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-conferenceUD Arena, Dayton, OH

Cincinnati

Efficiency #52

2025-26: 18-15 · 10-10 conf

Dayton

Efficiency #62

2025-26: 25-12 · 14-7 conf

Sat, Nov 14 · TBD

67.6

win 40%

Projected

70.5

win 60%

No line posted yet.

Model: DAY −2.9 · total 138.0 · 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: Dayton 67.8, Cincinnati 68.5 → 68.1 possessions

−0.6

Dayton offense vs Cincinnati defense

−5.3

Cincinnati offense vs Dayton defense

−4.3

Projected total

138.0

Axis starts at 130 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Dayton offense vs Cincinnati defense

−5.3

Cincinnati offense vs Dayton defense

+4.3

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

+3.9

Dayton by 2.9

2.9

Cincinnati side ◂▸ Dayton 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 Dayton.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 68.1, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Cincinnati is the faster team (69.2, #136 of 365) and Dayton the slower (67.6, #216). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

68.1

per team, 40 min

Projected total

138.0

model

Projected team totals

67.6 / 70.5

Cincinnati / Dayton

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

68.5#163

Cincinnati

67.8#222

Dayton

How this game plays

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

AdvantageCincinnati

Where Cincinnati struggles: ball control

Cincinnati turns it over on 17.0% of possessions (#203); Dayton forces turnovers on 21.0% of opponent possessions (#11). Expect about 19.6%, 2.8 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.4 points per 100 possessions.

AdvantageDayton

Where Dayton struggles: shooting

Dayton shoots an effective 51.6% (#168); Cincinnati allows 47.3% (#27). Expect about 49.4%, 1.8 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.6 points per 100 possessions.

GlassDayton

Dayton gets out-rebounded

Projected offensive rebound rate of 26.5% is worth roughly -2.4 points per 100 possessions against Dayton's offense.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Cincinnati'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 Cincinnati at about 43.8% of its shots from three, Dayton about 41.3%.

ClashCincinnati

Strength vs strength: live-ball turnovers

Cincinnati (#55 in live-ball turnovers) against Dayton (#23 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 10.6%. Historically Dayton's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.40 vs 0.65).

ClashCincinnati

Strength vs strength: shot-blocking exposure

Cincinnati (#15 in shot-blocking exposure) against Dayton (#49 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 10.1%. Historically Dayton's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.41 vs 0.68).

Cincinnati has the ball

OffenseDayton allowsvs D1 avg

50.5% #213

51.0% #164

-0.8 pt/100

17.0% #203

21.0% #11

-3.4 pt/100

30.6% #174

28.8% #94

-0.4 pt/100

29.4% #323

35.5% #194

-0.3 pt/100

68.1% #325

—

-0.4 pt/100

Cincinnati net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -5.3 pts/100

Dayton has the ball

OffenseCincinnati allowsvs D1 avg

51.6% #168

47.3% #27

-2.6 pt/100

16.9% #195

18.2% #89

-1.2 pt/100

26.9% #298

27.3% #45

-2.4 pt/100

46.2% #2

30.0% #58

+0.3 pt/100

75.4% #71

—

+0.3 pt/100

Dayton net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -5.7 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Cincinnatioffense vsDaytondefense

Share of shots by zone

Cincinnati shoots

28.3

7.4

21.1

43.2

Dayton allows

37.3

9.9

12.5

40.3

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	59.9%#120	57.9%#143	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	40.0%#171	34.8%#54	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	38.4%#173	37.1%#134	38.0%
Three	33.9%#175	35.4%#270	33.7%

Daytonoffense vsCincinnatidefense

Share of shots by zone

Dayton shoots

42.8

6.3

9.8

41.1

Cincinnati allows

32.5

6.5

21.1

39.8

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	59.8%#122	53.7%#35	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	27.4%#360	39.4%#170	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	33.3%#326	41.9%#298	38.0%
Three	33.9%#182	31.0%#35	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

Cincinnati

+1.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#100 of 365

Off reb %

30.6%

#174

Def reb %

72.7%

#45

Turnover %

17.0%

#203

Forced TO %

18.2%

#89

FT rate

29.4%

#323

FT allowed

30.0%

#58

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.1

Defensive rebounding+1.1

Ball security−0.1

Forcing turnovers+1.0

Foul shots drawn−1.4

Foul shots allowed+1.3

Dayton

+5.1extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#19 of 365

Off reb %

26.9%

#298

Def reb %

71.2%

#94

Turnover %

16.9%

#195

Forced TO %

21.0%

#11

FT rate

46.2%

FT allowed

35.5%

#194

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−1.1

Defensive rebounding+0.6

Ball security−0.1

Forcing turnovers+2.9

Foul shots drawn+2.9

Foul shots allowed−0.1

Dayton has more extra scoring chances per game: +5.1 (#19 of 365) to Cincinnati’s +1.9 (#100).

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

Cincinnati2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
52	Moustapha Thiam	C	So	7'2"	31-31	27.2	12.8	7.1	0.5	1.4	54.9%	28.8%	1.7	63.3%	26.9%
2	Jizzle James	G	Jr	6'3"	23-21	30.0	10.9	2.2	2.1	1.7	53.7%	44.2%	4.1	77.3%	23.1%
11	Kerr Kriisa	G	Sr	6'3"	19-12	20.9	5.8	1.3	3.0	1.3	48.1%	32.0%	5.1	75.0%	18.8%
7	Keyshuan Tillery	G	Fr	6'0"	31-0	12.4	3.8	1.2	1.8	1.2	44.4%	33.3%	1.5	70.0%	24.1%
24	Tyler McKinley	F	Fr	6'9"	25-3	12.1	1.8	2.2	0.6	0.4	51.2%	0.0%	0.1	22.2%	10.7%
65	Halvine Dzellat	C	So	6'10"	26-0	8.3	2.1	2.0	0.1	0.4	55.3%	0.0%	0.0	72.2%	15.5%
17	Jordi Rodriguez	G	Fr	6'6"	15-0	8.1	2.3	1.1	0.5	0.3	40.0%	27.6%	1.9	60.0%	20.3%
13	Grant Darbyshire	G	Sr	6'2"	7-0	1.9	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.1	0.0%	—	0.0	—	21.4%
0	Bryson Buckingham	G	Fr	6'2"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
3	Jalen Haynes	F	Sr	6'8"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
14	Lucas Atauri	G	Fr	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.

Dayton2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
0	Javon Bennett	G	Sr	5'10"	37-37	34.5	15.8	2.2	2.9	1.4	49.0%	34.7%	7.0	89.8%	27.3%
7	Keonte Jones	G	Sr	6'6"	37-37	30.2	7.7	5.3	2.2	1.4	53.9%	31.7%	1.1	63.1%	16.1%
29	Amael L'Etang	F	So	7'1"	33-31	25.5	11.9	5.9	1.6	2.1	55.7%	36.1%	2.9	76.5%	27.6%
4	Jordan Derkack	G	Sr	6'5"	32-14	24.8	9.2	4.8	2.5	1.7	40.9%	27.6%	1.8	72.2%	24.8%
10	Bryce Heard	G	So	6'6"	36-6	18.4	6.6	2.4	0.8	0.8	51.9%	36.6%	2.0	79.1%	20.5%
3	Jaiun Simon	F	So	6'6"	36-16	18.3	5.6	3.3	1.2	0.8	53.7%	40.0%	1.0	80.5%	17.7%
24	Jacob Conner	F	Sr	6'10"	36-8	17.0	3.2	2.3	1.1	0.6	50.0%	29.7%	1.8	63.0%	12.8%
1	Malcolm Thomas	F	Fr	6'8"	26-0	8.7	4.0	1.5	0.3	0.7	54.8%	33.3%	0.7	56.8%	29.2%
22	Damon Friery	F	Fr	6'9"	16-0	5.6	1.8	1.2	0.1	0.2	44.4%	35.3%	1.1	50.0%	22.5%
50	Sean Pouedet	G	Fr	6'2"	14-0	5.4	0.6	0.2	0.4	0.4	38.9%	25.0%	0.3	100.0%	12.9%
11	Evan Dickey	G	Jr	6'3"	4-0	2.0	0.5	0.3	0.0	0.0	0.0%	0.0%	0.3	100.0%	14.6%
33	Makai Grant	G	Jr	6'1"	6-0	1.2	0.5	0.0	0.2	0.0	37.5%	33.3%	0.5	—	33.9%
25	Will Maxwell	G	Jr	6'4"	4-0	1.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0%	0.0%	0.3	—	15.6%
8	Jaron McKie	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.

Cincinnati2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
52	Moustapha Thiam	C	So	7'2"	31-31	27.2	12.8	7.1	0.5	1.4	54.9%	28.8%	1.7	63.3%	26.9%
2	Jizzle James	G	Jr	6'3"	23-21	30.0	10.9	2.2	2.1	1.7	53.7%	44.2%	4.1	77.3%	23.1%
11	Kerr Kriisa	G	Sr	6'3"	19-12	20.9	5.8	1.3	3.0	1.3	48.1%	32.0%	5.1	75.0%	18.8%
7	Keyshuan Tillery	G	Fr	6'0"	31-0	12.4	3.8	1.2	1.8	1.2	44.4%	33.3%	1.5	70.0%	24.1%
24	Tyler McKinley	F	Fr	6'9"	25-3	12.1	1.8	2.2	0.6	0.4	51.2%	0.0%	0.1	22.2%	10.7%
65	Halvine Dzellat	C	So	6'10"	26-0	8.3	2.1	2.0	0.1	0.4	55.3%	0.0%	0.0	72.2%	15.5%
17	Jordi Rodriguez	G	Fr	6'6"	15-0	8.1	2.3	1.1	0.5	0.3	40.0%	27.6%	1.9	60.0%	20.3%
13	Grant Darbyshire	G	Sr	6'2"	7-0	1.9	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.1	0.0%	—	0.0	—	21.4%
0	Bryson Buckingham	G	Fr	6'2"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
3	Jalen Haynes	F	Sr	6'8"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
14	Lucas Atauri	G	Fr	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.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

Cincinnati

Against the spread

Season

14-19

Home

10-8

Road

3-7

Last 10

5-5

avg cover +7.0

Missed the spread 3 straightCovered 4 of 7 as a favorite

Over / under

Season

12-21

Home

6-12

Road

5-5

Last 10

7-3

avg vs total +2.9

Under in the last gameOver in 5 of 7 as a favorite

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 11	UCFAdjEM #70	N	L 65–66 OT	−3.5	L−4.5	149.0	U131	85.0	86.3	76.5
Mar 10	UtahAdjEM #177	N	W 73–66	−12.0	L−5.0	137.5	O139	111.3	100.6	65.6
Mar 7	TCUAdjEM #51	A	L 63–73	+2.5	L−7.5	139.5	U136	99.3	115.1	63.4
Mar 3	BYUAdjEM #26	H	W 90–68	−1.5	W+20.5	152.5	O158	125.5	94.8	71.7
Feb 28	Oklahoma StAdjEM #89	H	W 91–68	−9.5	W+13.5	152.5	O159	126.7	94.7	71.8
Feb 24	#16Texas TechAdjEM #21	A	L 68–80	+6.5	L−5.5	143.5	O148	111.8	131.5	60.8
Feb 21	#8KansasAdjEM #25	A	W 84–68	+9.0	W+25.0	139.0	O152	124.2	100.5	67.7
Feb 15	UtahAdjEM #177	H	W 69–65	−12.5	L−8.5	139.0	U134	108.2	101.9	63.8
Feb 11	Kansas StAdjEM #128	A	W 91–62	−2.5	W+26.5	147.0	O153	129.2	88.0	70.4
Feb 8	UCFAdjEM #70	H	W 92–72	−4.5	W+15.5	146.0	O164	131.3	102.8	70.0

Dayton

Against the spread

Season

17-18-2

Home

8-10

Road

6-6-1

Last 10

5-3-2

avg cover +3.0

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 2 of 6 as a favorite, 2 pushesCovered 3 of 4 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

13-24

Home

4-14

Road

6-7

Last 10

2-8

avg vs total −11.4

Under in the last gameOver in 2 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 0 of 4 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 25	Illinois StAdjEM #80	H	L 55–61	−7.0	L−13.0	140.0	U116	87.6	97.2	62.8
Mar 21	UNC WilmingtonAdjEM #86	A	W 80–61	−3.5	W+15.5	138.5	O141	125.8	95.9	63.6
Mar 18	BradleyAdjEM #117	A	W 80–66	−2.5	W+11.5	141.0	O146	133.9	110.4	59.8
Mar 15	VCUAdjEM #39	N	L 62–70	+2.5	L−5.5	138.5	U132	96.0	108.4	64.6
Mar 14	Saint LouisAdjEM #20	N	W 70–69	+5.0	W+6.0	145.5	U139	102.3	100.8	68.4
Mar 13	St BonaventureAdjEM #138	N	W 68–63	−5.0	P0.0	142.0	U131	103.3	95.7	65.8
Mar 6	VCUAdjEM #39	H	L 62–68	−1.5	L−7.5	147.0	U130	102.2	112.1	60.6
Mar 3	RichmondAdjEM #150	A	W 65–60	−5.0	P0.0	145.0	U125	105.1	97.0	61.8
Feb 27	G WashingtonAdjEM #68	A	W 68–66	+2.5	W+4.5	152.0	U134	101.7	98.7	66.9
Feb 24	#23Saint LouisAdjEM #20	H	W 77–62	+3.5	W+18.5	157.5	U139	110.9	89.3	69.4

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

CincinnatiDayton

Efficiency

108.5

109.9

99.2

102.2

68.5

67.8

—

Shooting

50.5%

51.6%

50.2%

52.1%

33.9%

68.1%

75.4%

29.4%

46.2%

Ball control & glass

17.0%

16.9%

18.2%

21.0%

30.6%

26.9%

27.3%

28.8%

8.3%

9.9%

6.8%

11.4%

Style

43.8%

41.4%

36.8%

41.6%

15.3%

14.1%

63.7%

59.1%

29.1%

27.4%

Roster

2.24

3.13

6'7"

6'5.6"

44.8%

85.2%

Offseason

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

Cincinnati

Returning minutes: 44.8%Returning production: 40.2%

Lost

Day Day Thomas 30.4 mpg, 11.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Baba Miller 29.9 mpg, 12.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Jalen Celestine 23.1 mpg, 8.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Sencire Harris 15.9 mpg, 5.4 ppg · transferred to E Michigan
Shon Abaev 11.6 mpg, 5.1 ppg · transferred to Florida St

Added

Jalen Haynes no D1 minutes last season
Bryson Buckingham no D1 minutes last season
Lucas Atauri no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 45% of last season's minutes; lost 3 of its top 5.

Dayton

Returning minutes: 85.2%Returning production: 82.2%

Lost

De'Shayne Montgomery 29.8 mpg, 13.0 ppg · transferred to Louisville

Added

Jaron McKie no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 85% 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
Tue, Nov 11	2025-26	Dayton 62 – 74 Cincinnati

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.