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-conferenceKaplan Arena, Williamsburg, VA
Bowling Green
Efficiency #114
2025-26: 18-14 · 9-10 conf
@
William & Mary
Efficiency #127
2025-26: 20-12 · 11-9 conf
Tue, Nov 17 · TBD
75.5
win 37%
Projected
79.4
win 63%
No line posted yet.
Model: W&M −3.9 · total 154.8 · 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: William & Mary 71.8, Bowling Green 68.9 → 72.4 possessions
+8.9
William & Mary offense vs Bowling Green defense
−1.3
Bowling Green offense vs William & Mary defense
−1.0
Projected total
154.8
Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
William & Mary offense vs Bowling Green defense
−1.3
Bowling Green offense vs William & Mary defense
+1.0
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+4.2
William & Mary by 3.9
3.9
Bowling Green side ◂▸ William & Mary 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 William & Mary.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 72.4, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, William & Mary is the faster team (73.6, #9 of 365) and Bowling Green the slower (70.2, #86). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
72.4
per team, 40 min
Projected total
154.8
model
Projected team totals
75.5 / 79.4
Bowling Green / William & Mary
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
68.9#128
Bowling Green
71.8#6
William & Mary
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetPace
Track meet
William & Mary averages 73.6 possessions per 40, Bowling Green 70.2. 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 73 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
AdvantageWilliam & Mary
Where William & Mary struggles: the offensive glass
William & Mary rebounds 26.0% of its own misses (#324); Bowling Green lets opponents grab 26.9% of their own misses (#31). Expect about 25.6%, 4.8 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.9 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageBowling Green
Where Bowling Green struggles: ball control
Bowling Green turns it over on 16.5% of possessions (#166); William & Mary forces turnovers on 19.0% of opponent possessions (#48). Expect about 18.1%, 1.3 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -1.6 points per 100 possessions.
DefenseBowling Green
Bowling Green's ball-hawking
Bowling Green ranks #31 nationally in steal rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 11.1% of William & Mary's possessions to end in a steal against this defense.
ClashBowling Green
Style clash: 3-point volume
Bowling Green rarely shoots threes (34.2% of its shots); William & Mary lets opponents take 45.5% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 39.1% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.80 vs 0.64).
Bowling Green has the ball
OffenseWilliam & Mary allowsvs D1 avg
51.8% #153
51.9% #205
+0.9 pt/100
16.5% #166
19.0% #48
-1.6 pt/100
28.7% #244
31.5% #229
-0.4 pt/100
37.0% #129
35.5% #195
+0.2 pt/100
72.3% #196
—
-0.0 pt/100
Bowling Green net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -1.0 pts/100
William & Mary has the ball
OffenseBowling Green allowsvs D1 avg
54.3% #58
51.0% #163
+2.3 pt/100
16.5% #169
18.4% #80
-1.1 pt/100
26.0% #324
26.9% #31
-2.9 pt/100
44.0% #9
37.2% #243
+0.7 pt/100
74.9% #87
—
+0.2 pt/100
William & Mary net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -0.8 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersBowling Greenoffense vsWilliam & Marydefense
Share of shots by zone
Bowling Green shoots
49.9
8.9
8.1
33.1
William & Mary allows
38.6
4.2
11.3
45.8
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 57.4%#214 | 59.9%#222 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 33.8%#306 | 34.2%#48 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 35.5%#274 | 40.2%#249 | 38.0% |
| Three | 34.4%#148 | 33.1%#126 | 33.7% |
William & Maryoffense vsBowling Greendefense
Share of shots by zone
William & Mary shoots
43.8
4.6
8.6
43.0
Bowling Green allows
36.2
10.8
11.8
41.2
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 64.0%#37 | 55.8%#81 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 32.0%#332 | 46.3%#323 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 39.7%#120 | 40.2%#251 | 38.0% |
| Three | 33.0%#233 | 33.5%#161 | 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 numbersBowling Green
+2.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#98 of 365
Off reb %
28.7%
#244
Def reb %
73.1%
#31
Turnover %
16.5%
#166
Forced TO %
18.4%
#80
FT rate
37.0%
#129
FT allowed
37.2%
#243
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.6
Defensive rebounding+1.2
Ball security+0.2
Forcing turnovers+1.2
Foul shots drawn+0.5
Foul shots allowed−0.5
William & Mary
+2.3extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#83 of 365
Off reb %
26.0%
#324
Def reb %
68.5%
#229
Turnover %
16.5%
#169
Forced TO %
19.0%
#48
FT rate
44.0%
#9
FT allowed
35.5%
#195
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.4
Defensive rebounding−0.3
Ball security+0.2
Forcing turnovers+1.6
Foul shots drawn+2.3
Foul shots allowed−0.1
William & Mary has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.3 (#83 of 365) to Bowling Green’s +2.0 (#98).
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
Bowling Green2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | Jayden Johnsonat SC State | G | Jr | 6'1" | 32-29 | 27.4 | 13.4 | 3.0 | 3.5 | 2.6 | 48.8% | 37.0% | 3.1 | 72.6% | 31.5% | |
| 8 | Juan Cranford Jr.at E Kentucky | G | Jr | 6'4" | 32-29 | 25.9 | 12.1 | 2.5 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 53.3% | 36.3% | 7.0 | 79.6% | 27.2% | |
| 4 | Josiah Shackelford | G | Jr | 6'5" | 32-14 | 22.8 | 11.3 | 3.5 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 52.0% | 35.3% | 3.6 | 74.7% | 27.2% | |
| 3 | Makhi Leach | G | So | 6'2" | 25-0 | 8.8 | 3.2 | 1.1 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 47.5% | 11.1% | 0.7 | 75.0% | 21.9% | |
| 34 | Aiden Goins | F | Sr | 6'9" | 25-0 | 8.5 | 4.5 | 1.4 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 48.3% | 25.0% | 0.8 | 87.9% | 29.6% | |
| 22 | Christ Essandokoat South Carolina | F | Sr | 7'1" | 21-4 | 7.5 | 2.0 | 1.6 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 38.6% | 37.5% | 0.8 | 50.0% | 23.1% | |
| 0 | Tristan Beckfordat South Florida | G | So | 6'7" | 19-1 | 7.9 | 2.9 | 1.9 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 52.7% | 23.1% | 0.7 | 72.7% | 19.2% | |
| 15 | Camden Karel | F | So | 6'9" | 19-0 | 5.9 | 2.1 | 1.3 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 64.6% | 50.0% | 0.1 | 50.0% | 18.0% | |
| 13 | Preston Squire | F | Jr | 6'11" | 4-0 | 5.0 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 50.0% | 0.0% | 0.5 | — | 10.0% | |
| 5 | Christian Dedivanaj | G | So | 6'3" | 5-0 | 2.4 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 100.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 4.0% | |
| 2 | KJ Torbert | G | Fr | 6'3" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 35 | Leek Ateny | F | Fr | 6'11" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Talan Staley | G | Fr | 6'3" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Trey Simmons | G | Jr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 7 | Zach Howell | G | Sr | 6'5" | 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.
Transfers in: Tristan Beckford (from South Florida), Juan Cranford Jr. (from E Kentucky), Christ Essandoko (from South Carolina), Jayden Johnson (from SC State)
William & Mary2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16 | Tunde Vahlberg Fasasi | F | Jr | 6'8" | 32-31 | 26.8 | 11.9 | 4.1 | 2.5 | 1.4 | 55.0% | 35.0% | 4.5 | 78.7% | 23.4% | |
| 2 | Chase Lowe | G | Sr | 6'5" | 32-32 | 23.4 | 9.2 | 5.8 | 3.8 | 1.7 | 58.0% | 11.1% | 0.3 | 72.8% | 21.0% | |
| 0 | Reese Miller | G | Jr | 6'4" | 30-0 | 24.5 | 12.1 | 2.5 | 2.4 | 1.4 | 52.9% | 32.8% | 4.3 | 73.4% | 27.1% | |
| 11 | Kyle Pulliam | G | Sr | 6'4" | 30-29 | 24.4 | 10.4 | 3.4 | 1.9 | 1.0 | 51.7% | 30.1% | 3.1 | 82.0% | 21.9% | |
| 23 | Jo'el Emanuel | F | Sr | 6'6" | 31-4 | 22.1 | 8.5 | 3.0 | 1.6 | 1.3 | 58.2% | 33.3% | 1.4 | 69.6% | 20.0% | |
| 15 | Ryan Jackson Jr. | G | So | 6'6" | 31-0 | 18.6 | 7.0 | 3.0 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 69.4% | 52.4% | 0.7 | 67.9% | 16.8% | |
| 1 | Cade Haskins | F | Sr | 6'6" | 32-31 | 16.9 | 6.3 | 2.4 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 51.8% | 34.4% | 4.1 | 76.5% | 21.3% | |
| 8 | Jhei-R Jones | G | Sr | 6'1" | 24-0 | 17.7 | 5.4 | 2.2 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 52.2% | 33.3% | 2.0 | 82.9% | 17.8% | |
| 43 | Finn Lally | F | Sr | 6'8" | 25-1 | 10.0 | 3.9 | 1.9 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 56.5% | 38.5% | 1.0 | 66.7% | 21.1% | |
| 7 | Kyle Frazier | G | Sr | 6'2" | 16-1 | 5.6 | 1.7 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 39.1% | 22.2% | 1.1 | 69.2% | 17.2% | |
| 24 | Kaleb Spencer | F | Fr | 6'8" | 6-0 | 5.7 | 3.0 | 3.7 | 1.2 | 0.7 | 56.7% | 25.0% | 0.7 | 33.3% | 30.8% | |
| 6 | Colin Ndaw | G | So | 6'3" | 5-0 | 5.6 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 33.3% | 0.0% | 0.6 | 66.7% | 25.9% | |
| 5 | Ethan Connery | G | Jr | 6'3" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 25 | Miles Hicks | G | Sr | 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.
Bowling Green2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | Jayden Johnsonat SC State | G | Jr | 6'1" | 32-29 | 27.4 | 13.4 | 3.0 | 3.5 | 2.6 | 48.8% | 37.0% | 3.1 | 72.6% | 31.5% | |
| 8 | Juan Cranford Jr.at E Kentucky | G | Jr | 6'4" | 32-29 | 25.9 | 12.1 | 2.5 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 53.3% | 36.3% | 7.0 | 79.6% | 27.2% | |
| 4 | Josiah Shackelford | G | Jr | 6'5" | 32-14 | 22.8 | 11.3 | 3.5 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 52.0% | 35.3% | 3.6 | 74.7% | 27.2% | |
| 3 | Makhi Leach | G | So | 6'2" | 25-0 | 8.8 | 3.2 | 1.1 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 47.5% | 11.1% | 0.7 | 75.0% | 21.9% | |
| 34 | Aiden Goins | F | Sr | 6'9" | 25-0 | 8.5 | 4.5 | 1.4 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 48.3% | 25.0% | 0.8 | 87.9% | 29.6% | |
| 22 | Christ Essandokoat South Carolina | F | Sr | 7'1" | 21-4 | 7.5 | 2.0 | 1.6 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 38.6% | 37.5% | 0.8 | 50.0% | 23.1% | |
| 0 | Tristan Beckfordat South Florida | G | So | 6'7" | 19-1 | 7.9 | 2.9 | 1.9 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 52.7% | 23.1% | 0.7 | 72.7% | 19.2% | |
| 15 | Camden Karel | F | So | 6'9" | 19-0 | 5.9 | 2.1 | 1.3 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 64.6% | 50.0% | 0.1 | 50.0% | 18.0% | |
| 13 | Preston Squire | F | Jr | 6'11" | 4-0 | 5.0 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 50.0% | 0.0% | 0.5 | — | 10.0% | |
| 5 | Christian Dedivanaj | G | So | 6'3" | 5-0 | 2.4 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 100.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 4.0% | |
| 2 | KJ Torbert | G | Fr | 6'3" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 35 | Leek Ateny | F | Fr | 6'11" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Talan Staley | G | Fr | 6'3" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Trey Simmons | G | Jr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 7 | Zach Howell | G | Sr | 6'5" | 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.
Transfers in: Tristan Beckford (from South Florida), Juan Cranford Jr. (from E Kentucky), Christ Essandoko (from South Carolina), Jayden Johnson (from SC State)
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26Bowling Green
Against the spread
Season
14-14-1
Home
5-8-1
Road
7-5
Last 10
6-4
avg cover −2.3
Covered 3 straightCovered 5 of 7 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
11-17-1
Home
5-8-1
Road
5-7
Last 10
4-5-1
avg vs total −1.9
Over 2 straightOver in 2 of 7 as a favorite, 1 push
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 12 | Toledo | N | L 76–77 | +1.5 | W+0.5 | 152.0 | O153 | 111.6 | 113.1 | 68.1 |
| Mar 6 | E Michigan | A | W 77–69 | −5.0 | W+3.0 | 143.0 | O146 | 108.2 | 96.9 | 71.2 |
| Feb 28 | UMass | H | W 81–62 | −4.0 | W+15.0 | 151.5 | U143 | 123.5 | 94.5 | 65.6 |
| Feb 24 | W Michigan | H | L 79–88 | −12.0 | L−21.0 | 149.0 | O167 | 108.3 | 120.6 | 73.0 |
| Feb 20 | #22Miami OH | A | L 77–91 | +8.0 | L−6.0 | 154.0 | O168 | 104.1 | 123.0 | 74.0 |
| Feb 17 | Kent State | H | L 71–78 | −2.5 | L−9.5 | 151.5 | U149 | 97.9 | 107.5 | 72.5 |
| Feb 14 | Toledo | H | W 80–70 | −4.0 | W+6.0 | 150.0 | P150 | 122.0 | 106.7 | 65.6 |
| Feb 11 | N Illinois | A | W 68–52 | −7.5 | W+8.5 | 145.0 | U120 | 97.6 | 74.6 | 69.7 |
| Feb 7 | Arkansas St | A | L 54–91 | +3.5 | L−33.5 | 155.0 | U145 | 71.8 | 121.0 | 75.2 |
| Feb 3 | Ball State | H | W 77–52 | −11.0 | W+14.0 | 138.0 | U129 | 123.0 | 83.1 | 62.6 |
William & Mary
Against the spread
Season
16-14
Home
6-5
Road
7-8
Last 10
3-7
avg cover −2.5
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 2 of 8 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
12-17-1
Home
5-6
Road
6-9
Last 10
3-6-1
avg vs total −0.3
Over in 2 of 8 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 8 | Hofstra | N | L 61–92 | +2.5 | L−28.5 | 153.0 | P153 | 92.8 | 140.0 | 65.7 |
| Mar 7 | Elon | N | W 72–62 | −5.5 | W+4.5 | 163.5 | U134 | 106.4 | 91.6 | 67.7 |
| Mar 3 | Hampton | H | W 94–85 | −11.5 | L−2.5 | 154.0 | O179 | 130.3 | 117.9 | 72.1 |
| Feb 28 | NC A&T | A | W 91–88 | −7.0 | L−4.0 | 163.5 | O179 | 121.0 | 117.0 | 75.2 |
| Feb 26 | Northeastern | H | W 84–77 | −11.0 | L−4.0 | 164.5 | U161 | 105.1 | 96.4 | 79.9 |
| Feb 19 | Campbell | A | L 83–84 | −2.5 | L−3.5 | 167.5 | U167 | 111.8 | 113.1 | 74.3 |
| Feb 14 | Elon | H | L 78–81 | −8.0 | L−11.0 | 165.5 | U159 | 109.6 | 113.8 | 71.2 |
| Feb 12 | Northeastern | A | W 94–67 | −5.5 | W+21.5 | 167.5 | U161 | 135.0 | 96.2 | 69.7 |
| Feb 7 | Hampton | A | L 74–77 | −5.5 | L−8.5 | 152.0 | U151 | 103.6 | 107.7 | 71.5 |
| Feb 5 | UNC Wilmington | A | W 85–78 | +4.5 | W+11.5 | 159.0 | O163 | 125.9 | 115.6 | 67.5 |
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 homeBowling GreenWilliam & Mary
Efficiency
107.8
110.1
105.1
107.7
68.9
71.8
—
—
Shooting
51.8%
54.3%
51.9%
57.9%
34.4%
33.0%
72.3%
74.9%
37.0%
44.0%
Ball control & glass
16.5%
16.5%
18.4%
19.0%
28.7%
26.0%
26.9%
31.5%
9.0%
9.9%
9.8%
9.8%
Style
34.2%
42.8%
48.7%
43.3%
19.8%
19.6%
48.5%
63.8%
28.7%
43.8%
Roster
2.96
3.49
6'4.4"
6'5.3"
20.3%
89.1%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputBowling Green
Returning minutes: 20.3%Returning production: 18.4%
Lost
- Javontae Campbell 34.1 mpg, 18.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Sam Towns 32.0 mpg, 11.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Justin Thomas 24.3 mpg, 5.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Troy Glover II 22.9 mpg, 7.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Javon Ruffin 22.8 mpg, 7.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Mayar Wol 20.0 mpg, 10.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Jayden Johnson from SC State · 27.4 mpg, 13.4 ppg last season
- Juan Cranford Jr. from E Kentucky · 25.9 mpg, 12.1 ppg last season
- Christ Essandoko from South Carolina · 4.9 mpg, 1.3 ppg last season
- Tristan Beckford from South Florida · 4.4 mpg, 1.6 ppg last season
- Zach Howell no D1 minutes last season
- Talan Staley no D1 minutes last season
Returns 20% of last season's minutes; lost 4 of its top 5. Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
William & Mary
Returning minutes: 89.1%Returning production: 88.7%
Lost
- Kilian Brockhoff 21.7 mpg, 10.7 ppg · transferred to E Michigan
Added
- Miles Hicks no D1 minutes last season
- Ethan Connery no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 89% 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).
Head-to-head
this season and last| Date | Season | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Wed, Nov 19 | 2025-26 | William & Mary 82 – 74 Bowling Green |
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.