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-conferenceXFINITY Center, College Park, MD

Bucknell

Efficiency #334

2025-26: 10-23 · 7-13 conf

Maryland

Efficiency #198

2025-26: 12-21 · 5-17 conf

Mon, Nov 2 · TBD

66.7

win 19%

Projected

76.9

win 81%

No line posted yet.

Model: MD −10.2 · total 143.6 · 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: Maryland 67.7, Bucknell 68.1 → 67.4 possessions

−1.9

Maryland offense vs Bucknell defense

+1.8

Bucknell offense vs Maryland defense

−4.5

Projected total

143.6

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Maryland offense vs Bucknell defense

+1.8

Bucknell offense vs Maryland defense

+4.5

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

+3.9

Maryland by 10.2

10.2

Bucknell side ◂▸ Maryland 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 Maryland.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 67.4, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Bucknell is the faster team (66.9, #247 of 365) and Maryland the slower (66.7, #257). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

67.4

per team, 40 min

Projected total

143.6

model

Projected team totals

66.7 / 76.9

Bucknell / Maryland

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

68.1#202

Bucknell

67.7#239

Maryland

How this game plays

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

ClashMaryland

Style match: 3-point volume

Maryland takes 46.9% of its shots from three; Bucknell lets opponents take 45.7% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 49.4% — both habits push the same way.

AdvantageMaryland

Where Maryland struggles: ball control

Maryland turns it over on 18.6% of possessions (#304); Bucknell forces turnovers on 17.9% of opponent possessions (#99). Expect about 18.5%, 1.7 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.1 points per 100 possessions.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Bucknell, Maryland's defense, Bucknell'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 Bucknell at about 44.4% of its shots from three, Maryland about 49.4%.

AdvantageBucknell

Where Bucknell struggles: the offensive glass

Bucknell rebounds 27.0% of its own misses (#295); Maryland lets opponents grab 29.1% of their own misses (#111). Expect about 27.3%, 3.1 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -1.9 points per 100 possessions.

GlassMaryland

Maryland owns the glass

Projected offensive rebound rate of 33.2% is worth roughly +1.7 points per 100 possessions for Maryland's offense.

ClashBucknell

Style match: 3-point volume

Bucknell takes 42.7% of its shots from three; Maryland lets opponents take 43.1% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 44.4% — both habits push the same way.

Bucknell has the ball

OffenseMaryland allowsvs D1 avg

48.5% #304

54.4% #312

-0.0 pt/100

19.0% #320

14.9% #296

-0.1 pt/100

27.0% #295

29.1% #111

-1.9 pt/100

29.8% #314

35.8% #205

-0.3 pt/100

76.8% #35

—

+0.4 pt/100

Bucknell net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -1.9 pts/100

Maryland has the ball

OffenseBucknell allowsvs D1 avg

48.1% #311

54.7% #323

-0.1 pt/100

18.6% #304

17.9% #99

-2.1 pt/100

33.8% #73

31.3% #216

+1.7 pt/100

36.4% #142

35.3% #186

+0.1 pt/100

72.2% #202

—

-0.0 pt/100

Maryland net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -0.5 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Bucknelloffense vsMarylanddefense

Share of shots by zone

Bucknell shoots

39.5

6.2

12.0

42.2

Maryland allows

37.3

4.4

14.6

43.7

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	57.8%#201	59.6%#211	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	36.2%#265	31.9%#22	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	32.5%#336	41.3%#283	38.0%
Three	30.6%#328	36.3%#317	33.7%

Marylandoffense vsBucknelldefense

Share of shots by zone

Maryland shoots

32.6

5.0

15.9

46.5

Bucknell allows

33.5

6.5

13.6

46.4

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	55.8%#279	60.3%#245	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	32.1%#328	45.5%#309	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	39.6%#129	40.7%#268	38.0%
Three	31.7%#293	37.0%#344	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

Bucknell

−3.4extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#310 of 365

Off reb %

27.0%

#295

Def reb %

68.7%

#216

Turnover %

19.0%

#320

Forced TO %

17.9%

#99

FT rate

29.8%

#314

FT allowed

35.3%

#186

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−1.1

Defensive rebounding−0.2

Ball security−1.5

Forcing turnovers+0.8

Foul shots drawn−1.3

Foul shots allowed0.0

Maryland

−0.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#204 of 365

Off reb %

33.8%

#73

Def reb %

70.9%

#111

Turnover %

18.6%

#304

Forced TO %

14.9%

#296

FT rate

36.4%

#142

FT allowed

35.8%

#205

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+1.1

Defensive rebounding+0.5

Ball security−1.2

Forcing turnovers−1.2

Foul shots drawn+0.3

Foul shots allowed−0.1

Maryland has more extra scoring chances per game: −0.6 (#204 of 365) to Bucknell’s −3.4 (#310).

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

Bucknell2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
24	Achile Spadone	G	Sr	6'4"	33-33	34.8	12.4	6.1	1.9	1.9	47.3%	29.7%	4.4	79.2%	23.9%
2	Jayden Williams	G	So	5'10"	33-33	32.6	7.5	2.9	4.0	1.8	39.4%	31.0%	3.5	82.8%	18.7%
22	Amon Dorries	C	Fr	6'11"	33-32	32.5	16.2	4.4	1.4	2.7	57.8%	33.3%	2.5	78.8%	29.2%
3	Aleksander Pachucki	G	So	6'5"	33-10	20.7	5.9	2.8	0.8	0.7	53.9%	35.9%	3.5	69.6%	17.5%
21	Pat Curtin	G	Fr	6'3"	27-19	25.1	12.8	4.3	1.5	1.8	47.8%	26.9%	4.4	80.2%	33.4%
4	Ruot Bijiek	F	Sr	6'9"	12-11	28.8	11.8	5.2	0.8	2.6	44.2%	28.4%	6.2	85.4%	29.2%
1	Jacob Meachem	G	Fr	5'8"	30-0	10.4	1.5	0.5	1.6	1.0	27.4%	25.0%	0.4	77.3%	17.5%
23	Grgur Brcic	C	Jr	6'10"	18-8	16.9	4.3	4.8	0.4	0.7	56.9%	—	0.0	46.2%	16.2%
10	Brandon McCreesh	G	Jr	6'4"	8-8	27.6	7.4	3.1	1.6	0.8	52.9%	37.5%	4.0	62.5%	16.2%
0	Patrick O'Brien	F	Jr	6'8"	21-3	9.8	2.2	1.2	0.1	0.2	39.7%	16.7%	0.9	70.4%	15.1%
5	Josh Fulton	G	Sr	6'6"	8-0	10.9	2.3	2.4	1.3	1.0	75.0%	0.0%	0.1	85.7%	12.7%
7	Matt Lange	G	So	6'2"	8-0	2.5	0.5	0.3	0.0	0.1	150.0%	100.0%	0.1	25.0%	11.0%
32	Kellen Welch	F	So	6'7"	10-0	1.9	0.5	0.7	0.1	0.0	28.6%	0.0%	0.2	50.0%	23.9%
11	Brady Muller	F	Sr	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.

Maryland2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
13	Elijah Saunders	F	Sr	6'8"	33-32	30.7	9.0	4.4	0.9	1.1	56.4%	41.1%	4.3	80.0%	17.2%
7	Andre Mills	G	Fr	6'4"	33-25	26.7	12.2	4.1	1.6	1.7	49.2%	34.6%	4.8	76.7%	29.7%
8	David Coit	G	Sr	5'11"	33-16	26.7	13.5	1.8	2.8	1.8	51.0%	32.4%	6.6	85.6%	31.4%
1	Darius Adams	G	Fr	6'5"	33-28	25.6	10.8	3.4	1.6	2.0	40.6%	24.8%	4.0	71.4%	31.5%
12	Isaiah Watts	G	Jr	6'3"	32-8	17.0	4.3	1.8	0.7	0.8	44.5%	29.3%	3.1	64.3%	18.8%
45	Collin Metcalf	C	Sr	6'9"	31-13	13.5	1.3	3.2	0.3	0.5	54.5%	0.0%	0.0	38.5%	8.2%
2	Myles Rice	G	Jr	6'3"	17-4	16.5	5.6	2.1	1.3	1.4	43.3%	34.4%	1.9	92.6%	24.4%
21	Pharrel Payne	F	Sr	6'9"	10-10	26.8	17.5	7.2	1.4	2.7	62.4%	—	0.0	71.9%	32.8%
11	George Turkson Jr.	G	Fr	6'7"	23-5	11.4	1.3	2.0	0.2	0.3	33.3%	0.0%	0.3	50.0%	10.3%
18	Guillermo Del Pino	G	Fr	6'5"	23-2	9.3	1.6	0.7	0.5	0.6	37.0%	27.6%	1.3	50.0%	17.5%
24	Aleks Alston	F	Fr	6'10"	25-0	8.4	1.4	1.7	0.3	0.4	40.3%	20.8%	1.0	55.6%	13.8%
15	Jaziah Harper	G	Fr	6'7"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
30	Lukas Sotell	G	Jr	6'3"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
25	Nick Blake	G	Fr	6'2"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
4	Rakease Passmore	G	So	6'5"	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.

Bucknell2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
24	Achile Spadone	G	Sr	6'4"	33-33	34.8	12.4	6.1	1.9	1.9	47.3%	29.7%	4.4	79.2%	23.9%
2	Jayden Williams	G	So	5'10"	33-33	32.6	7.5	2.9	4.0	1.8	39.4%	31.0%	3.5	82.8%	18.7%
22	Amon Dorries	C	Fr	6'11"	33-32	32.5	16.2	4.4	1.4	2.7	57.8%	33.3%	2.5	78.8%	29.2%
3	Aleksander Pachucki	G	So	6'5"	33-10	20.7	5.9	2.8	0.8	0.7	53.9%	35.9%	3.5	69.6%	17.5%
21	Pat Curtin	G	Fr	6'3"	27-19	25.1	12.8	4.3	1.5	1.8	47.8%	26.9%	4.4	80.2%	33.4%
4	Ruot Bijiek	F	Sr	6'9"	12-11	28.8	11.8	5.2	0.8	2.6	44.2%	28.4%	6.2	85.4%	29.2%
1	Jacob Meachem	G	Fr	5'8"	30-0	10.4	1.5	0.5	1.6	1.0	27.4%	25.0%	0.4	77.3%	17.5%
23	Grgur Brcic	C	Jr	6'10"	18-8	16.9	4.3	4.8	0.4	0.7	56.9%	—	0.0	46.2%	16.2%
10	Brandon McCreesh	G	Jr	6'4"	8-8	27.6	7.4	3.1	1.6	0.8	52.9%	37.5%	4.0	62.5%	16.2%
0	Patrick O'Brien	F	Jr	6'8"	21-3	9.8	2.2	1.2	0.1	0.2	39.7%	16.7%	0.9	70.4%	15.1%
5	Josh Fulton	G	Sr	6'6"	8-0	10.9	2.3	2.4	1.3	1.0	75.0%	0.0%	0.1	85.7%	12.7%
7	Matt Lange	G	So	6'2"	8-0	2.5	0.5	0.3	0.0	0.1	150.0%	100.0%	0.1	25.0%	11.0%
32	Kellen Welch	F	So	6'7"	10-0	1.9	0.5	0.7	0.1	0.0	28.6%	0.0%	0.2	50.0%	23.9%
11	Brady Muller	F	Sr	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

Bucknell

Against the spread

Season

14-19

Home

5-9

Road

7-10

Last 10

4-6

avg cover −3.1

Covered 2 straightCovered 3 of 8 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

12-20-1

Home

5-8-1

Road

7-10

Last 10

4-5-1

avg vs total −0.8

Over in the last gameOver in 4 of 8 as an underdog, 1 push

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 5	NavyAdjEM #104	A	L 69–74	+14.5	W+9.5	132.5	O143	110.1	118.1	62.7
Mar 3	ArmyAdjEM #336	H	W 65–55	−2.0	W+8.0	144.0	U120	97.2	82.2	66.9
Feb 28	LehighAdjEM #273	A	L 79–89	+4.5	L−5.5	139.5	O168	116.3	131.1	67.9
Feb 25	ArmyAdjEM #336	A	W 75–73	+3.5	W+5.5	142.5	O148	103.6	100.8	72.4
Feb 22	Holy CrossAdjEM #325	H	L 63–72	−2.5	L−11.5	141.5	U135	95.7	109.4	65.8
Feb 18	AmericanAdjEM #234	H	L 57–75	+3.0	L−15.0	140.5	U132	88.1	115.9	64.7
Feb 14	Boston UAdjEM #237	A	L 69–82	+5.5	L−7.5	137.0	O151	105.6	125.5	65.3
Feb 9	NavyAdjEM #104	H	L 60–76	+6.5	L−9.5	136.0	P136	86.7	109.9	69.2
Feb 7	ColgateAdjEM #223	H	L 59–78	+5.0	L−14.0	141.5	U137	80.4	106.3	73.4
Feb 4	AmericanAdjEM #234	A	W 60–59	+8.0	W+9.0	142.0	U119	101.4	99.7	59.2

Maryland

Against the spread

Season

15-16-2

Home

6-8-1

Road

6-5-1

Last 10

7-3

avg cover +1.9

Covered 3 straightCovered 7 of 9 as an underdogCovered 4 of 5 with a line of 10+

Over / under

Season

18-15

Home

9-6

Road

5-7

Last 10

4-6

avg vs total −6.5

Over in the last gameOver in 4 of 9 as an underdogOver in 3 of 5 with a line of 10+

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 11	IowaAdjEM #22	N	L 64–75	+12.0	W+1.0	134.5	O139	97.4	114.1	65.7
Mar 10	OregonAdjEM #143	N	W 70–60	+4.0	W+14.0	139.0	U130	111.5	95.6	62.8
Mar 8	#11IllinoisAdjEM #4	H	L 72–78	+14.0	W+8.0	145.0	O150	117.6	127.4	61.2
Mar 4	WisconsinAdjEM #28	A	L 45–78	+14.5	L−18.5	153.5	U123	77.9	135.0	57.8
Mar 1	RutgersAdjEM #192	H	L 65–69	−5.0	L−9.0	143.5	U134	92.5	98.2	70.3
Feb 25	#12NebraskaAdjEM #17	A	L 61–74	+16.5	W+3.5	141.0	U135	95.9	116.4	63.6
Feb 21	WashingtonAdjEM #59	H	W 64–60	+3.0	W+7.0	143.5	U124	112.7	105.7	56.8
Feb 18	NorthwesternAdjEM #78	A	L 74–78	+8.0	W+4.0	142.5	O152	112.2	118.3	65.9
Feb 15	RutgersAdjEM #192	A	L 57–68	+3.0	L−8.0	142.5	U125	88.0	105.0	64.8
Feb 11	IowaAdjEM #22	H	W 77–70	+10.0	W+17.0	139.0	O147	123.8	112.6	62.2

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

BucknellMaryland

Efficiency

101.2

107.9

111.7

109.1

68.1

67.7

—

Shooting

48.5%

48.1%

50.4%

48.6%

30.6%

31.7%

76.8%

72.2%

29.8%

36.4%

Ball control & glass

19.0%

18.6%

17.9%

14.9%

27.0%

33.8%

31.3%

29.1%

11.1%

9.5%

11.5%

11.6%

Style

42.7%

46.9%

43.4%

34.4%

9.9%

8.7%

54.0%

45.2%

24.0%

31.4%

Roster

2.30

2.61

6'4.5"

6'4.9"

92.5%

87.9%

Offseason

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

Bucknell

Returning minutes: 92.5%Returning production: 96.3%

Lost

Quin Berger 15.1 mpg, 2.8 ppg · transferred to Miami

Added

Brady Muller no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 93% 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).

Maryland

Returning minutes: 87.9%Returning production: 86.1%

Lost

Solomon Washington 24.3 mpg, 7.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Nick Blake no D1 minutes last season
Rakease Passmore no D1 minutes last season
Lukas Sotell no D1 minutes last season
Jaziah Harper 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. 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

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.