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-conferenceNeutral siteEnterprise Center, St. Louis, MO
Missouri
Efficiency #67
2025-26: 20-13 · 10-9 conf
vs
Saint Louis
Efficiency #20
2025-26: 29-6 · 16-4 conf
Fri, Nov 6 · TBD
75.7
win 33%
Projected
80.8
win 67%
No line posted yet.
Model: SLU −5.1 · 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 oneProjected total
Average D-I game
148.2
PaceAdjusted tempo: Saint Louis 70.7, Missouri 67.7 → 70.1 possessions
+3.9
Saint Louis offense vs Missouri defense
+4.7
Missouri offense vs Saint Louis defense
−0.3
Projected total
156.5
Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Saint Louis offense vs Missouri defense
+4.7
Missouri offense vs Saint Louis defense
+0.3
Saint Louis by 5.1
5.1
Missouri side ◂▸ Saint Louis side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the margin steps add to +5.0 against +5.1. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Saint Louis.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 70.1, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Saint Louis is the faster team (72.1, #22 of 365) and Missouri the slower (68.3, #182). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
70.1
per team, 40 min
Projected total
156.5
model
Projected team totals
75.7 / 80.8
Missouri / Saint Louis
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
67.7#235
Missouri
70.7#21
Saint Louis
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageSaint Louis
Where Saint Louis scores: shooting
Saint Louis shoots an effective 59.7% (#2); Missouri allows 51.5% (#183). Expect about 56.3%, 5.0 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +7.1 points per 100 possessions.
ClashSaint Louis
Strength vs strength: 2-point shooting
Saint Louis (#11 in 2-point shooting) against Missouri (#55 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 54.8%. Historically Saint Louis's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.61 vs 0.55).
Pace
Track meet
Saint Louis averages 72.1 possessions per 40, Missouri 68.3. 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 71 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
ClashSaint Louis
Style match: 3-point volume
Saint Louis takes 45.1% of its shots from three; Missouri lets opponents take 43.0% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 46.3% — both habits push the same way.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (Saint Louis, Saint Louis's defense, Missouri'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 Missouri at about 38.6% of its shots from three, Saint Louis about 46.3%.
ClashMissouri
Strength vs strength: eFG%
Missouri (#36 in eFG%) against Saint Louis (#3 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 50.3%. Historically Missouri's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.58 vs 0.51).
Missouri has the ball
OffenseSaint Louis allowsvs D1 avg
55.0% #36
45.2% #3
-1.3 pt/100
17.8% #261
15.9% #224
-0.1 pt/100
34.9% #48
27.2% #43
+1.0 pt/100
42.1% #28
37.1% #242
+0.6 pt/100
69.1% #298
—
-0.3 pt/100
Missouri net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -0.1 pts/100
Saint Louis has the ball
OffenseMissouri allowsvs D1 avg
59.7% #2
51.5% #183
+7.1 pt/100
17.2% #217
16.5% #186
-0.0 pt/100
30.7% #173
31.7% #238
+0.5 pt/100
33.7% #221
35.5% #193
-0.0 pt/100
74.1% #128
—
+0.1 pt/100
Saint Louis net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +7.6 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersMissourioffense vsSaint Louisdefense
Share of shots by zone
Missouri shoots
43.9
7.6
12.5
35.9
Saint Louis allows
38.4
7.1
12.5
42.0
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 65.0%#21 | 48.0%#2 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 36.8%#247 | 35.0%#57 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 34.5%#301 | 37.0%#132 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.0%#112 | 30.3%#14 | 33.7% |
Saint Louisoffense vsMissouridefense
Share of shots by zone
Saint Louis shoots
46.6
4.8
3.8
44.8
Missouri allows
32.8
7.0
17.0
43.2
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 61.9%#76 | 55.4%#72 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 43.2%#99 | 39.5%#172 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 33.8%#317 | 36.2%#116 | 38.0% |
| Three | 39.9%#2 | 36.8%#341 | 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 numbersMissouri
+2.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#97 of 365
Off reb %
34.9%
#48
Def reb %
68.3%
#238
Turnover %
17.8%
#261
Forced TO %
16.5%
#186
FT rate
42.1%
#28
FT allowed
35.5%
#193
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.5
Defensive rebounding−0.3
Ball security−0.7
Forcing turnovers−0.2
Foul shots drawn+1.8
Foul shots allowed−0.1
Saint Louis
−0.4extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#196 of 365
Off reb %
30.7%
#173
Def reb %
72.8%
#43
Turnover %
17.2%
#217
Forced TO %
15.9%
#224
FT rate
33.7%
#221
FT allowed
37.1%
#242
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.1
Defensive rebounding+1.1
Ball security−0.3
Forcing turnovers−0.5
Foul shots drawn−0.3
Foul shots allowed−0.5
Missouri has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.0 (#97 of 365) to Saint Louis’s −0.4 (#196).
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
Missouri2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | Jordan Crawfordat South Dakota | G | Sr | 6'2" | 32-32 | 31.2 | 14.4 | 2.9 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 51.7% | 36.8% | 6.5 | 74.5% | 26.1% | |
| 0 | Cord Stansberryat W Carolina | G | Sr | 6'4" | 30-29 | 30.0 | 14.1 | 4.0 | 2.1 | 1.4 | 43.6% | 29.6% | 6.3 | 80.3% | 30.2% | |
| 4 | Kennard Davis Jr.at BYU | G | Sr | 6'6" | 32-32 | 29.5 | 8.5 | 2.7 | 1.3 | 0.7 | 50.6% | 32.1% | 5.2 | 75.0% | 16.8% | |
| 15 | Bryson Tillerat Kansas | F | So | 6'11" | 35-31 | 25.9 | 7.9 | 6.1 | 1.0 | 1.8 | 48.0% | 26.9% | 1.5 | 69.4% | 21.3% | |
| 1 | Jamier Jonesat Providence | G | So | 6'6" | 31-19 | 25.7 | 11.9 | 4.5 | 1.4 | 1.7 | 59.5% | 38.7% | 1.0 | 66.4% | 24.7% | |
| 23 | Jaylen Careyat Tennessee | F | Sr | 6'8" | 37-8 | 18.4 | 7.4 | 6.0 | 1.3 | 0.9 | 48.7% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 49.1% | 27.3% | |
| 11 | Trent Pierce | G | Sr | 6'10" | 20-12 | 28.4 | 10.4 | 3.8 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 59.7% | 38.4% | 5.0 | 75.0% | 19.3% | |
| 45 | Luke Northweather | F | Sr | 6'11" | 20-2 | 12.3 | 3.0 | 2.4 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 61.1% | 41.9% | 1.6 | 57.1% | 12.6% | |
| 7 | Trent Burns | C | Jr | 7'5" | 21-0 | 8.7 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 45.6% | 7.7% | 0.6 | 50.0% | 19.0% | |
| 6 | Annor Boateng | G | Jr | 6'6" | 15-4 | 11.5 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 0.3 | 1.1 | 37.5% | 25.0% | 1.3 | 50.0% | 23.2% | |
| 24 | Nicholas Randall | F | So | 6'9" | 22-0 | 5.5 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 27.8% | 0.0% | 0.2 | 50.0% | 15.5% | |
| 2 | Aaron Rowe | G | So | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 10 | Aidan Chronister | G | Fr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 5 | Jason Crowe Jr. | G | Fr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 14 | Toni Bryant | F | Fr | 6'10" | 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: Jaylen Carey (from Tennessee), Jordan Crawford (from South Dakota), Kennard Davis Jr. (from BYU), Jamier Jones (from Providence), Cord Stansberry (from W Carolina), Bryson Tiller (from Kansas)
Saint Louis2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Quentin Jones | G | Jr | 6'5" | 35-33 | 26.5 | 9.1 | 3.9 | 3.0 | 1.9 | 52.3% | 36.2% | 2.7 | 80.0% | 20.8% | |
| 3 | Trey Green | G | So | 6'0" | 34-30 | 23.6 | 10.7 | 2.9 | 1.7 | 0.7 | 64.0% | 44.2% | 6.1 | 86.1% | 20.7% | |
| 9 | Ishan Sharma | F | So | 6'5" | 35-2 | 22.2 | 9.1 | 2.7 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 61.6% | 41.7% | 5.5 | 86.0% | 19.0% | |
| 4 | Amari McCottry | G | So | 6'6" | 34-31 | 22.9 | 10.5 | 5.3 | 2.9 | 2.4 | 55.1% | 29.0% | 1.8 | 58.2% | 28.7% | |
| 0 | Kellen Thames | G | Jr | 6'6" | 33-2 | 17.1 | 9.7 | 4.7 | 1.8 | 1.3 | 65.8% | 25.0% | 0.4 | 62.8% | 28.3% | |
| 25 | Paul Otieno | F | Sr | 6'9" | 35-4 | 15.3 | 5.3 | 3.9 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 60.0% | 66.7% | 0.1 | 77.5% | 17.2% | |
| 15 | Jax Kerr | F | Fr | 6'11" | 17-0 | 6.8 | 2.9 | 2.1 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 43.0% | 18.5% | 1.6 | 63.6% | 28.8% | |
| 24 | Cam Hutson | G | Fr | 6'5" | 18-0 | 5.4 | 1.8 | 0.9 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 39.3% | 12.5% | 0.9 | 71.4% | 26.8% | |
| 5 | Jaden Schertz | G | Jr | 5'11" | 12-1 | 3.2 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 42.9% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 50.0% | 15.5% | |
| 12 | Isaac Holmes | G | Jr | 6'4" | 13-0 | 2.8 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 41.7% | 22.2% | 0.7 | 50.0% | 18.7% | |
| 2 | Badara Diakite | F | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 33 | Dylan Warlick | F | So | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 6 | Kalu Anya | F | Sr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 14 | Luke Laczkowski | G | Fr | 6'8" | 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.
Missouri2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | Jordan Crawfordat South Dakota | G | Sr | 6'2" | 32-32 | 31.2 | 14.4 | 2.9 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 51.7% | 36.8% | 6.5 | 74.5% | 26.1% | |
| 0 | Cord Stansberryat W Carolina | G | Sr | 6'4" | 30-29 | 30.0 | 14.1 | 4.0 | 2.1 | 1.4 | 43.6% | 29.6% | 6.3 | 80.3% | 30.2% | |
| 4 | Kennard Davis Jr.at BYU | G | Sr | 6'6" | 32-32 | 29.5 | 8.5 | 2.7 | 1.3 | 0.7 | 50.6% | 32.1% | 5.2 | 75.0% | 16.8% | |
| 15 | Bryson Tillerat Kansas | F | So | 6'11" | 35-31 | 25.9 | 7.9 | 6.1 | 1.0 | 1.8 | 48.0% | 26.9% | 1.5 | 69.4% | 21.3% | |
| 1 | Jamier Jonesat Providence | G | So | 6'6" | 31-19 | 25.7 | 11.9 | 4.5 | 1.4 | 1.7 | 59.5% | 38.7% | 1.0 | 66.4% | 24.7% | |
| 23 | Jaylen Careyat Tennessee | F | Sr | 6'8" | 37-8 | 18.4 | 7.4 | 6.0 | 1.3 | 0.9 | 48.7% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 49.1% | 27.3% | |
| 11 | Trent Pierce | G | Sr | 6'10" | 20-12 | 28.4 | 10.4 | 3.8 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 59.7% | 38.4% | 5.0 | 75.0% | 19.3% | |
| 45 | Luke Northweather | F | Sr | 6'11" | 20-2 | 12.3 | 3.0 | 2.4 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 61.1% | 41.9% | 1.6 | 57.1% | 12.6% | |
| 7 | Trent Burns | C | Jr | 7'5" | 21-0 | 8.7 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 45.6% | 7.7% | 0.6 | 50.0% | 19.0% | |
| 6 | Annor Boateng | G | Jr | 6'6" | 15-4 | 11.5 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 0.3 | 1.1 | 37.5% | 25.0% | 1.3 | 50.0% | 23.2% | |
| 24 | Nicholas Randall | F | So | 6'9" | 22-0 | 5.5 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 27.8% | 0.0% | 0.2 | 50.0% | 15.5% | |
| 2 | Aaron Rowe | G | So | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 10 | Aidan Chronister | G | Fr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 5 | Jason Crowe Jr. | G | Fr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 14 | Toni Bryant | F | Fr | 6'10" | 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: Jaylen Carey (from Tennessee), Jordan Crawford (from South Dakota), Kennard Davis Jr. (from BYU), Jamier Jones (from Providence), Cord Stansberry (from W Carolina), Bryson Tiller (from Kansas)
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26Missouri
Against the spread
Season
14-19
Home
8-10
Road
6-5
Last 10
5-5
avg cover −1.2
Missed the spread 4 straightCovered 4 of 7 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
17-15-1
Home
11-7
Road
4-6-1
Last 10
7-3
avg vs total +3.7
Over 3 straightOver in 5 of 7 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20 | #7Miami | N | L 66–80 | +1.0 | L−13.0 | 145.5 | O146 | 98.3 | 119.1 | 67.2 |
| Mar 12 | Kentucky | N | L 72–78 | +3.5 | L−2.5 | 149.5 | O150 | 104.5 | 113.2 | 68.9 |
| Mar 7 | #20Arkansas | H | L 84–88 OT | −2.5 | L−6.5 | 161.5 | O172 | 109.9 | 115.1 | 76.4 |
| Mar 3 | Oklahoma | A | L 64–80 | +1.0 | L−15.0 | 154.0 | U144 | 100.7 | 125.9 | 63.5 |
| Feb 28 | Mississippi St | A | W 88–64 | −1.0 | W+23.0 | 154.5 | U152 | 127.9 | 93.0 | 68.8 |
| Feb 24 | #22Tennessee | H | W 73–69 | +4.0 | W+8.0 | 144.0 | U142 | 111.4 | 105.3 | 65.6 |
| Feb 21 | #20Arkansas | A | L 86–94 | +9.5 | W+1.5 | 159.5 | O180 | 125.7 | 137.4 | 68.4 |
| Feb 18 | #19Vanderbilt | H | W 81–80 | +3.0 | W+4.0 | 155.0 | O161 | 115.9 | 114.5 | 69.9 |
| Feb 14 | Texas | H | L 68–85 | −2.0 | L−19.0 | 150.5 | O153 | 105.4 | 131.8 | 64.5 |
| Feb 11 | Texas A&M | A | W 86–85 | +6.5 | W+7.5 | 160.0 | O171 | 131.0 | 129.5 | 65.6 |
Saint Louis
Against the spread
Season
19-14-1
Home
13-5
Road
4-6
Last 10
4-6
avg cover −6.0
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 8 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
17-16-1
Home
10-8
Road
4-5-1
Last 10
5-5
avg vs total −0.5
Over 2 straightOver in 3 of 8 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 21 | #1Michigan | N | L 72–95 | +12.0 | L−11.0 | 160.5 | O167 | 102.1 | 134.7 | 70.5 |
| Mar 19 | #8Georgia | N | W 102–77 | +1.5 | W+26.5 | 167.5 | O179 | 127.8 | 96.5 | 79.8 |
| Mar 14 | Dayton | N | L 69–70 | −5.0 | L−6.0 | 145.5 | U139 | 100.8 | 102.3 | 68.4 |
| Mar 13 | G Washington | N | W 88–81 | −6.5 | W+0.5 | 162.5 | O169 | 118.2 | 108.8 | 74.4 |
| Mar 7 | George Mason | A | L 57–86 | −7.0 | L−36.0 | 147.0 | U143 | 90.6 | 136.6 | 62.9 |
| Mar 4 | Loyola Chicago | H | W 79–65 | −21.5 | L−7.5 | 155.0 | U144 | 132.9 | 109.4 | 59.4 |
| Feb 28 | Duquesne | H | W 91–76 | −13.5 | W+1.5 | 160.0 | O167 | 138.6 | 115.7 | 65.7 |
| Feb 24 | Dayton | A | L 62–77 | −3.5 | L−18.5 | 157.5 | U139 | 89.3 | 110.9 | 69.4 |
| Feb 20 | VCU | H | W 88–75 | −7.5 | W+5.5 | 164.5 | U163 | 114.1 | 97.3 | 77.1 |
| Feb 17 | Rhode Island | A | L 76–81 | −9.5 | L−14.5 | 152.0 | O157 | 101.9 | 108.6 | 74.6 |
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 homeMissouriSaint Louis
Efficiency
114.0
117.2
106.5
102.5
67.7
70.7
—
—
Shooting
55.0%
59.7%
56.4%
59.5%
35.0%
39.9%
69.1%
74.1%
42.1%
33.7%
Ball control & glass
17.8%
17.2%
16.5%
15.9%
34.9%
30.7%
31.7%
27.2%
9.6%
10.1%
9.7%
11.2%
Style
36.4%
45.1%
48.3%
44.4%
14.1%
18.7%
51.2%
60.4%
32.1%
39.3%
Roster
3.39
2.52
6'6.9"
6'5"
19.4%
66.8%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputMissouri
Returning minutes: 19.4%Returning production: 13.8%
Lost
- Mark Mitchell Jr. 33.8 mpg, 18.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Anthony Robinson II 27.0 mpg, 8.9 ppg · transferred to Florida St
- Jayden Stone 23.6 mpg, 10.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- T.O. Barrett 22.8 mpg, 8.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Jacob Crews 20.7 mpg, 8.4 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Shawn Phillips Jr. 19.3 mpg, 7.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Jordan Crawford from South Dakota · 31.2 mpg, 14.4 ppg last season
- Cord Stansberry from W Carolina · 29.1 mpg, 13.7 ppg last season
- Kennard Davis Jr. from BYU · 27.0 mpg, 7.7 ppg last season
- Bryson Tiller from Kansas · 25.9 mpg, 7.9 ppg last season
- Jamier Jones from Providence · 24.2 mpg, 11.2 ppg last season
- Jaylen Carey from Tennessee · 18.4 mpg, 7.4 ppg last season
Returns 19% of last season's minutes; lost 5 of its top 5 (1 transferred). Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
Saint Louis
Returning minutes: 66.8%Returning production: 64.6%
Lost
- Robbie Avila 26.4 mpg, 12.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Dion Brown 23.7 mpg, 11.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Brady Dunlap 16.4 mpg, 6.8 ppg · transferred to Georgia
Added
- Dylan Warlick no D1 minutes last season
- Luke Laczkowski no D1 minutes last season
- Kalu Anya no D1 minutes last season
- Badara Diakite no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 67% of last season's minutes; lost 2 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 lastNo 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.