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 siteAcrisure Arena, Palm Springs, CAAcrisure Series

Nevada

Efficiency #71

2025-26: 24-13 · 14-9 conf

San Francisco

Efficiency #148

2025-26: 17-16 · 9-11 conf

Mon, Nov 23 · 4:30 PM ET

75.1

win 63%

Projected

71.3

win 37%

No line posted yet.

Model: NEV −3.8 · total 146.4 · 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: San Francisco 67.4, Nevada 67.4 → 66.4 possessions

−4.1

San Francisco offense vs Nevada defense

−0.8

Nevada offense vs San Francisco defense

+3.0

Projected total

146.4

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

San Francisco offense vs Nevada defense

−0.8

Nevada offense vs San Francisco defense

−3.0

Nevada by 3.8

3.8

Nevada side ◂▸ San Francisco side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 146.3 against a projected 146.4. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help San Francisco.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 66.4, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Nevada is the faster team (66.8, #253 of 365) and San Francisco the slower (66.7, #256). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

66.4

per team, 40 min

Projected total

146.4

model

Projected team totals

75.1 / 71.3

Nevada / San Francisco

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

67.4#263

Nevada

67.4#261

San Francisco

How this game plays

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

AdvantageNevada

Where Nevada scores: ball control

Nevada turns it over on 14.8% of possessions (#55); San Francisco forces turnovers on 14.1% of opponent possessions (#330). Expect about 14.0%, 2.8 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.4 points per 100 possessions.

ClashNevada

Style match: 3-point volume

Nevada rarely shoots threes (32.3% of its shots); San Francisco runs teams off the line (35.8% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 31.4% — both habits push the same way.

ClashNevada

Strength vs strength: free-throw rate

Nevada (#6 in free-throw rate) against San Francisco (#51 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 36.6%. Historically San Francisco's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.50 vs 0.61).

Nevada has the ball

OffenseSan Francisco allowsvs D1 avg

50.0% #234

50.8% #143

-1.4 pt/100

14.8% #55

14.1% #330

+3.4 pt/100

32.2% #119

29.0% #105

+0.4 pt/100

44.8% #6

29.6% #51

+0.2 pt/100

75.7% #61

—

+0.3 pt/100

Nevada net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +2.8 pts/100

San Francisco has the ball

OffenseNevada allowsvs D1 avg

51.2% #184

51.1% #166

-0.1 pt/100

15.8% #125

17.0% #150

+0.5 pt/100

31.3% #148

26.9% #33

-0.6 pt/100

40.1% #59

38.9% #282

+0.6 pt/100

70.9% #242

—

-0.1 pt/100

San Francisco net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +0.2 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Nevadaoffense vsSan Franciscodefense

Share of shots by zone

Nevada shoots

39.2

6.2

22.1

32.5

San Francisco allows

37.7

8.4

18.3

35.6

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	53.4%#335	59.3%#205	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	37.5%#236	45.5%#312	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	39.7%#123	35.0%#78	38.0%
Three	35.8%#70	34.1%#187	33.7%

San Franciscooffense vsNevadadefense

Share of shots by zone

San Francisco shoots

34.3

4.9

14.3

46.5

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	57.1%#229	53.7%#36	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	41.5%#132	37.8%#132	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	35.4%#278	46.9%#359	38.0%
Three	34.6%#140	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

San Francisco

+2.5extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#78 of 365

Off reb %

31.3%

#148

Def reb %

71.0%

#105

Turnover %

15.8%

#125

Forced TO %

14.1%

#330

FT rate

40.1%

#59

FT allowed

29.6%

#51

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.3

Defensive rebounding+0.5

Ball security+0.7

Forcing turnovers−1.8

Foul shots drawn+1.3

Foul shots allowed+1.5

Nevada has more extra scoring chances per game: +4.9 (#26 of 365) to San Francisco’s +2.5 (#78).

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.

San Francisco2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
0	Ryan Beasley	G	Jr	5'11"	31-31	33.2	13.6	3.4	4.0	1.6	48.4%	32.7%	4.8	82.7%	25.3%
5	Tyrone Riley IV	G	So	6'6"	31-31	31.8	12.2	4.8	1.2	0.9	54.2%	36.8%	3.7	70.7%	22.1%
7	Vukasin Masic	G	Sr	6'5"	33-21	21.7	5.3	1.6	2.0	1.0	47.1%	29.1%	3.3	69.6%	18.0%
13	Legend Smiley	G	Fr	6'5"	33-14	21.3	8.1	1.9	0.6	0.8	59.8%	42.0%	4.0	87.5%	20.2%
35	Junjie Wang	F	Jr	6'9"	33-24	20.2	8.5	3.0	0.8	1.2	51.7%	34.2%	3.4	75.3%	25.7%
1	Mookie Cook	F	Jr	6'6"	25-5	20.8	7.6	4.2	1.5	1.7	52.4%	39.7%	2.3	71.4%	24.4%
14	Veniamin Abosi	G	So	6'6"	24-1	17.6	5.0	4.1	1.2	1.3	52.8%	40.4%	2.2	68.3%	19.4%
10	Saba Gigiberia	C	Sr	7'2"	26-0	6.3	2.2	2.7	0.6	0.5	44.6%	0.0%	0.0	34.8%	28.8%
2	Aidan Braccia	G	Jr	6'1"	15-0	6.0	0.8	0.6	0.3	0.1	23.5%	13.3%	1.0	66.7%	14.0%
23	Weilun Zhao	G	Fr	6'0"	14-0	5.4	1.3	0.2	1.1	0.6	26.3%	0.0%	0.9	72.7%	25.0%
21	Sean Blakely Drummond	G	Fr	6'4"	5-0	2.0	0.4	0.4	0.0	0.2	33.3%	0.0%	0.4	0.0%	26.8%
12	Isa Silva	G	Sr	6'4"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
3	Ndewedo Newbury	F	Sr	6'7"	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

San Francisco

Against the spread

Season

14-18

Home

5-10

Road

6-5

Last 10

4-6

avg cover −5.7

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 6 as a favoriteCovered 1 of 4 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

18-14

Home

9-6

Road

5-6

Last 10

7-3

avg vs total +6.7

Over 2 straightOver in 6 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 1 of 4 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 8	Oregon StAdjEM #219	N	L 77–78	−3.5	L−4.5	145.5	O155	116.6	118.1	66.0
Mar 7	PortlandAdjEM #259	N	W 82–65	−7.0	W+10.0	144.5	O147	122.3	97.0	67.0
Feb 28	PacificAdjEM #126	A	W 72–61	+4.5	W+15.5	143.5	U133	111.7	94.6	64.5
Feb 21	Santa ClaraAdjEM #33	H	L 73–94	+6.5	L−14.5	159.0	O167	97.8	125.9	74.7
Feb 18	#11GonzagaAdjEM #8	H	L 59–80	+15.5	L−5.5	151.0	U139	87.9	119.2	67.1
Feb 15	San DiegoAdjEM #269	A	W 92–79	−5.0	W+8.0	148.0	O171	133.2	114.3	69.1
Feb 12	Oregon StAdjEM #219	H	L 63–90	−9.0	L−36.0	141.0	O153	103.8	148.3	60.7
Feb 7	Saint Mary'sAdjEM #23	A	L 54–79	+11.5	L−13.5	143.0	U133	84.1	123.1	64.2
Feb 4	LMUAdjEM #183	H	L 75–84	−8.0	L−17.0	146.0	O159	108.8	121.8	69.0
Jan 31	PacificAdjEM #126	H	W 87–82	−4.0	W+1.0	138.0	O169	128.4	121.1	67.7

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

NevadaSan Francisco

Efficiency

112.3

110.5

105.3

109.2

67.4

—

Shooting

50.0%

51.2%

48.2%

50.7%

35.8%

34.6%

75.7%

70.9%

44.8%

40.1%

Ball control & glass

14.8%

15.8%

17.0%

14.1%

32.2%

31.3%

26.9%

29.0%

8.7%

9.2%

9.5%

8.7%

Style

32.3%

46.1%

39.9%

36.9%

15.7%

10.1%

57.6%

55.6%

34.5%

34.2%

Roster

2.84

2.61

6'5.1"

6'4.8"

85.8%

81.0%

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).

San Francisco

Returning minutes: 81.0%Returning production: 76.4%

Lost

David Fuchs 21.1 mpg, 11.2 ppg · transferred to Clemson
Guillermo Diaz Graham 17.2 mpg, 5.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Ndewedo Newbury no D1 minutes last season
Isa Silva no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 81% 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
Fri, Nov 28	2025-26	San Francisco 65 – 81 Nevada(N)

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.