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-conferenceThe Thunderdome, Santa Barbara, CA

Nevada

Efficiency #71

2025-26: 24-13 · 14-9 conf

Santa Barbara

Efficiency #140

2025-26: 18-14 · 11-10 conf

Wed, Nov 11 · TBD

72.4

win 49%

Projected

72.7

win 51%

No line posted yet.

Model: UCSB −0.3 · total 145.1 · 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: Santa Barbara 66.3, Nevada 67.4 → 65.4 possessions

−6.3

Santa Barbara offense vs Nevada defense

−0.1

Nevada offense vs Santa Barbara defense

+3.4

Projected total

145.1

Axis starts at 135 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Santa Barbara offense vs Nevada defense

−0.1

Nevada offense vs Santa Barbara defense

−3.4

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

+3.8

Santa Barbara by 0.3

0.3

Nevada side ◂▸ Santa Barbara side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 145.2 against a projected 145.1. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Santa Barbara.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 65.4, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Santa Barbara is the faster team (67.1, #240 of 365) and Nevada the slower (66.8, #253). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

65.4

per team, 40 min

Projected total

145.1

model

Projected team totals

72.4 / 72.7

Nevada / Santa Barbara

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

67.4#263

Nevada

66.3#327

Santa Barbara

How this game plays

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

AdvantageSanta Barbara

Where Santa Barbara scores: shooting

Santa Barbara shoots an effective 54.7% (#47); Nevada allows 51.1% (#166). Expect about 53.2%, 1.9 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.7 points per 100 possessions.

ClashNevada

Style match: 3-point volume

Nevada rarely shoots threes (32.3% of its shots); Santa Barbara runs teams off the line (35.7% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 31.3% — both habits push the same way.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Santa Barbara) 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 Nevada at about 31.3% of its shots from three, Santa Barbara about 45.0%.

TurnoversSanta Barbara

Santa Barbara turns it over

Projected turnover rate of 18.0% is worth roughly -1.6 points per 100 possessions against Santa Barbara's offense.

Nevada has the ball

OffenseSanta Barbara allowsvs D1 avg

50.0% #234

52.6% #244

-0.1 pt/100

14.8% #55

16.8% #166

+1.3 pt/100

32.2% #119

25.5% #14

-0.7 pt/100

44.8% #6

42.4% #330

+1.1 pt/100

75.7% #61

—

+0.3 pt/100

Nevada net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +2.0 pts/100

Santa Barbara has the ball

OffenseNevada allowsvs D1 avg

54.7% #47

51.1% #166

+2.7 pt/100

18.7% #311

17.0% #150

-1.6 pt/100

31.0% #165

26.9% #33

-0.8 pt/100

36.8% #134

38.9% #282

+0.4 pt/100

77.5% #23

—

+0.5 pt/100

Santa Barbara net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +1.2 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Nevadaoffense vsSanta Barbaradefense

Share of shots by zone

Nevada shoots

39.2

6.2

22.1

32.5

Santa Barbara allows

40.4

6.2

17.5

35.8

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	53.4%#335	60.8%#261	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	37.5%#236	37.2%#120	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	39.7%#123	39.0%#203	38.0%
Three	35.8%#70	33.9%#177	33.7%

Santa Barbaraoffense vsNevadadefense

Share of shots by zone

Santa Barbara shoots

38.5

6.2

11.4

43.9

Nevada allows

38.7

5.9

12.9

42.5

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	58.9%#164	53.7%#36	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	34.4%#297	37.8%#132	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	42.9%#37	46.9%#359	38.0%
Three	37.4%#23	33.7%#168	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

Nevada

+4.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#26 of 365

Off reb %

32.2%

#119

Def reb %

73.1%

#33

Turnover %

14.8%

#55

Forced TO %

17.0%

#150

FT rate

44.8%

FT allowed

38.9%

#282

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.6

Defensive rebounding+1.2

Ball security+1.3

Forcing turnovers+0.2

Foul shots drawn+2.5

Foul shots allowed−0.9

Santa Barbara

−0.8extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#215 of 365

Off reb %

31.0%

#165

Def reb %

74.5%

#14

Turnover %

18.7%

#311

Forced TO %

16.8%

#166

FT rate

36.8%

#134

FT allowed

42.4%

#330

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.2

Defensive rebounding+1.6

Ball security−1.3

Forcing turnovers+0.1

Foul shots drawn+0.5

Foul shots allowed−1.8

Nevada has more extra scoring chances per game: +4.9 (#26 of 365) to Santa Barbara’s −0.8 (#215).

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

Nevada2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
1	Elijah Price	F	So	6'9"	37-37	30.0	12.8	8.5	1.1	1.9	46.3%	35.5%	0.8	73.3%	26.5%
12	Tayshawn Comer	G	Sr	6'1"	37-36	25.2	11.0	1.8	3.6	2.0	44.2%	35.1%	3.1	79.7%	30.7%
7	Vaughn Weems	G	Jr	6'5"	34-25	25.0	10.1	4.2	0.9	1.1	60.4%	38.2%	2.0	76.8%	21.8%
6	Kaleb Lowery	F	Sr	6'8"	36-27	18.3	4.6	3.1	1.0	0.5	56.9%	33.9%	1.7	75.8%	14.4%
0	Chuck Bailey III	G	Jr	6'4"	33-14	18.0	6.3	2.4	1.0	0.5	45.9%	39.4%	2.2	74.4%	23.3%
3	Tyler Rolison	G	Jr	6'0"	34-4	17.2	5.5	1.7	2.6	1.0	41.1%	22.0%	1.2	76.0%	23.0%
17	Peyton White	G	Fr	6'6"	36-0	13.9	4.6	1.7	0.4	0.4	48.1%	32.7%	1.4	79.2%	20.2%
21	Joel Armotrading	C	Sr	6'10"	21-10	16.9	5.2	4.0	0.5	0.9	50.7%	—	0.0	77.4%	18.3%
5	Amire Robinson	G	So	6'3"	36-0	9.4	2.7	1.1	0.4	0.2	56.0%	33.3%	1.3	70.6%	16.0%
2	Myles Walker	G	Fr	5'10"	32-0	7.7	1.3	0.6	1.4	0.4	46.3%	33.3%	0.6	100.0%	13.7%
10	Jeriah Coleman	C	Sr	7'1"	29-0	5.8	1.1	1.6	0.0	0.1	70.6%	—	0.0	50.0%	9.6%
50	Ethan Croley	F	Fr	6'9"	16-0	5.3	1.9	1.3	0.0	0.3	57.1%	0.0%	0.1	46.2%	22.5%
24	Christopher Baudreau	F	Fr	6'9"	4-0	2.0	1.0	0.5	0.0	0.0	40.0%	—	0.0	—	37.9%

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

Santa Barbara2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
3	CJ Shaw	G	Fr	6'5"	32-15	29.0	12.2	2.0	2.3	1.8	60.1%	43.2%	3.0	82.6%	22.9%
7	Colin Smith	F	Jr	6'8"	31-31	29.4	11.9	4.2	1.5	1.7	55.1%	40.5%	3.7	80.0%	23.5%
24	Zion Sensley	G	So	6'8"	32-24	25.2	10.9	7.6	0.8	1.0	53.9%	36.0%	5.1	82.4%	25.1%
34	Hosana Kitenge	F	Sr	6'8"	32-27	20.8	7.5	4.5	1.7	2.1	55.9%	25.0%	0.3	61.4%	24.9%
4	Marvin McGhee IV	G	Jr	6'7"	28-3	20.7	6.3	4.2	1.4	1.1	59.1%	38.3%	2.9	88.9%	17.2%
1	Miro Little	G	Jr	6'3"	18-18	28.7	11.9	5.4	4.6	2.1	53.6%	34.4%	3.4	82.9%	24.8%
23	Michael Simcoe	F	Fr	6'8"	30-0	9.4	2.2	1.7	0.6	0.5	50.0%	18.2%	0.4	54.2%	17.0%
12	Evans Kipruto	C	Sr	6'8"	28-5	9.0	2.6	2.0	0.2	0.7	65.9%	—	0.0	65.5%	17.8%
44	Zachiah Clark	G	Fr	6'2"	15-0	9.3	3.1	1.1	0.5	0.7	50.0%	36.8%	1.3	72.7%	22.6%
10	Jason Fontenet II	G	Jr	6'6"	5-5	26.6	6.6	5.0	1.6	2.2	37.5%	20.0%	2.0	47.4%	22.8%
00	Koat Keat Tong	F	Jr	6'10"	15-0	6.3	2.0	1.9	0.3	0.5	61.8%	100.0%	0.1	69.2%	19.5%
2	Luke Zuffelato	G	Fr	6'5"	8-0	9.1	1.3	0.4	0.4	0.6	21.9%	7.7%	1.6	50.0%	18.4%
18	Isaac Shingange	G	Jr	6'5"	4-0	5.0	0.3	0.0	1.0	0.5	0.0%	0.0%	0.3	50.0%	10.9%
21	John Simcoe	F	Fr	6'5"	4-0	3.5	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.5	—	—	0.0	—	7.9%
6	Kyle Haughy	F	Jr	6'6"	4-0	2.5	1.0	1.3	0.0	0.0	100.0%	—	0.0	0.0%	16.2%
35	Bryce Bedgood	F	Fr	6'11"	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.

Nevada2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
1	Elijah Price	F	So	6'9"	37-37	30.0	12.8	8.5	1.1	1.9	46.3%	35.5%	0.8	73.3%	26.5%
12	Tayshawn Comer	G	Sr	6'1"	37-36	25.2	11.0	1.8	3.6	2.0	44.2%	35.1%	3.1	79.7%	30.7%
7	Vaughn Weems	G	Jr	6'5"	34-25	25.0	10.1	4.2	0.9	1.1	60.4%	38.2%	2.0	76.8%	21.8%
6	Kaleb Lowery	F	Sr	6'8"	36-27	18.3	4.6	3.1	1.0	0.5	56.9%	33.9%	1.7	75.8%	14.4%
0	Chuck Bailey III	G	Jr	6'4"	33-14	18.0	6.3	2.4	1.0	0.5	45.9%	39.4%	2.2	74.4%	23.3%
3	Tyler Rolison	G	Jr	6'0"	34-4	17.2	5.5	1.7	2.6	1.0	41.1%	22.0%	1.2	76.0%	23.0%
17	Peyton White	G	Fr	6'6"	36-0	13.9	4.6	1.7	0.4	0.4	48.1%	32.7%	1.4	79.2%	20.2%
21	Joel Armotrading	C	Sr	6'10"	21-10	16.9	5.2	4.0	0.5	0.9	50.7%	—	0.0	77.4%	18.3%
5	Amire Robinson	G	So	6'3"	36-0	9.4	2.7	1.1	0.4	0.2	56.0%	33.3%	1.3	70.6%	16.0%
2	Myles Walker	G	Fr	5'10"	32-0	7.7	1.3	0.6	1.4	0.4	46.3%	33.3%	0.6	100.0%	13.7%
10	Jeriah Coleman	C	Sr	7'1"	29-0	5.8	1.1	1.6	0.0	0.1	70.6%	—	0.0	50.0%	9.6%
50	Ethan Croley	F	Fr	6'9"	16-0	5.3	1.9	1.3	0.0	0.3	57.1%	0.0%	0.1	46.2%	22.5%
24	Christopher Baudreau	F	Fr	6'9"	4-0	2.0	1.0	0.5	0.0	0.0	40.0%	—	0.0	—	37.9%

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

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

Nevada

Against the spread

Season

21-15-1

Home

12-7

Road

6-6-1

Last 10

6-4

avg cover +1.0

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

Over / under

Season

21-16

Home

10-9

Road

7-6

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total −1.2

Under 2 straightOver in 3 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 2 of 4 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 25	AuburnAdjEM #41	A	L 69–75	+8.0	W+2.0	153.0	U144	107.2	116.5	64.4
Mar 21	LibertyAdjEM #103	H	W 73–63	−7.0	W+3.0	147.5	U136	117.6	101.5	62.0
Mar 18	Murray StAdjEM #108	H	W 89–75	−9.0	W+5.0	160.0	O164	123.2	103.8	72.2
Mar 13	Utah StateAdjEM #24	N	L 66–79	+6.5	L−6.5	144.5	O145	90.3	108.1	73.1
Mar 12	Grand CanyonAdjEM #65	N	W 84–80	+3.5	W+7.5	137.5	O164	119.3	113.6	70.4
Mar 11	Air ForceAdjEM #360	N	W 80–45	−19.0	W+16.0	141.0	U125	112.3	63.2	71.2
Mar 7	Air ForceAdjEM #360	H	W 74–59	−25.5	L−10.5	145.0	U133	114.2	91.1	64.8
Mar 3	WyomingAdjEM #98	A	L 73–83	−1.5	L−11.5	144.0	O156	110.1	125.2	66.3
Feb 28	UNLVAdjEM #124	A	L 83–85 OT	−1.0	L−3.0	151.5	O168	110.0	112.7	75.4
Feb 24	New MexicoAdjEM #42	H	W 67–60	+1.0	W+8.0	150.0	U127	94.7	84.9	70.7

Santa Barbara

Against the spread

Season

11-18-1

Home

7-5-1

Road

3-10

Last 10

3-6-1

avg cover −4.0

Missed the spread 3 straightCovered 1 of 7 as a favorite, 1 push

Over / under

Season

16-14

Home

8-5

Road

6-7

Last 10

6-4

avg vs total +3.0

Over in the last gameOver in 4 of 7 as a favorite

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 11	UC DavisAdjEM #185	N	L 73–79	−4.5	L−10.5	139.5	O152	99.1	107.2	73.7
Mar 7	UC San DiegoAdjEM #121	H	L 63–64	−2.0	L−3.0	142.0	U127	100.9	102.5	62.4
Feb 28	UC IrvineAdjEM #105	A	L 60–64	+3.5	L−0.5	138.5	U124	90.8	96.9	66.1
Feb 26	UC RiversideAdjEM #288	H	W 70–59	−11.0	P0.0	145.5	U129	102.7	86.6	68.1
Feb 21	Hawai'iAdjEM #96	A	L 75–78 OT	+5.0	W+2.0	145.5	O153	101.3	105.4	74.0
Feb 19	CSU NorthridgeAdjEM #196	H	L 83–85 OT	−5.5	L−7.5	156.5	O168	99.7	102.1	83.2
Feb 14	Cal PolyAdjEM #240	A	L 79–89	−4.5	L−14.5	159.0	O168	118.5	133.5	66.7
Feb 12	UC RiversideAdjEM #288	A	W 76–68	−7.0	W+1.0	145.0	U144	118.1	105.7	64.3
Feb 7	UC IrvineAdjEM #105	H	W 84–79	+1.0	W+6.0	138.5	O163	118.3	111.2	71.0
Feb 5	UC DavisAdjEM #185	A	L 75–85	−3.5	L−13.5	148.0	O160	116.0	131.5	64.7

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

NevadaSanta Barbara

Efficiency

112.3

111.5

105.3

109.8

67.4

66.3

—

Shooting

50.0%

54.7%

48.2%

53.6%

35.8%

37.4%

75.7%

77.5%

44.8%

36.8%

Ball control & glass

14.8%

18.7%

17.0%

16.8%

32.2%

31.0%

26.9%

25.5%

8.7%

10.7%

9.5%

9.9%

Style

32.3%

44.1%

39.9%

38.4%

15.7%

11.1%

57.6%

54.6%

34.5%

30.9%

Roster

2.84

2.49

6'5.1"

6'6.7"

85.8%

83.5%

Offseason

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

Nevada

Returning minutes: 85.8%Returning production: 81.9%

Lost

Corey Camper Jr. 28.8 mpg, 14.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Nobody of note.

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

Returns 86% of last season's minutes; lost 1 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).

Santa Barbara

Returning minutes: 83.5%Returning production: 84.6%

Lost

Aidan Mahaney 33.6 mpg, 14.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Bryce Bedgood no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 83% of last season's minutes; lost 1 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 last

Date	Season	Result
Sat, Nov 22	2025-26	Santa Barbara 64 – 77 Nevada

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.