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-conferenceProvident Credit Union Event Center, San Jose, CA

Fresno St

Efficiency #169

2025-26: 13-19 · 7-14 conf

San José St

Efficiency #282

2025-26: 9-24 · 4-18 conf

Wed, Nov 18 · 9:00 PM ET

74.1

win 52%

Projected

73.5

win 48%

No line posted yet.

Model: FRES −0.5 · total 147.6 · 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: San José St 66.7, Fresno St 68.9 → 67.3 possessions

−2.1

San José St offense vs Fresno St defense

−1.5

Fresno St offense vs San José St defense

+2.9

Projected total

147.6

Axis starts at 142 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

San José St offense vs Fresno St defense

−1.5

Fresno St offense vs San José St defense

−2.9

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

+3.9

Fresno St by 0.5

0.5

Fresno St side ◂▸ San José St side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 147.5 against a projected 147.6. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help San José St.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 67.3, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Fresno St is the faster team (69.4, #124 of 365) and San José St the slower (65.7, #305). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

67.3

per team, 40 min

Projected total

147.6

model

Projected team totals

74.1 / 73.5

Fresno St / San José St

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

68.9#127

Fresno St

66.7#306

San José St

How this game plays

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

AdvantageFresno St

Where Fresno St scores: shooting

Fresno St shoots an effective 50.6% (#206); San José St allows 57.1% (#359). Expect about 53.9%, 2.6 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.7 points per 100 possessions.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Fresno St'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 Fresno St at about 40.5% of its shots from three, San José St about 41.4%.

Fresno St has the ball

OffenseSan José St allowsvs D1 avg

50.6% #206

57.1% #359

+3.7 pt/100

18.1% #279

17.4% #122

-1.5 pt/100

27.9% #272

36.5% #354

+0.7 pt/100

33.8% #218

35.3% #189

-0.0 pt/100

75.1% #78

—

+0.2 pt/100

Fresno St net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +3.2 pts/100

San José St has the ball

OffenseFresno St allowsvs D1 avg

49.7% #255

51.5% #184

-1.2 pt/100

15.1% #77

18.2% #87

-0.0 pt/100

29.3% #225

30.6% #183

-0.4 pt/100

33.4% #225

28.6% #37

-0.6 pt/100

73.8% #140

—

+0.1 pt/100

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

Shot diet

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

Fresno Stoffense vsSan José Stdefense

Share of shots by zone

Fresno St shoots

36.0

8.3

14.8

40.8

San José St allows

43.3

7.2

10.9

38.6

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	58.4%#182	66.2%#360	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	42.1%#118	39.7%#181	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	41.9%#60	42.4%#314	38.0%
Three	32.1%#274	36.0%#305	33.7%

San José Stoffense vsFresno Stdefense

Share of shots by zone

San José St shoots

30.9

8.5

22.5

38.1

Fresno St allows

36.7

5.1

14.5

43.7

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	55.9%#278	64.9%#349	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	32.6%#321	41.7%#227	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	41.2%#76	40.8%#270	38.0%
Three	35.3%#97	30.7%#30	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

Fresno St

+0.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#151 of 365

Off reb %

27.9%

#272

Def reb %

69.4%

#183

Turnover %

18.1%

#279

Forced TO %

18.2%

#87

FT rate

33.8%

#218

FT allowed

28.6%

#37

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.8

Defensive rebounding0.0

Ball security−0.9

Forcing turnovers+1.0

Foul shots drawn−0.3

Foul shots allowed+1.7

San José St

−1.1extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#235 of 365

Off reb %

29.3%

#225

Def reb %

63.5%

#354

Turnover %

15.1%

#77

Forced TO %

17.4%

#122

FT rate

33.4%

#225

FT allowed

35.3%

#189

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.3

Defensive rebounding−1.9

Ball security+1.1

Forcing turnovers+0.5

Foul shots drawn−0.4

Foul shots allowed0.0

Fresno St has more extra scoring chances per game: +0.7 (#151 of 365) to San José St’s −1.1 (#235).

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

Fresno St2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
3	Jake Heidbreder	G	Sr	6'5"	30-30	37.0	17.0	2.8	2.3	2.0	49.7%	31.9%	7.2	90.1%	26.5%
35	DeShawn Gory	F	Fr	6'6"	32-32	29.3	13.7	6.2	2.0	1.6	52.5%	27.0%	3.5	64.7%	28.1%
16	Wilson Jacques	C	Fr	7'0"	32-32	27.4	8.8	8.8	1.1	1.6	49.3%	30.8%	0.4	74.4%	20.6%
4	Cameron Faas	G	Sr	6'7"	32-17	19.1	5.3	2.3	0.3	0.5	54.1%	37.1%	3.6	90.0%	15.9%
9	Gasper Kocevar	C	Fr	6'10"	26-5	13.4	3.3	2.2	0.7	0.7	65.4%	44.4%	0.3	54.3%	14.1%
15	David Douglas Jr.	G	Jr	6'5"	18-8	17.8	7.2	1.4	0.2	0.6	58.2%	39.7%	4.1	71.9%	21.0%
11	Jac Mani	F	Jr	6'9"	26-0	11.8	6.0	2.7	0.4	0.9	51.2%	30.0%	1.9	68.0%	31.5%
6	DJ Stickman	G	Fr	6'2"	20-1	15.2	3.6	2.6	1.4	1.3	60.5%	44.4%	0.5	72.4%	15.3%
5	Makhan Diouf	F	Fr	6'11"	17-2	5.1	1.1	1.4	0.2	0.7	28.3%	9.1%	0.6	85.7%	25.0%
17	Matteo Porto	G	Fr	6'7"	13-0	3.6	0.6	0.2	0.0	0.2	13.3%	0.0%	0.8	57.1%	25.7%
1	Troy Jenkins	G	Fr	6'4"	2-0	3.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0%	0.0%	0.5	—	9.6%
80	Nathan Zulemie	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.

San José St2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
4	Melvin Bell Jr.	G	Fr	6'4"	33-24	33.4	8.7	4.1	0.5	1.2	44.9%	27.0%	1.9	62.4%	18.0%
13	Jermaine Washington	G	So	6'1"	25-24	34.7	11.5	1.8	2.9	1.7	51.0%	36.7%	5.9	62.3%	22.0%
1	Adrian Myers	F	So	6'6"	28-22	28.5	11.1	4.9	1.0	1.0	52.1%	37.2%	4.6	72.7%	23.9%
99	Sadraque NgaNga	F	Sr	6'10"	32-26	24.3	7.8	4.1	0.6	1.4	48.8%	35.8%	3.0	82.6%	22.1%
7	Pasha Goodarzi	G	So	6'3"	19-10	26.1	8.2	1.9	0.9	0.8	52.9%	40.7%	4.8	93.1%	18.9%
32	Yaphet Moundi	F	Sr	6'8"	13-11	26.7	12.5	7.6	1.4	1.7	52.6%	20.0%	0.4	73.8%	27.1%
11	Ben Roseborough	G	Fr	6'4"	11-9	27.6	12.0	1.6	1.1	0.8	50.0%	41.1%	5.1	82.1%	26.3%
24	Douglas Langford	F	Fr	6'7"	27-5	10.9	1.6	2.4	0.3	0.6	39.5%	0.0%	0.1	57.1%	13.6%
33	Marcus Overstreet	F	Jr	6'9"	26-4	10.5	2.8	3.2	0.3	0.5	54.2%	—	0.0	52.6%	18.1%
21	Japhet Moupadele	F	Fr	6'8"	23-1	11.6	2.7	1.6	0.7	0.7	44.6%	23.5%	1.5	45.5%	19.5%
2	JaVaughn Hannah	G	Sr	6'3"	2-2	22.0	7.5	1.0	0.5	1.5	63.6%	40.0%	2.5	33.3%	19.9%
14	Eren Karakaya	C	Fr	6'10"	3-0	7.7	2.3	1.7	0.0	0.3	60.0%	0.0%	0.3	50.0%	17.6%
17	Jaden Goodall	F	Fr	6'6"	3-0	4.7	1.7	0.7	0.3	0.3	66.7%	—	0.0	50.0%	20.7%
20	Christian Wise	F	So	6'6"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
8	Damase Coly	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.

Fresno St2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
3	Jake Heidbreder	G	Sr	6'5"	30-30	37.0	17.0	2.8	2.3	2.0	49.7%	31.9%	7.2	90.1%	26.5%
35	DeShawn Gory	F	Fr	6'6"	32-32	29.3	13.7	6.2	2.0	1.6	52.5%	27.0%	3.5	64.7%	28.1%
16	Wilson Jacques	C	Fr	7'0"	32-32	27.4	8.8	8.8	1.1	1.6	49.3%	30.8%	0.4	74.4%	20.6%
4	Cameron Faas	G	Sr	6'7"	32-17	19.1	5.3	2.3	0.3	0.5	54.1%	37.1%	3.6	90.0%	15.9%
9	Gasper Kocevar	C	Fr	6'10"	26-5	13.4	3.3	2.2	0.7	0.7	65.4%	44.4%	0.3	54.3%	14.1%
15	David Douglas Jr.	G	Jr	6'5"	18-8	17.8	7.2	1.4	0.2	0.6	58.2%	39.7%	4.1	71.9%	21.0%
11	Jac Mani	F	Jr	6'9"	26-0	11.8	6.0	2.7	0.4	0.9	51.2%	30.0%	1.9	68.0%	31.5%
6	DJ Stickman	G	Fr	6'2"	20-1	15.2	3.6	2.6	1.4	1.3	60.5%	44.4%	0.5	72.4%	15.3%
5	Makhan Diouf	F	Fr	6'11"	17-2	5.1	1.1	1.4	0.2	0.7	28.3%	9.1%	0.6	85.7%	25.0%
17	Matteo Porto	G	Fr	6'7"	13-0	3.6	0.6	0.2	0.0	0.2	13.3%	0.0%	0.8	57.1%	25.7%
1	Troy Jenkins	G	Fr	6'4"	2-0	3.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0%	0.0%	0.5	—	9.6%
80	Nathan Zulemie	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.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

Fresno St

Against the spread

Season

20-11

Home

12-4

Road

6-6

Last 10

7-3

avg cover +2.4

Covered the last gameCovered 5 of 8 as an underdogCovered 3 of 4 with a line of 10+

Over / under

Season

14-17

Home

9-7

Road

5-7

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total −1.4

Under 2 straightOver in 3 of 8 as an underdogOver in 2 of 4 with a line of 10+

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 11	Colorado StAdjEM #88	N	L 63–67	+7.5	W+3.5	145.5	U130	100.1	106.4	63.0
Mar 7	Grand CanyonAdjEM #65	A	L 60–85	+12.5	L−12.5	150.0	U145	82.6	117.0	72.7
Mar 3	San José StAdjEM #282	H	W 82–68	−7.5	W+6.5	149.5	O150	120.2	99.7	68.2
Feb 28	Boise StAdjEM #63	H	L 53–69	+7.0	L−9.0	149.0	U122	88.3	114.9	60.0
Feb 24	Colorado StAdjEM #88	A	L 70–74	+8.5	W+4.5	148.5	U144	105.0	111.0	66.7
Feb 21	New MexicoAdjEM #42	H	L 78–80	+9.0	W+7.0	156.5	O158	116.0	119.0	67.2
Feb 17	WyomingAdjEM #98	A	L 82–92	+9.5	L−0.5	147.5	O174	125.6	140.9	65.3
Feb 14	Air ForceAdjEM #360	H	W 93–63	−15.0	W+15.0	142.0	O156	127.5	86.4	72.9
Feb 10	Utah StateAdjEM #24	A	L 78–91	+21.0	W+8.0	152.5	O169	111.5	130.0	70.0
Feb 7	NevadaAdjEM #71	A	L 59–69	+11.5	W+1.5	149.5	U128	93.3	109.1	63.2

San José St

Against the spread

Season

15-16-1

Home

6-9

Road

7-5-1

Last 10

4-5-1

avg cover +4.1

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 4 of 9 as an underdogCovered 4 of 6 with a line of 10+

Over / under

Season

21-10-1

Home

11-4

Road

8-4-1

Last 10

10-0

avg vs total +14.4

Over 10 straightOver in 9 of 9 as an underdogOver in 6 of 6 with a line of 10+

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 12	New MexicoAdjEM #42	N	L 77–93	+15.5	L−0.5	154.5	O170	111.9	135.2	68.8
Mar 11	Boise StAdjEM #63	N	W 84–74	+14.5	W+24.5	146.0	O158	120.3	106.0	69.8
Mar 7	WyomingAdjEM #98	H	L 78–88	+5.5	L−4.5	148.0	O166	129.4	146.0	60.3
Mar 3	Fresno StAdjEM #169	A	L 68–82	+7.5	L−6.5	149.5	O150	99.7	120.2	68.2
Feb 28	Colorado StAdjEM #88	H	L 73–85	+8.0	L−4.0	145.5	O158	114.7	133.6	63.6
Feb 24	Air ForceAdjEM #360	A	W 86–80	−6.0	P0.0	145.0	O166	129.8	120.8	66.2
Feb 21	Boise StAdjEM #63	A	L 69–84	+17.5	W+2.5	146.0	O153	105.0	127.9	65.7
Feb 17	NevadaAdjEM #71	H	W 87–71	+11.0	W+27.0	141.5	O158	122.3	99.8	71.1
Feb 14	Grand CanyonAdjEM #65	H	L 79–94	+11.5	L−3.5	139.0	O173	121.6	144.7	65.0
Feb 10	UNLVAdjEM #124	A	L 75–82	+13.0	W+6.0	150.0	O157	110.7	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

Fresno StSan José St

Efficiency

106.2

109.0

105.8

115.1

68.9

66.7

—

Shooting

50.6%

49.7%

52.3%

47.6%

32.1%

35.3%

75.1%

73.8%

33.8%

33.4%

Ball control & glass

18.1%

15.1%

18.2%

17.4%

27.9%

29.3%

30.6%

36.5%

10.7%

8.2%

9.8%

8.3%

Style

40.9%

38.3%

43.9%

38.6%

13.1%

10.6%

49.9%

42.2%

27.3%

22.5%

Roster

2.29

2.11

6'7.2"

6'5.4"

77.4%

84.6%

Offseason

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

Fresno St

Returning minutes: 77.4%Returning production: 79.7%

Lost

Zaon Collins 24.9 mpg, 9.4 ppg · transferred to Ball State
Bastien Rieber 16.4 mpg, 4.0 ppg · transferred to Niagara
Aram Vladimir Soqui Urbano 3.9 mpg, 0.9 ppg · transferred to Merrimack

Added

Nathan Zulemie no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 77% 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).

San José St

Returning minutes: 84.6%Returning production: 73.6%

Lost

Colby Garland 30.9 mpg, 17.8 ppg · transferred to Georgia Tech

Added

Damase Coly no D1 minutes last season
Christian Wise no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 85% 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
Tue, Mar 3	2025-26	San José St 68 – 82 Fresno St
Tue, Jan 6	2025-26	Fresno St 70 – 55 San José St

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.