassong from Florida St · 19.3 mpg, 5.9 ppg last season
- Ashton Magee from Southern · 10.3 mpg, 2.7 ppg last season
Returns 21% of last season's minutes; lost 4 of its top 5. Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
Head-to-head
this season and last| Date | Season | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Wed, Dec 3 | 2025-26 | Mississippi St 85 – 73 Georgia Tech |
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.