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-conferenceNeutral sitePPG Paints Arena, Pittsburgh, PABackyard Basketball Classic
West Virginia
Efficiency #58
2025-26: 21-14 · 9-10 conf
vs
Pitt
Efficiency #120
2025-26: 13-20 · 6-14 conf
Wed, Dec 9 · TBD
68.2
win 62%
Projected
64.6
win 38%
No line posted yet.
Model: WVU −3.5 · total 132.8 · 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, West Virginia 65.2 → 62.7 possessions
−12.1
Pitt offense vs West Virginia defense
−3.4
West Virginia offense vs Pitt defense
+0.1
Projected total
132.8
Axis starts at 120 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Pitt offense vs West Virginia defense
−3.4
West Virginia offense vs Pitt defense
−0.1
West Virginia by 3.5
3.5
West Virginia 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: 62.7, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Pitt is the faster team (64.5, #340 of 365) and West Virginia the slower (64.1, #353). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
62.7
per team, 40 min
Projected total
132.8
model
Projected team totals
68.2 / 64.6
West Virginia / Pitt
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
65.2#361
West Virginia
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, West Virginia 64.1. 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 62 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
AdvantagePitt
Where Pitt struggles: shooting
Pitt shoots an effective 51.0% (#193); West Virginia allows 48.5% (#50). Expect about 49.7%, 1.5 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.2 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageWest Virginia
Where West Virginia scores: shooting
West Virginia shoots an effective 51.6% (#166); Pitt allows 53.4% (#279). Expect about 52.5%, 1.2 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +1.8 points per 100 possessions.
West Virginia has the ball
OffensePitt allowsvs D1 avg
51.6% #166
53.4% #279
+1.8 pt/100
16.8% #188
16.2% #208
+0.4 pt/100
30.5% #178
28.1% #68
-0.6 pt/100
35.1% #173
30.9% #82
-0.3 pt/100
68.3% #319
—
-0.4 pt/100
West Virginia net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +0.9 pts/100
Pitt has the ball
OffenseWest Virginia allowsvs D1 avg
51.0% #193
48.5% #50
-2.2 pt/100
17.3% #225
17.8% #108
-1.1 pt/100
33.9% #72
28.6% #86
+0.9 pt/100
30.4% #300
29.3% #47
-0.7 pt/100
67.4% #336
—
-0.4 pt/100
Pitt net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -3.5 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersWest Virginiaoffense vsPittdefense
Share of shots by zone
West Virginia shoots
38.5
4.6
13.3
43.6
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 | 59.4%#150 | 60.0%#225 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 30.1%#348 | 44.3%#278 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 40.6%#89 | 38.8%#193 | 38.0% |
| Three | 33.1%#227 | 35.2%#263 | 33.7% |
Pittoffense vsWest Virginiadefense
Share of shots by zone
Pitt shoots
37.1
5.6
14.8
42.5
West Virginia allows
37.1
4.8
19.5
38.6
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 57.3%#217 | 55.2%#66 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 35.4%#281 | 36.8%#106 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 43.1%#35 | 32.2%#18 | 38.0% |
| Three | 33.4%#206 | 34.3%#201 | 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 numbersWest Virginia
+2.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#54 of 365
Off reb %
30.5%
#178
Def reb %
71.4%
#86
Turnover %
16.8%
#188
Forced TO %
17.8%
#108
FT rate
35.1%
#173
FT allowed
29.3%
#47
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding0.0
Defensive rebounding+0.6
Ball security0.0
Forcing turnovers+0.7
Foul shots drawn0.0
Foul shots allowed+1.5
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
West Virginia has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.9 (#54 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
West Virginia2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | Honor Huff | G | Sr | 5'10" | 35-35 | 35.9 | 16.5 | 2.3 | 2.1 | 1.7 | 50.0% | 35.4% | 9.7 | 86.9% | 28.2% | |
| 0 | Brenen Lorient | F | Sr | 6'9" | 34-34 | 29.4 | 11.9 | 5.2 | 1.9 | 1.9 | 58.0% | 35.8% | 2.0 | 70.4% | 25.1% | |
| 1 | Jasper Floyd | G | Sr | 6'3" | 35-35 | 28.3 | 7.0 | 3.8 | 3.2 | 1.9 | 52.9% | 37.7% | 1.7 | 70.0% | 17.9% | |
| 55 | Harlan Obioha | C | Sr | 7'0" | 35-35 | 19.9 | 5.1 | 4.6 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 52.9% | 25.0% | 0.1 | 56.7% | 17.3% | |
| 13 | Chance Moore | G | Sr | 6'6" | 29-1 | 22.3 | 10.6 | 5.8 | 0.8 | 1.3 | 55.2% | 28.1% | 1.1 | 56.3% | 29.9% | |
| 5 | DJ Thomas | F | Fr | 6'7" | 35-0 | 16.8 | 6.6 | 2.1 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 55.1% | 26.9% | 2.2 | 62.5% | 24.5% | |
| 2 | Amir Jenkins | G | Fr | 6'2" | 32-0 | 16.0 | 3.4 | 2.1 | 2.0 | 0.7 | 37.3% | 28.6% | 0.9 | 53.8% | 19.2% | |
| 23 | Morris Ugusuk | G | Jr | 6'4" | 24-0 | 11.3 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 31.8% | 17.1% | 1.5 | 55.6% | 11.3% | |
| 4 | Jayden Forsythe | G | Fr | 6'5" | 5-0 | 4.0 | 1.2 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 42.9% | 28.6% | 1.4 | — | 22.2% | |
| 21 | Niyol Hauet | G | Fr | 6'4" | 6-0 | 1.8 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.2 | — | 11.6% | |
| 8 | Abraham Oyeadier | C | Fr | 6'9" | 1-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | 0.0% | 29.3% | |
| 7 | Evans Barning Jr. | F | Fr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 20 | MJ Feenane | G | Fr | 6'6" | 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.
West Virginia2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | Honor Huff | G | Sr | 5'10" | 35-35 | 35.9 | 16.5 | 2.3 | 2.1 | 1.7 | 50.0% | 35.4% | 9.7 | 86.9% | 28.2% | |
| 0 | Brenen Lorient | F | Sr | 6'9" | 34-34 | 29.4 | 11.9 | 5.2 | 1.9 | 1.9 | 58.0% | 35.8% | 2.0 | 70.4% | 25.1% | |
| 1 | Jasper Floyd | G | Sr | 6'3" | 35-35 | 28.3 | 7.0 | 3.8 | 3.2 | 1.9 | 52.9% | 37.7% | 1.7 | 70.0% | 17.9% | |
| 55 | Harlan Obioha | C | Sr | 7'0" | 35-35 | 19.9 | 5.1 | 4.6 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 52.9% | 25.0% | 0.1 | 56.7% | 17.3% | |
| 13 | Chance Moore | G | Sr | 6'6" | 29-1 | 22.3 | 10.6 | 5.8 | 0.8 | 1.3 | 55.2% | 28.1% | 1.1 | 56.3% | 29.9% | |
| 5 | DJ Thomas | F | Fr | 6'7" | 35-0 | 16.8 | 6.6 | 2.1 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 55.1% | 26.9% | 2.2 | 62.5% | 24.5% | |
| 2 | Amir Jenkins | G | Fr | 6'2" | 32-0 | 16.0 | 3.4 | 2.1 | 2.0 | 0.7 | 37.3% | 28.6% | 0.9 | 53.8% | 19.2% | |
| 23 | Morris Ugusuk | G | Jr | 6'4" | 24-0 | 11.3 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 31.8% | 17.1% | 1.5 | 55.6% | 11.3% | |
| 4 | Jayden Forsythe | G | Fr | 6'5" | 5-0 | 4.0 | 1.2 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 42.9% | 28.6% | 1.4 | — | 22.2% | |
| 21 | Niyol Hauet | G | Fr | 6'4" | 6-0 | 1.8 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.2 | — | 11.6% | |
| 8 | Abraham Oyeadier | C | Fr | 6'9" | 1-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | 0.0% | 29.3% | |
| 7 | Evans Barning Jr. | F | Fr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 20 | MJ Feenane | G | Fr | 6'6" | 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 2025-26West Virginia
Against the spread
Season
18-17
Home
10-8
Road
3-6
Last 10
5-5
avg cover +0.1
Covered 3 straightCovered 3 of 6 as a favoriteCovered 2 of 4 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
13-22
Home
5-13
Road
2-7
Last 10
5-5
avg vs total +3.9
Over 3 straightOver in 3 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 2 of 4 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 5 | Oklahoma | N | W 89–82 OT | +3.0 | W+10.0 | 138.5 | O171 | 123.9 | 114.2 | 71.8 |
| Apr 4 | Creighton | N | W 87–70 | −1.5 | W+15.5 | 137.0 | O157 | 128.7 | 103.6 | 67.6 |
| Apr 2 | Stanford | N | W 82–77 OT | −2.0 | W+3.0 | 135.5 | O159 | 111.7 | 104.9 | 73.4 |
| Mar 11 | BYU | N | L 48–68 | +3.5 | L−16.5 | 141.0 | U116 | 76.6 | 108.5 | 62.6 |
| Mar 6 | UCF | H | W 77–62 | −4.5 | W+10.5 | 141.5 | U139 | 115.4 | 92.9 | 66.7 |
| Mar 3 | Kansas St | A | L 63–65 | −4.0 | L−6.0 | 141.5 | U128 | 94.4 | 97.4 | 66.7 |
| Feb 28 | #19BYU | H | W 79–71 | +2.0 | W+10.0 | 141.0 | O150 | 124.9 | 112.3 | 63.2 |
| Feb 24 | Oklahoma St | A | L 84–91 OT | −1.0 | L−8.0 | 143.5 | O175 | 115.4 | 125.1 | 72.8 |
| Feb 21 | TCU | A | L 54–60 | +4.5 | L−1.5 | 133.5 | U114 | 89.6 | 99.6 | 60.3 |
| Feb 18 | Utah | H | L 56–61 | −10.5 | L−15.5 | 134.0 | U117 | 91.7 | 99.9 | 61.0 |
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 homeWest VirginiaPitt
Efficiency
109.6
110.2
101.3
107.6
65.2
65.9
—
—
Shooting
51.6%
51.0%
53.1%
51.7%
33.1%
33.4%
68.3%
67.4%
35.1%
30.4%
Ball control & glass
16.8%
17.3%
17.8%
16.2%
30.5%
33.9%
28.6%
28.1%
9.6%
9.5%
11.4%
9.2%
Style
43.0%
42.6%
43.1%
41.5%
10.4%
12.6%
51.9%
52.3%
30.1%
22.7%
Roster
3.39
2.02
6'4.7"
6'3.6"
84.2%
55.7%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputWest Virginia
Returning minutes: 84.2%Returning production: 85.1%
Lost
- Treysen Eaglestaff 28.6 mpg, 9.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Jackson Fields 3.7 mpg, 1.1 ppg · transferred to Georgia Tech
Added
- MJ Feenane no D1 minutes last season
- Evans Barning Jr. no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 84% 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).
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Thu, Nov 13 | 2025-26 | Pitt 49 – 71 West Virginia |
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.