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-conferenceFiserv Forum, Milwaukee, WI

Chicago St

Efficiency #342

2025-26: 7-25 · 5-14 conf

Marquette

Efficiency #100

2025-26: 12-20 · 7-14 conf

Sun, Nov 22 · TBD

65.6

win 10%

Projected

80.4

win 90%

No line posted yet.

Model: MARQ −14.8 · total 146.1 · 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: Marquette 69.5, Chicago St 67.2 → 68.4 possessions

+0.2

Marquette offense vs Chicago St defense

+4.2

Chicago St offense vs Marquette defense

−6.6

Projected total

146.1

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Marquette offense vs Chicago St defense

+4.2

Chicago St offense vs Marquette defense

+6.6

Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors

+3.9

Marquette by 14.8

14.8

Chicago St side ◂▸ Marquette side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 146.0 against a projected 146.1, and the margin steps add to +14.7 against +14.8. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Marquette.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 68.4, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Marquette is the faster team (70.1, #91 of 365) and Chicago St the slower (65.8, #304). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

68.4

per team, 40 min

Projected total

146.1

model

Projected team totals

65.6 / 80.4

Chicago St / Marquette

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

67.2#272

Chicago St

69.5#81

Marquette

How this game plays

what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meet

AdvantageChicago St

Where Chicago St struggles: shooting

Chicago St shoots an effective 45.3% (#358); Marquette allows 50.6% (#131). Expect about 47.5%, 3.8 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -5.4 points per 100 possessions.

ClashMarquette

Style match: ball movement

Marquette assists on 58.1% of its made baskets; Chicago St allows assists on 72.7% of opponents' baskets (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 69.2% — both habits push the same way.

AdvantageMarquette

Where Marquette scores: shooting

Marquette shoots an effective 50.5% (#215); Chicago St allows 56.7% (#354). Expect about 53.6%, 2.3 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.3 points per 100 possessions.

TurnoversMarquette

Marquette turns it over

Projected turnover rate of 18.5% is worth roughly -2.1 points per 100 possessions against Marquette's offense.

DefenseChicago St

Chicago St's ball-hawking

Chicago St ranks #19 nationally in steal rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 11.4% of Marquette's possessions to end in a steal against this defense.

DefenseMarquette

Marquette's ball-hawking

Marquette ranks #8 nationally in steal rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 11.4% of Chicago St's possessions to end in a steal against this defense.

Chicago St has the ball

OffenseMarquette allowsvs D1 avg

45.3% #358

50.6% #131

-5.4 pt/100

15.6% #113

19.3% #38

-1.2 pt/100

28.3% #255

34.7% #331

+0.4 pt/100

30.0% #311

32.0% #104

-0.5 pt/100

75.0% #84

—

+0.2 pt/100

Chicago St net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -6.6 pts/100

Marquette has the ball

OffenseChicago St allowsvs D1 avg

50.5% #215

56.7% #354

+3.3 pt/100

16.0% #144

20.1% #20

-2.1 pt/100

29.7% #216

35.0% #339

+1.1 pt/100

32.8% #243

38.0% #261

+0.1 pt/100

67.5% #332

—

-0.4 pt/100

Marquette net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +1.9 pts/100

Shot diet

Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbers

Chicago Stoffense vsMarquettedefense

Share of shots by zone

Chicago St shoots

33.6

8.8

26.8

30.7

Marquette allows

39.3

4.7

16.5

39.5

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	49.8%#361	60.9%#264	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	39.0%#195	36.3%#95	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	36.8%#232	35.5%#88	38.0%
Three	32.1%#275	32.7%#104	33.7%

Marquetteoffense vsChicago Stdefense

Share of shots by zone

Marquette shoots

46.1

4.0

7.9

42.0

Chicago St allows

37.0

4.0

8.8

50.2

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	57.0%#238	64.9%#350	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	40.6%#161	31.0%#19	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	34.3%#306	44.1%#341	38.0%
Three	31.7%#297	35.6%#290	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 numbers

Chicago St

−1.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#232 of 365

Off reb %

28.3%

#255

Def reb %

65.0%

#339

Turnover %

15.6%

#113

Forced TO %

20.1%

#20

FT rate

30.0%

#311

FT allowed

38.0%

#261

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.7

Defensive rebounding−1.4

Ball security+0.8

Forcing turnovers+2.3

Foul shots drawn−1.3

Foul shots allowed−0.7

Marquette

+1.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#137 of 365

Off reb %

29.7%

#216

Def reb %

65.3%

#331

Turnover %

16.0%

#144

Forced TO %

19.3%

#38

FT rate

32.8%

#243

FT allowed

32.0%

#104

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.2

Defensive rebounding−1.3

Ball security+0.5

Forcing turnovers+1.8

Foul shots drawn−0.6

Foul shots allowed+0.8

Marquette has more extra scoring chances per game: +1.0 (#137 of 365) to Chicago St’s −1.0 (#232).

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

Chicago St2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Chicago St's 2026-27 roster yet — these are last season's players.

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
23	CJ Ray	F	Sr	6'6"	32-27	31.1	13.5	4.7	1.5	1.3	47.8%	37.2%	3.5	85.2%	28.3%
4	Marcus Tankersley	G	Sr	6'5"	30-29	30.6	13.0	3.1	2.5	2.0	46.5%	23.3%	1.0	65.6%	29.9%
3	Doyel Cockrill III	G	Jr	6'2"	28-9	24.4	11.8	2.6	2.0	1.0	49.4%	36.4%	5.8	83.3%	29.7%
21	Braelon Bush	G	Sr	5'9"	26-9	25.9	8.5	1.9	3.1	1.4	45.6%	27.7%	3.9	91.9%	23.3%
10	Corey Sands	G	Sr	6'4"	30-20	17.4	2.8	1.9	0.6	0.4	39.4%	25.8%	2.1	73.3%	13.1%
8	Stephen Byard	F	Sr	6'8"	22-9	22.6	9.8	4.8	0.8	1.4	48.3%	41.7%	0.5	73.4%	28.7%
9	Malek Robinson	G	Fr	5'11"	32-22	15.4	3.0	1.6	0.9	0.8	36.5%	31.8%	0.7	70.4%	15.8%
22	Dailliss Cox	F	Sr	6'6"	32-21	15.2	3.1	3.2	0.2	0.4	48.4%	33.3%	0.3	69.2%	14.0%
15	Joseph Owens	F	Sr	6'7"	26-2	11.2	2.1	2.2	0.2	0.6	53.7%	—	0.0	62.5%	13.5%
11	Lionel Larvadain III	G	So	6'0"	21-1	11.2	2.8	1.1	0.7	1.0	31.6%	20.0%	0.7	71.4%	24.4%
5	Chauncey Gibson	G	Jr	6'7"	15-4	15.5	4.9	2.3	1.2	1.1	37.8%	26.4%	3.5	42.9%	30.0%
6	Daniel Zatsepin	F	Jr	6'4"	25-2	8.7	0.9	1.4	0.1	0.2	35.2%	50.0%	0.1	50.0%	10.1%
25	Dakari Thomas	G	So	6'1"	19-0	5.0	0.7	0.6	0.1	0.1	42.9%	—	0.0	63.6%	8.3%
20	CJ Delancy	F	Sr	6'9"	6-2	9.2	1.7	1.8	0.3	0.3	44.4%	—	0.0	100.0%	12.4%
1	Deshawn Jean-Charles	G	Sr	6'7"	4-3	8.5	0.8	1.3	0.5	0.0	0.0%	—	0.0	75.0%	7.7%
12	DaJuan Bates	G	Jr	6'2"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
0	Greg Spate	G	Jr	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.

Marquette2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
0	Nigel James Jr.	G	Fr	6'0"	32-29	29.3	16.4	3.4	4.9	2.8	52.0%	34.7%	3.8	69.2%	35.0%
13	Royce Parham	F	So	6'8"	31-20	28.8	12.5	4.9	0.9	1.4	58.4%	33.3%	3.3	65.0%	23.4%
12	Ben Gold	F	Sr	6'11"	31-26	27.3	8.0	5.8	0.9	0.6	49.3%	26.4%	4.5	65.3%	17.8%
10	Adrien Stevens	G	Fr	6'4"	32-23	26.1	7.9	2.6	1.6	1.0	56.6%	37.5%	4.5	71.0%	17.4%
9	Damarius Owens	F	So	6'7"	30-1	15.7	4.8	2.6	0.7	0.7	47.4%	27.1%	2.0	71.7%	19.5%
18	Caedin Hamilton	F	So	6'9"	32-17	13.0	2.9	2.9	0.6	0.8	42.3%	0.0%	0.1	67.5%	16.9%
5	Tre Norman	G	Jr	6'4"	30-0	8.1	2.2	1.4	0.7	0.7	44.1%	11.1%	0.3	64.5%	20.5%
35	Michael Phillips II	F	Fr	6'6"	28-0	7.9	2.1	1.3	0.2	0.3	46.6%	37.0%	1.6	35.7%	19.1%
22	Sean Jones	G	Jr	5'10"	8-3	21.4	6.3	1.4	3.9	1.5	40.6%	32.1%	3.5	68.8%	21.5%
8	Joshua Clark	F	So	7'1"	22-0	5.7	1.4	2.0	0.0	0.0	46.7%	—	0.0	23.1%	16.6%
40	Casey O'Malley	G	Sr	6'3"	4-0	1.0	0.0	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.0%	—	0.0	—	14.6%
42	Braeden Brenn	F	Fr	6'8"	3-0	1.0	0.7	0.0	0.0	0.0	100.0%	—	0.0	—	19.3%
41	Jonah Lucas	G	Sr	6'1"	3-0	1.0	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.3	—	—	0.0	—	19.3%
21	Ian Miletic	F	Fr	6'7"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
1	Nash Walker	G	Fr	6'6"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
6	Sheek Pearson	F	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.

Chicago St2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Chicago St's 2026-27 roster yet — these are last season's players.

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
23	CJ Ray	F	Sr	6'6"	32-27	31.1	13.5	4.7	1.5	1.3	47.8%	37.2%	3.5	85.2%	28.3%
4	Marcus Tankersley	G	Sr	6'5"	30-29	30.6	13.0	3.1	2.5	2.0	46.5%	23.3%	1.0	65.6%	29.9%
3	Doyel Cockrill III	G	Jr	6'2"	28-9	24.4	11.8	2.6	2.0	1.0	49.4%	36.4%	5.8	83.3%	29.7%
21	Braelon Bush	G	Sr	5'9"	26-9	25.9	8.5	1.9	3.1	1.4	45.6%	27.7%	3.9	91.9%	23.3%
10	Corey Sands	G	Sr	6'4"	30-20	17.4	2.8	1.9	0.6	0.4	39.4%	25.8%	2.1	73.3%	13.1%
8	Stephen Byard	F	Sr	6'8"	22-9	22.6	9.8	4.8	0.8	1.4	48.3%	41.7%	0.5	73.4%	28.7%
9	Malek Robinson	G	Fr	5'11"	32-22	15.4	3.0	1.6	0.9	0.8	36.5%	31.8%	0.7	70.4%	15.8%
22	Dailliss Cox	F	Sr	6'6"	32-21	15.2	3.1	3.2	0.2	0.4	48.4%	33.3%	0.3	69.2%	14.0%
15	Joseph Owens	F	Sr	6'7"	26-2	11.2	2.1	2.2	0.2	0.6	53.7%	—	0.0	62.5%	13.5%
11	Lionel Larvadain III	G	So	6'0"	21-1	11.2	2.8	1.1	0.7	1.0	31.6%	20.0%	0.7	71.4%	24.4%
5	Chauncey Gibson	G	Jr	6'7"	15-4	15.5	4.9	2.3	1.2	1.1	37.8%	26.4%	3.5	42.9%	30.0%
6	Daniel Zatsepin	F	Jr	6'4"	25-2	8.7	0.9	1.4	0.1	0.2	35.2%	50.0%	0.1	50.0%	10.1%
25	Dakari Thomas	G	So	6'1"	19-0	5.0	0.7	0.6	0.1	0.1	42.9%	—	0.0	63.6%	8.3%
20	CJ Delancy	F	Sr	6'9"	6-2	9.2	1.7	1.8	0.3	0.3	44.4%	—	0.0	100.0%	12.4%
1	Deshawn Jean-Charles	G	Sr	6'7"	4-3	8.5	0.8	1.3	0.5	0.0	0.0%	—	0.0	75.0%	7.7%
12	DaJuan Bates	G	Jr	6'2"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
0	Greg Spate	G	Jr	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.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

Chicago St

Against the spread

Season

14-16-1

Home

6-4

Road

8-12-1

Last 10

6-4

avg cover +2.5

Covered the last gameCovered 5 of 9 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

15-16

Home

3-7

Road

12-9

Last 10

4-6

avg vs total −2.1

Over 2 straightOver in 3 of 9 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 4	Long IslandAdjEM #195	A	L 75–79	+11.0	W+7.0	138.0	O154	122.2	128.7	61.4
Feb 28	WagnerAdjEM #285	A	L 61–80	+5.0	L−14.0	135.5	O141	88.6	116.2	68.9
Feb 26	Long IslandAdjEM #195	A	L 56–73	+11.5	L−5.5	140.0	U129	85.8	111.9	65.3
Feb 21	C ConnecticutAdjEM #277	H	W 70–51	+3.0	W+22.0	138.5	U121	113.1	82.4	61.9
Feb 19	FDUAdjEM #332	H	L 59–60	+2.0	W+1.0	132.0	U119	111.6	113.5	52.9
Feb 14	Le MoyneAdjEM #270	A	L 63–81	+7.0	L−11.0	146.0	U144	91.5	117.6	68.9
Feb 12	StonehillAdjEM #320	H	W 68–55	+1.5	W+14.5	132.5	U123	121.5	98.3	56.0
Feb 9	Saint Francis Red Wolves	H	W 80–75	−3.0	W+2.0	145.5	O155	112.7	105.7	71.0
Feb 7	New HavenAdjEM #326	A	W 63–57	+5.5	W+11.5	127.5	U120	106.9	96.8	58.9
Feb 5	C ConnecticutAdjEM #277	A	L 67–78	+9.0	L−2.0	137.0	O145	107.5	125.1	62.3

Marquette

Against the spread

Season

11-19-2

Home

6-10-1

Road

5-7

Last 10

7-3

avg cover +5.5

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 6 of 7 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

14-18

Home

6-11

Road

6-6

Last 10

3-7

avg vs total −8.2

Over in the last gameOver in 2 of 7 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 11	XavierAdjEM #129	N	L 87–89	−4.0	L−6.0	157.0	O176	113.7	116.3	76.6
Mar 7	#4UConnAdjEM #10	H	W 68–62	+10.0	W+16.0	142.5	U130	101.1	92.2	67.2
Mar 4	ProvidenceAdjEM #81	A	W 78–56	+4.5	W+26.5	162.0	U134	109.9	78.9	71.0
Mar 1	DePaulAdjEM #113	H	L 51–62	−4.5	L−15.5	139.5	U113	80.6	98.0	63.2
Feb 24	GeorgetownAdjEM #95	A	W 76–60	+2.5	W+18.5	150.5	U136	116.6	92.0	65.2
Feb 18	#17St John'sAdjEM #16	H	L 70–76	+8.5	W+2.5	157.0	U146	102.2	110.9	68.5
Feb 14	XavierAdjEM #129	A	L 88–96	+2.0	L−6.0	157.5	O184	122.1	133.1	72.1
Feb 10	VillanovaAdjEM #40	A	L 74–77	+9.5	W+6.5	145.0	O151	105.5	109.8	70.1
Feb 7	ButlerAdjEM #87	H	W 70–55	−3.5	W+11.5	155.5	U125	104.6	82.2	66.9
Jan 31	Seton HallAdjEM #56	A	L 64–69	+5.5	W+0.5	143.0	U133	102.8	110.8	62.3

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 home

Chicago StMarquette

Efficiency

102.4

108.7

114.4

104.8

67.2

69.5

—

Shooting

45.3%

50.5%

44.0%

52.7%

32.1%

31.7%

75.0%

67.5%

30.0%

32.8%

Ball control & glass

15.6%

16.0%

20.1%

19.3%

28.3%

29.7%

35.0%

34.7%

8.4%

9.7%

8.7%

10.0%

Style

30.9%

42.2%

41.8%

47.8%

11.7%

19.5%

50.3%

58.1%

39.8%

29.0%

Roster

3.49

2.02

6'3.7"

6'5.9"

—

79.8%

Offseason

roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model input

Chicago St

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted Chicago St'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.)

Marquette

Returning minutes: 79.8%Returning production: 78.7%

Lost

Chase Ross 32.9 mpg, 14.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Zaide Lowery 8.0 mpg, 2.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Sheek Pearson no D1 minutes last season
Nash Walker no D1 minutes last season
Ian Miletic no D1 minutes last season

No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.

Returns 80% 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 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.