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-conferenceLJVM Coliseum, Winston-Salem, NC

Charleston So

Efficiency #220

2025-26: 15-17 · 6-11 conf

Wake Forest

Efficiency #76

2025-26: 18-17 · 8-12 conf

Tue, Nov 10 · TBD

73.4

win 19%

Projected

83.7

win 81%

No line posted yet.

Model: WAKE −10.3 · total 157.1 · 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: Wake Forest 69.0, Charleston So 71.1 → 71.8 possessions

+7.5

Wake Forest offense vs Charleston So defense

+3.8

Charleston So offense vs Wake Forest defense

−2.4

Projected total

157.1

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Wake Forest offense vs Charleston So defense

+3.8

Charleston So offense vs Wake Forest defense

+2.4

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

+4.1

Wake Forest by 10.3

10.3

Charleston So side ◂▸ Wake Forest 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 Wake Forest.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 71.8, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Charleston So is the faster team (73.2, #10 of 365) and Wake Forest the slower (69.4, #120). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

71.8

per team, 40 min

Projected total

157.1

model

Projected team totals

73.4 / 83.7

Charleston So / Wake Forest

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

71.1#13

Charleston So

69.0#125

Wake Forest

How this game plays

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

Pace

Track meet

Wake Forest averages 69.4 possessions per 40, Charleston So 73.2. 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 72 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.

AdvantageWake Forest

Where Wake Forest scores: ball control

Wake Forest turns it over on 15.5% of possessions (#106); Charleston So forces turnovers on 12.8% of opponent possessions (#361). Expect about 13.5%, 3.3 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +4.0 points per 100 possessions.

ClashCharleston So

Style match: 3-point volume

Charleston So takes 49.5% of its shots from three; Wake Forest lets opponents take 46.6% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 52.1% — both habits push the same way.

AdvantageCharleston So

Where Charleston So scores: shooting

Charleston So shoots an effective 54.1% (#66); Wake Forest allows 51.8% (#202). Expect about 53.2%, 1.9 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.7 points per 100 possessions.

TurnoversCharleston So

Charleston So turns it over

Projected turnover rate of 18.4% is worth roughly -1.9 points per 100 possessions against Charleston So's offense.

ClashWake Forest

Style clash: 3-point volume

Wake Forest takes 43.6% of its shots from three; Charleston So runs teams off the line (31.3% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 37.5% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.80 vs 0.64).

Charleston So has the ball

OffenseWake Forest allowsvs D1 avg

54.1% #66

51.8% #202

+2.7 pt/100

18.5% #298

17.7% #115

-1.9 pt/100

29.4% #223

33.0% #298

+0.3 pt/100

30.5% #296

35.7% #203

-0.2 pt/100

64.8% #360

—

-0.7 pt/100

Charleston So net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +0.2 pts/100

Wake Forest has the ball

OffenseCharleston So allowsvs D1 avg

52.7% #117

46.9% #21

-2.0 pt/100

15.5% #106

12.8% #361

+4.0 pt/100

30.1% #196

30.3% #174

-0.2 pt/100

35.2% #170

43.3% #341

+0.6 pt/100

77.6% #22

—

+0.5 pt/100

Wake Forest net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +3.0 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Charleston Sooffense vsWake Forestdefense

Share of shots by zone

Charleston So shoots

40.6

3.6

6.5

49.3

Wake Forest allows

36.1

5.6

11.2

47.2

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	58.1%#193	60.3%#244	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	49.2%#13	35.8%#85	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	36.4%#256	38.5%#183	38.0%
Three	35.6%#78	32.9%#117	33.7%

Wake Forestoffense vsCharleston Sodefense

Share of shots by zone

Wake Forest shoots

33.8

6.0

16.4

43.8

Charleston So allows

39.3

9.6

20.4

30.7

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	62.0%#70	51.7%#14	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	41.9%#126	44.2%#275	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	39.0%#145	36.6%#122	38.0%
Three	34.1%#166	31.9%#58	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

Charleston So

−7.3extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#360 of 365

Off reb %

29.4%

#223

Def reb %

69.7%

#174

Turnover %

18.5%

#298

Forced TO %

12.8%

#361

FT rate

30.5%

#296

FT allowed

43.3%

#341

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.3

Defensive rebounding+0.1

Ball security−1.2

Forcing turnovers−2.7

Foul shots drawn−1.2

Foul shots allowed−2.1

Wake Forest

+0.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#156 of 365

Off reb %

30.1%

#196

Def reb %

67.0%

#298

Turnover %

15.5%

#106

Forced TO %

17.7%

#115

FT rate

35.2%

#170

FT allowed

35.7%

#203

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.1

Defensive rebounding−0.8

Ball security+0.9

Forcing turnovers+0.7

Foul shots drawn0.0

Foul shots allowed−0.1

Wake Forest has more extra scoring chances per game: +0.6 (#156 of 365) to Charleston So’s −7.3 (#360).

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

Charleston So2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Charleston So'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
1	A'lahn Sumler	G	Jr	6'4"	28-18	30.4	18.9	4.8	3.8	2.5	55.4%	39.6%	5.3	65.4%	34.0%
12	Jesse Hafemeister	F	Sr	6'5"	32-30	26.3	12.7	5.3	1.0	1.4	58.5%	39.0%	5.8	66.7%	24.9%
11	Brycen Blaine	G	Jr	6'5"	25-7	28.0	17.2	7.2	3.1	3.2	51.0%	34.6%	8.7	78.3%	36.6%
5	Jacob Taylor	G	Fr	6'3"	30-24	20.9	5.2	2.2	1.1	1.0	53.3%	36.1%	2.0	74.4%	14.7%
8	Luke Williams	G	Sr	6'0"	20-18	31.1	10.6	3.0	4.4	1.2	56.8%	39.6%	5.0	64.5%	18.0%
7	Nate Brafford	F	Sr	6'9"	32-12	19.3	5.2	3.3	1.2	0.8	54.3%	36.0%	3.1	60.7%	15.4%
23	Reis Jones	F	Sr	6'10"	32-15	18.4	6.6	5.2	1.0	1.3	58.9%	—	0.0	54.1%	20.6%
34	Lase Olalere	F	So	6'10"	32-17	15.6	4.6	3.9	0.7	1.2	66.3%	—	0.0	44.4%	17.1%
0	Armari Carraway	G	Jr	6'0"	24-14	17.0	6.7	1.4	1.1	0.9	48.0%	32.8%	5.7	69.0%	23.8%
2	Jaquias Franklin	G	Sr	6'1"	24-3	14.6	3.8	1.5	2.6	1.3	48.8%	29.6%	2.3	81.8%	18.5%
4	Trent Coleman	F	Sr	6'7"	24-1	10.9	3.8	2.5	0.3	0.1	60.7%	40.0%	1.3	71.9%	15.1%
22	Devin Brafford	F	So	7'1"	19-1	7.3	2.5	2.5	0.5	0.7	52.9%	20.0%	0.8	52.6%	22.4%
24	Easton Hupp	G	Fr	6'4"	4-0	5.5	3.5	0.8	0.0	1.0	42.9%	22.2%	2.3	100.0%	42.7%
10	AJ Gladieux	G	Fr	6'2"	4-0	4.5	1.5	0.8	0.8	0.5	100.0%	—	0.0	50.0%	16.3%
6	Anthony Gause	G	So	6'3"	1-0	5.0	2.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	50.0%	—	0.0	—	19.9%
13	Kaleb Lofton	G	Jr	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.

Wake Forest2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
2	Juke Harris	G	So	6'7"	35-35	35.2	21.4	6.5	1.9	1.7	52.7%	33.2%	7.5	78.3%	33.1%
6	Myles Colvin	G	Jr	6'5"	35-24	27.2	11.6	4.4	1.4	1.7	50.0%	36.0%	4.7	87.0%	25.5%
0	Omaha Biliew	F	Jr	6'8"	35-24	20.2	6.3	2.4	0.5	0.7	56.7%	36.8%	2.5	79.4%	16.7%
8	Mekhi Mason	G	Sr	6'5"	34-12	20.1	7.4	2.6	1.4	1.0	50.0%	33.8%	4.0	67.7%	22.9%
1	Nate Calmese	G	Sr	6'2"	26-23	24.7	10.3	1.9	4.5	1.8	55.5%	39.8%	4.0	77.4%	25.0%
10	Sebastian Akins	G	So	6'2"	35-8	15.1	5.3	1.5	1.9	1.2	43.3%	18.0%	1.4	77.8%	24.8%
7	Isaac Carr	G	Fr	6'4"	23-4	12.8	2.5	1.9	1.3	0.7	47.0%	31.3%	0.7	62.5%	15.0%
11	Marqus Marion	F	So	6'9"	20-0	12.1	1.4	2.3	0.7	0.3	42.0%	9.1%	0.6	61.5%	8.3%
23	Jaylen Cross	F	Fr	6'4"	12-0	5.5	2.0	1.1	0.4	0.5	50.0%	60.0%	0.4	71.4%	23.7%
9	Vincent Ricchiuti	F	Jr	6'6"	4-0	2.0	1.5	0.0	0.0	0.3	75.0%	50.0%	1.0	—	34.8%
4	Will Underwood	G	Jr	6'3"	4-0	1.8	0.0	0.5	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%
30	Anson Beard Jr.	G	Fr	6'5"	3-0	2.0	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.3	—	—	0.0	—	9.2%
44	Owen Kmety	F	Jr	6'7"	2-0	1.0	1.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	100.0%	—	0.0	—	28.9%
33	Dimitrije Kovacevic	F	Fr	6'8"	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.

Charleston So2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Charleston So'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
1	A'lahn Sumler	G	Jr	6'4"	28-18	30.4	18.9	4.8	3.8	2.5	55.4%	39.6%	5.3	65.4%	34.0%
12	Jesse Hafemeister	F	Sr	6'5"	32-30	26.3	12.7	5.3	1.0	1.4	58.5%	39.0%	5.8	66.7%	24.9%
11	Brycen Blaine	G	Jr	6'5"	25-7	28.0	17.2	7.2	3.1	3.2	51.0%	34.6%	8.7	78.3%	36.6%
5	Jacob Taylor	G	Fr	6'3"	30-24	20.9	5.2	2.2	1.1	1.0	53.3%	36.1%	2.0	74.4%	14.7%
8	Luke Williams	G	Sr	6'0"	20-18	31.1	10.6	3.0	4.4	1.2	56.8%	39.6%	5.0	64.5%	18.0%
7	Nate Brafford	F	Sr	6'9"	32-12	19.3	5.2	3.3	1.2	0.8	54.3%	36.0%	3.1	60.7%	15.4%
23	Reis Jones	F	Sr	6'10"	32-15	18.4	6.6	5.2	1.0	1.3	58.9%	—	0.0	54.1%	20.6%
34	Lase Olalere	F	So	6'10"	32-17	15.6	4.6	3.9	0.7	1.2	66.3%	—	0.0	44.4%	17.1%
0	Armari Carraway	G	Jr	6'0"	24-14	17.0	6.7	1.4	1.1	0.9	48.0%	32.8%	5.7	69.0%	23.8%
2	Jaquias Franklin	G	Sr	6'1"	24-3	14.6	3.8	1.5	2.6	1.3	48.8%	29.6%	2.3	81.8%	18.5%
4	Trent Coleman	F	Sr	6'7"	24-1	10.9	3.8	2.5	0.3	0.1	60.7%	40.0%	1.3	71.9%	15.1%
22	Devin Brafford	F	So	7'1"	19-1	7.3	2.5	2.5	0.5	0.7	52.9%	20.0%	0.8	52.6%	22.4%
24	Easton Hupp	G	Fr	6'4"	4-0	5.5	3.5	0.8	0.0	1.0	42.9%	22.2%	2.3	100.0%	42.7%
10	AJ Gladieux	G	Fr	6'2"	4-0	4.5	1.5	0.8	0.8	0.5	100.0%	—	0.0	50.0%	16.3%
6	Anthony Gause	G	So	6'3"	1-0	5.0	2.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	50.0%	—	0.0	—	19.9%
13	Kaleb Lofton	G	Jr	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 2025-26

Charleston So

Against the spread

Season

14-15

Home

6-5

Road

7-9

Last 10

4-6

avg cover −0.8

Covered 3 straightCovered 1 of 5 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 5 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

19-10

Home

8-3

Road

9-7

Last 10

7-3

avg vs total +8.1

Over 4 straightOver in 3 of 5 as a favoriteOver in 4 of 5 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 6	WinthropAdjEM #116	N	L 81–86	+5.5	W+0.5	163.5	O167	104.8	111.2	77.3
Feb 28	UNC AshevilleAdjEM #226	A	W 92–75	+4.0	W+21.0	149.5	O167	129.9	105.9	70.8
Feb 26	WinthropAdjEM #116	H	W 86–84	+8.0	W+10.0	164.0	O170	107.4	104.9	80.1
Feb 21	LongwoodAdjEM #248	H	L 96–107 2OT	−2.5	L−13.5	154.0	O203	112.9	125.8	85.0
Feb 17	Gardner-WebbAdjEM #363	H	W 75–66	−17.5	L−8.5	160.5	U141	100.9	88.8	74.4
Feb 14	RadfordAdjEM #245	A	L 80–90	+4.5	L−5.5	162.0	O170	103.8	116.7	77.1
Feb 12	PresbyterianAdjEM #252	H	W 84–67	−1.5	W+15.5	146.5	O151	124.5	99.3	67.5
Feb 7	SC UpstateAdjEM #284	A	L 94–100 OT	−1.0	L−7.0	151.5	O194	122.1	129.9	77.0
Feb 4	High PointAdjEM #50	A	L 55–80	+14.0	L−11.0	162.5	U135	78.1	113.6	70.4
Jan 29	RadfordAdjEM #245	H	L 75–84	−1.0	L−10.0	162.5	U159	95.7	107.2	78.4

Wake Forest

Against the spread

Season

16-18-1

Home

8-11-1

Road

4-5

Last 10

5-4-1

avg cover −0.7

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

Over / under

Season

20-15

Home

14-6

Road

3-6

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total +5.3

Over 2 straightOver in 4 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 1 of 4 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 22	Illinois StAdjEM #80	H	L 75–78	−8.0	L−11.0	152.5	O153	108.0	112.3	69.5
Mar 18	NavyAdjEM #104	H	W 82–72	−10.0	P0.0	147.5	O154	124.1	109.0	66.1
Mar 11	ClemsonAdjEM #35	N	L 62–71	+5.5	L−3.5	142.0	U133	103.9	119.0	59.6
Mar 10	Virginia TechAdjEM #61	N	W 95–89 OT	−1.0	W+5.0	151.5	O184	126.6	118.6	75.0
Mar 7	CaliforniaAdjEM #79	H	W 80–73	−6.0	W+1.0	154.0	U153	109.6	100.1	73.0
Mar 3	#13VirginiaAdjEM #15	A	L 70–75	+14.0	W+9.0	149.5	U145	102.9	110.3	68.0
Feb 28	SyracuseAdjEM #85	H	W 88–83	−4.0	W+1.0	152.0	O171	135.2	127.5	65.1
Feb 25	Boston CollegeAdjEM #187	A	L 67–68	−4.0	L−5.0	144.5	U135	105.3	106.9	63.6
Feb 21	Virginia TechAdjEM #61	A	L 63–82	+4.0	L−15.0	148.5	U145	104.0	135.3	60.6
Feb 18	ClemsonAdjEM #35	H	W 85–77	+4.0	W+12.0	140.0	O162	127.6	115.6	66.6

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

Charleston SoWake Forest

Efficiency

106.9

113.1

109.1

106.7

71.1

69.0

—

Shooting

54.1%

52.7%

54.6%

53.9%

35.6%

34.1%

64.8%

77.6%

30.5%

35.2%

Ball control & glass

18.5%

15.5%

12.8%

17.7%

29.4%

30.1%

30.3%

33.0%

10.6%

8.9%

10.0%

8.3%

Style

49.5%

43.6%

40.6%

39.9%

11.0%

11.1%

54.9%

53.5%

39.5%

32.7%

Roster

3.20

2.74

6'5.1"

6'5.3"

—

75.9%

Offseason

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

Charleston So

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted Charleston So'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.)

Wake Forest

Returning minutes: 75.9%Returning production: 74.4%

Lost

Tre'Von Spillers 29.1 mpg, 11.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Cooper Schwieger 19.7 mpg, 4.9 ppg · transferred to Florida St

Added

Dimitrije Kovacevic no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 76% 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.