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-conferenceUniversity Credit Union Center, Davis, CA

Incarnate Word

Efficiency #264

2025-26: 12-19 · 7-15 conf

UC Davis

Efficiency #185

2025-26: 19-14 · 12-10 conf

Wed, Nov 11 · TBD

71.2

win 27%

Projected

78.2

win 73%

No line posted yet.

Model: UCD −7.0 · total 149.4 · 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: UC Davis 69.3, Incarnate Word 67.0 → 68.0 possessions

−0.7

UC Davis offense vs Incarnate Word defense

+2.5

Incarnate Word offense vs UC Davis defense

−0.6

Projected total

149.4

Axis starts at 146 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

UC Davis offense vs Incarnate Word defense

+2.5

Incarnate Word offense vs UC Davis defense

+0.6

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

+3.9

UC Davis by 7.0

7.0

Incarnate Word side ◂▸ UC Davis 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 UC Davis.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 68.0, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, UC Davis is the faster team (71.3, #41 of 365) and Incarnate Word the slower (65.4, #318). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

68.0

per team, 40 min

Projected total

149.4

model

Projected team totals

71.2 / 78.2

Incarnate Word / UC Davis

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

67.0#290

Incarnate Word

69.3#99

UC Davis

How this game plays

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

Pace

Tempo tug-of-war

UC Davis averages 71.3 possessions per 40, Incarnate Word 65.4. Slower teams pull the pace toward themselves more than fast teams push it (0.80 vs 0.66 in five seasons of games), so expect about 68 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.

AdvantageUC Davis

Where UC Davis scores: shooting

UC Davis shoots an effective 51.8% (#157); Incarnate Word allows 54.5% (#314). Expect about 53.2%, 1.9 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.7 points per 100 possessions.

AdvantageIncarnate Word

Where Incarnate Word struggles: ball control

Incarnate Word turns it over on 17.2% of possessions (#215); UC Davis forces turnovers on 19.8% of opponent possessions (#30). Expect about 18.9%, 2.1 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.6 points per 100 possessions.

GlassUC Davis

UC Davis gets out-rebounded

Projected offensive rebound rate of 27.6% is worth roughly -1.7 points per 100 possessions against UC Davis's offense.

ClashUC Davis

Style clash: 3-point volume

UC Davis takes 43.5% of its shots from three; Incarnate Word runs teams off the line (35.4% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 40.0% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.80 vs 0.64).

Incarnate Word has the ball

OffenseUC Davis allowsvs D1 avg

50.2% #228

51.7% #197

-0.5 pt/100

17.2% #215

19.8% #30

-2.6 pt/100

32.1% #120

30.5% #182

+0.8 pt/100

34.0% #210

39.1% #290

+0.2 pt/100

71.2% #233

—

-0.1 pt/100

Incarnate Word net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -2.2 pts/100

UC Davis has the ball

OffenseIncarnate Word allowsvs D1 avg

51.8% #157

54.5% #314

+2.7 pt/100

17.9% #266

15.7% #239

+0.1 pt/100

25.2% #334

32.0% #260

-1.7 pt/100

40.5% #53

41.6% #318

+0.8 pt/100

75.3% #74

—

+0.3 pt/100

UC Davis net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +2.1 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Incarnate Wordoffense vsUC Davisdefense

Share of shots by zone

Incarnate Word shoots

38.3

5.1

18.1

38.4

UC Davis allows

44.1

5.0

12.7

38.2

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	54.3%#317	58.4%#164	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	33.3%#312	41.2%#213	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	37.7%#195	33.6%#42	38.0%
Three	36.1%#54	33.8%#172	33.7%

UC Davisoffense vsIncarnate Worddefense

Share of shots by zone

UC Davis shoots

35.7

3.8

16.7

43.8

Incarnate Word allows

44.5

5.9

14.4

35.2

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	59.5%#141	61.9%#298	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	37.5%#236	41.0%#208	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	38.0%#189	41.6%#292	38.0%
Three	34.4%#149	34.4%#214	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

Incarnate Word

−2.8extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#293 of 365

Off reb %

32.1%

#120

Def reb %

68.0%

#260

Turnover %

17.2%

#215

Forced TO %

15.7%

#239

FT rate

34.0%

#210

FT allowed

41.6%

#318

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.6

Defensive rebounding−0.5

Ball security−0.3

Forcing turnovers−0.7

Foul shots drawn−0.3

Foul shots allowed−1.6

UC Davis

+0.1extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#176 of 365

Off reb %

25.2%

#334

Def reb %

69.5%

#182

Turnover %

17.9%

#266

Forced TO %

19.8%

#30

FT rate

40.5%

#53

FT allowed

39.1%

#290

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−1.7

Defensive rebounding0.0

Ball security−0.8

Forcing turnovers+2.1

Foul shots drawn+1.4

Foul shots allowed−1.0

UC Davis has more extra scoring chances per game: +0.1 (#176 of 365) to Incarnate Word’s −2.8 (#293).

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

Incarnate Word2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
5	Davion Bailey	G	Sr	6'4"	30-29	35.5	18.6	3.4	2.0	2.1	49.4%	35.7%	8.8	77.1%	33.0%
10	Harold Woods	G	Sr	6'5"	31-24	30.3	8.8	6.8	1.3	1.5	52.1%	32.7%	1.6	67.5%	19.1%
7	Jordan Pyke	F	Jr	6'7"	27-25	25.4	12.6	5.1	1.6	1.3	57.1%	40.4%	2.1	70.7%	27.5%
3	Love Bettis	G	Sr	5'11"	30-8	17.0	4.3	0.7	0.9	0.9	47.6%	31.0%	1.4	84.6%	18.7%
8	Marcus Glover	F	Jr	6'8"	29-20	16.5	3.5	3.4	0.6	0.7	50.0%	—	0.0	70.3%	13.2%
21	Lewis Rowe	C	Sr	6'10"	26-9	14.8	2.3	2.4	1.0	0.4	46.0%	—	0.0	33.3%	12.1%
0	Esteban Mann	F	Jr	6'7"	22-3	12.0	2.1	2.9	0.2	0.7	28.1%	0.0%	0.2	44.1%	20.3%
9	Mihael Tomic	G	Fr	—	22-3	9.0	1.9	2.2	0.1	0.3	65.2%	—	0.0	78.6%	11.0%
4	Jayden Williams	C	So	6'9"	22-1	8.0	2.2	2.1	0.2	0.4	62.5%	—	0.0	61.5%	15.5%
99	Amani Drummond	G	Sr	6'1"	19-0	4.4	1.6	0.8	0.1	0.1	48.2%	31.3%	0.8	66.7%	23.3%
22	Drew Barbee	F	So	6'5"	5-0	5.6	2.2	1.8	0.8	0.4	35.7%	50.0%	0.4	75.0%	24.9%
93	Tyler Simon	F	Sr	6'5"	4-0	4.5	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0%	—	0.0	0.0%	7.9%
11	Isaiah Kortas	G	So	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.

UC Davis2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted UC Davis'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
4	Connor Sevilla	G	Jr	6'0"	31-31	31.1	13.3	1.7	0.8	1.4	53.4%	39.9%	5.4	90.3%	22.2%
2	Marcus Wilson	G	Fr	6'3"	33-33	26.4	12.5	3.2	3.9	2.2	48.1%	32.4%	3.1	78.5%	29.1%
20	Isaiah Chappell	F	So	6'9"	33-18	24.1	8.5	4.6	1.0	1.0	52.3%	35.6%	4.9	60.0%	20.6%
0	Brayden Fagbemi	G	Jr	6'0"	31-3	25.4	7.0	3.5	4.3	2.0	46.8%	27.3%	1.8	64.7%	19.7%
7	Niko Rocak	F	Sr	6'9"	32-32	24.2	9.4	5.2	1.8	1.8	59.7%	36.1%	2.6	68.1%	21.8%
36	Nils Cooper	G	Jr	6'6"	27-23	24.7	12.3	4.6	1.9	1.6	57.2%	23.8%	1.6	73.7%	26.2%
1	Carl Daughtery Jr.	G	Sr	6'3"	24-9	26.5	10.0	3.3	0.8	0.6	55.1%	42.0%	4.7	73.3%	19.4%
21	Omer Suljanovic	F	Fr	6'8"	32-9	14.7	5.6	3.0	0.4	1.2	46.6%	24.6%	1.8	68.3%	25.5%
5	Jalen Stokes	G	Fr	6'5"	27-7	13.9	4.7	2.5	0.8	0.9	48.9%	33.3%	0.8	87.8%	19.7%
10	Cyril Franklin Jr.	G	So	6'5"	19-0	7.1	1.3	0.5	0.7	0.5	52.2%	0.0%	0.3	33.3%	13.6%
8	Chase Rawlins	G	Fr	6'5"	19-0	5.6	1.6	0.4	0.7	0.5	54.8%	42.9%	0.4	77.8%	17.8%
14	Abdullah Amzil	F	Fr	6'7"	15-0	3.1	0.5	0.5	0.3	0.1	35.7%	20.0%	0.3	100.0%	10.3%
11	Ylan Esso-Essis	G	So	6'8"	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.

Incarnate Word2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
5	Davion Bailey	G	Sr	6'4"	30-29	35.5	18.6	3.4	2.0	2.1	49.4%	35.7%	8.8	77.1%	33.0%
10	Harold Woods	G	Sr	6'5"	31-24	30.3	8.8	6.8	1.3	1.5	52.1%	32.7%	1.6	67.5%	19.1%
7	Jordan Pyke	F	Jr	6'7"	27-25	25.4	12.6	5.1	1.6	1.3	57.1%	40.4%	2.1	70.7%	27.5%
3	Love Bettis	G	Sr	5'11"	30-8	17.0	4.3	0.7	0.9	0.9	47.6%	31.0%	1.4	84.6%	18.7%
8	Marcus Glover	F	Jr	6'8"	29-20	16.5	3.5	3.4	0.6	0.7	50.0%	—	0.0	70.3%	13.2%
21	Lewis Rowe	C	Sr	6'10"	26-9	14.8	2.3	2.4	1.0	0.4	46.0%	—	0.0	33.3%	12.1%
0	Esteban Mann	F	Jr	6'7"	22-3	12.0	2.1	2.9	0.2	0.7	28.1%	0.0%	0.2	44.1%	20.3%
9	Mihael Tomic	G	Fr	—	22-3	9.0	1.9	2.2	0.1	0.3	65.2%	—	0.0	78.6%	11.0%
4	Jayden Williams	C	So	6'9"	22-1	8.0	2.2	2.1	0.2	0.4	62.5%	—	0.0	61.5%	15.5%
99	Amani Drummond	G	Sr	6'1"	19-0	4.4	1.6	0.8	0.1	0.1	48.2%	31.3%	0.8	66.7%	23.3%
22	Drew Barbee	F	So	6'5"	5-0	5.6	2.2	1.8	0.8	0.4	35.7%	50.0%	0.4	75.0%	24.9%
93	Tyler Simon	F	Sr	6'5"	4-0	4.5	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0%	—	0.0	0.0%	7.9%
11	Isaiah Kortas	G	So	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

Incarnate Word

Against the spread

Season

11-17

Home

5-7

Road

5-9

Last 10

4-6

avg cover −1.9

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 7 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

14-14

Home

7-5

Road

5-9

Last 10

4-6

avg vs total +3.6

Over in the last gameOver in 3 of 7 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 2	SF AustinAdjEM #73	H	L 68–76	+7.0	L−1.0	143.5	O144	113.0	126.2	60.2
Feb 28	LamarAdjEM #236	H	W 72–60	−1.0	W+11.0	138.0	U132	113.3	94.4	63.6
Feb 23	N'Western StAdjEM #299	A	L 49–54	+2.5	L−2.5	138.0	U103	81.6	89.9	60.1
Feb 21	East Texas A&MAdjEM #311	A	W 82–73	+4.0	W+13.0	146.5	O155	143.4	127.6	57.2
Feb 16	LSU N OrleansAdjEM #221	H	L 64–78	−2.0	L−16.0	153.5	U142	99.2	120.9	64.5
Feb 14	NichollsAdjEM #250	H	L 83–91	−1.5	L−9.5	149.0	O174	126.5	138.7	65.6
Feb 9	SE LouisianaAdjEM #296	A	L 62–74	+1.0	L−11.0	137.5	U136	101.5	121.1	61.1
Feb 7	McNeeseAdjEM #49	A	L 64–81	+17.5	W+0.5	146.0	U145	103.1	130.5	62.1
Feb 2	Texas A&M-CCAdjEM #181	A	W 71–69	+5.0	W+7.0	140.5	U140	108.1	105.1	65.7
Jan 31	UT Rio GrandeAdjEM #109	H	L 93–106	+2.0	L−11.0	141.0	O199	129.3	147.3	72.0

UC Davis

Against the spread

Season

17-13-1

Home

9-5

Road

7-7-1

Last 10

5-4-1

avg cover +0.6

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

Over / under

Season

17-14

Home

7-7

Road

9-6

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total −6.0

Under in the last gameOver in 1 of 4 as a favoriteOver in 4 of 6 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 12	FullertonAdjEM #205	N	L 70–82	+1.0	L−11.0	155.0	U152	84.4	98.9	82.9
Mar 11	Santa BarbaraAdjEM #140	N	W 79–73	+4.5	W+10.5	139.5	O152	107.2	99.1	73.7
Mar 7	UC IrvineAdjEM #105	A	L 69–79 OT	+8.5	L−1.5	145.0	O148	92.6	106.0	74.6
Mar 5	Long Beach StAdjEM #267	A	W 76–70 OT	−2.0	W+4.0	150.0	U146	95.7	88.2	79.4
Feb 26	Hawai'iAdjEM #96	H	L 73–77	+2.0	L−2.0	147.0	O150	106.2	112.0	68.8
Feb 21	UC RiversideAdjEM #288	A	W 78–73	−3.0	W+2.0	150.0	O151	104.9	98.2	74.4
Feb 19	FullertonAdjEM #205	A	L 92–93	+1.0	P0.0	157.0	O185	138.1	139.6	66.6
Feb 14	Long Beach StAdjEM #267	H	W 71–54	−5.0	W+12.0	149.5	U125	100.8	76.6	70.5
Feb 12	UC San DiegoAdjEM #121	A	L 51–68	+6.0	L−11.0	150.5	U119	72.5	96.7	70.3
Feb 7	Cal PolyAdjEM #240	H	W 67–58	−6.0	W+3.0	169.0	U125	96.6	83.6	69.4

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

Incarnate WordUC Davis

Efficiency

108.2

107.2

113.5

107.8

67.0

69.3

—

Shooting

50.2%

51.8%

47.7%

51.9%

36.1%

34.4%

71.2%

75.3%

34.0%

40.5%

Ball control & glass

17.2%

17.9%

15.7%

19.8%

32.1%

25.2%

32.0%

30.5%

9.3%

9.2%

9.8%

10.3%

Style

39.1%

43.5%

39.1%

37.0%

11.1%

13.1%

44.2%

59.9%

27.1%

34.0%

Roster

3.50

2.51

6'5.3"

6'4.5"

78.0%

—

Offseason

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

Incarnate Word

Returning minutes: 78.0%Returning production: 73.1%

Lost

Tahj Staveskie 35.3 mpg, 17.3 ppg · transferred to Akron
Harrison Reede 8.8 mpg, 4.1 ppg · transferred to Buffalo

Added

Isaiah Kortas no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 78% 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).

UC Davis

Returning minutes: 99.7%Returning production: 100.1%

ESPN hasn't posted UC Davis'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.)

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.