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-conferenceCapital One Arena, Washington, DC
Rider
Efficiency #356
2025-26: 4-25 · 3-17 conf
@
Georgetown
Efficiency #95
2025-26: 16-18 · 8-15 conf
Wed, Dec 9 · TBD
63.1
win 7%
Projected
79.9
win 93%
No line posted yet.
Model: GTWN −16.7 · total 143.0 · 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 one
Projected total
Average D-I game
148.2
PaceAdjusted tempo: Georgetown 67.6, Rider 67.2 → 66.5 possessions
−4.0
Georgetown offense vs Rider defense
+5.9
Rider offense vs Georgetown defense
−7.0
Projected total
143.0
Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Georgetown offense vs Rider defense
+5.9
Rider offense vs Georgetown defense
+7.0
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.8
Georgetown by 16.7
16.7
Rider side ◂▸ Georgetown side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 143.1 against a projected 143.0. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Georgetown.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes
Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 66.5, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Georgetown is the faster team (67.0, #244 of 365) and Rider the slower (65.7, #309). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions
66.5
per team, 40 min
Projected total
143.0
model
Projected team totals
63.1 / 79.9
Rider / Georgetown
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
67.2#273
Rider
67.6#247
Georgetown

How this game plays

what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meet
AdvantageRider
Where Rider struggles: shooting
Rider shoots an effective 42.8% (#365); Georgetown allows 49.9% (#96). Expect about 45.7%, 5.6 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -8.0 points per 100 possessions.
Pace
Half-court grind
Georgetown averages 67.0 possessions per 40, Rider 65.7. 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 65 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (Rider, Rider's defense) is close to a coin flip going forward — the study's model of next-game 3P% barely beats guessing the D1 average. Shot volume is what actually carries: expect Rider at about 31.0% of its shots from three, Georgetown about 36.3%.
AdvantageGeorgetown
Where Georgetown scores: ball control
Georgetown turns it over on 15.8% of possessions (#119); Rider forces turnovers on 15.3% of opponent possessions (#268). Expect about 15.2%, 1.5 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +1.9 points per 100 possessions.
GlassGeorgetown
Georgetown owns the glass
Projected offensive rebound rate of 33.0% is worth roughly +1.6 points per 100 possessions for Georgetown's offense.
Rider has the ball
OffenseGeorgetown allowsvs D1 avg
42.8% #365
49.9% #96
-8.0 pt/100
16.9% #196
16.2% #212
+0.4 pt/100
32.6% #101
31.5% #228
+1.3 pt/100
30.1% #307
33.9% #146
-0.4 pt/100
70.1% #270
—
-0.2 pt/100
Rider net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -6.9 pts/100
Georgetown has the ball
OffenseRider allowsvs D1 avg
49.6% #257
55.2% #335
+1.5 pt/100
15.8% #119
15.3% #268
+1.9 pt/100
32.5% #107
32.8% #294
+1.6 pt/100
37.3% #121
32.5% #116
-0.0 pt/100
74.0% #133
—
+0.1 pt/100
Georgetown net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +5.1 pts/100

Shot diet

Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbers
Rideroffense vsGeorgetowndefense
Share of shots by zone
Rider shoots
Georgetown allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim49.2%#36456.6%#10558.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)41.5%#13033.3%#3139.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)36.9%#22741.9%#29438.0%
Three27.7%#36533.3%#13933.7%
Georgetownoffense vsRiderdefense
Share of shots by zone
Georgetown shoots
Rider allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim56.9%#24357.0%#11158.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)39.7%#18240.6%#20339.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)40.9%#8044.7%#34638.0%
Three31.8%#28537.9%#35633.7%
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 numbers
Rider
−1.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#258 of 365
Off reb %
32.6%
#101
Def reb %
67.2%
#294
Turnover %
16.9%
#196
Forced TO %
15.3%
#268
FT rate
30.1%
#307
FT allowed
32.5%
#116
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.7
Defensive rebounding−0.7
Ball security−0.1
Forcing turnovers−1.0
Foul shots drawn−1.3
Foul shots allowed+0.7
Georgetown
+1.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#113 of 365
Off reb %
32.5%
#107
Def reb %
68.5%
#228
Turnover %
15.8%
#119
Forced TO %
16.2%
#212
FT rate
37.3%
#121
FT allowed
33.9%
#146
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.7
Defensive rebounding−0.3
Ball security+0.7
Forcing turnovers−0.3
Foul shots drawn+0.6
Foul shots allowed+0.3

Georgetown has more extra scoring chances per game: +1.7 (#113 of 365) to Rider’s −1.6 (#258).

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

Rider2025-26 numbers
#PlayerPosClHtGP-GSMPGPPGRPGAPGTOVeFG%3P%3PA/gFT%UsageStatus
10Mark Butlerat LafayetteGSr5'10"32-3233.910.72.24.21.143.7%25.0%0.676.0%20.9%
22Khalil Farmerat UMass LowellGSr6'4"33-014.23.81.50.50.543.2%32.1%1.761.7%18.3%
55Bryce Bakerat CharlestonGSr6'5"8-013.31.61.50.40.426.1%10.5%2.450.0%14.9%
23Horace Simmons Jr.at DrexelFJr6'6"13-06.81.70.90.40.432.8%18.8%1.275.0%22.8%
5Ty Bevinsat G WashingtonGJr6'6"10-07.61.91.30.20.342.1%26.7%1.575.0%17.0%
13Rich Briscoat AkronFSo6'8"8-03.11.30.90.00.450.0%—0.0—27.2%
14Kam Wylieat 2598FSo6'8"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
24Bryce PresleyGFr6'5"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
11JJ WashingtonGFr6'2"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
9Mikes ConnellyGFr6'3"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
3Nasir WashingtonGJr6'3"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
2Richie RosaGFr6'0"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
0Segun Ezekiel ObeFSo6'10"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
8Stephen Avegah SemeyCJr6'8"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Transfers in: Bryce Baker (from Charleston), Ty Bevins (from G Washington), Rich Brisco (from Akron), Mark Butler (from Lafayette), Khalil Farmer (from UMass Lowell), Horace Simmons Jr. (from Drexel), Kam Wylie (from 2598)

Tale of the tape

national rank toned left for away, right for home
RiderGeorgetown
Efficiency
100.0
110.7
115.1
106.3
67.2
67.6
—
—
Shooting
42.8%
49.6%
43.3%
50.7%
27.7%
31.8%
70.1%
74.0%
30.1%
37.3%
Ball control & glass
16.9%
15.8%
15.3%
16.2%
32.6%
32.5%
32.8%
31.5%
9.9%
9.2%
8.3%
9.1%
Style
27.5%
35.2%
43.2%
44.1%
12.6%
16.0%
44.3%
57.8%
33.0%
33.5%
Roster
3.88
2.74
6'0.8"
6'6.3"
0.0%
—

Offseason

roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model input
Rider
Returning minutes: 0.0%Returning production: 0.0%
Lost
  • Flash Burton 32.1 mpg, 15.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Zion Cruz 30.4 mpg, 12.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Caleb Smith 29.8 mpg, 7.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Shemani Fuller 21.4 mpg, 6.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Davis Bynum 18.3 mpg, 5.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Cole McCabe 12.2 mpg, 2.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
  • Mark Butler from Lafayette · 33.9 mpg, 10.7 ppg last season
  • Khalil Farmer from UMass Lowell · 14.2 mpg, 3.8 ppg last season
  • Bryce Baker from Charleston · 3.3 mpg, 0.4 ppg last season
  • Horace Simmons Jr. from Drexel · 2.7 mpg, 0.7 ppg last season
  • Ty Bevins from G Washington · 2.2 mpg, 0.5 ppg last season
  • Rich Brisco from Akron · 0.7 mpg, 0.3 ppg last season

Returns 0% 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).

Georgetown
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Georgetown's roster for this season yet — no movement to show.

Returns 100% of last season's minutes. 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). (ESPN hasn't posted this season's roster yet -- this may still be last season's list.)

Head-to-head

this season and last
No 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.