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.

Conference gameConvocation Center (OH), Athens, OH

Toledo

Efficiency #115

2025-26: 19-15 · 13-8 conf

Ohio

Efficiency #233

2025-26: 15-17 · 9-10 conf

Wed, Dec 2 · TBD

78.3

win 50%

Projected

78.2

win 50%

No line posted yet.

Model: TOL −0.1 · total 156.5 · 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: Ohio 69.4, Toledo 68.7 → 69.7 possessions

+3.0

Ohio offense vs Toledo defense

+0.6

Toledo offense vs Ohio defense

+4.7

Projected total

156.5

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Ohio offense vs Toledo defense

+0.6

Toledo offense vs Ohio defense

−4.7

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

+4.0

Toledo by 0.1

0.1

Toledo side ◂▸ Ohio 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 Ohio.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 69.7, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Ohio is the faster team (70.4, #79 of 365) and Toledo the slower (69.5, #114). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

69.7

per team, 40 min

Projected total

156.5

model

Projected team totals

78.3 / 78.2

Toledo / Ohio

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

68.7#151

Toledo

69.4#93

Ohio

How this game plays

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

AdvantageToledo

Where Toledo scores: shooting

Toledo shoots an effective 54.5% (#50); Ohio allows 53.0% (#269). Expect about 54.0%, 2.8 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.9 points per 100 possessions.

ClashToledo

Style match: 3-point volume

Toledo rarely shoots threes (32.5% of its shots); Ohio runs teams off the line (33.6% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 30.1% — both habits push the same way.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Ohio, Toledo, Ohio'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 Toledo at about 30.1% of its shots from three, Ohio about 38.7%.

TurnoversToledo

Toledo protects the ball

Projected turnover rate of 15.2% is worth roughly +2.0 points per 100 possessions for Toledo's offense.

AdvantageOhio

Where Ohio scores: shooting

Ohio shoots an effective 50.9% (#197); Toledo allows 54.3% (#308). Expect about 52.6%, 1.4 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +1.9 points per 100 possessions.

Toledo has the ball

OffenseOhio allowsvs D1 avg

54.5% #50

53.0% #269

+3.9 pt/100

14.7% #51

16.1% #217

+2.0 pt/100

29.5% #220

32.8% #289

+0.3 pt/100

30.5% #298

38.2% #266

-0.0 pt/100

75.4% #70

—

+0.3 pt/100

Toledo net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +6.5 pts/100

Ohio has the ball

OffenseToledo allowsvs D1 avg

50.9% #197

54.3% #308

+1.9 pt/100

15.5% #101

17.9% #103

+0.1 pt/100

28.4% #248

33.7% #313

+0.1 pt/100

36.9% #132

26.6% #16

-0.5 pt/100

71.0% #237

—

-0.1 pt/100

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

Shot diet

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

Toledooffense vsOhiodefense

Share of shots by zone

Toledo shoots

40.0

9.7

17.9

32.4

Ohio allows

43.8

6.6

16.8

32.8

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	57.3%#220	58.6%#169	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	52.0%#6	39.8%#189	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	46.6%#5	38.8%#192	38.0%
Three	37.0%#29	36.8%#340	33.7%

Ohiooffense vsToledodefense

Share of shots by zone

Ohio shoots

38.7

6.0

18.2

37.0

Toledo allows

42.6

6.8

11.0

39.6

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	61.2%#87	61.9%#299	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	43.9%#83	53.7%#363	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	44.6%#19	35.7%#98	38.0%
Three	30.1%#341	34.4%#215	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

Toledo

+2.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#99 of 365

Off reb %

29.5%

#220

Def reb %

66.3%

#313

Turnover %

14.7%

#51

Forced TO %

17.9%

#103

FT rate

30.5%

#298

FT allowed

26.6%

#16

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.3

Defensive rebounding−1.0

Ball security+1.4

Forcing turnovers+0.8

Foul shots drawn−1.2

Foul shots allowed+2.2

Ohio

−1.1extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#236 of 365

Off reb %

28.4%

#248

Def reb %

67.2%

#289

Turnover %

15.5%

#101

Forced TO %

16.1%

#217

FT rate

36.9%

#132

FT allowed

38.2%

#266

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.6

Defensive rebounding−0.7

Ball security+0.9

Forcing turnovers−0.4

Foul shots drawn+0.5

Foul shots allowed−0.8

Toledo has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.0 (#99 of 365) to Ohio’s −1.1 (#236).

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

Toledo2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Toledo'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
3	Sonny Wilson	G	Jr	6'1"	34-34	36.2	17.0	3.7	4.6	1.6	53.7%	37.8%	3.3	69.4%	26.5%
2	Leroy Blyden Jr.	G	Fr	6'1"	34-32	33.4	16.4	4.0	4.5	1.9	55.4%	40.7%	5.6	84.6%	26.9%
7	Sean Craig	F	Sr	6'7"	34-32	31.6	11.6	7.3	1.5	1.1	55.2%	35.6%	3.1	75.0%	20.0%
25	Austin Parks	C	Jr	6'10"	34-34	25.2	10.7	5.6	1.9	1.8	62.4%	27.3%	0.3	71.3%	22.8%
4	Kyler Vanderjagt	G	Sr	6'4"	34-21	22.1	8.4	1.7	1.1	1.2	54.7%	38.2%	3.0	78.8%	21.7%
32	Jaylan Ouwinga	F	So	6'9"	34-2	18.6	6.3	3.4	0.6	0.9	53.0%	30.8%	1.1	63.6%	20.4%
5	Mynor Strong	G	So	6'3"	33-15	17.7	5.2	1.8	0.8	0.6	49.3%	34.9%	1.9	89.3%	18.3%
11	Will James Jr.	G	Fr	6'4"	34-0	9.4	3.1	1.7	0.8	0.6	54.3%	29.4%	0.5	88.2%	19.7%
21	London Praytor	F	Fr	7'0"	15-0	4.9	2.4	1.7	0.3	0.3	48.4%	23.5%	1.1	100.0%	28.9%
22	Tyler Ode	G	So	6'5"	12-0	3.8	0.8	0.3	0.2	0.0	45.5%	25.0%	0.7	—	13.8%
10	Chris Riddle	F	So	6'5"	3-0	13.0	4.3	2.0	1.7	1.7	65.0%	20.0%	1.7	—	21.7%
0	Toby Nwokolo	F	Fr	6'6"	6-0	2.7	1.0	0.2	0.2	0.0	50.0%	0.0%	0.2	0.0%	22.0%

Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Ohio2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Ohio'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
13	Jackson Paveletzke	G	Sr	6'2"	31-31	36.7	17.3	3.0	5.3	2.3	51.1%	31.6%	3.2	80.5%	26.4%
10	Aidan Hadaway	F	Sr	6'8"	32-32	31.8	14.4	7.4	2.1	1.9	54.3%	30.1%	4.6	69.7%	26.3%
0	Ajay Sheldon	G	Sr	6'1"	32-30	30.8	7.5	2.4	1.9	1.2	50.9%	37.1%	5.6	70.0%	15.3%
1	Javan Simmons	F	Jr	6'7"	31-31	27.1	15.1	5.7	1.6	1.7	54.6%	20.0%	1.0	68.5%	30.4%
4	JJ Kelly	G	Fr	6'6"	31-26	26.6	8.6	3.8	0.6	0.9	58.0%	32.9%	2.4	77.3%	17.2%
22	Jalen Breath	F	Sr	6'8"	28-1	13.4	3.7	3.0	0.4	0.8	52.9%	0.0%	0.0	41.7%	18.8%
3	Dior Conners	G	Sr	6'3"	31-3	11.5	4.2	1.2	0.7	0.6	42.2%	27.5%	2.9	78.8%	24.4%
6	Elijah Elliott	G	So	6'3"	13-5	21.5	4.1	3.5	2.0	1.2	34.2%	22.7%	1.7	63.6%	16.7%
17	Kiir Kuany	F	Fr	6'9"	31-1	8.9	3.5	1.4	0.2	0.3	57.2%	24.1%	0.9	73.7%	20.5%
21	Jesse Burris	G	Fr	6'5"	23-0	10.4	3.5	1.3	0.2	0.5	45.0%	28.6%	2.1	90.0%	23.1%
5	Ayden Evans	F	So	6'10"	11-0	8.3	2.3	1.1	0.3	0.3	47.7%	16.7%	0.5	66.7%	17.5%
24	Jordan Fisher	F	Fr	6'5"	5-0	4.4	3.8	0.4	0.2	0.2	53.6%	20.0%	1.0	66.7%	46.5%
11	Carter Reese	G	Jr	6'3"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
15	Chase Boals	F	Fr	6'5"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
8	Zay Mosley	F	Fr	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.

Toledo2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Toledo'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
3	Sonny Wilson	G	Jr	6'1"	34-34	36.2	17.0	3.7	4.6	1.6	53.7%	37.8%	3.3	69.4%	26.5%
2	Leroy Blyden Jr.	G	Fr	6'1"	34-32	33.4	16.4	4.0	4.5	1.9	55.4%	40.7%	5.6	84.6%	26.9%
7	Sean Craig	F	Sr	6'7"	34-32	31.6	11.6	7.3	1.5	1.1	55.2%	35.6%	3.1	75.0%	20.0%
25	Austin Parks	C	Jr	6'10"	34-34	25.2	10.7	5.6	1.9	1.8	62.4%	27.3%	0.3	71.3%	22.8%
4	Kyler Vanderjagt	G	Sr	6'4"	34-21	22.1	8.4	1.7	1.1	1.2	54.7%	38.2%	3.0	78.8%	21.7%
32	Jaylan Ouwinga	F	So	6'9"	34-2	18.6	6.3	3.4	0.6	0.9	53.0%	30.8%	1.1	63.6%	20.4%
5	Mynor Strong	G	So	6'3"	33-15	17.7	5.2	1.8	0.8	0.6	49.3%	34.9%	1.9	89.3%	18.3%
11	Will James Jr.	G	Fr	6'4"	34-0	9.4	3.1	1.7	0.8	0.6	54.3%	29.4%	0.5	88.2%	19.7%
21	London Praytor	F	Fr	7'0"	15-0	4.9	2.4	1.7	0.3	0.3	48.4%	23.5%	1.1	100.0%	28.9%
22	Tyler Ode	G	So	6'5"	12-0	3.8	0.8	0.3	0.2	0.0	45.5%	25.0%	0.7	—	13.8%
10	Chris Riddle	F	So	6'5"	3-0	13.0	4.3	2.0	1.7	1.7	65.0%	20.0%	1.7	—	21.7%
0	Toby Nwokolo	F	Fr	6'6"	6-0	2.7	1.0	0.2	0.2	0.0	50.0%	0.0%	0.2	0.0%	22.0%

Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

Toledo

Against the spread

Season

19-13

Home

6-7

Road

10-4

Last 10

7-3

avg cover +5.4

Covered 2 straightCovered 4 of 6 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 4 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

13-18-1

Home

6-7

Road

6-7-1

Last 10

4-5-1

avg vs total +1.0

Under 2 straightOver in 4 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 0 of 4 as an underdog, 1 push

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 14	AkronAdjEM #48	N	L 76–79	+8.0	W+5.0	157.5	U155	111.4	115.8	68.2
Mar 13	UMassAdjEM #184	N	W 77–67	−3.0	W+7.0	158.0	U144	109.5	95.3	70.3
Mar 12	Bowling GreenAdjEM #114	N	W 77–76	−1.5	L−0.5	152.0	O153	113.1	111.6	68.1
Mar 6	BuffaloAdjEM #186	H	W 99–78	−5.5	W+15.5	156.5	O177	151.8	119.6	65.2
Mar 3	#19Miami OHAdjEM #66	A	L 72–74	+8.0	W+6.0	162.5	U146	104.7	107.6	68.8
Feb 28	OhioAdjEM #233	A	W 79–67	+2.5	W+14.5	159.0	U146	119.4	101.2	66.2
Feb 24	N IllinoisAdjEM #341	H	W 79–69	−12.5	L−2.5	150.0	U148	119.5	104.3	66.1
Feb 21	E MichiganAdjEM #247	H	W 94–75	−8.5	W+10.5	147.0	O169	131.9	105.2	71.3
Feb 14	Bowling GreenAdjEM #114	A	L 70–80	+4.0	L−6.0	150.0	P150	106.7	122.0	65.6
Feb 11	W MichiganAdjEM #276	A	W 90–79	−6.5	W+4.5	154.5	O169	131.0	115.0	68.7

Ohio

Against the spread

Season

12-18

Home

7-7

Road

4-8

Last 10

5-5

avg cover −2.0

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 5 as a favoriteCovered 2 of 5 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

15-15

Home

7-7

Road

5-7

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total +5.8

Over 3 straightOver in 1 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 12	Kent StateAdjEM #157	N	L 75–86	+3.5	L−7.5	160.5	O161	105.7	121.1	71.0
Mar 6	#19Miami OHAdjEM #66	H	L 108–110 OT	+3.5	W+1.5	160.0	O218	129.8	132.3	83.2
Mar 3	UMassAdjEM #184	A	L 82–94	+1.5	L−10.5	156.5	O176	106.9	122.6	76.7
Feb 28	ToledoAdjEM #115	H	L 67–79	−2.5	L−14.5	159.0	U146	101.2	119.4	66.2
Feb 21	N IllinoisAdjEM #341	A	W 74–66	−5.5	W+2.5	150.0	U140	114.6	102.2	64.6
Feb 17	Ball StateAdjEM #295	H	W 69–57	−9.5	W+2.5	144.5	U126	115.4	95.3	59.8
Feb 13	#23Miami OHAdjEM #66	A	L 74–90	+7.5	L−8.5	164.5	U164	102.9	125.2	71.9
Feb 7	Old DominionAdjEM #242	A	L 72–78	−3.5	L−9.5	156.0	U150	111.0	120.3	64.8
Feb 3	W MichiganAdjEM #276	H	W 91–71	−10.5	W+9.5	156.0	O162	131.6	102.7	69.2
Jan 31	BuffaloAdjEM #186	A	W 95–83	+2.5	W+14.5	156.5	O178	132.7	115.9	71.6

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

ToledoOhio

Efficiency

112.5

108.0

109.8

111.1

68.7

69.4

—

Shooting

54.5%

50.9%

54.0%

54.5%

37.0%

30.1%

75.4%

71.0%

30.5%

36.9%

Ball control & glass

14.7%

15.5%

17.9%

16.1%

29.5%

28.4%

33.7%

32.8%

9.0%

8.5%

7.5%

Style

32.5%

38.1%

47.8%

45.2%

16.8%

9.2%

53.1%

46.6%

23.9%

23.8%

Roster

2.62

3.12

6'4.7"

6'4.9"

—

Offseason

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

Toledo

Returning minutes: 99.4%Returning production: 99.5%

ESPN hasn't posted Toledo's roster for this season yet — no movement to show.

Returns 99% 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.)

Ohio

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted Ohio'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

Date	Season	Result
Sat, Feb 28	2025-26	Toledo 79 – 67 Ohio
Tue, Jan 13	2025-26	Ohio 85 – 101 Toledo

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.