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-conferenceConte Forum, Chestnut Hill, MA
MD Eastern
Efficiency #345
2025-26: 9-23 · 5-10 conf
@
Boston College
Efficiency #187
2025-26: 11-20 · 4-14 conf
Tue, Nov 10 · TBD
59.4
win 17%
Projected
70.6
win 83%
No line posted yet.
Model: BC −11.2 · total 130.0 · 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: Boston College 67.4, MD Eastern 65.7 → 64.7 possessions
−7.8
Boston College offense vs MD Eastern defense
−1.5
MD Eastern offense vs Boston College defense
−8.9
Projected total
130.0
Axis starts at 120 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Boston College offense vs MD Eastern defense
−1.5
MD Eastern offense vs Boston College defense
+8.9
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.7
Boston College by 11.2
11.2
MD Eastern side ◂▸ Boston College side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the margin steps add to +11.1 against +11.2. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Boston College.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 64.7, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Boston College is the faster team (66.4, #281 of 365) and MD Eastern the slower (64.4, #343). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
64.7
per team, 40 min
Projected total
130.0
model
Projected team totals
59.4 / 70.6
MD Eastern / Boston College
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
65.7#352
MD Eastern
67.4#262
Boston College
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageMD Eastern
Where MD Eastern struggles: shooting
MD Eastern shoots an effective 47.8% (#319); Boston College allows 48.9% (#62). Expect about 48.0%, 3.3 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -4.6 points per 100 possessions.
Pace
Half-court grind
Boston College averages 66.4 possessions per 40, MD Eastern 64.4. 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 64 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
AdvantageBoston College
Where Boston College struggles: shooting
Boston College shoots an effective 47.0% (#338); MD Eastern allows 50.7% (#142). Expect about 48.5%, 2.8 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.9 points per 100 possessions.
TurnoversMD Eastern
MD Eastern turns it over
Projected turnover rate of 19.6% is worth roughly -3.4 points per 100 possessions against MD Eastern's offense.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (Boston College, MD Eastern) 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 MD Eastern at about 34.4% of its shots from three, Boston College about 42.0%.
MD Eastern has the ball
OffenseBoston College allowsvs D1 avg
47.8% #319
48.9% #62
-4.6 pt/100
23.8% #365
14.9% #300
-3.4 pt/100
32.4% #112
28.6% #87
+0.3 pt/100
29.5% #321
34.6% #166
-0.4 pt/100
71.5% #224
—
-0.1 pt/100
MD Eastern net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -8.2 pts/100
Boston College has the ball
OffenseMD Eastern allowsvs D1 avg
47.0% #338
50.7% #142
-3.9 pt/100
15.4% #95
17.9% #102
+0.1 pt/100
28.3% #254
33.6% #311
+0.1 pt/100
32.4% #251
43.0% #340
+0.4 pt/100
65.3% #358
—
-0.6 pt/100
Boston College net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -3.9 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersMD Easternoffense vsBoston Collegedefense
Share of shots by zone
MD Eastern shoots
40.3
4.5
20.7
34.5
Boston College allows
38.9
5.3
16.6
39.3
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 55.9%#277 | 57.1%#116 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 36.4%#259 | 35.6%#78 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 39.3%#138 | 36.0%#110 | 38.0% |
| Three | 29.0%#354 | 31.9%#59 | 33.7% |
Boston Collegeoffense vsMD Easterndefense
Share of shots by zone
Boston College shoots
31.0
7.9
18.6
42.6
MD Eastern allows
40.3
3.1
17.9
38.7
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 56.3%#260 | 58.3%#155 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 45.7%#55 | 35.6%#74 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 40.0%#109 | 33.2%#32 | 38.0% |
| Three | 29.4%#348 | 33.5%#156 | 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 numbersMD Eastern
−7.8extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#361 of 365
Off reb %
32.4%
#112
Def reb %
66.4%
#311
Turnover %
23.8%
#365
Forced TO %
17.9%
#102
FT rate
29.5%
#321
FT allowed
43.0%
#340
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.6
Defensive rebounding−1.0
Ball security−4.8
Forcing turnovers+0.8
Foul shots drawn−1.4
Foul shots allowed−2.0
Boston College
−0.8extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#219 of 365
Off reb %
28.3%
#254
Def reb %
71.4%
#87
Turnover %
15.4%
#95
Forced TO %
14.9%
#300
FT rate
32.4%
#251
FT allowed
34.6%
#166
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.7
Defensive rebounding+0.6
Ball security+0.9
Forcing turnovers−1.2
Foul shots drawn−0.7
Foul shots allowed+0.2
Boston College has more extra scoring chances per game: −0.8 (#219 of 365) to MD Eastern’s −7.8 (#361).
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
MD Eastern2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted MD Eastern'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 | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Michael Teal | G | Sr | 6'1" | 32-32 | 26.2 | 5.8 | 2.1 | 3.5 | 2.2 | 43.8% | 17.1% | 1.3 | 76.1% | 18.8% | |
| 0 | Jaden Cooper | G | Sr | 6'3" | 32-31 | 26.0 | 8.0 | 3.7 | 1.7 | 1.2 | 49.5% | 33.6% | 3.6 | 83.7% | 20.5% | |
| 5 | Dorion Staples | F | Sr | 6'8" | 32-24 | 24.3 | 9.3 | 3.0 | 1.8 | 1.2 | 52.4% | 33.8% | 4.3 | 78.8% | 24.4% | |
| 1 | Zion Obanla | G | Sr | 6'8" | 32-15 | 22.1 | 10.8 | 5.9 | 0.9 | 1.6 | 60.6% | 20.0% | 0.2 | 70.4% | 28.1% | |
| 12 | Justin Monden | G | Jr | 6'0" | 32-1 | 20.8 | 6.0 | 1.2 | 1.6 | 1.5 | 45.6% | 27.0% | 2.3 | 72.2% | 23.1% | |
| 14 | Joseph Locandro | F | Sr | 6'9" | 32-22 | 19.3 | 9.3 | 3.3 | 0.5 | 1.6 | 56.9% | 40.7% | 2.8 | 71.8% | 30.7% | |
| 24 | Levi Beckwith | SF | Fr | 6'7" | 26-24 | 17.3 | 2.0 | 2.9 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 27.0% | 11.8% | 1.3 | 61.1% | 14.2% | |
| 35 | Christopher Flippin | PF | Sr | 6'8" | 30-1 | 13.2 | 5.0 | 2.8 | 0.7 | 1.1 | 47.0% | — | 0.0 | 55.1% | 29.2% | |
| 3 | Trey Brown | PG | Jr | 6'7" | 27-0 | 13.8 | 3.3 | 2.4 | 1.3 | 1.5 | 41.0% | 31.0% | 1.1 | 66.7% | 23.4% | |
| 31 | Maurio Hanson Jr. | F | So | 6'7" | 23-0 | 8.8 | 2.8 | 1.7 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 56.8% | 40.0% | 0.2 | 70.0% | 20.8% | |
| 22 | Maurice Vassel | F | So | 6'9" | 25-10 | 7.6 | 2.0 | 1.2 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 58.1% | — | 0.0 | 70.0% | 18.9% | |
| 23 | Trey Hall | F | Sr | 6'9" | 16-0 | 11.4 | 1.8 | 1.4 | 0.4 | 1.2 | 39.2% | 20.0% | 1.6 | — | 18.5% | |
| 2 | Jaden Johnson | PG | Jr | 5'10" | 22-0 | 6.9 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 26.7% | 13.3% | 0.7 | 100.0% | 18.8% | |
| 11 | Javoy Thompson | G | Jr | 6'7" | 17-0 | 8.6 | 1.7 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 41.4% | 0.0% | 0.2 | 71.4% | 15.9% | |
| 10 | Devin Thomas | G | Fr | 6'0" | 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.
Boston College2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | Ernest Sheltonat Merrimack | G | Sr | 6'5" | 34-34 | 36.9 | 15.9 | 3.1 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 51.3% | 34.6% | 8.4 | 87.2% | 25.2% | |
| 5 | Armoni Zeiglerat Ball State | G | Sr | 6'4" | 31-29 | 32.4 | 12.5 | 5.1 | 3.3 | 2.7 | 45.0% | 33.0% | 3.0 | 77.9% | 28.0% | |
| 0 | Money Williamsat Montana | G | Sr | 6'4" | 34-34 | 31.2 | 20.6 | 4.3 | 4.7 | 4.1 | 54.7% | 34.0% | 4.2 | 85.5% | 37.4% | |
| 20 | Brandon Benjaminat Fairfield | F | So | 6'8" | 32-31 | 31.3 | 14.2 | 10.4 | 1.2 | 1.8 | 56.8% | 25.0% | 0.3 | 68.6% | 26.5% | |
| 1 | Andrija Bukumirovicat UT Martin | F | Sr | 6'7" | 32-32 | 29.3 | 13.8 | 7.8 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 59.0% | 36.4% | 4.0 | 57.5% | 26.5% | |
| 11 | JB Frankelat Northeastern | G | Sr | 6'3" | 30-13 | 20.7 | 5.9 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 0.9 | 42.9% | 29.7% | 3.7 | 84.0% | 20.4% | |
| 33 | Luke Hungerat G Washington | F | Sr | 6'10" | 33-13 | 19.2 | 8.4 | 5.1 | 0.9 | 1.5 | 52.9% | 31.1% | 1.4 | 81.7% | 25.7% | |
| 13 | Aly Tounkaraat Arkansas St | F | Jr | 7'0" | 32-21 | 18.2 | 4.3 | 5.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 62.9% | — | 0.0 | 36.8% | 13.9% | |
| 2 | Colby Dugganat Charleston | F | Sr | 6'7" | 19-19 | 28.0 | 9.3 | 2.4 | 2.3 | 1.5 | 47.9% | 29.5% | 4.1 | 86.4% | 21.4% | |
| 7 | Jacob Furphyat UConn | G | So | 6'5" | 14-0 | 2.5 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 42.9% | 0.0% | 0.1 | — | 15.7% | |
| 12 | Jameson O'Tooleat Fordham | G | Sr | 6'3" | 7-1 | 3.9 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 31.3% | 20.0% | 0.7 | 100.0% | 23.0% | |
| 21 | Will Eggemeier | G | Sr | 6'3" | 1-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.0 | — | 61.3% | |
| 22 | Jack Bailey | F | Fr | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 24 | ak Smrekar | G | Fr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 14 | Jordan Ghee | G | Fr | 6'4" | 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: Brandon Benjamin (from Fairfield), Andrija Bukumirovic (from UT Martin), Colby Duggan (from Charleston), JB Frankel (from Northeastern), Jacob Furphy (from UConn), Luke Hunger (from G Washington), Jameson O'Toole (from Fordham), Ernest Shelton (from Merrimack), Aly Tounkara (from Arkansas St), Money Williams (from Montana), Armoni Zeigler (from Ball State)
MD Eastern2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted MD Eastern'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 | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Michael Teal | G | Sr | 6'1" | 32-32 | 26.2 | 5.8 | 2.1 | 3.5 | 2.2 | 43.8% | 17.1% | 1.3 | 76.1% | 18.8% | |
| 0 | Jaden Cooper | G | Sr | 6'3" | 32-31 | 26.0 | 8.0 | 3.7 | 1.7 | 1.2 | 49.5% | 33.6% | 3.6 | 83.7% | 20.5% | |
| 5 | Dorion Staples | F | Sr | 6'8" | 32-24 | 24.3 | 9.3 | 3.0 | 1.8 | 1.2 | 52.4% | 33.8% | 4.3 | 78.8% | 24.4% | |
| 1 | Zion Obanla | G | Sr | 6'8" | 32-15 | 22.1 | 10.8 | 5.9 | 0.9 | 1.6 | 60.6% | 20.0% | 0.2 | 70.4% | 28.1% | |
| 12 | Justin Monden | G | Jr | 6'0" | 32-1 | 20.8 | 6.0 | 1.2 | 1.6 | 1.5 | 45.6% | 27.0% | 2.3 | 72.2% | 23.1% | |
| 14 | Joseph Locandro | F | Sr | 6'9" | 32-22 | 19.3 | 9.3 | 3.3 | 0.5 | 1.6 | 56.9% | 40.7% | 2.8 | 71.8% | 30.7% | |
| 24 | Levi Beckwith | SF | Fr | 6'7" | 26-24 | 17.3 | 2.0 | 2.9 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 27.0% | 11.8% | 1.3 | 61.1% | 14.2% | |
| 35 | Christopher Flippin | PF | Sr | 6'8" | 30-1 | 13.2 | 5.0 | 2.8 | 0.7 | 1.1 | 47.0% | — | 0.0 | 55.1% | 29.2% | |
| 3 | Trey Brown | PG | Jr | 6'7" | 27-0 | 13.8 | 3.3 | 2.4 | 1.3 | 1.5 | 41.0% | 31.0% | 1.1 | 66.7% | 23.4% | |
| 31 | Maurio Hanson Jr. | F | So | 6'7" | 23-0 | 8.8 | 2.8 | 1.7 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 56.8% | 40.0% | 0.2 | 70.0% | 20.8% | |
| 22 | Maurice Vassel | F | So | 6'9" | 25-10 | 7.6 | 2.0 | 1.2 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 58.1% | — | 0.0 | 70.0% | 18.9% | |
| 23 | Trey Hall | F | Sr | 6'9" | 16-0 | 11.4 | 1.8 | 1.4 | 0.4 | 1.2 | 39.2% | 20.0% | 1.6 | — | 18.5% | |
| 2 | Jaden Johnson | PG | Jr | 5'10" | 22-0 | 6.9 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 26.7% | 13.3% | 0.7 | 100.0% | 18.8% | |
| 11 | Javoy Thompson | G | Jr | 6'7" | 17-0 | 8.6 | 1.7 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 41.4% | 0.0% | 0.2 | 71.4% | 15.9% | |
| 10 | Devin Thomas | G | Fr | 6'0" | 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 2025-26MD Eastern
Against the spread
Season
14-16
Home
3-5
Road
10-10
Last 10
2-8
avg cover −6.2
Missed the spread 3 straightCovered 1 of 7 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
13-17
Home
3-5
Road
9-11
Last 10
4-6
avg vs total +1.6
Over in the last gameOver in 4 of 7 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 12 | NC Central | N | L 76–83 OT | −1.0 | L−8.0 | 132.0 | O159 | 109.5 | 119.6 | 69.4 |
| Mar 5 | Delaware St | H | L 56–57 | −5.5 | L−6.5 | 125.0 | U113 | 94.2 | 95.9 | 59.4 |
| Mar 2 | NC Central | H | L 73–77 | −2.5 | L−6.5 | 133.5 | O150 | 106.9 | 112.8 | 68.3 |
| Feb 28 | SC State | H | W 69–57 | −6.0 | W+6.0 | 132.5 | U126 | 104.0 | 85.9 | 66.3 |
| Feb 21 | Coppin St | A | L 65–71 OT | −3.0 | L−9.0 | 127.0 | O136 | 88.3 | 96.4 | 73.6 |
| Feb 16 | Norfolk St | H | L 66–70 | +2.0 | L−2.0 | 136.5 | U136 | 111.7 | 118.5 | 59.1 |
| Feb 14 | Howard | A | L 53–79 | +11.0 | L−15.0 | 133.0 | U132 | 82.4 | 122.8 | 64.3 |
| Feb 7 | Morgan St | A | L 71–79 | −1.5 | L−9.5 | 141.0 | O150 | 106.1 | 118.0 | 66.9 |
| Feb 4 | SC State | A | L 54–63 | −4.5 | L−13.5 | 134.5 | U117 | 83.7 | 97.7 | 64.5 |
| Feb 2 | NC Central | A | L 63–65 | +4.0 | W+2.0 | 135.5 | U128 | 101.7 | 104.9 | 61.9 |
Boston College
Against the spread
Season
15-16
Home
9-8
Road
6-5
Last 10
6-4
avg cover +0.8
Covered 2 straightCovered 6 of 10 as an underdogCovered 3 of 5 with a line of 10+
Over / under
Season
12-19
Home
6-11
Road
4-7
Last 10
5-5
avg vs total −2.1
Over in the last gameOver in 5 of 10 as an underdogOver in 2 of 5 with a line of 10+
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7 | Notre Dame | H | W 77–69 | +2.5 | W+10.5 | 142.0 | O146 | 102.4 | 91.7 | 75.2 |
| Mar 3 | Virginia Tech | A | L 63–72 | +11.5 | W+2.5 | 143.0 | U135 | 95.2 | 108.8 | 66.2 |
| Feb 28 | Miami | A | L 54–76 | +16.0 | L−6.0 | 144.5 | U130 | 83.6 | 117.6 | 64.6 |
| Feb 25 | Wake Forest | H | W 68–67 | +4.0 | W+5.0 | 144.5 | U135 | 106.9 | 105.3 | 63.6 |
| Feb 21 | SMU | A | L 70–94 | +15.5 | L−8.5 | 150.0 | O164 | 106.6 | 143.1 | 65.7 |
| Feb 17 | Florida St | A | L 72–80 | +12.0 | W+4.0 | 148.0 | O152 | 107.6 | 119.6 | 66.9 |
| Feb 14 | California | H | L 75–86 | +3.5 | L−7.5 | 141.0 | O161 | 116.1 | 133.1 | 64.6 |
| Feb 11 | Stanford | H | L 64–70 | +3.0 | L−3.0 | 139.5 | U134 | 93.4 | 102.2 | 68.5 |
| Feb 7 | Miami | H | L 68–74 | +8.0 | W+2.0 | 141.5 | O142 | 97.4 | 106.0 | 69.8 |
| Feb 3 | #4Duke | A | L 49–67 | +26.5 | W+8.5 | 142.0 | U116 | 79.8 | 109.1 | 61.4 |
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 homeMD EasternBoston College
Efficiency
98.6
103.8
110.9
104.5
65.7
67.4
—
—
Shooting
47.8%
47.0%
49.9%
49.1%
29.0%
29.4%
71.5%
65.3%
29.5%
32.4%
Ball control & glass
23.8%
15.4%
17.9%
14.9%
32.4%
28.3%
33.6%
28.6%
13.8%
9.2%
8.6%
10.0%
Style
33.5%
42.4%
46.3%
40.9%
10.1%
9.5%
56.5%
47.4%
42.2%
30.0%
Roster
3.47
3.65
6'5.4"
6'6.3"
—
0.0%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputMD Eastern
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted MD Eastern'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.)
Boston College
Returning minutes: 0.0%Returning production: -0.1%
Lost
- Fred Payne 34.7 mpg, 15.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Donald Hand Jr. 27.8 mpg, 11.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Boden Kapke 26.8 mpg, 10.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Aidan Shaw 25.5 mpg, 4.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Chase Forte 23.3 mpg, 6.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Jayden Hastings 22.6 mpg, 6.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Ernest Shelton from Merrimack · 36.9 mpg, 15.9 ppg last season
- Armoni Zeigler from Ball State · 32.4 mpg, 12.5 ppg last season
- Money Williams from Montana · 31.2 mpg, 20.6 ppg last season
- Brandon Benjamin from Fairfield · 29.5 mpg, 13.4 ppg last season
- Andrija Bukumirovic from UT Martin · 28.4 mpg, 13.3 ppg last season
- JB Frankel from Northeastern · 20.0 mpg, 5.7 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).
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.