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-conferenceLawlor Events Center, Reno, NV
Utah Valley
Efficiency #75
2025-26: 25-9 · 15-5 conf
@
Nevada
Efficiency #71
2025-26: 24-13 · 14-9 conf
Sat, Nov 14 · TBD
71.4
win 36%
Projected
75.8
win 64%
No line posted yet.
Model: NEV −4.3 · total 147.2 · 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: Nevada 67.4, Utah Valley 69.1 → 68.1 possessions
−0.4
Nevada offense vs Utah Valley defense
−0.1
Utah Valley offense vs Nevada defense
−0.5
Projected total
147.2
Axis starts at 147 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Nevada offense vs Utah Valley defense
−0.1
Utah Valley offense vs Nevada defense
+0.5
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.9
Nevada by 4.3
4.3
Utah Valley side ◂▸ Nevada 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 Nevada.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 68.1, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Utah Valley is the faster team (69.4, #122 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
68.1
per team, 40 min
Projected total
147.2
model
Projected team totals
71.4 / 75.8
Utah Valley / Nevada
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
69.1#116
Utah Valley
67.4#263
Nevada
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageUtah Valley
Where Utah Valley scores: shooting
Utah Valley shoots an effective 54.9% (#38); Nevada allows 51.1% (#166). Expect about 53.3%, 2.1 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.9 points per 100 possessions.
ClashNevada
Style match: 3-point volume
Nevada rarely shoots threes (32.3% of its shots); Utah Valley runs teams off the line (33.3% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 29.8% — both habits push the same way.
DefenseUtah Valley
Utah Valley's shot-blocking
Utah Valley ranks #17 nationally in block rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 12.3% of Nevada's two-point attempts to get blocked against this defense.
TurnoversUtah Valley
Utah Valley turns it over
Projected turnover rate of 18.8% is worth roughly -2.5 points per 100 possessions against Utah Valley's offense.
AdvantageNevada
Where Nevada struggles: shooting
Nevada shoots an effective 50.0% (#234); Utah Valley allows 49.4% (#78). Expect about 49.6%, 1.7 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.4 points per 100 possessions.
ClashNevada
Strength vs strength: turnover rate
Nevada (#55 in turnover rate) against Utah Valley (#7 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 18.6%. Historically Utah Valley's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.57 vs 0.64).
Utah Valley has the ball
OffenseNevada allowsvs D1 avg
54.9% #38
51.1% #166
+2.9 pt/100
20.1% #350
17.0% #150
-2.5 pt/100
34.8% #51
26.9% #33
+0.8 pt/100
38.2% #98
38.9% #282
+0.5 pt/100
68.6% #308
—
-0.3 pt/100
Utah Valley net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +1.4 pts/100
Nevada has the ball
OffenseUtah Valley allowsvs D1 avg
50.0% #234
49.4% #78
-2.4 pt/100
14.8% #55
21.3% #7
-2.2 pt/100
32.2% #119
31.4% #221
+1.1 pt/100
44.8% #6
39.2% #291
+0.9 pt/100
75.7% #61
—
+0.3 pt/100
Nevada net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -2.4 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersUtah Valleyoffense vsNevadadefense
Share of shots by zone
Utah Valley shoots
47.2
8.8
11.3
32.6
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 | 63.7%#43 | 53.7%#36 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 38.2%#217 | 37.8%#132 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 36.6%#247 | 46.9%#359 | 38.0% |
| Three | 34.0%#170 | 33.7%#168 | 33.7% |
Nevadaoffense vsUtah Valleydefense
Share of shots by zone
Nevada shoots
39.2
6.2
22.1
32.5
Utah Valley allows
42.9
7.3
16.6
33.2
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 53.4%#335 | 52.1%#16 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 37.5%#236 | 39.5%#171 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 39.7%#123 | 38.8%#197 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.8%#70 | 35.2%#260 | 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 numbersUtah Valley
+1.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#107 of 365
Off reb %
34.8%
#51
Def reb %
68.6%
#221
Turnover %
20.1%
#350
Forced TO %
21.3%
#7
FT rate
38.2%
#98
FT allowed
39.2%
#291
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.4
Defensive rebounding−0.2
Ball security−2.3
Forcing turnovers+3.2
Foul shots drawn+0.8
Foul shots allowed−1.0
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%
#6
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
Nevada has more extra scoring chances per game: +4.9 (#26 of 365) to Utah Valley’s +1.9 (#107).
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
Utah Valley2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | Trevan Leonhardt | G | Jr | 6'4" | 34-34 | 34.5 | 11.9 | 5.4 | 6.0 | 2.7 | 57.7% | 36.8% | 3.4 | 75.6% | 20.9% | |
| 2 | Jackson Holcombe | G | So | 6'7" | 34-34 | 30.1 | 16.0 | 7.0 | 3.6 | 2.4 | 53.8% | 16.2% | 1.1 | 68.2% | 31.0% | |
| 9 | Braden Housley | G | So | 6'4" | 28-19 | 26.1 | 5.3 | 2.7 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 47.4% | 29.4% | 1.8 | 57.8% | 15.5% | |
| 1 | Isaac Davis | F | So | 6'8" | 34-34 | 19.1 | 10.9 | 3.7 | 1.3 | 1.8 | 63.8% | 33.3% | 0.6 | 67.0% | 30.8% | |
| 7 | Noah Taitz | G | Sr | 6'4" | 30-15 | 19.6 | 5.0 | 1.7 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 47.7% | 34.5% | 2.9 | 71.4% | 16.8% | |
| 8 | Hayden Welling | F | Sr | 6'9" | 34-1 | 16.5 | 7.5 | 3.0 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 45.8% | 20.3% | 2.0 | 68.5% | 30.3% | |
| 4 | Sherman Weatherspoon IV | G | Jr | 6'3" | 32-5 | 16.1 | 5.0 | 1.9 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 55.4% | 38.0% | 3.1 | 72.7% | 18.2% | |
| 23 | Isaac Hawkins | F | Jr | 6'10" | 34-0 | 14.0 | 7.2 | 3.7 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 67.2% | 27.3% | 0.3 | 76.1% | 24.2% | |
| 11 | Tyler Weaver | F | Fr | 6'7" | 20-0 | 8.2 | 3.0 | 1.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 49.0% | 34.5% | 1.4 | 75.0% | 23.9% | |
| 12 | Tyler Medaris | F | Fr | 6'7" | 15-0 | 5.4 | 1.7 | 2.1 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 52.9% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 57.1% | 18.2% | |
| 99 | Joul Karram | C | So | 6'11" | 9-0 | 4.7 | 1.9 | 1.8 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 61.5% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 50.0% | 20.5% | |
| 5 | AJ Riggs | G | So | 6'3" | 11-0 | 3.4 | 1.4 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 57.7% | 33.3% | 0.8 | — | 21.8% | |
| 24 | AJ Dixon | G | Jr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 3 | Jaxson Roberts | G | Fr | 6'2" | 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 | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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.
Utah Valley2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | Trevan Leonhardt | G | Jr | 6'4" | 34-34 | 34.5 | 11.9 | 5.4 | 6.0 | 2.7 | 57.7% | 36.8% | 3.4 | 75.6% | 20.9% | |
| 2 | Jackson Holcombe | G | So | 6'7" | 34-34 | 30.1 | 16.0 | 7.0 | 3.6 | 2.4 | 53.8% | 16.2% | 1.1 | 68.2% | 31.0% | |
| 9 | Braden Housley | G | So | 6'4" | 28-19 | 26.1 | 5.3 | 2.7 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 47.4% | 29.4% | 1.8 | 57.8% | 15.5% | |
| 1 | Isaac Davis | F | So | 6'8" | 34-34 | 19.1 | 10.9 | 3.7 | 1.3 | 1.8 | 63.8% | 33.3% | 0.6 | 67.0% | 30.8% | |
| 7 | Noah Taitz | G | Sr | 6'4" | 30-15 | 19.6 | 5.0 | 1.7 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 47.7% | 34.5% | 2.9 | 71.4% | 16.8% | |
| 8 | Hayden Welling | F | Sr | 6'9" | 34-1 | 16.5 | 7.5 | 3.0 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 45.8% | 20.3% | 2.0 | 68.5% | 30.3% | |
| 4 | Sherman Weatherspoon IV | G | Jr | 6'3" | 32-5 | 16.1 | 5.0 | 1.9 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 55.4% | 38.0% | 3.1 | 72.7% | 18.2% | |
| 23 | Isaac Hawkins | F | Jr | 6'10" | 34-0 | 14.0 | 7.2 | 3.7 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 67.2% | 27.3% | 0.3 | 76.1% | 24.2% | |
| 11 | Tyler Weaver | F | Fr | 6'7" | 20-0 | 8.2 | 3.0 | 1.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 49.0% | 34.5% | 1.4 | 75.0% | 23.9% | |
| 12 | Tyler Medaris | F | Fr | 6'7" | 15-0 | 5.4 | 1.7 | 2.1 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 52.9% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 57.1% | 18.2% | |
| 99 | Joul Karram | C | So | 6'11" | 9-0 | 4.7 | 1.9 | 1.8 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 61.5% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 50.0% | 20.5% | |
| 5 | AJ Riggs | G | So | 6'3" | 11-0 | 3.4 | 1.4 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 57.7% | 33.3% | 0.8 | — | 21.8% | |
| 24 | AJ Dixon | G | Jr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 3 | Jaxson Roberts | G | Fr | 6'2" | 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 2025-26Utah Valley
Against the spread
Season
13-18
Home
6-7
Road
4-9
Last 10
2-8
avg cover −4.0
Missed the spread 7 straightCovered 2 of 10 as a favoriteCovered 0 of 4 with a line of 10+
Over / under
Season
17-14
Home
9-4
Road
8-5
Last 10
6-4
avg vs total +4.2
Over in the last gameOver in 6 of 10 as a favoriteOver in 4 of 4 with a line of 10+
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 18 | G Washington | H | L 78–79 | −1.5 | L−2.5 | 153.0 | O157 | 113.1 | 114.5 | 69.0 |
| Mar 14 | CA Baptist | N | L 61–63 | −2.5 | L−4.5 | 138.5 | U124 | 92.0 | 95.0 | 66.3 |
| Mar 13 | UT Arlington | N | W 67–65 | −8.0 | L−6.0 | 136.0 | U132 | 107.4 | 104.2 | 62.4 |
| Mar 7 | Utah Tech | A | W 104–101 2OT | −9.0 | L−6.0 | 148.0 | O205 | 122.1 | 118.6 | 85.2 |
| Mar 5 | Southern Utah | A | W 92–88 | −10.0 | L−6.0 | 150.0 | O180 | 129.1 | 123.5 | 71.3 |
| Feb 28 | Abilene Chrstn | H | W 74–67 | −15.0 | L−8.0 | 140.5 | O141 | 106.7 | 96.6 | 69.3 |
| Feb 26 | Tarleton St | H | W 79–72 | −17.0 | L−10.0 | 141.5 | O151 | 113.8 | 103.7 | 69.4 |
| Feb 21 | UT Arlington | A | W 66–54 | −5.5 | W+6.5 | 137.5 | U120 | 99.0 | 81.0 | 66.6 |
| Feb 19 | CA Baptist | H | W 65–46 | −8.5 | W+10.5 | 143.0 | U111 | 99.3 | 70.3 | 65.4 |
| Feb 12 | Utah Tech | A | L 77–81 | −10.0 | L−14.0 | 149.0 | O158 | 113.9 | 119.8 | 67.6 |
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 | Auburn | A | L 69–75 | +8.0 | W+2.0 | 153.0 | U144 | 107.2 | 116.5 | 64.4 |
| Mar 21 | Liberty | H | W 73–63 | −7.0 | W+3.0 | 147.5 | U136 | 117.6 | 101.5 | 62.0 |
| Mar 18 | Murray St | H | W 89–75 | −9.0 | W+5.0 | 160.0 | O164 | 123.2 | 103.8 | 72.2 |
| Mar 13 | Utah State | N | L 66–79 | +6.5 | L−6.5 | 144.5 | O145 | 90.3 | 108.1 | 73.1 |
| Mar 12 | Grand Canyon | N | W 84–80 | +3.5 | W+7.5 | 137.5 | O164 | 119.3 | 113.6 | 70.4 |
| Mar 11 | Air Force | N | W 80–45 | −19.0 | W+16.0 | 141.0 | U125 | 112.3 | 63.2 | 71.2 |
| Mar 7 | Air Force | H | W 74–59 | −25.5 | L−10.5 | 145.0 | U133 | 114.2 | 91.1 | 64.8 |
| Mar 3 | Wyoming | A | L 73–83 | −1.5 | L−11.5 | 144.0 | O156 | 110.1 | 125.2 | 66.3 |
| Feb 28 | UNLV | A | L 83–85 OT | −1.0 | L−3.0 | 151.5 | O168 | 110.0 | 112.7 | 75.4 |
| Feb 24 | New Mexico | H | W 67–60 | +1.0 | W+8.0 | 150.0 | U127 | 94.7 | 84.9 | 70.7 |
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 homeUtah ValleyNevada
Efficiency
110.9
112.3
104.5
105.3
69.1
67.4
—
—
Shooting
54.9%
50.0%
56.9%
48.2%
34.0%
35.8%
68.6%
75.7%
38.2%
44.8%
Ball control & glass
20.1%
14.8%
21.3%
17.0%
34.8%
32.2%
31.4%
26.9%
12.1%
8.7%
8.1%
9.5%
Style
32.9%
32.3%
53.2%
39.9%
15.2%
15.7%
62.1%
57.6%
31.0%
34.5%
Roster
2.70
2.84
6'6"
6'5.1"
87.9%
85.8%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputUtah Valley
Returning minutes: 87.9%Returning production: 88.1%
Lost
- Tyler Hendricks 24.5 mpg, 9.7 ppg · transferred to Oklahoma
Added
- AJ Dixon no D1 minutes last season
- Jaxson Roberts no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 88% 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).
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).
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.