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-conferencePetersen Events Center, Pittsburgh, PA
Villanova
Efficiency #40
2025-26: 24-9 · 15-6 conf
@
Pitt
Efficiency #120
2025-26: 13-20 · 6-14 conf
Tue, Nov 17 · TBD
71.6
win 56%
Projected
70.0
win 44%
No line posted yet.
Model: VILL −1.6 · total 141.5 · 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: Pitt 65.9, Villanova 66.8 → 64.4 possessions
−8.6
Pitt offense vs Villanova defense
−1.7
Villanova offense vs Pitt defense
+3.6
Projected total
141.5
Axis starts at 130 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Pitt offense vs Villanova defense
−1.7
Villanova offense vs Pitt defense
−3.6
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.7
Villanova by 1.6
1.6
Villanova side ◂▸ Pitt 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 Pitt.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 64.4, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Villanova is the faster team (66.5, #269 of 365) and Pitt the slower (64.5, #340). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
64.4
per team, 40 min
Projected total
141.5
model
Projected team totals
71.6 / 70.0
Villanova / Pitt
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
66.8#302
Villanova
65.9#346
Pitt
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetPace
Half-court grind
Pitt averages 64.5 possessions per 40, Villanova 66.5. 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.
AdvantageVillanova
Where Villanova scores: shooting
Villanova shoots an effective 53.8% (#74); Pitt allows 53.4% (#279). Expect about 53.8%, 2.5 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.6 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantagePitt
Where Pitt scores: the offensive glass
Pitt rebounds 33.9% of its own misses (#72); Villanova lets opponents grab 31.8% of their own misses (#246). Expect about 33.5%, 3.1 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +1.9 points per 100 possessions.
TurnoversPitt
Pitt turns it over
Projected turnover rate of 18.2% is worth roughly -1.8 points per 100 possessions against Pitt's offense.
TurnoversVillanova
Villanova protects the ball
Projected turnover rate of 15.4% is worth roughly +1.7 points per 100 possessions for Villanova's offense.
Villanova has the ball
OffensePitt allowsvs D1 avg
53.8% #74
53.4% #279
+3.6 pt/100
15.0% #66
16.2% #208
+1.7 pt/100
32.2% #118
28.1% #68
+0.1 pt/100
30.9% #284
30.9% #82
-0.5 pt/100
68.9% #302
—
-0.3 pt/100
Villanova net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +4.5 pts/100
Pitt has the ball
OffenseVillanova allowsvs D1 avg
51.0% #193
51.4% #181
-0.1 pt/100
17.3% #225
18.6% #69
-1.8 pt/100
33.9% #72
31.8% #246
+1.9 pt/100
30.4% #300
30.0% #59
-0.6 pt/100
67.4% #336
—
-0.4 pt/100
Pitt net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -1.1 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersVillanovaoffense vsPittdefense
Share of shots by zone
Villanova shoots
34.9
6.0
13.6
45.6
Pitt allows
40.2
6.4
12.8
40.6
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 61.6%#81 | 60.0%#225 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 43.5%#91 | 44.3%#278 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 35.4%#280 | 38.8%#193 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.7%#77 | 35.2%#263 | 33.7% |
Pittoffense vsVillanovadefense
Share of shots by zone
Pitt shoots
37.1
5.6
14.8
42.5
Villanova allows
37.3
6.9
19.3
36.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 57.3%#217 | 60.9%#267 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 35.4%#281 | 38.8%#155 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 43.1%#35 | 40.0%#243 | 38.0% |
| Three | 33.4%#206 | 33.4%#148 | 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 numbersVillanova
+3.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#53 of 365
Off reb %
32.2%
#118
Def reb %
68.2%
#246
Turnover %
15.0%
#66
Forced TO %
18.6%
#69
FT rate
30.9%
#284
FT allowed
30.0%
#59
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.6
Defensive rebounding−0.4
Ball security+1.2
Forcing turnovers+1.3
Foul shots drawn−1.0
Foul shots allowed+1.3
Pitt
+1.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#131 of 365
Off reb %
33.9%
#72
Def reb %
71.9%
#68
Turnover %
17.3%
#225
Forced TO %
16.2%
#208
FT rate
30.4%
#300
FT allowed
30.9%
#82
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.1
Defensive rebounding+0.8
Ball security−0.3
Forcing turnovers−0.3
Foul shots drawn−1.2
Foul shots allowed+1.1
Villanova has more extra scoring chances per game: +3.0 (#53 of 365) to Pitt’s +1.2 (#131).
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
Villanova2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Tyler Perkins | G | Jr | 6'4" | 33-33 | 29.8 | 13.7 | 5.4 | 1.6 | 0.8 | 53.2% | 36.9% | 5.4 | 74.5% | 26.3% | |
| 2 | Bryce Lindsay | G | So | 6'3" | 33-31 | 28.5 | 12.3 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 1.2 | 49.6% | 35.6% | 6.6 | 77.1% | 27.1% | |
| 33 | Matt Hodge | F | Fr | 6'8" | 29-29 | 27.6 | 9.2 | 3.6 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 57.2% | 36.8% | 4.7 | 65.2% | 18.9% | |
| 7 | Malachi Palmer | G | So | 6'6" | 33-4 | 18.3 | 4.6 | 1.7 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 58.6% | 35.9% | 2.4 | 76.2% | 14.0% | |
| 17 | Braden Pierce | C | So | 7'0" | 30-1 | 6.5 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 66.7% | — | 0.0 | 60.0% | 11.0% | |
| 0 | Chris Jeffrey | G | Fr | 6'3" | 22-0 | 8.3 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 54.3% | 35.7% | 0.6 | 80.0% | 20.2% | |
| 6 | Tafara Gapare | F | Sr | 6'9" | 9-0 | 16.3 | 2.9 | 2.9 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 31.5% | 21.4% | 1.6 | 81.8% | 15.8% | |
| 1 | Zion Stanford | G | Jr | 6'6" | 10-0 | 5.0 | 1.3 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 50.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | 75.0% | 23.4% | |
| 14 | Wade Chiddick | G | Sr | 6'4" | 1-0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | 75.0% | 38.5% | |
| 15 | Malcolm Flaggs | G | So | 6'6" | 1-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 30.2% | |
| 21 | Nico Onyekwere | C | Fr | 7'1" | 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.
Pitt2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Damarco Minor | G | Sr | 6'0" | 33-32 | 32.1 | 8.5 | 3.8 | 3.4 | 1.5 | 48.3% | 31.6% | 5.3 | 88.3% | 18.4% | |
| 8 | Omari Witherspoon | G | Fr | 6'4" | 33-25 | 27.8 | 7.5 | 3.0 | 2.5 | 2.4 | 43.2% | 28.7% | 2.6 | 64.5% | 23.6% | |
| 13 | Roman Siulepa | F | Fr | 6'6" | 33-33 | 26.7 | 10.0 | 5.5 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 51.5% | 29.6% | 3.0 | 50.0% | 24.7% | |
| 3 | Brandin Cummings | G | So | 6'3" | 19-9 | 26.3 | 12.5 | 1.5 | 2.1 | 1.2 | 50.5% | 32.6% | 4.8 | 71.8% | 29.5% | |
| 21 | Macari Moore | G | Fr | 6'3" | 21-0 | 6.1 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 46.0% | 75.0% | 0.2 | 87.5% | 20.6% | |
| 4 | Papa Amadou Kante | F | So | 6'10" | 8-0 | 14.3 | 2.8 | 5.4 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 45.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | 44.4% | 14.3% | |
| 12 | Kieran Mullen | C | Fr | 7'0" | 18-0 | 6.0 | 0.8 | 1.2 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 41.7% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 100.0% | 11.0% | |
| 0 | Amdy Ndiaye | F | So | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 35 | Benjamin Mayhew | F | Jr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Dishon Jackson | C | Sr | 6'11" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 6 | Henry Lau | F | Fr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 44 | Jajuan Nelson | F | 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.
Villanova2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Tyler Perkins | G | Jr | 6'4" | 33-33 | 29.8 | 13.7 | 5.4 | 1.6 | 0.8 | 53.2% | 36.9% | 5.4 | 74.5% | 26.3% | |
| 2 | Bryce Lindsay | G | So | 6'3" | 33-31 | 28.5 | 12.3 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 1.2 | 49.6% | 35.6% | 6.6 | 77.1% | 27.1% | |
| 33 | Matt Hodge | F | Fr | 6'8" | 29-29 | 27.6 | 9.2 | 3.6 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 57.2% | 36.8% | 4.7 | 65.2% | 18.9% | |
| 7 | Malachi Palmer | G | So | 6'6" | 33-4 | 18.3 | 4.6 | 1.7 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 58.6% | 35.9% | 2.4 | 76.2% | 14.0% | |
| 17 | Braden Pierce | C | So | 7'0" | 30-1 | 6.5 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 66.7% | — | 0.0 | 60.0% | 11.0% | |
| 0 | Chris Jeffrey | G | Fr | 6'3" | 22-0 | 8.3 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 54.3% | 35.7% | 0.6 | 80.0% | 20.2% | |
| 6 | Tafara Gapare | F | Sr | 6'9" | 9-0 | 16.3 | 2.9 | 2.9 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 31.5% | 21.4% | 1.6 | 81.8% | 15.8% | |
| 1 | Zion Stanford | G | Jr | 6'6" | 10-0 | 5.0 | 1.3 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 50.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | 75.0% | 23.4% | |
| 14 | Wade Chiddick | G | Sr | 6'4" | 1-0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | 75.0% | 38.5% | |
| 15 | Malcolm Flaggs | G | So | 6'6" | 1-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 30.2% | |
| 21 | Nico Onyekwere | C | Fr | 7'1" | 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 2025-26Villanova
Against the spread
Season
18-14-1
Home
8-9
Road
8-3-1
Last 10
2-8
avg cover −4.4
Missed the spread 3 straightCovered 2 of 7 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
20-13
Home
11-6
Road
7-5
Last 10
7-3
avg vs total +6.5
Over 3 straightOver in 6 of 7 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20 | #9Utah State | N | L 76–86 | +2.0 | L−8.0 | 147.5 | O162 | 111.5 | 126.2 | 68.1 |
| Mar 12 | Georgetown | N | L 64–78 | −6.5 | L−20.5 | 141.0 | O142 | 99.4 | 121.1 | 64.4 |
| Mar 7 | Xavier | H | W 91–78 | −13.5 | L−0.5 | 154.0 | O169 | 128.2 | 109.9 | 71.0 |
| Mar 4 | DePaul | A | W 76–57 | −2.0 | W+17.0 | 136.5 | U133 | 108.2 | 81.1 | 70.3 |
| Feb 28 | #15St John's | A | L 57–89 | +7.5 | L−24.5 | 148.0 | U146 | 78.6 | 122.8 | 72.5 |
| Feb 25 | Butler | H | W 82–73 | −10.5 | L−1.5 | 147.0 | O155 | 116.7 | 103.9 | 70.2 |
| Feb 21 | #5UConn | H | L 63–73 | +3.0 | L−7.0 | 141.0 | U136 | 100.1 | 116.0 | 62.9 |
| Feb 17 | Xavier | A | W 92–89 OT | −4.0 | L−1.0 | 153.5 | O181 | 116.7 | 112.9 | 78.8 |
| Feb 14 | Creighton | A | W 80–69 | −2.5 | W+8.5 | 146.0 | O149 | 115.3 | 99.5 | 69.4 |
| Feb 10 | Marquette | H | W 77–74 | −9.5 | L−6.5 | 145.0 | O151 | 109.8 | 105.5 | 70.1 |
Pitt
Against the spread
Season
15-16-2
Home
9-9
Road
4-5-2
Last 10
6-3-1
avg cover +2.5
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 5 of 9 as an underdog, 1 push
Over / under
Season
18-15
Home
13-5
Road
4-7
Last 10
5-5
avg vs total +1.6
Over in the last gameOver in 4 of 9 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 11 | NC State | N | L 88–98 | +9.0 | L−1.0 | 144.5 | O186 | 133.6 | 148.8 | 65.8 |
| Mar 10 | Stanford | N | W 64–63 | +5.0 | W+6.0 | 136.5 | U127 | 109.3 | 107.6 | 58.6 |
| Mar 7 | Syracuse | A | W 71–69 OT | +6.5 | W+8.5 | 142.0 | U140 | 104.0 | 101.0 | 68.3 |
| Mar 4 | Florida St | H | L 74–75 | +1.5 | W+0.5 | 145.0 | O149 | 112.8 | 114.3 | 65.6 |
| Feb 28 | California | A | W 72–56 | +7.5 | W+23.5 | 143.5 | U128 | 107.5 | 83.6 | 67.0 |
| Feb 25 | Stanford | A | L 67–75 | +8.0 | P0.0 | 138.5 | O142 | 109.1 | 122.1 | 61.4 |
| Feb 21 | Notre Dame | H | W 73–68 | −2.5 | W+2.5 | 139.0 | O141 | 116.4 | 108.4 | 62.7 |
| Feb 14 | #11North Carolina | A | L 65–79 | +11.5 | L−2.5 | 145.0 | U144 | 99.3 | 120.7 | 65.4 |
| Feb 10 | #4Duke | H | L 54–70 | +17.5 | W+1.5 | 136.5 | U124 | 88.1 | 114.2 | 61.3 |
| Feb 7 | SMU | H | L 67–86 | +4.5 | L−14.5 | 147.5 | O153 | 101.4 | 130.2 | 66.1 |
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 homeVillanovaPitt
Efficiency
115.0
110.2
104.1
107.6
66.8
65.9
—
—
Shooting
53.8%
51.0%
54.0%
51.7%
35.7%
33.4%
68.9%
67.4%
30.9%
30.4%
Ball control & glass
15.0%
17.3%
18.6%
16.2%
32.2%
33.9%
31.8%
28.1%
7.6%
9.5%
7.3%
9.2%
Style
45.7%
42.6%
40.3%
41.5%
11.7%
12.6%
56.8%
52.3%
27.3%
22.7%
Roster
2.09
2.02
6'5.5"
6'3.6"
58.6%
55.7%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputVillanova
Returning minutes: 58.6%Returning production: 51.4%
Lost
- Acaden Lewis 30.5 mpg, 12.2 ppg · transferred to Miami
- Duke Brennan 30.1 mpg, 12.1 ppg · transferred to Oklahoma
- Devin Askew 23.1 mpg, 9.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Nico Onyekwere no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 59% of last season's minutes; lost 2 of its top 5 (2 transferred).
Pitt
Returning minutes: 55.7%Returning production: 50.3%
Lost
- Cameron Corhen 33.8 mpg, 13.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Barry Dunning Jr. 31.8 mpg, 12.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Nojus Indrusaitis 23.6 mpg, 9.1 ppg · transferred to California
Added
- Benjamin Mayhew no D1 minutes last season
- Henry Lau no D1 minutes last season
- Jajuan Nelson no D1 minutes last season
- Amdy Ndiaye no D1 minutes last season
- Dishon Jackson no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 56% of last season's minutes; lost 2 of its top 5.
Head-to-head
this season and last| Date | Season | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Sat, Dec 13 | 2025-26 | Pitt 61 – 79 Villanova |
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.