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
Queens
Efficiency #191
2025-26: 21-14 · 16-5 conf
@
Baylor
Efficiency #55
2025-26: 17-17 · 6-13 conf
Wed, Dec 9 · TBD
76.9
win 18%
Projected
87.7
win 82%
No line posted yet.
Model: BAY −10.8 · total 164.5 · 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 one
Projected total
Average D-I game
148.2
PaceAdjusted tempo: Baylor 68.6, Queens 69.7 → 70.0 possessions
+3.7
Baylor offense vs Queens defense
+9.7
Queens offense vs Baylor defense
+2.9
Projected total
164.5
Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Baylor offense vs Queens defense
+9.7
Queens offense vs Baylor defense
−2.9
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+4.0
Baylor by 10.8
10.8
Queens side ◂▸ Baylor 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 Baylor.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes
Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 70.0, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Queens is the faster team (70.6, #68 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
70.0
per team, 40 min
Projected total
164.5
model
Projected team totals
76.9 / 87.7
Queens / Baylor
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
69.7#68
Queens
68.6#155
Baylor

How this game plays

what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meet
AdvantageQueens
Where Queens scores: shooting
Queens shoots an effective 56.4% (#15); Baylor allows 52.4% (#237). Expect about 54.8%, 3.6 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +5.1 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageBaylor
Where Baylor scores: shooting
Baylor shoots an effective 53.4% (#84); Queens allows 54.6% (#319). Expect about 54.2%, 2.9 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +4.2 points per 100 possessions.
GlassBaylor
Baylor owns the glass
Projected offensive rebound rate of 36.5% is worth roughly +3.7 points per 100 possessions for Baylor's offense.
TurnoversQueens
Queens protects the ball
Projected turnover rate of 15.0% is worth roughly +2.1 points per 100 possessions for Queens's offense.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (Queens's defense) 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 Queens at about 42.3% of its shots from three, Baylor about 39.6%.
TurnoversBaylor
Baylor protects the ball
Projected turnover rate of 15.4% is worth roughly +1.6 points per 100 possessions for Baylor's offense.
Queens has the ball
OffenseBaylor allowsvs D1 avg
56.4% #15
52.4% #237
+5.1 pt/100
14.8% #54
15.9% #226
+2.1 pt/100
30.2% #190
31.3% #219
+0.2 pt/100
35.4% #167
30.1% #61
-0.3 pt/100
74.9% #88
—
+0.2 pt/100
Queens net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +7.3 pts/100
Baylor has the ball
OffenseQueens allowsvs D1 avg
53.4% #84
54.6% #319
+4.2 pt/100
16.3% #154
15.1% #277
+1.6 pt/100
36.9% #18
33.6% #308
+3.7 pt/100
34.1% #202
38.1% #263
+0.2 pt/100
73.5% #155
—
+0.1 pt/100
Baylor net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +9.8 pts/100

Shot diet

Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbers
Queensoffense vsBaylordefense
Share of shots by zone
Queens shoots
Baylor allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim64.2%#3265.9%#35858.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)46.8%#4247.6%#33639.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)40.5%#9538.9%#19938.0%
Three35.7%#7434.8%#24033.7%
Bayloroffense vsQueensdefense
Share of shots by zone
Baylor shoots
Queens allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim62.9%#5558.9%#18658.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)46.3%#4750.5%#35739.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)43.5%#2937.8%#15338.0%
Three33.9%#17936.5%#32533.7%
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
Queens
−1.3extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#251 of 365
Off reb %
30.2%
#190
Def reb %
66.4%
#308
Turnover %
14.8%
#54
Forced TO %
15.1%
#277
FT rate
35.4%
#167
FT allowed
38.1%
#263
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.1
Defensive rebounding−0.9
Ball security+1.4
Forcing turnovers−1.1
Foul shots drawn+0.1
Foul shots allowed−0.7
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 Queens’s −1.3 (#251).

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

Queens2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Queens's 2026-27 roster yet — these are last season's players.
#PlayerPosClHtGP-GSMPGPPGRPGAPGTOVeFG%3P%3PA/gFT%UsageStatus
11Chris AshbyGSr6'2"35-3530.711.62.01.50.753.5%37.5%8.587.8%20.5%
1Nasir MannGSr6'5"35-3530.413.35.72.81.654.6%31.8%3.178.0%24.1%
24Yoav BermanGSo6'6"35-3029.212.33.93.61.748.3%29.7%4.278.7%25.2%
22Carson SchwiegerFSo6'8"34-2724.610.13.10.80.660.7%40.9%6.669.0%20.4%
6Avantae ParkerFJr6'9"35-3422.111.15.31.21.668.2%38.5%0.461.7%25.1%
0Jordan WatfordGFr6'5"35-820.811.82.63.91.961.8%37.5%0.777.8%29.0%
9Maban JabrielFSo6'9"35-219.87.73.81.00.961.6%43.2%3.277.4%19.9%
7Gus LarsonFSr6'10"35-111.83.12.10.70.755.3%18.8%0.557.4%16.8%
3Isaiah HenryGFr6'4"26-07.93.01.70.40.555.0%25.0%0.673.3%22.2%
5Kam ClarkFJr6'7"26-37.31.81.00.30.335.1%11.1%1.078.9%19.1%
4Reid CelestinGJr6'6"15-02.90.20.70.20.220.0%0.0%0.125.0%12.9%
12Tyler CriderGFr6'0"8-01.30.00.00.10.00.0%0.0%0.4—22.6%
25Jacob BrandlyGFr6'6"1-01.00.00.00.00.0——0.0—0.0%
35Colby ChristiansenGFr6'2"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
2Danzelle Bullock ColesGFr6'5"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
8Jimma JamesGJr6'6"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
23Matthew WalterGFr6'3"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
13Saif-Allah ZatariGFr6'3"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
15Seamus WilsonGFr6'0"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Tale of the tape

national rank toned left for away, right for home
QueensBaylor
Efficiency
113.5
116.4
114.4
107.6
69.7
68.6
—
—
Shooting
56.4%
53.4%
58.9%
55.2%
35.7%
33.9%
74.9%
73.5%
35.4%
34.1%
Ball control & glass
14.8%
16.3%
15.1%
15.9%
30.2%
36.9%
33.6%
31.3%
9.0%
9.7%
9.4%
8.8%
Style
46.5%
39.7%
43.6%
44.8%
13.2%
13.6%
54.9%
52.2%
32.2%
22.3%
Roster
2.73
3.01
6'6.2"
6'5.3"
—
83.1%

Offseason

roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model input
Queens
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Queens'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.