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-conferenceFoster Pavilion, Waco, TX

AR-Pine Bluff

Efficiency #323

2025-26: 13-19 · 10-9 conf

Baylor

Efficiency #55

2025-26: 17-17 · 6-13 conf

Fri, Nov 6 · 5:00 PM ET

70.5

win 7%

Projected

87.3

win 93%

No line posted yet.

Model: BAY −16.8 · total 157.8 · 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 one

Projected total

Average D-I game

148.2

PaceAdjusted tempo: Baylor 68.6, AR-Pine Bluff 69.7 → 69.9 possessions

+3.5

Baylor offense vs AR-Pine Bluff defense

+9.4

AR-Pine Bluff offense vs Baylor defense

−3.4

Projected total

157.8

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Baylor offense vs AR-Pine Bluff defense

+9.4

AR-Pine Bluff offense vs Baylor defense

+3.4

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

+4.0

Baylor by 16.8

16.8

AR-Pine Bluff side ◂▸ Baylor side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 157.7 against a projected 157.8. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Baylor.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 69.9, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, AR-Pine Bluff is the faster team (71.2, #43 of 365) and Baylor the slower (69.3, #126). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

69.9

per team, 40 min

Projected total

157.8

model

Projected team totals

70.5 / 87.3

AR-Pine Bluff / Baylor

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

69.7#73

AR-Pine Bluff

68.6#155

Baylor

How this game plays

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

AdvantageBaylor

Where Baylor scores: the offensive glass

Baylor rebounds 36.9% of its own misses (#18); AR-Pine Bluff lets opponents grab 34.2% of their own misses (#321). Expect about 36.8%, 6.4 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.9 points per 100 possessions.

Pace

Track meet

Baylor averages 69.3 possessions per 40, AR-Pine Bluff 71.2. 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 71 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.

AR-Pine Bluff has the ball

OffenseBaylor allowsvs D1 avg

50.0% #233

52.4% #237

-0.2 pt/100

18.7% #309

15.9% #226

-0.6 pt/100

27.9% #271

31.3% #219

-0.8 pt/100

38.4% #91

30.1% #61

-0.2 pt/100

75.5% #65

—

+0.3 pt/100

AR-Pine Bluff net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -1.5 pts/100

Baylor has the ball

OffenseAR-Pine Bluff allowsvs D1 avg

53.4% #84

52.6% #249

+2.8 pt/100

16.3% #154

16.5% #188

+0.6 pt/100

36.9% #18

34.2% #321

+3.9 pt/100

34.1% #202

43.6% #342

+0.6 pt/100

73.5% #155

—

+0.1 pt/100

Baylor net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +7.9 pts/100

Shot diet

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

AR-Pine Bluffoffense vsBaylordefense

Share of shots by zone

AR-Pine Bluff shoots

38.1

4.9

20.4

36.6

Baylor allows

26.3

16.6

22.4

34.7

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	59.3%#153	65.9%#358	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	39.7%#180	47.6%#336	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	34.5%#299	38.9%#199	38.0%
Three	33.6%#190	34.8%#240	33.7%

Bayloroffense vsAR-Pine Bluffdefense

Share of shots by zone

Baylor shoots

28.4

13.1

18.9

39.6

AR-Pine Bluff allows

41.3

4.5

17.0

37.2

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	62.9%#55	61.3%#276	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	46.3%#47	52.9%#360	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	43.5%#29	35.5%#89	38.0%
Three	33.9%#179	33.2%#136	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

AR-Pine Bluff

−4.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#345 of 365

Off reb %

27.9%

#271

Def reb %

65.8%

#321

Turnover %

18.7%

#309

Forced TO %

16.5%

#188

FT rate

38.4%

#91

FT allowed

43.6%

#342

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.8

Defensive rebounding−1.2

Ball security−1.3

Forcing turnovers−0.2

Foul shots drawn+0.9

Foul shots allowed−2.1

Baylor

+2.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#65 of 365

Off reb %

36.9%

#18

Def reb %

68.7%

#219

Turnover %

16.3%

#154

Forced TO %

15.9%

#226

FT rate

34.1%

#202

FT allowed

30.1%

#61

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+2.1

Defensive rebounding−0.2

Ball security+0.4

Forcing turnovers−0.6

Foul shots drawn−0.2

Foul shots allowed+1.3

Baylor has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.7 (#65 of 365) to AR-Pine Bluff’s −4.7 (#345).

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

AR-Pine Bluff2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted AR-Pine Bluff'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
11	Quion Williams	G	Sr	6'5"	32-32	36.1	17.7	8.2	5.4	3.3	49.8%	32.2%	2.8	73.6%	30.0%
20	Trevon Payton	G	Jr	6'5"	32-32	33.8	10.0	3.6	2.9	1.8	67.1%	47.1%	4.4	76.3%	15.0%
1	Alex Mirhosseini	G	Sr	5'10"	31-31	31.9	11.7	2.4	2.7	1.6	47.3%	33.2%	7.7	71.2%	23.3%
9	Milhan Charles	G	Fr	6'7"	30-30	30.1	10.5	4.0	1.4	1.8	55.7%	23.1%	0.9	72.4%	19.6%
4	Jaquan Scott	F	Sr	6'8"	31-30	28.5	16.0	7.0	1.1	2.4	50.0%	31.1%	1.5	85.1%	32.1%
22	Ramel Lloyd Jr.	G	Jr	6'6"	20-0	21.1	6.8	2.3	1.0	1.1	45.7%	26.5%	2.5	64.6%	21.6%
10	Ahmad Johnson	G	Sr	6'4"	29-2	12.2	3.7	0.8	0.8	0.6	47.5%	31.5%	2.5	73.3%	19.0%
24	Kyle Brown	F	Sr	6'9"	23-1	7.7	1.4	2.0	0.5	0.3	34.2%	28.6%	0.3	70.0%	14.9%
2	Jai'chaunn Hayes	G	Fr	6'7"	10-1	17.4	6.1	1.3	0.6	0.5	47.2%	23.1%	2.6	84.6%	18.3%
15	Dennis Asoro	F	Sr	6'8"	30-1	5.3	1.1	1.1	0.2	0.5	59.3%	—	0.0	28.6%	15.5%
3	Anthony Sellars	G	Jr	6'7"	14-0	7.4	2.9	1.1	0.2	0.5	60.7%	33.3%	0.9	100.0%	19.1%
0	Trejon Ware	G	Sr	5'9"	1-0	18.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	2.0	0.0%	—	0.0	—	9.2%
33	Travis Pourciau	F	Sr	6'10"	2-0	1.5	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%
23	Harrison Pickett	G	Fr	6'2"	1-0	1.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%
8	Jahmari Hamilton-Brown	G	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.

Baylor2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
24	Tounde Yessoufou	G	Fr	6'5"	34-34	32.7	17.8	5.9	1.6	1.9	52.0%	29.3%	5.3	74.6%	31.8%
5	Obi Agbim	G	Sr	6'3"	33-33	33.3	10.7	2.7	3.1	1.1	49.7%	35.6%	6.6	85.4%	19.7%
10	Isaac Williams IV	G	So	6'1"	34-14	25.0	10.4	2.2	3.3	1.6	61.5%	47.1%	1.5	68.4%	22.5%
44	Caden Powell	C	Sr	6'9"	34-20	24.4	6.9	6.3	1.3	1.1	67.2%	0.0%	0.1	66.7%	14.6%
12	Michael Rataj	G	Sr	6'8"	34-19	23.1	7.2	4.6	1.7	1.4	45.2%	21.8%	1.6	70.7%	21.3%
0	Dan Skillings Jr.	G	Sr	6'6"	29-16	25.5	9.4	5.7	2.0	1.2	49.6%	29.7%	2.6	71.2%	22.6%
46	James Nnaji	C	Fr	7'0"	18-0	8.2	1.4	2.1	0.2	0.4	69.2%	—	0.0	57.1%	11.2%
2	Will Kuykendall	G	So	6'2"	9-0	3.7	2.0	0.3	0.1	0.6	61.5%	44.4%	1.0	100.0%	30.1%
1	JJ White	G	Sr	6'1"	4-0	6.5	1.5	0.8	0.0	0.0	50.0%	33.3%	1.5	—	12.5%
3	Drew Perry	G	Fr	5'10"	9-0	2.7	1.1	0.0	0.0	0.2	42.9%	28.6%	0.8	66.7%	26.0%
13	James Goodis	G	Jr	6'0"	3-0	2.7	1.7	0.0	0.0	0.0	125.0%	100.0%	0.3	—	12.8%
7	Andre Iguodala II	G	Fr	6'7"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
21	Juslin Bodo Bodo	C	Jr	6'11"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
20	Maikcol Perez	F	Fr	6'8"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
15	Mayo Soyoye	C	Fr	6'10"	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.

AR-Pine Bluff2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted AR-Pine Bluff'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
11	Quion Williams	G	Sr	6'5"	32-32	36.1	17.7	8.2	5.4	3.3	49.8%	32.2%	2.8	73.6%	30.0%
20	Trevon Payton	G	Jr	6'5"	32-32	33.8	10.0	3.6	2.9	1.8	67.1%	47.1%	4.4	76.3%	15.0%
1	Alex Mirhosseini	G	Sr	5'10"	31-31	31.9	11.7	2.4	2.7	1.6	47.3%	33.2%	7.7	71.2%	23.3%
9	Milhan Charles	G	Fr	6'7"	30-30	30.1	10.5	4.0	1.4	1.8	55.7%	23.1%	0.9	72.4%	19.6%
4	Jaquan Scott	F	Sr	6'8"	31-30	28.5	16.0	7.0	1.1	2.4	50.0%	31.1%	1.5	85.1%	32.1%
22	Ramel Lloyd Jr.	G	Jr	6'6"	20-0	21.1	6.8	2.3	1.0	1.1	45.7%	26.5%	2.5	64.6%	21.6%
10	Ahmad Johnson	G	Sr	6'4"	29-2	12.2	3.7	0.8	0.8	0.6	47.5%	31.5%	2.5	73.3%	19.0%
24	Kyle Brown	F	Sr	6'9"	23-1	7.7	1.4	2.0	0.5	0.3	34.2%	28.6%	0.3	70.0%	14.9%
2	Jai'chaunn Hayes	G	Fr	6'7"	10-1	17.4	6.1	1.3	0.6	0.5	47.2%	23.1%	2.6	84.6%	18.3%
15	Dennis Asoro	F	Sr	6'8"	30-1	5.3	1.1	1.1	0.2	0.5	59.3%	—	0.0	28.6%	15.5%
3	Anthony Sellars	G	Jr	6'7"	14-0	7.4	2.9	1.1	0.2	0.5	60.7%	33.3%	0.9	100.0%	19.1%
0	Trejon Ware	G	Sr	5'9"	1-0	18.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	2.0	0.0%	—	0.0	—	9.2%
33	Travis Pourciau	F	Sr	6'10"	2-0	1.5	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%
23	Harrison Pickett	G	Fr	6'2"	1-0	1.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%
8	Jahmari Hamilton-Brown	G	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.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

AR-Pine Bluff

Against the spread

Season

13-16-1

Home

3-5-1

Road

9-11

Last 10

3-6-1

avg cover −1.3

Covered 2 straightCovered 2 of 7 as a favorite, 1 push

Over / under

Season

14-16

Home

5-4

Road

8-12

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total +0.6

Over in the last gameOver in 3 of 7 as a favorite

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 12	SouthernAdjEM #286	N	L 81–84	+5.0	W+2.0	150.5	O165	123.9	128.4	65.4
Mar 5	Alcorn StAdjEM #355	A	W 83–48	−1.0	W+34.0	144.0	U131	111.6	64.5	74.4
Mar 3	Jackson StAdjEM #353	A	L 78–81	−1.0	L−4.0	153.0	O159	112.5	116.8	69.3
Feb 28	Miss Valley StAdjEM #365	H	L 69–70	−14.0	L−15.0	147.5	U139	99.0	100.4	69.7
Feb 21	Prairie ViewAdjEM #303	H	W 84–82	−3.5	L−1.5	158.0	O166	123.7	120.8	67.9
Feb 19	Texas SouthernAdjEM #321	H	L 64–83	−1.0	L−20.0	152.5	U147	93.7	121.5	68.3
Feb 16	Alabama A&MAdjEM #312	A	L 70–82	+3.5	L−8.5	144.0	O152	110.4	129.3	63.4
Feb 14	Alabama StAdjEM #324	A	L 61–79	+3.5	L−14.5	150.0	U140	84.2	109.1	72.4
Feb 9	Jackson StAdjEM #353	H	W 84–63	−6.5	W+14.5	156.5	U147	128.1	96.1	65.5
Feb 7	Alcorn StAdjEM #355	H	W 84–77	−7.0	P0.0	145.5	O161	126.7	116.2	66.3

Baylor

Against the spread

Season

14-18-1

Home

6-9-1

Road

5-5

Last 10

4-5-1

avg cover −1.8

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

Over / under

Season

18-15

Home

11-5

Road

3-7

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total −0.1

Under 2 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 4	OklahomaAdjEM #47	N	L 69–82	−1.5	L−14.5	159.5	U151	98.5	117.1	70.0
Apr 1	MinnesotaAdjEM #94	N	W 67–48	−3.5	W+15.5	146.5	U115	112.7	80.7	59.5
Mar 10	Arizona StAdjEM #93	N	L 79–83	−5.0	L−9.0	152.5	O162	111.6	117.3	70.8
Mar 7	UtahAdjEM #177	H	W 101–75	−12.0	W+14.0	148.5	O176	159.9	118.7	63.2
Mar 4	#7HoustonAdjEM #6	A	L 64–77	+13.5	W+0.5	144.5	U141	98.2	118.2	65.2
Feb 28	UCFAdjEM #70	A	W 87–86	+1.5	W+2.5	159.0	O173	131.3	129.8	66.2
Feb 24	#2ArizonaAdjEM #3	H	L 80–87	+7.0	P0.0	155.5	O167	122.2	132.9	65.4
Feb 21	Arizona StAdjEM #93	H	W 73–68	−8.5	L−3.5	158.0	U141	111.6	104.0	65.4
Feb 17	Kansas StAdjEM #128	A	L 74–90	−3.5	L−19.5	159.0	O164	91.3	111.1	81.0
Feb 14	#24LouisvilleAdjEM #14	N	L 71–82	+7.0	L−4.0	161.5	U153	104.6	120.8	67.9

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

AR-Pine BluffBaylor

Efficiency

104.6

116.4

114.0

107.6

69.7

68.6

—

Shooting

50.0%

53.4%

49.8%

55.2%

33.6%

33.9%

75.5%

73.5%

38.4%

34.1%

Ball control & glass

18.7%

16.3%

16.5%

15.9%

27.9%

36.9%

34.2%

31.3%

10.7%

9.7%

8.7%

8.8%

Style

37.2%

39.7%

42.7%

44.8%

13.1%

13.6%

56.3%

52.2%

20.7%

22.3%

Roster

3.25

3.01

6'4.9"

6'5.3"

—

83.1%

Offseason

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

AR-Pine Bluff

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.1%

ESPN hasn't posted AR-Pine Bluff'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.)

Baylor

Returning minutes: 83.1%Returning production: 77.9%

Lost

Cameron Carr 33.7 mpg, 18.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Maikcol Perez no D1 minutes last season
Mayo Soyoye no D1 minutes last season
Andre Iguodala II no D1 minutes last season
Juslin Bodo Bodo no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 83% 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).

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.