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-conferenceESPN2KFC Yum! Center, Louisville, KYACC/SEC Men's Challenge
Texas
Efficiency #38
2025-26: 21-15 · 9-10 conf
@
Louisville
Efficiency #14
2025-26: 24-11 · 12-8 conf
Tue, Dec 1 · 9:00 PM ET
74.7
win 26%
Projected
82.3
win 74%
No line posted yet.
Model: LOU −7.5 · total 157.0 · 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: Louisville 69.9, Texas 67.8 → 69.4 possessions
+2.3
Louisville offense vs Texas defense
+5.0
Texas offense vs Louisville defense
+1.5
Projected total
157.0
Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Louisville offense vs Texas defense
+5.0
Texas offense vs Louisville defense
−1.5
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+4.0
Louisville by 7.5
7.5
Texas side ◂▸ Louisville 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 Louisville.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 69.4, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Louisville is the faster team (71.0, #54 of 365) and Texas the slower (68.2, #193). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
69.4
per team, 40 min
Projected total
157.0
model
Projected team totals
74.7 / 82.3
Texas / Louisville
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
67.8#223
Texas
69.9#60
Louisville
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageLouisville
Where Louisville scores: shooting
Louisville shoots an effective 56.5% (#14); Texas allows 50.8% (#144). Expect about 54.1%, 2.8 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +4.0 points per 100 possessions.
TurnoversLouisville
Louisville protects the ball
Projected turnover rate of 14.4% is worth roughly +3.0 points per 100 possessions for Louisville's offense.
ClashLouisville
Style clash: 3-point volume
Louisville takes 52.9% of its shots from three; Texas runs teams off the line (33.0% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 46.1% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.80 vs 0.64).
ClashTexas
Strength vs strength: offensive rebounding
Texas (#35 in offensive rebounding) against Louisville (#50 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 32.5%. Historically Texas's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.70 vs 0.49).
ClashLouisville
Style clash: ball movement
Louisville assists on 59.6% of its made baskets; Texas breaks up passing offenses (assists on 46.0% allowed) (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 52.9% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.65 vs 0.65).
Texas has the ball
OffenseLouisville allowsvs D1 avg
54.1% #65
48.7% #54
+0.5 pt/100
15.0% #67
16.7% #172
+1.3 pt/100
35.4% #35
27.5% #50
+1.3 pt/100
44.2% #7
33.0% #130
+0.4 pt/100
74.4% #110
—
+0.2 pt/100
Texas net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +3.6 pts/100
Louisville has the ball
OffenseTexas allowsvs D1 avg
56.5% #14
50.8% #144
+4.0 pt/100
16.8% #186
13.0% #355
+3.0 pt/100
32.8% #93
26.9% #35
-0.0 pt/100
33.1% #236
39.6% #297
+0.2 pt/100
76.1% #51
—
+0.3 pt/100
Louisville net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +7.5 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersTexasoffense vsLouisvilledefense
Share of shots by zone
Texas shoots
39.0
5.9
19.7
35.5
Louisville allows
32.4
9.0
19.1
39.5
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 61.9%#74 | 58.8%#181 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 38.9%#197 | 39.2%#162 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 42.1%#51 | 32.9%#28 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.1%#107 | 32.3%#76 | 33.7% |
Louisvilleoffense vsTexasdefense
Share of shots by zone
Louisville shoots
36.2
5.3
6.1
52.5
Texas allows
39.2
5.2
22.8
32.8
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 63.8%#41 | 57.6%#134 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 47.4%#36 | 42.3%#234 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 35.8%#265 | 38.2%#165 | 38.0% |
| Three | 36.0%#58 | 34.7%#230 | 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 numbersTexas
+2.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#67 of 365
Off reb %
35.4%
#35
Def reb %
73.1%
#35
Turnover %
15.0%
#67
Forced TO %
13.0%
#355
FT rate
44.2%
#7
FT allowed
39.6%
#297
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.6
Defensive rebounding+1.2
Ball security+1.2
Forcing turnovers−2.5
Foul shots drawn+2.4
Foul shots allowed−1.1
Louisville
+1.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#104 of 365
Off reb %
32.8%
#93
Def reb %
72.5%
#50
Turnover %
16.8%
#186
Forced TO %
16.7%
#172
FT rate
33.1%
#236
FT allowed
33.0%
#130
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.8
Defensive rebounding+1.0
Ball security0.0
Forcing turnovers0.0
Foul shots drawn−0.5
Foul shots allowed+0.6
Texas has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.7 (#67 of 365) to Louisville’s +1.9 (#104).
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
Texas2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Jordan Pope | G | Sr | 6'1" | 36-35 | 29.0 | 13.1 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 0.9 | 51.3% | 37.2% | 6.4 | 84.0% | 25.7% | |
| 8 | Matas Vokietaitis | C | So | 7'0" | 36-36 | 26.0 | 15.6 | 7.1 | 0.6 | 2.1 | 61.9% | — | 0.0 | 66.9% | 31.8% | |
| 5 | Camden Heide | F | Jr | 6'7" | 35-29 | 22.5 | 5.9 | 2.7 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 66.1% | 45.4% | 3.1 | 70.6% | 12.5% | |
| 2 | Chendall Weaver | G | Sr | 6'3" | 36-2 | 20.9 | 5.8 | 4.1 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 47.3% | 21.7% | 1.3 | 71.4% | 17.5% | |
| 7 | Simeon Wilcher | G | Jr | 6'4" | 36-1 | 18.6 | 5.6 | 1.8 | 1.7 | 1.3 | 45.6% | 33.7% | 2.6 | 91.7% | 20.7% | |
| 10 | Nic Codie | F | So | 6'8" | 24-4 | 15.8 | 4.1 | 3.1 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 50.6% | 14.3% | 0.6 | 63.0% | 16.8% | |
| 23 | Lassina Traore | F | Sr | 6'10" | 23-1 | 15.7 | 3.4 | 5.1 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 44.9% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 66.0% | 15.3% | |
| 4 | Declan Duru Jr. | F | Fr | 6'8" | 12-0 | 7.0 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 50.0% | 0.0% | 0.4 | 25.0% | 12.9% | |
| 33 | Anthon McDermott | G | Fr | 6'4" | 7-0 | 2.9 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 75.0% | 50.0% | 0.6 | — | 15.7% | |
| 1 | Cole Bott | F | Sr | 6'6" | 6-0 | 1.2 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 150.0% | 100.0% | 0.2 | — | 7.4% | |
| 44 | Brandon Taylor | G | Sr | 5'10" | 4-0 | 1.3 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 30.0% | 25.0% | 1.0 | — | 64.8% | |
| 9 | John Clark | F | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 14 | Lewis Obiorah | C | Fr | 7'0" | 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.
Louisville2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40 | Flory Bidungaat Kansas | F | Jr | 6'9" | 35-34 | 31.6 | 13.3 | 9.0 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 64.0% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 65.4% | 21.9% | |
| 11 | De'Shayne Montgomeryat Dayton | G | Sr | 6'4" | 36-36 | 30.6 | 13.4 | 4.0 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 56.2% | 33.5% | 4.3 | 78.9% | 25.7% | |
| 53 | LJ Wellsat N Kentucky | F | Sr | 6'8" | 33-33 | 30.3 | 15.0 | 7.3 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 57.9% | 28.3% | 1.6 | 67.5% | 26.1% | |
| 5 | Seth Trimbleat North Carolina | G | Sr | 6'3" | 24-24 | 32.5 | 14.0 | 3.8 | 3.0 | 1.4 | 50.8% | 28.6% | 2.6 | 66.7% | 25.4% | |
| 14 | Adrian Wooley | G | Jr | 6'4" | 35-16 | 22.5 | 8.7 | 3.9 | 1.8 | 1.1 | 53.9% | 35.0% | 3.3 | 77.8% | 21.8% | |
| 7 | Alvaro Folgueirasat Iowa | F | Sr | 6'10" | 37-1 | 20.6 | 8.4 | 3.6 | 2.2 | 1.2 | 58.6% | 33.3% | 2.9 | 76.7% | 24.8% | |
| 3 | Jackson Shelstadat Oregon | G | Sr | 6'1" | 12-12 | 34.9 | 15.6 | 2.9 | 4.9 | 1.8 | 48.8% | 31.4% | 8.8 | 84.6% | 28.0% | |
| 1 | Karter Knoxat Arkansas | G | Jr | 6'6" | 22-18 | 22.2 | 8.1 | 4.5 | 1.2 | 1.0 | 55.4% | 37.7% | 3.1 | 72.7% | 20.1% | |
| 45 | Gabe Dynesat USC | C | Sr | 7'5" | 30-6 | 11.9 | 2.9 | 2.3 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 78.8% | — | 0.0 | 35.3% | 12.8% | |
| 33 | Will Hanke | G | So | 6'4" | 9-0 | 1.1 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 33.3% | — | 0.0 | — | 16.1% | |
| 6 | Boyuan Zhang | F | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 22 | Isaac Ellis | G | Fr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 15 | Obinna Ekezie Jr. | C | Fr | 7'2" | 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: Flory Bidunga (from Kansas), Gabe Dynes (from USC), Alvaro Folgueiras (from Iowa), De'Shayne Montgomery (from Dayton), Jackson Shelstad (from Oregon), Seth Trimble (from North Carolina), LJ Wells (from N Kentucky), Karter Knox (from Arkansas)
Texas2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Jordan Pope | G | Sr | 6'1" | 36-35 | 29.0 | 13.1 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 0.9 | 51.3% | 37.2% | 6.4 | 84.0% | 25.7% | |
| 8 | Matas Vokietaitis | C | So | 7'0" | 36-36 | 26.0 | 15.6 | 7.1 | 0.6 | 2.1 | 61.9% | — | 0.0 | 66.9% | 31.8% | |
| 5 | Camden Heide | F | Jr | 6'7" | 35-29 | 22.5 | 5.9 | 2.7 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 66.1% | 45.4% | 3.1 | 70.6% | 12.5% | |
| 2 | Chendall Weaver | G | Sr | 6'3" | 36-2 | 20.9 | 5.8 | 4.1 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 47.3% | 21.7% | 1.3 | 71.4% | 17.5% | |
| 7 | Simeon Wilcher | G | Jr | 6'4" | 36-1 | 18.6 | 5.6 | 1.8 | 1.7 | 1.3 | 45.6% | 33.7% | 2.6 | 91.7% | 20.7% | |
| 10 | Nic Codie | F | So | 6'8" | 24-4 | 15.8 | 4.1 | 3.1 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 50.6% | 14.3% | 0.6 | 63.0% | 16.8% | |
| 23 | Lassina Traore | F | Sr | 6'10" | 23-1 | 15.7 | 3.4 | 5.1 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 44.9% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 66.0% | 15.3% | |
| 4 | Declan Duru Jr. | F | Fr | 6'8" | 12-0 | 7.0 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 50.0% | 0.0% | 0.4 | 25.0% | 12.9% | |
| 33 | Anthon McDermott | G | Fr | 6'4" | 7-0 | 2.9 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 75.0% | 50.0% | 0.6 | — | 15.7% | |
| 1 | Cole Bott | F | Sr | 6'6" | 6-0 | 1.2 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 150.0% | 100.0% | 0.2 | — | 7.4% | |
| 44 | Brandon Taylor | G | Sr | 5'10" | 4-0 | 1.3 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 30.0% | 25.0% | 1.0 | — | 64.8% | |
| 9 | John Clark | F | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 14 | Lewis Obiorah | C | Fr | 7'0" | 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 2025-26Texas
Against the spread
Season
20-15
Home
8-9
Road
7-3
Last 10
5-5
avg cover −1.2
Covered 4 straightCovered 5 of 8 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
20-15
Home
10-7
Road
7-3
Last 10
4-6
avg vs total +0.1
Over in the last gameOver in 3 of 8 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 26 | #2Purdue | N | L 77–79 | +8.5 | W+6.5 | 146.5 | O156 | 126.6 | 129.9 | 60.8 |
| Mar 21 | #3Gonzaga | N | W 74–68 | +6.0 | W+12.0 | 147.5 | U142 | 115.6 | 106.3 | 64.0 |
| Mar 19 | #6BYU | N | W 79–71 | +2.5 | W+10.5 | 158.0 | U150 | 118.0 | 106.0 | 67.0 |
| Mar 17 | #11NC State | N | W 68–66 | +1.0 | W+3.0 | 157.5 | U134 | 100.5 | 97.5 | 67.7 |
| Mar 11 | Ole Miss | N | L 66–76 | −6.0 | L−16.0 | 148.0 | U142 | 94.7 | 109.1 | 69.7 |
| Mar 7 | Oklahoma | H | L 85–88 OT | −6.5 | L−9.5 | 153.5 | O173 | 109.7 | 113.6 | 77.5 |
| Mar 4 | #20Arkansas | A | L 85–105 | +7.0 | L−13.0 | 164.5 | O190 | 107.5 | 132.8 | 79.0 |
| Feb 28 | Texas A&M | A | W 76–70 | +2.5 | W+8.5 | 160.5 | U146 | 110.5 | 101.8 | 68.8 |
| Feb 25 | #7Florida | H | L 71–84 | +7.0 | L−6.0 | 158.5 | U155 | 110.0 | 130.1 | 64.5 |
| Feb 21 | Georgia | A | L 80–91 | +3.0 | L−8.0 | 163.5 | O171 | 129.0 | 146.7 | 62.0 |
Louisville
Against the spread
Season
15-18-2
Home
9-7-1
Road
3-8
Last 10
1-7-2
avg cover −4.2
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 0 of 8 as a favorite, 2 pushes
Over / under
Season
14-21
Home
6-11
Road
6-5
Last 10
4-6
avg vs total −4.5
Under in the last gameOver in 3 of 8 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 21 | #3Michigan St | N | L 69–77 | +5.0 | L−3.0 | 151.0 | U146 | 103.1 | 115.0 | 66.9 |
| Mar 19 | #11South Florida | N | W 83–79 | −4.0 | P0.0 | 160.0 | O162 | 110.3 | 105.0 | 75.2 |
| Mar 12 | Miami | N | L 73–78 | −1.5 | L−6.5 | 153.5 | U151 | 106.7 | 114.0 | 68.4 |
| Mar 11 | SMU | N | W 62–58 | −6.5 | L−2.5 | 163.5 | U120 | 100.9 | 94.4 | 61.5 |
| Mar 7 | #22Miami | A | W 92–89 | +1.5 | W+4.5 | 155.5 | O181 | 142.7 | 138.1 | 64.5 |
| Mar 3 | Syracuse | H | W 77–62 | −15.0 | P0.0 | 160.0 | U139 | 113.8 | 91.6 | 67.7 |
| Feb 28 | Clemson | A | L 75–80 | −2.0 | L−7.0 | 146.5 | O155 | 107.3 | 114.4 | 69.9 |
| Feb 23 | #18North Carolina | A | L 74–77 | −3.5 | L−6.5 | 163.0 | U151 | 111.1 | 115.6 | 66.6 |
| Feb 21 | Georgia Tech | H | W 87–70 | −23.5 | L−6.5 | 166.5 | U157 | 118.2 | 95.1 | 73.6 |
| Feb 17 | SMU | A | L 85–95 | −4.0 | L−14.0 | 168.0 | O180 | 111.2 | 124.3 | 76.4 |
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 homeTexasLouisville
Efficiency
117.6
117.8
106.4
101.5
67.8
69.9
—
—
Shooting
54.1%
56.5%
54.8%
59.4%
35.1%
36.0%
74.4%
76.1%
44.2%
33.1%
Ball control & glass
15.0%
16.8%
13.0%
16.7%
35.4%
32.8%
26.9%
27.5%
9.1%
9.5%
10.0%
12.5%
Style
35.8%
52.9%
42.2%
39.1%
14.9%
8.6%
43.7%
59.6%
30.9%
31.7%
Roster
3.13
3.65
6'6"
6'6.6"
69.6%
11.4%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputTexas
Returning minutes: 69.6%Returning production: 60.5%
Lost
- Dailyn Swain 32.9 mpg, 17.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Tramon Mark 28.3 mpg, 14.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Lewis Obiorah no D1 minutes last season
- John Clark no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 70% of last season's minutes; lost 2 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).
Louisville
Returning minutes: 11.4%Returning production: 10.0%
Lost
- Ryan Conwell 30.0 mpg, 18.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Isaac McKneely 29.0 mpg, 10.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- J'Vonne Hadley 27.2 mpg, 11.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Sananda Fru 22.0 mpg, 9.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Mikel Brown Jr. 17.5 mpg, 10.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Khani Rooths 14.1 mpg, 4.7 ppg · transferred to Oklahoma
Added
- Flory Bidunga from Kansas · 31.6 mpg, 13.3 ppg last season
- De'Shayne Montgomery from Dayton · 29.8 mpg, 13.0 ppg last season
- LJ Wells from N Kentucky · 29.4 mpg, 14.5 ppg last season
- Seth Trimble from North Carolina · 23.6 mpg, 10.2 ppg last season
- Alvaro Folgueiras from Iowa · 20.6 mpg, 8.4 ppg last season
- Karter Knox from Arkansas · 13.2 mpg, 4.8 ppg last season
Returns 11% 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 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.