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-conferenceAmica Mutual Pavilion, Providence, RI

Stonehill

Efficiency #320

2025-26: 12-21 · 9-11 conf

Providence

Efficiency #81

2025-26: 15-18 · 8-14 conf

Tue, Dec 1 · TBD

67.9

win 11%

Projected

82.4

win 89%

No line posted yet.

Model: PROV −14.5 · total 150.3 · 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: Providence 70.9, Stonehill 67.7 → 70.3 possessions

+4.2

Providence offense vs Stonehill defense

+4.1

Stonehill offense vs Providence defense

−6.3

Projected total

150.3

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Providence offense vs Stonehill defense

+4.1

Stonehill offense vs Providence defense

+6.3

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

+4.0

Providence by 14.5

14.5

Stonehill side ◂▸ Providence side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 150.2 against a projected 150.3, and the margin steps add to +14.4 against +14.5. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Providence.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 70.3, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Providence is the faster team (72.3, #21 of 365) and Stonehill the slower (66.6, #265). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

70.3

per team, 40 min

Projected total

150.3

model

Projected team totals

67.9 / 82.4

Stonehill / Providence

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

67.7#240

Stonehill

70.9#18

Providence

How this game plays

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

AdvantageStonehill

Where Stonehill struggles: shooting

Stonehill shoots an effective 46.9% (#339); Providence allows 51.4% (#179). Expect about 48.8%, 2.5 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.5 points per 100 possessions.

Pace

Tempo tug-of-war

Providence averages 72.3 possessions per 40, Stonehill 66.6. 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 70 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.

AdvantageProvidence

Where Providence scores: ball control

Providence turns it over on 16.7% of possessions (#174); Stonehill forces turnovers on 13.4% of opponent possessions (#347). Expect about 14.5%, 2.2 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.8 points per 100 possessions.

ClashProvidence

Style match: ball movement

Providence creates off the dribble (assists on 47.5% of its baskets); Stonehill breaks up passing offenses (assists on 44.0% allowed) (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 43.8% — both habits push the same way.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Providence) 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 Stonehill at about 39.7% of its shots from three, Providence about 35.7%.

ClashProvidence

Strength vs strength: 2-point shooting

Providence (#51 in 2-point shooting) against Stonehill (#21 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 51.1%. Historically Providence's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.61 vs 0.55).

Stonehill has the ball

OffenseProvidence allowsvs D1 avg

46.9% #339

51.4% #179

-3.5 pt/100

19.4% #335

13.1% #352

+1.0 pt/100

27.5% #282

30.8% #195

-1.1 pt/100

27.3% #350

32.7% #125

-0.6 pt/100

68.5% #311

—

-0.3 pt/100

Stonehill net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -4.6 pts/100

Providence has the ball

OffenseStonehill allowsvs D1 avg

55.0% #37

47.8% #36

+0.5 pt/100

16.7% #174

13.4% #347

+2.8 pt/100

31.7% #135

27.1% #40

-0.4 pt/100

36.7% #138

30.3% #67

-0.2 pt/100

75.7% #60

—

+0.3 pt/100

Providence net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +2.9 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Stonehilloffense vsProvidencedefense

Share of shots by zone

Stonehill shoots

42.6

4.2

12.7

40.6

Providence allows

37.3

6.1

18.4

38.1

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	49.6%#362	57.2%#121	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	28.4%#355	46.7%#329	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	35.1%#285	37.9%#154	38.0%
Three	31.7%#294	35.3%#265	33.7%

Providenceoffense vsStonehilldefense

Share of shots by zone

Providence shoots

40.7

4.6

14.1

40.5

Stonehill allows

40.9

8.7

17.9

32.4

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	61.2%#88	53.6%#33	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	40.7%#156	37.2%#114	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	40.2%#107	34.2%#54	38.0%
Three	36.4%#45	33.4%#150	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

Stonehill

−4.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#341 of 365

Off reb %

27.5%

#282

Def reb %

72.9%

#40

Turnover %

19.4%

#335

Forced TO %

13.4%

#347

FT rate

27.3%

#350

FT allowed

30.3%

#67

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.9

Defensive rebounding+1.1

Ball security−1.8

Forcing turnovers−2.3

Foul shots drawn−2.0

Foul shots allowed+1.3

Providence

−0.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#228 of 365

Off reb %

31.7%

#135

Def reb %

69.2%

#195

Turnover %

16.7%

#174

Forced TO %

13.1%

#352

FT rate

36.7%

#138

FT allowed

32.7%

#125

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.4

Defensive rebounding−0.1

Ball security+0.1

Forcing turnovers−2.4

Foul shots drawn+0.4

Foul shots allowed+0.6

Providence has more extra scoring chances per game: −0.9 (#228 of 365) to Stonehill’s −4.6 (#341).

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

Stonehill2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Stonehill'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
10	Hermann Koffi	G	So	6'4"	32-32	35.4	12.8	2.8	1.3	1.3	51.4%	36.8%	6.6	88.7%	22.1%
4	Davante Hackett	G	Jr	6'3"	33-11	27.7	13.6	4.1	1.5	1.3	51.0%	34.4%	5.6	73.6%	29.8%
5	Chas Stinson	G	Sr	6'4"	32-29	27.9	11.3	5.5	1.6	2.1	47.2%	23.5%	1.1	70.3%	27.6%
1	Rex Sunderland	G	Sr	6'5"	33-32	26.9	4.7	3.5	3.2	2.4	38.3%	27.4%	2.5	62.2%	17.9%
13	Raymond Espinal-Guzman	F	Sr	6'8"	33-22	24.1	6.3	5.1	1.3	1.6	43.1%	26.3%	2.3	67.3%	20.9%
11	Ridvan Tutic	F	Jr	6'11"	30-24	22.5	7.1	7.8	1.0	1.3	59.4%	—	0.0	53.8%	19.4%
33	Ethan Meuser	F	Sr	6'8"	20-11	20.4	6.1	5.2	1.3	1.1	46.4%	28.3%	3.0	54.3%	22.4%
2	Trenton Ruth	G	So	6'3"	32-0	11.4	3.4	1.1	1.2	0.7	38.7%	28.0%	1.6	62.1%	25.2%
31	Pearse McGuinn	F	So	6'8"	25-1	9.3	2.7	1.6	0.3	0.6	44.1%	25.0%	0.6	78.9%	20.9%
30	Anthony Holden	G	Sr	6'5"	20-0	10.0	2.4	0.9	0.4	0.2	59.0%	42.9%	1.4	66.7%	12.9%
3	William Batchelder	G	Sr	6'2"	3-3	27.3	10.3	2.0	1.3	2.0	54.0%	46.7%	5.0	66.7%	22.5%
20	Cory Lovell	F	Jr	6'9"	11-0	5.9	0.6	1.0	0.1	0.1	37.5%	0.0%	0.2	33.3%	9.2%
22	Charlie Diamantis	G	Sr	6'3"	5-0	3.8	0.6	1.2	0.4	0.6	0.0%	0.0%	0.4	60.0%	21.3%
15	Norbu Jenpa	G	Fr	6'4"	6-0	2.8	0.8	0.8	0.2	0.5	35.7%	20.0%	0.8	—	32.5%
12	Eino Montin	G	Jr	6'1"	2-0	4.5	1.0	0.5	0.0	0.5	100.0%	—	0.0	0.0%	22.8%
21	Colin Byrne	G	Fr	6'3"	2-0	2.0	0.0	1.0	0.5	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%

Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Providence2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
7	Stefan Vaaks	G	Fr	6'7"	31-22	31.5	15.8	2.5	3.2	1.9	52.2%	35.0%	8.4	83.9%	27.9%
11	Ryan Mela	G	So	6'7"	33-22	25.9	9.9	5.3	2.0	1.6	53.9%	32.1%	1.7	80.5%	21.6%
55	Oswin Erhunmwunse	F	So	6'10"	33-31	25.0	6.9	8.3	0.8	1.4	67.3%	—	0.0	52.5%	15.0%
1	Jason Edwards	G	Sr	6'1"	23-13	26.7	16.5	2.8	3.0	1.8	51.6%	34.3%	6.1	79.0%	33.8%
14	Corey Floyd Jr.	G	Sr	6'4"	24-18	25.4	7.6	4.0	2.5	1.5	49.3%	37.3%	2.1	79.5%	18.5%
13	Cole Hargrove	F	Sr	6'8"	29-1	13.1	1.8	2.9	0.5	0.5	51.4%	0.0%	0.1	66.7%	8.8%
31	Duncan Powell	F	Sr	6'8"	22-5	16.6	4.6	3.0	0.8	0.7	47.7%	30.8%	3.0	60.7%	17.6%
20	Nilavan Daniels	G	So	6'3"	20-1	9.8	1.9	1.1	0.4	0.1	69.6%	47.6%	1.1	77.8%	8.8%
17	Peteris Pinnis	F	Fr	7'0"	18-0	4.1	0.8	1.2	0.1	0.4	53.8%	—	0.0	33.3%	16.9%
4	Jaylen Harrell	G	Fr	6'5"	6-0	8.8	3.7	0.7	0.3	0.0	59.4%	27.3%	1.8	100.0%	17.8%
3	Daquan Davis	G	So	6'1"	3-0	9.3	0.7	0.3	1.0	0.3	25.0%	0.0%	0.7	0.0%	9.9%
8	Jack Williams	G	Sr	6'4"	7-0	1.9	0.4	0.0	0.1	0.0	50.0%	33.3%	0.4	—	12.8%
10	Rich Barron	F	Jr	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.

Stonehill2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Stonehill'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
10	Hermann Koffi	G	So	6'4"	32-32	35.4	12.8	2.8	1.3	1.3	51.4%	36.8%	6.6	88.7%	22.1%
4	Davante Hackett	G	Jr	6'3"	33-11	27.7	13.6	4.1	1.5	1.3	51.0%	34.4%	5.6	73.6%	29.8%
5	Chas Stinson	G	Sr	6'4"	32-29	27.9	11.3	5.5	1.6	2.1	47.2%	23.5%	1.1	70.3%	27.6%
1	Rex Sunderland	G	Sr	6'5"	33-32	26.9	4.7	3.5	3.2	2.4	38.3%	27.4%	2.5	62.2%	17.9%
13	Raymond Espinal-Guzman	F	Sr	6'8"	33-22	24.1	6.3	5.1	1.3	1.6	43.1%	26.3%	2.3	67.3%	20.9%
11	Ridvan Tutic	F	Jr	6'11"	30-24	22.5	7.1	7.8	1.0	1.3	59.4%	—	0.0	53.8%	19.4%
33	Ethan Meuser	F	Sr	6'8"	20-11	20.4	6.1	5.2	1.3	1.1	46.4%	28.3%	3.0	54.3%	22.4%
2	Trenton Ruth	G	So	6'3"	32-0	11.4	3.4	1.1	1.2	0.7	38.7%	28.0%	1.6	62.1%	25.2%
31	Pearse McGuinn	F	So	6'8"	25-1	9.3	2.7	1.6	0.3	0.6	44.1%	25.0%	0.6	78.9%	20.9%
30	Anthony Holden	G	Sr	6'5"	20-0	10.0	2.4	0.9	0.4	0.2	59.0%	42.9%	1.4	66.7%	12.9%
3	William Batchelder	G	Sr	6'2"	3-3	27.3	10.3	2.0	1.3	2.0	54.0%	46.7%	5.0	66.7%	22.5%
20	Cory Lovell	F	Jr	6'9"	11-0	5.9	0.6	1.0	0.1	0.1	37.5%	0.0%	0.2	33.3%	9.2%
22	Charlie Diamantis	G	Sr	6'3"	5-0	3.8	0.6	1.2	0.4	0.6	0.0%	0.0%	0.4	60.0%	21.3%
15	Norbu Jenpa	G	Fr	6'4"	6-0	2.8	0.8	0.8	0.2	0.5	35.7%	20.0%	0.8	—	32.5%
12	Eino Montin	G	Jr	6'1"	2-0	4.5	1.0	0.5	0.0	0.5	100.0%	—	0.0	0.0%	22.8%
21	Colin Byrne	G	Fr	6'3"	2-0	2.0	0.0	1.0	0.5	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

Stonehill

Against the spread

Season

16-15

Home

5-6

Road

11-8

Last 10

4-6

avg cover −0.6

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 7 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

10-21

Home

5-6

Road

5-14

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total +0.4

Under in the last gameOver in 4 of 7 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 7	MercyhurstAdjEM #261	A	L 51–56	+4.5	L−0.5	135.0	U107	77.8	85.4	65.6
Mar 4	Le MoyneAdjEM #270	A	W 81–71	+4.5	W+14.5	140.0	O152	114.8	100.6	70.5
Feb 28	MercyhurstAdjEM #261	H	L 72–75 OT	+2.5	L−0.5	138.5	O147	94.0	97.9	76.6
Feb 26	Saint Francis Red Wolves	H	W 103–77	−5.5	W+20.5	140.0	O180	141.0	105.4	73.0
Feb 21	Le MoyneAdjEM #270	H	W 77–68	+2.0	W+11.0	137.0	O145	109.4	96.6	70.4
Feb 19	New HavenAdjEM #326	A	L 51–64	+3.0	L−10.0	121.0	U115	77.9	97.8	65.5
Feb 14	WagnerAdjEM #285	H	L 57–68	−3.0	L−14.0	129.5	U125	86.5	103.2	65.9
Feb 12	Chicago StAdjEM #342	A	L 55–68	−1.5	L−14.5	132.5	U123	98.3	121.5	56.0
Feb 7	Long IslandAdjEM #195	A	L 54–61	+10.0	W+3.0	132.5	U115	88.2	99.7	61.2
Feb 5	FDUAdjEM #332	A	L 58–74	+1.0	L−15.0	131.0	O132	91.0	116.1	63.7

Providence

Against the spread

Season

18-14-1

Home

9-7

Road

6-5-1

Last 10

5-4-1

avg cover +0.7

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 4 as a favoriteCovered 2 of 6 as an underdog, 1 push

Over / under

Season

22-11

Home

11-5

Road

8-4

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total −3.0

Under in the last gameOver in 3 of 4 as a favoriteOver in 2 of 6 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 12	#13St John'sAdjEM #16	A	L 72–85	+12.0	L−1.0	159.5	U157	95.4	112.6	75.5
Mar 11	ButlerAdjEM #87	N	W 91–81	−2.0	W+8.0	162.5	O172	125.4	111.6	72.6
Mar 7	GeorgetownAdjEM #95	A	L 79–80	+1.0	P0.0	157.0	O159	108.5	109.8	72.8
Mar 4	MarquetteAdjEM #100	H	L 56–78	−4.5	L−26.5	162.0	U134	78.9	109.9	71.0
Feb 28	CreightonAdjEM #92	A	W 79–76	+4.0	W+7.0	167.0	U155	116.3	111.9	67.9
Feb 25	XavierAdjEM #129	H	W 94–84	−5.5	W+4.5	170.0	O178	135.3	120.9	69.5
Feb 21	DePaulAdjEM #113	A	W 71–68	+3.0	W+6.0	152.5	U139	105.7	101.2	67.2
Feb 14	#17St John'sAdjEM #16	H	L 69–79	+7.5	L−2.5	167.0	U148	91.6	104.9	75.3
Feb 11	Seton HallAdjEM #56	A	L 80–87	+5.0	L−2.0	150.5	O167	116.8	127.1	68.5
Feb 7	DePaulAdjEM #113	H	W 90–72	−5.0	W+13.0	153.5	O162	125.8	100.6	71.5

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

StonehillProvidence

Efficiency

98.2

115.4

107.4

109.8

67.7

70.9

—

Shooting

46.9%

55.0%

46.5%

55.3%

31.7%

36.4%

68.5%

75.7%

27.3%

36.7%

Ball control & glass

19.4%

16.7%

13.4%

13.1%

27.5%

31.7%

27.1%

30.8%

11.2%

10.4%

13.6%

8.6%

Style

40.5%

44.1%

43.4%

12.4%

14.3%

51.3%

47.5%

29.3%

30.8%

Roster

3.23

2.57

6'5.6"

6'6.4"

—

73.6%

Offseason

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

Stonehill

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted Stonehill'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.)

Providence

Returning minutes: 73.6%Returning production: 69.1%

Lost

Jaylin Sellers 30.0 mpg, 18.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Jamier Jones 24.2 mpg, 11.2 ppg · transferred to Missouri

Added

Rich Barron no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 74% of last season's minutes; lost 2 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).

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.