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 siteJenny Craig Pavilion, San Diego, CARady Children's Invitational

Saint Mary's

Efficiency #23

2025-26: 27-6 · 16-3 conf

UCLA

Efficiency #37

2025-26: 24-12 · 15-8 conf

Thu, Nov 26 · 5:00 PM ET

72.2

win 56%

Projected

70.4

win 44%

No line posted yet.

Model: SMC −1.8 · total 142.6 · 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: UCLA 66.6, Saint Mary's 66.7 → 65.1 possessions

−7.1

UCLA offense vs Saint Mary's defense

−0.1

Saint Mary's offense vs UCLA defense

+1.6

Projected total

142.6

Axis starts at 135 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

UCLA offense vs Saint Mary's defense

−0.1

Saint Mary's offense vs UCLA defense

−1.6

Saint Mary's by 1.8

1.8

Saint Mary's side ◂▸ UCLA side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the margin steps add to −1.7 against −1.8. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help UCLA.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 65.1, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Saint Mary's is the faster team (66.2, #288 of 365) and UCLA the slower (65.8, #303). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

65.1

per team, 40 min

Projected total

142.6

model

Projected team totals

72.2 / 70.4

Saint Mary's / UCLA

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

66.7#305

Saint Mary's

66.6#313

UCLA

How this game plays

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

AdvantageSaint Mary's

Where Saint Mary's scores: the offensive glass

Saint Mary's rebounds 37.5% of its own misses (#11); UCLA lets opponents grab 33.3% of their own misses (#304). Expect about 36.8%, 6.4 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.9 points per 100 possessions.

AdvantageUCLA

Where UCLA scores: ball control

UCLA turns it over on 13.4% of possessions (#14); Saint Mary's forces turnovers on 15.2% of opponent possessions (#270). Expect about 13.9%, 2.9 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.6 points per 100 possessions.

Pace

Half-court grind

UCLA averages 65.8 possessions per 40, Saint Mary's 66.2. 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 65 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.

ClashSaint Mary's

Style match: ball movement

Saint Mary's assists on 57.8% of its made baskets; UCLA allows assists on 63.3% of opponents' baskets (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 62.9% — both habits push the same way.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (UCLA, Saint Mary's, Saint Mary's'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 Saint Mary's at about 40.4% of its shots from three, UCLA about 34.7%.

GlassUCLA

UCLA gets out-rebounded

Projected offensive rebound rate of 27.7% is worth roughly -1.6 points per 100 possessions against UCLA's offense.

Saint Mary's has the ball

OffenseUCLA allowsvs D1 avg

52.8% #109

50.4% #120

+0.6 pt/100

16.8% #189

18.5% #76

-1.4 pt/100

37.5% #11

33.3% #304

+3.9 pt/100

35.5% #162

34.4% #163

-0.0 pt/100

80.3% #2

—

+0.7 pt/100

Saint Mary's net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +3.8 pts/100

UCLA has the ball

OffenseSaint Mary's allowsvs D1 avg

53.4% #85

46.8% #19

-1.5 pt/100

13.4% #14

15.2% #270

+3.6 pt/100

31.0% #162

23.9% #4

-1.6 pt/100

33.1% #237

25.7% #12

-0.8 pt/100

76.3% #46

—

+0.3 pt/100

UCLA net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -0.0 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Saint Mary'soffense vsUCLAdefense

Share of shots by zone

Saint Mary's shoots

37.5

7.8

17.6

37.0

UCLA allows

32.0

5.0

17.7

45.2

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	57.4%#215	61.6%#289	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	42.2%#117	39.6%#179	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	36.5%#253	39.6%#223	38.0%
Three	38.7%#7	32.0%#64	33.7%

UCLAoffense vsSaint Mary'sdefense

Share of shots by zone

UCLA shoots

31.4

5.8

27.4

35.5

Saint Mary's allows

36.6

7.7

18.7

37.0

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	62.3%#67	54.4%#47	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	42.2%#116	46.4%#324	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	42.0%#59	33.7%#43	38.0%
Three	37.9%#19	31.3%#40	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

Saint Mary's

+6.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#13 of 365

Off reb %

37.5%

#11

Def reb %

76.1%

Turnover %

16.8%

#189

Forced TO %

15.2%

#270

FT rate

35.5%

#162

FT allowed

25.7%

#12

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+2.3

Defensive rebounding+2.2

Ball security0.0

Forcing turnovers−1.0

Foul shots drawn+0.1

Foul shots allowed+2.4

UCLA

+2.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#75 of 365

Off reb %

31.0%

#162

Def reb %

66.7%

#304

Turnover %

13.4%

#14

Forced TO %

18.5%

#76

FT rate

33.1%

#237

FT allowed

34.4%

#163

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.2

Defensive rebounding−0.9

Ball security+2.3

Forcing turnovers+1.2

Foul shots drawn−0.5

Foul shots allowed+0.2

Saint Mary's has more extra scoring chances per game: +6.0 (#13 of 365) to UCLA’s +2.6 (#75).

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

Saint Mary's2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
7	Joshua Dent	G	So	6'3"	33-33	36.2	13.2	2.5	5.6	2.3	56.7%	40.4%	4.6	91.8%	21.7%
23	Paulius Murauskas	F	Jr	6'8"	33-32	32.2	18.4	7.6	2.1	1.8	52.5%	33.3%	3.3	84.0%	32.7%
11	Dillan Shaw	G	Fr	6'7"	33-22	27.5	7.5	5.4	1.5	1.0	55.7%	41.6%	3.8	69.7%	17.0%
0	Mikey Lewis	G	So	6'3"	33-33	26.8	13.9	2.7	2.1	1.4	48.6%	36.8%	5.6	88.2%	33.0%
45	Andrew McKeever	C	So	7'2"	33-10	23.1	8.2	9.2	1.8	1.7	50.0%	—	0.0	62.8%	24.8%
33	Liam Campbell	G	Fr	6'4"	33-0	14.7	4.9	1.8	0.5	0.5	63.7%	52.0%	1.5	80.0%	16.9%
8	Rory Hawke	G	Fr	6'5"	31-4	11.0	2.5	1.2	0.4	0.5	54.7%	22.2%	0.6	78.3%	14.3%
6	Mantas Juzenas	G	Fr	6'6"	26-1	5.8	2.1	1.4	0.3	0.3	66.2%	48.4%	1.2	55.6%	19.5%
2	Tony Duckett	G	So	6'4"	20-0	7.3	3.5	0.5	0.5	0.4	45.1%	30.8%	0.7	92.0%	29.4%
24	Kevin Gad	F	Jr	6'6"	7-7	10.1	1.4	1.3	0.7	0.1	45.5%	33.3%	0.9	—	10.0%
22	Cade Bennett	G	Jr	6'0"	8-0	4.5	1.0	1.0	0.5	0.1	60.0%	40.0%	0.6	50.0%	12.9%
14	Oliver Faubert	F	Fr	6'8"	11-0	1.9	0.2	0.0	0.0	0.1	33.3%	—	0.0	—	11.5%
32	Jazz Gardner	C	Jr	7'0"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
42	Trent MacLean	F	Fr	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.

UCLA2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
2	Donovan Dent	G	Sr	6'2"	35-34	34.4	13.3	2.9	7.6	1.8	43.0%	25.4%	2.0	65.6%	28.4%
0	Trent Perry	G	So	6'4"	35-24	29.9	12.6	3.0	2.8	1.3	51.5%	39.2%	3.4	85.8%	24.5%
3	Eric Dailey Jr.	G	Jr	6'8"	35-35	27.6	11.6	5.8	1.3	1.3	53.4%	31.6%	2.8	69.9%	25.9%
55	Skyy Clark	G	Sr	6'3"	26-23	28.6	11.5	2.3	2.0	1.0	58.6%	42.7%	4.8	82.1%	22.1%
1	Xavier Booker	F	Jr	6'11"	36-27	20.2	7.3	3.5	0.8	0.6	62.4%	43.3%	1.9	67.5%	19.5%
4	Jamar Brown	G	Sr	6'5"	36-2	15.6	3.8	2.7	0.5	0.3	54.0%	33.8%	2.1	100.0%	14.0%
5	Brandon Williams	G	So	6'7"	34-4	12.2	2.6	1.9	0.3	0.2	45.5%	24.0%	0.7	64.5%	14.5%
24	Steven Jamerson II	F	Sr	6'10"	33-1	10.2	2.0	2.1	0.5	0.6	75.0%	—	0.0	63.0%	12.0%
8	Eric Freeny	G	Fr	6'4"	28-0	11.0	2.0	1.6	0.4	0.3	46.4%	37.0%	1.0	50.0%	13.7%
23	Anthony Peoples Jr.	F	Sr	6'9"	5-0	2.2	0.4	1.0	0.0	0.0	50.0%	—	0.0	—	10.9%
30	Jack Seidler	G	Jr	6'4"	6-0	1.5	0.3	0.7	0.0	0.2	16.7%	0.0%	0.2	0.0%	48.9%
7	Christian Horry	G	Fr	6'2"	4-0	1.8	0.0	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.0%	0.0%	0.3	—	16.4%
21	Evan Manjikian	F	Jr	6'8"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
10	Markell Alston	G	Fr	6'1"	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.

Saint Mary's2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
7	Joshua Dent	G	So	6'3"	33-33	36.2	13.2	2.5	5.6	2.3	56.7%	40.4%	4.6	91.8%	21.7%
23	Paulius Murauskas	F	Jr	6'8"	33-32	32.2	18.4	7.6	2.1	1.8	52.5%	33.3%	3.3	84.0%	32.7%
11	Dillan Shaw	G	Fr	6'7"	33-22	27.5	7.5	5.4	1.5	1.0	55.7%	41.6%	3.8	69.7%	17.0%
0	Mikey Lewis	G	So	6'3"	33-33	26.8	13.9	2.7	2.1	1.4	48.6%	36.8%	5.6	88.2%	33.0%
45	Andrew McKeever	C	So	7'2"	33-10	23.1	8.2	9.2	1.8	1.7	50.0%	—	0.0	62.8%	24.8%
33	Liam Campbell	G	Fr	6'4"	33-0	14.7	4.9	1.8	0.5	0.5	63.7%	52.0%	1.5	80.0%	16.9%
8	Rory Hawke	G	Fr	6'5"	31-4	11.0	2.5	1.2	0.4	0.5	54.7%	22.2%	0.6	78.3%	14.3%
6	Mantas Juzenas	G	Fr	6'6"	26-1	5.8	2.1	1.4	0.3	0.3	66.2%	48.4%	1.2	55.6%	19.5%
2	Tony Duckett	G	So	6'4"	20-0	7.3	3.5	0.5	0.5	0.4	45.1%	30.8%	0.7	92.0%	29.4%
24	Kevin Gad	F	Jr	6'6"	7-7	10.1	1.4	1.3	0.7	0.1	45.5%	33.3%	0.9	—	10.0%
22	Cade Bennett	G	Jr	6'0"	8-0	4.5	1.0	1.0	0.5	0.1	60.0%	40.0%	0.6	50.0%	12.9%
14	Oliver Faubert	F	Fr	6'8"	11-0	1.9	0.2	0.0	0.0	0.1	33.3%	—	0.0	—	11.5%
32	Jazz Gardner	C	Jr	7'0"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
42	Trent MacLean	F	Fr	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.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

Saint Mary's

Against the spread

Season

19-13

Home

12-4

Road

6-4

Last 10

7-3

avg cover +3.0

Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 6 of 9 as a favorite

Over / under

Season

12-18-2

Home

7-7-2

Road

4-6

Last 10

3-7

avg vs total −5.3

Under 4 straightOver in 3 of 9 as a favorite

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 19	#10Texas A&MAdjEM #43	N	L 50–63	−2.5	L−15.5	148.5	U113	84.5	106.4	59.2
Mar 9	Santa ClaraAdjEM #33	N	L 71–76	−4.5	L−9.5	150.0	U147	114.8	122.9	61.8
Feb 28	#9GonzagaAdjEM #8	H	W 70–59	+2.5	W+13.5	143.0	U129	109.4	92.2	64.0
Feb 25	Santa ClaraAdjEM #33	H	W 86–67	−5.5	W+13.5	154.0	U153	131.5	102.4	65.4
Feb 21	Washington StAdjEM #174	A	W 83–67	−8.5	W+7.5	148.5	O150	131.9	106.5	62.9
Feb 18	Seattle UAdjEM #125	A	W 72–70	−9.5	L−7.5	133.0	O142	98.4	95.7	73.1
Feb 14	PacificAdjEM #126	A	W 72–61	−7.0	W+4.0	135.5	U133	113.5	96.2	63.4
Feb 11	PepperdineAdjEM #307	H	W 88–60	−24.5	W+3.5	144.0	O148	122.9	83.8	71.6
Feb 7	San FranciscoAdjEM #148	H	W 79–54	−11.5	W+13.5	143.0	U133	123.1	84.1	64.2
Feb 4	San DiegoAdjEM #269	H	W 87–60	−19.5	W+7.5	149.0	U147	136.3	94.0	63.8

UCLA

Against the spread

Season

15-19-2

Home

10-8

Road

3-7

Last 10

6-3-1

avg cover +4.8

Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 3 of 5 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 5 as an underdog, 1 push

Over / under

Season

17-19

Home

9-9

Road

5-5

Last 10

4-6

avg vs total +3.6

Under 3 straightOver in 2 of 5 as a favoriteOver in 2 of 5 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 22	#2UConnAdjEM #10	N	L 57–73	+5.5	L−10.5	136.0	U130	90.5	115.9	63.0
Mar 20	#10UCFAdjEM #70	N	W 75–71	−6.0	L−2.0	152.0	U146	106.3	100.6	70.6
Mar 14	#18PurdueAdjEM #9	N	L 66–73	+7.0	P0.0	145.0	U139	110.7	122.4	59.6
Mar 13	#8Michigan StAdjEM #11	N	W 88–84	+5.0	W+9.0	141.5	O172	131.9	125.9	66.7
Mar 12	RutgersAdjEM #192	N	W 72–59	−10.5	W+2.5	142.5	U131	104.6	85.7	68.8
Mar 7	USCAdjEM #97	A	W 89–68	−5.0	W+16.0	151.0	O157	142.2	108.7	62.6
Mar 3	#9NebraskaAdjEM #17	H	W 72–52	+1.0	W+21.0	144.5	U124	118.7	85.7	60.6
Feb 28	MinnesotaAdjEM #94	A	L 73–78	−1.5	L−6.5	135.5	O151	131.4	140.4	55.6
Feb 24	USCAdjEM #97	H	W 81–62	−7.0	W+12.0	150.5	U143	123.4	94.5	65.6
Feb 21	#10IllinoisAdjEM #4	H	W 95–94 OT	+6.0	W+7.0	147.0	O189	130.4	129.0	72.9

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

Saint Mary'sUCLA

Efficiency

114.9

115.9

100.8

104.5

66.7

66.6

—

Shooting

52.8%

53.4%

49.8%

51.4%

38.7%

37.9%

80.3%

76.3%

35.5%

33.1%

Ball control & glass

16.8%

13.4%

15.2%

18.5%

37.5%

31.0%

23.9%

33.3%

8.4%

7.3%

8.8%

8.1%

Style

36.4%

35.5%

40.9%

38.2%

10.5%

11.7%

57.8%

59.2%

29.3%

27.0%

Roster

1.88

3.12

6'6.2"

6'5.5"

91.9%

87.1%

Offseason

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

Saint Mary's

Returning minutes: 91.9%Returning production: 91.8%

Lost

Harry Wessels 16.2 mpg, 4.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Trent MacLean no D1 minutes last season
Jazz Gardner no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 92% 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).

UCLA

Returning minutes: 87.1%Returning production: 82.4%

Lost

Tyler Bilodeau 26.0 mpg, 15.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Markell Alston no D1 minutes last season
Evan Manjikian no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 87% 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.