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-conferenceNutter Center, Dayton, OH

Air Force

Efficiency #360

2025-26: 3-29 · 0-21 conf

Wright St

Efficiency #119

2025-26: 23-12 · 18-5 conf

Mon, Nov 2 · TBD

64.0

win 8%

Projected

80.7

win 92%

No line posted yet.

Model: WRST −16.7 · total 144.6 · 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: Wright St 68.1, Air Force 67.6 → 67.4 possessions

−2.1

Wright St offense vs Air Force defense

+5.6

Air Force offense vs Wright St defense

−7.2

Projected total

144.6

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Wright St offense vs Air Force defense

+5.6

Air Force offense vs Wright St defense

+7.2

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

+3.9

Wright St by 16.7

16.7

Air Force side ◂▸ Wright St side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 144.5 against a projected 144.6. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Wright St.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 67.4, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Wright St is the faster team (68.9, #156 of 365) and Air Force the slower (67.4, #227). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

67.4

per team, 40 min

Projected total

144.6

model

Projected team totals

64.0 / 80.7

Air Force / Wright St

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

67.6#242

Air Force

68.1#205

Wright St

How this game plays

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

AdvantageWright St

Where Wright St scores: shooting

Wright St shoots an effective 54.3% (#56); Air Force allows 56.4% (#350). Expect about 55.7%, 4.4 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +6.2 points per 100 possessions.

AdvantageAir Force

Where Air Force struggles: the offensive glass

Air Force rebounds 21.4% of its own misses (#360); Wright St lets opponents grab 29.4% of their own misses (#129). Expect about 23.6%, 6.8 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -4.1 points per 100 possessions.

TurnoversAir Force

Air Force turns it over

Projected turnover rate of 19.6% is worth roughly -3.5 points per 100 possessions against Air Force's offense.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Wright St, Air Force, Air Force'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 Air Force at about 38.1% of its shots from three, Wright St about 34.8%.

TurnoversWright St

Wright St protects the ball

Projected turnover rate of 15.3% is worth roughly +1.8 points per 100 possessions for Wright St's offense.

ClashAir Force

Style match: paint scoring

Air Force scores 46.5% of its points in the paint; Wright St gives up 48.4% of opponents' points in the paint (D1 average 42.8%). Expect about 45.6% — both habits push the same way.

Air Force has the ball

OffenseWright St allowsvs D1 avg

48.9% #292

52.4% #238

-1.1 pt/100

21.9% #361

16.7% #176

-3.5 pt/100

21.4% #360

29.4% #129

-4.1 pt/100

35.1% #174

33.3% #137

-0.1 pt/100

64.1% #364

—

-0.7 pt/100

Air Force net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -9.6 pts/100

Wright St has the ball

OffenseAir Force allowsvs D1 avg

54.3% #56

56.4% #350

+6.2 pt/100

16.1% #147

15.1% #281

+1.8 pt/100

32.8% #91

31.3% #215

+1.3 pt/100

37.4% #120

36.6% #227

+0.3 pt/100

74.7% #92

—

+0.2 pt/100

Wright St net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +9.8 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Air Forceoffense vsWright Stdefense

Share of shots by zone

Air Force shoots

38.6

7.1

12.7

41.6

Wright St allows

42.1

8.4

15.4

34.1

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	59.3%#152	57.5%#130	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	29.5%#351	44.1%#269	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	33.9%#314	41.4%#285	38.0%
Three	30.6%#332	34.3%#202	33.7%

Wright Stoffense vsAir Forcedefense

Share of shots by zone

Wright St shoots

44.9

9.3

11.8

34.0

Air Force allows

38.1

6.5

16.8

38.6

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	61.1%#95	62.7%#319	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	41.2%#141	45.5%#309	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	36.7%#238	42.1%#309	38.0%
Three	36.4%#44	37.6%#352	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

Air Force

−8.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#363 of 365

Off reb %

21.4%

#360

Def reb %

68.7%

#215

Turnover %

21.9%

#361

Forced TO %

15.1%

#281

FT rate

35.1%

#174

FT allowed

36.6%

#227

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−2.9

Defensive rebounding−0.2

Ball security−3.5

Forcing turnovers−1.1

Foul shots drawn0.0

Foul shots allowed−0.3

Wright St

+2.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#68 of 365

Off reb %

32.8%

#91

Def reb %

70.6%

#129

Turnover %

16.1%

#147

Forced TO %

16.7%

#176

FT rate

37.4%

#120

FT allowed

33.3%

#137

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.8

Defensive rebounding+0.4

Ball security+0.4

Forcing turnovers0.0

Foul shots drawn+0.6

Foul shots allowed+0.5

Wright St has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.7 (#68 of 365) to Air Force’s −8.0 (#363).

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

Air Force2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Air Force'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	Kam Sanders	G	Fr	6'3"	32-32	29.9	12.5	4.2	3.8	2.3	45.3%	36.0%	3.6	73.0%	28.8%
24	Lucas Hobin	F	Fr	6'8"	32-25	29.0	11.4	2.0	0.6	1.3	47.5%	31.8%	6.9	83.3%	24.8%
30	Eli Robinson	F	So	6'6"	31-31	28.0	7.8	5.2	1.6	1.8	52.2%	35.9%	1.3	65.8%	19.2%
21	Ethan Greenberg	G	Fr	6'4"	32-29	26.9	6.6	2.3	1.0	1.1	49.2%	34.2%	4.8	65.2%	16.9%
51	Wesley Celichowski	C	Jr	7'0"	32-29	20.7	4.8	2.4	1.3	1.1	43.5%	16.4%	1.9	53.3%	18.2%
10	Caleb Walker	F	Jr	6'9"	24-6	21.6	10.4	5.0	0.8	2.0	66.9%	0.0%	0.0	46.4%	28.6%
2	A.J. Patterson	G	So	6'3"	29-0	14.3	2.2	1.9	1.8	1.7	42.7%	14.3%	0.2	60.7%	16.9%
32	Kolby Gilles	F	Jr	6'5"	32-5	12.8	3.2	1.7	0.6	1.6	47.0%	13.6%	0.7	57.1%	22.5%
15	Justin Hinds	G	Fr	6'5"	29-3	11.5	1.4	1.4	0.5	0.7	30.0%	16.1%	1.1	58.3%	14.4%
5	Riley Dering	F	Fr	6'9"	14-0	13.5	5.4	2.8	0.0	0.4	62.7%	66.7%	0.2	66.7%	20.0%
35	Kyle Marshall	G	So	6'4"	4-0	16.5	3.5	2.8	2.0	0.3	41.2%	0.0%	0.5	0.0%	17.2%
11	Brendan Martin	F	Fr	6'6"	12-0	5.4	1.8	0.4	0.2	0.2	52.4%	26.7%	1.3	0.0%	21.4%
0	Josh Gatete	F	Jr	6'9"	14-0	4.4	0.3	0.4	0.4	0.8	21.4%	25.0%	0.3	50.0%	18.0%
33	Sam Imade	F	Fr	6'7"	10-0	3.4	0.8	0.1	0.0	0.0	40.0%	50.0%	0.4	—	17.7%
7	Elliott Taite	G	So	6'4"	11-0	1.8	1.6	0.2	0.2	0.1	69.2%	57.1%	0.6	0.0%	42.2%
25	Chris Catchings	G	Fr	6'4"	5-0	2.0	0.0	0.4	0.8	0.2	0.0%	0.0%	0.4	—	24.2%
8	Keaton Frisch	F	Fr	6'6"	1-0	1.0	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.

Wright St2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
13	Solomon Callaghan	G	So	6'2"	33-31	28.1	10.2	1.9	1.1	0.8	56.2%	39.5%	5.4	92.6%	19.0%
3	Dominic Pangonis	G	So	6'7"	34-28	27.0	8.9	2.6	1.1	1.0	56.1%	38.5%	2.8	73.5%	18.0%
22	TJ Burch	G	So	6'1"	34-23	24.7	12.4	2.4	3.6	2.1	49.4%	34.7%	2.2	73.3%	32.4%
33	Michael Imariagbe	F	Sr	6'7"	34-31	24.1	12.0	7.1	1.8	1.8	60.1%	40.0%	0.4	68.3%	27.2%
4	Kellen Pickett	F	Fr	6'9"	35-24	22.9	8.5	5.4	1.1	1.0	59.1%	26.9%	1.5	73.0%	20.0%
20	Andrea Holden	F	So	6'6"	35-3	14.3	6.1	3.9	0.4	1.0	56.6%	0.0%	0.0	70.7%	25.0%
2	Sam Alamutu	G	Sr	6'5"	34-4	11.9	2.9	2.4	1.1	0.9	51.9%	30.0%	0.3	64.0%	17.1%
1	Bryan Etumnu	F	Sr	6'7"	17-8	11.5	3.4	2.4	0.5	0.5	44.1%	28.6%	2.1	55.6%	21.3%
5	Alex Bruskotter	G	Fr	6'8"	15-0	8.3	4.5	1.5	0.2	0.4	76.5%	60.0%	1.3	80.0%	22.5%
51	Ayden Davis	C	Fr	6'10"	3-0	8.7	5.0	1.3	0.0	0.0	92.9%	100.0%	0.3	66.7%	18.5%
15	Isaiah Williams	G	Fr	6'3"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
12	PJ Douglas	G	Fr	6'4"	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.

Air Force2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Air Force'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	Kam Sanders	G	Fr	6'3"	32-32	29.9	12.5	4.2	3.8	2.3	45.3%	36.0%	3.6	73.0%	28.8%
24	Lucas Hobin	F	Fr	6'8"	32-25	29.0	11.4	2.0	0.6	1.3	47.5%	31.8%	6.9	83.3%	24.8%
30	Eli Robinson	F	So	6'6"	31-31	28.0	7.8	5.2	1.6	1.8	52.2%	35.9%	1.3	65.8%	19.2%
21	Ethan Greenberg	G	Fr	6'4"	32-29	26.9	6.6	2.3	1.0	1.1	49.2%	34.2%	4.8	65.2%	16.9%
51	Wesley Celichowski	C	Jr	7'0"	32-29	20.7	4.8	2.4	1.3	1.1	43.5%	16.4%	1.9	53.3%	18.2%
10	Caleb Walker	F	Jr	6'9"	24-6	21.6	10.4	5.0	0.8	2.0	66.9%	0.0%	0.0	46.4%	28.6%
2	A.J. Patterson	G	So	6'3"	29-0	14.3	2.2	1.9	1.8	1.7	42.7%	14.3%	0.2	60.7%	16.9%
32	Kolby Gilles	F	Jr	6'5"	32-5	12.8	3.2	1.7	0.6	1.6	47.0%	13.6%	0.7	57.1%	22.5%
15	Justin Hinds	G	Fr	6'5"	29-3	11.5	1.4	1.4	0.5	0.7	30.0%	16.1%	1.1	58.3%	14.4%
5	Riley Dering	F	Fr	6'9"	14-0	13.5	5.4	2.8	0.0	0.4	62.7%	66.7%	0.2	66.7%	20.0%
35	Kyle Marshall	G	So	6'4"	4-0	16.5	3.5	2.8	2.0	0.3	41.2%	0.0%	0.5	0.0%	17.2%
11	Brendan Martin	F	Fr	6'6"	12-0	5.4	1.8	0.4	0.2	0.2	52.4%	26.7%	1.3	0.0%	21.4%
0	Josh Gatete	F	Jr	6'9"	14-0	4.4	0.3	0.4	0.4	0.8	21.4%	25.0%	0.3	50.0%	18.0%
33	Sam Imade	F	Fr	6'7"	10-0	3.4	0.8	0.1	0.0	0.0	40.0%	50.0%	0.4	—	17.7%
7	Elliott Taite	G	So	6'4"	11-0	1.8	1.6	0.2	0.2	0.1	69.2%	57.1%	0.6	0.0%	42.2%
25	Chris Catchings	G	Fr	6'4"	5-0	2.0	0.0	0.4	0.8	0.2	0.0%	0.0%	0.4	—	24.2%
8	Keaton Frisch	F	Fr	6'6"	1-0	1.0	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

Air Force

Against the spread

Season

10-20-2

Home

4-12-2

Road

6-6

Last 10

2-7-1

avg cover −4.0

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 2 of 10 as an underdog, 1 pushCovered 2 of 9 with a line of 10+

Over / under

Season

19-12-1

Home

13-5

Road

6-5-1

Last 10

7-3

avg vs total +3.5

Under 2 straightOver in 7 of 10 as an underdogOver in 6 of 9 with a line of 10+

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 11	NevadaAdjEM #71	N	L 45–80	+19.0	L−16.0	141.0	U125	63.2	112.3	71.2
Mar 7	NevadaAdjEM #71	A	L 59–74	+25.5	W+10.5	145.0	U133	91.1	114.2	64.8
Mar 3	Grand CanyonAdjEM #65	H	L 60–86	+19.0	L−7.0	143.0	O146	87.4	125.3	68.7
Feb 28	WyomingAdjEM #98	A	L 62–66	+21.5	W+17.5	146.5	U128	95.0	101.1	65.3
Feb 24	San José StAdjEM #282	H	L 80–86	+6.0	P0.0	145.0	O166	120.8	129.8	66.2
Feb 21	UNLVAdjEM #124	H	L 66–91	+16.5	L−8.5	153.0	O157	95.7	132.0	69.0
Feb 17	New MexicoAdjEM #42	A	L 61–98	+28.0	L−9.0	148.5	O159	86.3	138.6	70.7
Feb 14	Fresno StAdjEM #169	A	L 63–93	+15.0	L−15.0	142.0	O156	86.4	127.5	72.9
Feb 10	Colorado StAdjEM #88	H	L 74–91	+16.5	L−0.5	137.5	O165	113.4	139.4	65.3
Feb 7	San Diego StAdjEM #53	H	L 54–88	+21.5	L−12.5	140.0	O142	77.0	125.4	70.2

Wright St

Against the spread

Season

19-12-2

Home

6-7-1

Road

10-4

Last 10

6-3-1

avg cover +1.4

Covered the last gameCovered 4 of 8 as a favorite, 1 pushCovered 2 of 4 with a line of 10+, 1 push

Over / under

Season

16-17

Home

7-7

Road

7-7

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total +6.2

Over in the last gameOver in 3 of 8 as a favoriteOver in 1 of 4 with a line of 10+

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 20	#3VirginiaAdjEM #15	N	L 73–82	+18.0	W+9.0	146.5	O155	112.4	126.3	64.9
Mar 10	Detroit MercyAdjEM #224	N	W 66–63	−5.0	L−2.0	153.5	U129	96.8	92.4	68.2
Mar 9	N KentuckyAdjEM #164	N	W 103–90	−1.0	W+12.0	158.0	O193	131.3	114.7	78.5
Mar 4	Cleveland StAdjEM #330	H	W 90–61	−14.5	W+14.5	161.5	U151	130.0	88.1	69.2
Feb 28	N KentuckyAdjEM #164	A	W 92–91	+3.0	W+4.0	152.5	O183	131.4	130.0	70.0
Feb 25	Purdue FWAdjEM #258	A	W 74–70	−1.0	W+3.0	152.0	U144	104.3	98.7	70.9
Feb 22	Robert MorrisAdjEM #142	H	L 68–81	−4.0	L−17.0	146.5	O149	100.6	119.9	67.6
Feb 19	IU IndyAdjEM #315	H	W 85–73	−12.0	P0.0	160.5	U158	119.3	102.5	71.2
Feb 15	Cleveland StAdjEM #330	A	W 102–90	−7.5	W+4.5	158.5	O192	137.4	121.2	74.2
Feb 12	Detroit MercyAdjEM #224	H	L 74–77	−11.5	L−14.5	153.0	U151	111.9	116.4	66.2

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

Air ForceWright St

Efficiency

97.8

111.2

114.2

108.5

67.6

68.1

—

Shooting

48.9%

54.3%

51.1%

54.2%

30.6%

36.4%

64.1%

74.7%

35.1%

37.4%

Ball control & glass

21.9%

16.1%

15.1%

16.7%

21.4%

32.8%

31.3%

29.4%

11.8%

9.7%

11.9%

9.1%

Style

41.8%

34.2%

46.5%

48.5%

10.5%

11.2%

55.9%

46.9%

32.1%

34.2%

Roster

1.73

2.34

6'6.2"

6'5.4"

—

79.2%

Offseason

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

Air Force

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted Air Force'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.)

Wright St

Returning minutes: 79.2%Returning production: 81.8%

Lost

Michael Cooper 23.4 mpg, 11.9 ppg · transferred to California
Logan Woods 18.4 mpg, 5.3 ppg · transferred to Niagara

Added

Isaiah Williams no D1 minutes last season
PJ Douglas no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 79% 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

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.