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-conferenceBramlage Coliseum, Manhattan, KS

Montana

Efficiency #207

2025-26: 18-16 · 12-9 conf

Kansas St

Efficiency #128

2025-26: 12-20 · 3-16 conf

Mon, Nov 16 · TBD

75.6

win 27%

Projected

82.6

win 73%

No line posted yet.

Model: KSU −7.1 · total 158.2 · 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: Kansas St 71.8, Montana 69.8 → 73.3 possessions

+10.7

Kansas St offense vs Montana defense

+1.1

Montana offense vs Kansas St defense

−1.8

Projected total

158.2

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Kansas St offense vs Montana defense

+1.1

Montana offense vs Kansas St defense

+1.8

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

+4.2

Kansas St by 7.1

7.1

Montana side ◂▸ Kansas St 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 Kansas St.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 73.3, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Kansas St is the faster team (73.8, #7 of 365) and Montana the slower (71.1, #48). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

73.3

per team, 40 min

Projected total

158.2

model

Projected team totals

75.6 / 82.6

Montana / Kansas St

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

69.8#67

Montana

71.8#7

Kansas St

How this game plays

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

Pace

Track meet

Kansas St averages 73.8 possessions per 40, Montana 71.1. 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 74 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.

AdvantageMontana

Where Montana scores: shooting

Montana shoots an effective 55.8% (#23); Kansas St allows 52.5% (#239). Expect about 54.5%, 3.2 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +4.6 points per 100 possessions.

GlassMontana

Montana gets out-rebounded

Projected offensive rebound rate of 25.3% is worth roughly -3.1 points per 100 possessions against Montana's offense.

TurnoversMontana

Montana turns it over

Projected turnover rate of 18.5% is worth roughly -2.2 points per 100 possessions against Montana's offense.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Kansas St, Montana) 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 Montana at about 40.8% of its shots from three, Kansas St about 39.7%.

Montana has the ball

OffenseKansas St allowsvs D1 avg

55.8% #23

52.5% #239

+4.6 pt/100

19.6% #340

17.1% #144

-2.2 pt/100

20.7% #363

33.9% #317

-3.1 pt/100

36.8% #135

35.2% #183

+0.1 pt/100

77.3% #27

—

+0.4 pt/100

Montana net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -0.1 pts/100

Kansas St has the ball

OffenseMontana allowsvs D1 avg

53.3% #88

50.5% #129

+1.1 pt/100

17.4% #234

14.3% #326

+1.5 pt/100

29.2% #229

29.6% #143

-0.7 pt/100

26.9% #351

32.6% #120

-0.7 pt/100

71.0% #241

—

-0.1 pt/100

Kansas St 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 numbers

Montanaoffense vsKansas Stdefense

Share of shots by zone

Montana shoots

37.3

7.1

13.9

41.7

Kansas St allows

39.3

6.6

15.8

38.2

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	61.5%#83	60.6%#255	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	45.3%#60	40.8%#205	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	45.9%#8	42.0%#301	38.0%
Three	36.6%#38	33.7%#166	33.7%

Kansas Stoffense vsMontanadefense

Share of shots by zone

Kansas St shoots

38.1

7.9

13.9

40.1

Montana allows

38.3

9.0

15.3

37.4

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	62.6%#60	59.9%#221	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	36.6%#254	36.6%#103	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	31.9%#341	38.5%#175	38.0%
Three	36.4%#43	32.3%#74	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

Montana

−5.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#348 of 365

Off reb %

20.7%

#363

Def reb %

70.4%

#143

Turnover %

19.6%

#340

Forced TO %

14.3%

#326

FT rate

36.8%

#135

FT allowed

32.6%

#120

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−3.1

Defensive rebounding+0.3

Ball security−1.9

Forcing turnovers−1.6

Foul shots drawn+0.4

Foul shots allowed+0.7

Kansas St

−3.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#323 of 365

Off reb %

29.2%

#229

Def reb %

66.1%

#317

Turnover %

17.4%

#234

Forced TO %

17.1%

#144

FT rate

26.9%

#351

FT allowed

35.2%

#183

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.4

Defensive rebounding−1.1

Ball security−0.5

Forcing turnovers+0.2

Foul shots drawn−2.1

Foul shots allowed0.0

Kansas St has more extra scoring chances per game: −3.7 (#323 of 365) to Montana’s −5.2 (#348).

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

Montana2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
4	Tyler Thompson	G	Fr	6'6"	33-33	29.3	8.4	4.0	1.3	1.2	58.9%	40.1%	5.2	80.6%	15.5%
32	Te'Jon Sawyer	F	Sr	6'8"	34-33	27.9	11.4	5.4	1.1	1.7	63.6%	35.8%	2.8	69.6%	21.3%
24	Kenyon Aguino	F	Fr	6'7"	34-34	23.6	8.4	4.2	1.5	1.2	57.9%	30.3%	1.0	71.8%	19.2%
8	Tyler Isaak	G	Jr	6'4"	34-17	22.4	6.1	2.8	2.3	0.9	50.0%	31.0%	2.5	85.3%	15.6%
3	Brooklyn Hicks	G	Jr	6'3"	34-8	22.1	9.0	3.8	0.9	1.0	55.7%	36.8%	3.4	70.0%	22.4%
11	Grant Kepley	G	So	6'4"	28-10	21.4	6.2	2.7	2.8	1.9	46.7%	30.0%	1.8	68.1%	21.2%
1	Trae Taylor	F	Sr	6'9"	29-0	8.3	2.2	1.6	0.1	0.4	67.5%	—	0.0	44.0%	14.7%
10	Connor Dick	G	So	6'3"	23-0	10.4	2.7	1.8	0.3	0.6	45.2%	23.5%	0.7	77.4%	16.4%
2	Chase Henderson	G	So	6'0"	19-0	7.3	2.5	0.6	0.6	0.7	51.3%	33.3%	0.8	81.8%	22.4%
5	Amari Jedkins	F	Jr	6'7"	23-1	5.3	1.3	1.1	0.0	0.1	51.9%	33.3%	0.5	60.0%	14.4%
13	Courtney Anderson Jr.	G	So	6'5"	10-0	11.3	5.7	1.4	0.2	0.7	71.4%	46.7%	3.0	77.8%	22.5%
7	Kadyn Betts	F	Jr	6'8"	9-0	6.6	3.1	1.1	0.2	1.0	71.9%	62.5%	0.9	83.3%	26.7%
22	Luke Moxon	G	Fr	6'3"	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.

Kansas St2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Kansas St'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
4	P.J. Haggerty	G	Jr	6'4"	31-31	35.2	23.4	5.3	3.8	3.3	52.5%	35.1%	3.7	70.1%	37.3%
34	Nate Johnson	G	Sr	6'2"	32-32	32.8	12.8	4.9	4.6	2.4	55.0%	40.8%	4.9	85.0%	22.0%
10	David Castillo	G	So	6'1"	32-16	28.1	10.3	1.9	1.8	1.3	49.7%	35.2%	5.0	82.0%	21.6%
15	Taj Manning	F	Jr	6'7"	30-17	20.7	4.2	5.1	0.9	0.7	51.0%	18.5%	0.9	69.7%	12.1%
21	Khamari McGriff	F	Sr	6'9"	28-28	20.1	9.7	4.4	1.0	1.0	68.4%	20.0%	0.2	66.7%	21.5%
3	C.J. Jones	G	Sr	6'5"	31-1	17.4	3.6	1.8	1.3	0.8	37.1%	23.2%	2.2	83.3%	16.7%
1	Abdi Bashir Jr.	G	Jr	6'7"	18-18	24.5	13.2	2.2	2.3	1.1	59.7%	44.4%	8.4	68.8%	26.3%
22	Dorin Buca	C	Jr	7'2"	27-4	12.9	3.2	3.3	0.5	1.1	52.2%	18.2%	0.4	53.3%	17.7%
47	Andrej Kostic	F	Fr	6'6"	23-0	13.8	5.2	1.7	1.0	0.9	51.9%	37.5%	3.5	76.9%	22.8%
0	Elias Rapieque	F	Jr	6'9"	20-12	15.3	3.7	2.5	1.5	0.7	54.0%	40.0%	1.3	31.6%	14.8%
14	Mobi Ikegwuruka	G	Jr	6'6"	10-1	12.7	1.9	2.0	0.4	0.6	57.1%	—	0.0	50.0%	9.6%
6	Marcus Johnson	F	Sr	6'7"	14-0	6.3	2.5	1.1	0.4	0.6	48.5%	35.5%	2.2	66.7%	27.6%
23	Stephen Osei	F	So	6'10"	3-0	3.0	0.7	1.0	0.0	1.0	33.3%	—	0.0	—	34.0%
2	Exavier Wilson	G	Fr	6'1"	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.

Montana2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
4	Tyler Thompson	G	Fr	6'6"	33-33	29.3	8.4	4.0	1.3	1.2	58.9%	40.1%	5.2	80.6%	15.5%
32	Te'Jon Sawyer	F	Sr	6'8"	34-33	27.9	11.4	5.4	1.1	1.7	63.6%	35.8%	2.8	69.6%	21.3%
24	Kenyon Aguino	F	Fr	6'7"	34-34	23.6	8.4	4.2	1.5	1.2	57.9%	30.3%	1.0	71.8%	19.2%
8	Tyler Isaak	G	Jr	6'4"	34-17	22.4	6.1	2.8	2.3	0.9	50.0%	31.0%	2.5	85.3%	15.6%
3	Brooklyn Hicks	G	Jr	6'3"	34-8	22.1	9.0	3.8	0.9	1.0	55.7%	36.8%	3.4	70.0%	22.4%
11	Grant Kepley	G	So	6'4"	28-10	21.4	6.2	2.7	2.8	1.9	46.7%	30.0%	1.8	68.1%	21.2%
1	Trae Taylor	F	Sr	6'9"	29-0	8.3	2.2	1.6	0.1	0.4	67.5%	—	0.0	44.0%	14.7%
10	Connor Dick	G	So	6'3"	23-0	10.4	2.7	1.8	0.3	0.6	45.2%	23.5%	0.7	77.4%	16.4%
2	Chase Henderson	G	So	6'0"	19-0	7.3	2.5	0.6	0.6	0.7	51.3%	33.3%	0.8	81.8%	22.4%
5	Amari Jedkins	F	Jr	6'7"	23-1	5.3	1.3	1.1	0.0	0.1	51.9%	33.3%	0.5	60.0%	14.4%
13	Courtney Anderson Jr.	G	So	6'5"	10-0	11.3	5.7	1.4	0.2	0.7	71.4%	46.7%	3.0	77.8%	22.5%
7	Kadyn Betts	F	Jr	6'8"	9-0	6.6	3.1	1.1	0.2	1.0	71.9%	62.5%	0.9	83.3%	26.7%
22	Luke Moxon	G	Fr	6'3"	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

Montana

Against the spread

Season

15-14-1

Home

7-5-1

Road

6-8

Last 10

4-5-1

avg cover −3.9

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

Over / under

Season

15-15

Home

7-6

Road

6-8

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total +1.2

Under in the last gameOver in 1 of 4 as a favoriteOver in 4 of 6 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 11	IdahoAdjEM #156	N	L 66–77	+3.5	L−7.5	146.5	U143	91.6	106.8	72.1
Mar 10	Portland StAdjEM #145	N	W 75–72	+3.5	W+6.5	145.0	O147	101.9	97.8	73.6
Mar 9	N ColoradoAdjEM #146	N	W 95–89	+4.5	W+10.5	152.5	O184	127.4	119.3	74.6
Mar 2	N ColoradoAdjEM #146	A	L 57–85	+5.5	L−22.5	155.0	U142	77.8	116.0	73.3
Feb 28	Portland StAdjEM #145	H	W 74–68	+1.0	W+7.0	140.0	O142	103.4	95.0	71.5
Feb 26	Sacramento StAdjEM #280	H	W 81–73	−8.0	P0.0	161.5	U154	112.5	101.4	72.0
Feb 21	Weber StAdjEM #203	A	L 72–92	+2.5	L−17.5	152.0	O164	106.6	136.2	67.5
Feb 19	Idaho StAdjEM #253	A	L 69–73	−1.0	L−5.0	150.0	U142	101.8	107.7	67.8
Feb 14	Montana StAdjEM #130	H	L 71–82	−2.0	L−13.0	146.0	O153	107.5	124.2	66.0
Feb 7	IdahoAdjEM #156	H	W 73–68	−2.5	W+2.5	151.0	U141	101.2	94.3	72.1

Kansas St

Against the spread

Season

12-20

Home

5-13

Road

5-6

Last 10

4-6

avg cover −1.4

Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 4 of 10 as an underdogCovered 2 of 5 with a line of 10+

Over / under

Season

17-15

Home

9-9

Road

5-6

Last 10

6-4

avg vs total +5.0

Over 2 straightOver in 6 of 10 as an underdogOver in 4 of 5 with a line of 10+

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 10	BYUAdjEM #26	N	L 91–105	+11.0	L−3.0	168.5	O196	117.0	135.0	77.8
Mar 7	#14KansasAdjEM #25	A	L 85–104	+17.5	L−1.5	157.0	O189	108.9	133.2	78.0
Mar 3	West VirginiaAdjEM #58	H	W 65–63	+4.0	W+6.0	141.5	U128	97.4	94.4	66.7
Feb 28	TCUAdjEM #51	H	L 68–77	+3.0	L−6.0	159.5	U145	94.3	106.8	72.1
Feb 25	ColoradoAdjEM #91	A	L 70–79	+6.0	L−3.0	163.0	U149	87.0	98.2	80.4
Feb 21	#13Texas TechAdjEM #21	A	L 72–100	+12.5	L−15.5	158.5	O172	104.3	144.9	69.0
Feb 17	BaylorAdjEM #55	H	W 90–74	+3.5	W+19.5	159.0	O164	111.1	91.3	81.0
Feb 14	#3HoustonAdjEM #6	A	L 64–78	+22.0	W+8.0	146.0	U142	84.7	103.2	75.6
Feb 11	CincinnatiAdjEM #52	H	L 62–91	+2.5	L−26.5	147.0	O153	88.0	129.2	70.4
Feb 7	TCUAdjEM #51	A	L 82–84	+10.0	W+8.0	154.0	O166	114.8	117.6	71.4

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

MontanaKansas St

Efficiency

106.8

110.1

108.3

107.7

69.8

71.8

—

Shooting

55.8%

53.3%

56.5%

52.4%

36.6%

36.4%

77.3%

71.0%

36.8%

26.9%

Ball control & glass

19.6%

17.4%

14.3%

17.1%

20.7%

29.2%

29.6%

33.9%

11.3%

10.0%

8.7%

11.0%

Style

41.8%

40.9%

41.8%

44.5%

10.3%

18.3%

55.1%

57.7%

30.6%

29.0%

Roster

2.40

3.11

6'5.5"

6'5.2"

84.4%

—

Offseason

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

Montana

Returning minutes: 84.4%Returning production: 75.9%

Lost

Money Williams 31.2 mpg, 20.6 ppg · transferred to Boston College

Added

Luke Moxon 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 (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).

Kansas St

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted Kansas St'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.)

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.