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-conferenceHaas Pavilion, Berkeley, CA
SE Louisiana
Efficiency #296
2025-26: 9-22 · 6-16 conf
@
California
Efficiency #79
2025-26: 22-12 · 9-10 conf
Thu, Dec 10 · TBD
64.6
win 13%
Projected
77.4
win 87%
No line posted yet.
Model: CAL −12.8 · total 142.0 · 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: California 68.7, SE Louisiana 67.1 → 67.5 possessions
−1.8
California offense vs SE Louisiana defense
+2.3
SE Louisiana offense vs California defense
−6.7
Projected total
142.0
Axis starts at 135 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
California offense vs SE Louisiana defense
+2.3
SE Louisiana offense vs California defense
+6.7
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.9
California by 12.8
12.8
SE Louisiana side ◂▸ California side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the margin steps add to +12.9 against +12.8. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help California.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes
Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 67.5, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, California is the faster team (69.3, #125 of 365) and SE Louisiana the slower (65.6, #312). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions
67.5
per team, 40 min
Projected total
142.0
model
Projected team totals
64.6 / 77.4
SE Louisiana / California
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
67.1#282
SE Louisiana
68.7#141
California

How this game plays

what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meet
AdvantageSE Louisiana
Where SE Louisiana struggles: shooting
SE Louisiana shoots an effective 46.7% (#343); California allows 49.8% (#91). Expect about 47.9%, 3.4 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -4.8 points per 100 possessions.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (California, SE Louisiana, California'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 SE Louisiana at about 40.3% of its shots from three, California about 41.3%.
AdvantageCalifornia
Where California scores: shooting
California shoots an effective 52.7% (#119); SE Louisiana allows 52.4% (#233). Expect about 52.6%, 1.4 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +1.9 points per 100 possessions.
GlassCalifornia
California gets out-rebounded
Projected offensive rebound rate of 27.8% is worth roughly -1.6 points per 100 possessions against California's offense.
SE Louisiana has the ball
OffenseCalifornia allowsvs D1 avg
46.7% #343
49.8% #91
-4.8 pt/100
18.4% #291
16.1% #218
-0.6 pt/100
28.6% #245
30.5% #180
-0.7 pt/100
40.3% #56
36.3% #220
+0.4 pt/100
68.4% #318
—
-0.4 pt/100
SE Louisiana net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -6.1 pts/100
California has the ball
OffenseSE Louisiana allowsvs D1 avg
52.7% #119
52.4% #233
+1.9 pt/100
15.1% #76
19.1% #46
-0.7 pt/100
26.0% #322
31.4% #225
-1.6 pt/100
36.2% #146
41.2% #314
+0.5 pt/100
77.4% #25
—
+0.4 pt/100
California net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +0.7 pts/100

Shot diet

Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbers
SE Louisianaoffense vsCaliforniadefense
Share of shots by zone
SE Louisiana shoots
California allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim58.7%#17160.8%#26058.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)33.8%#30935.2%#6339.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)34.1%#30936.7%#12338.0%
Three28.4%#36231.0%#3433.7%
Californiaoffense vsSE Louisianadefense
Share of shots by zone
California shoots
SE Louisiana allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim57.8%#20259.1%#19558.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)26.9%#36346.7%#32839.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)40.2%#10536.9%#12738.0%
Three36.9%#3036.0%#30133.7%
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
SE Louisiana
−0.5extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#200 of 365
Off reb %
28.6%
#245
Def reb %
68.6%
#225
Turnover %
18.4%
#291
Forced TO %
19.1%
#46
FT rate
40.3%
#56
FT allowed
41.2%
#314
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.6
Defensive rebounding−0.3
Ball security−1.1
Forcing turnovers+1.6
Foul shots drawn+1.4
Foul shots allowed−1.5
California
−0.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#208 of 365
Off reb %
26.0%
#322
Def reb %
69.5%
#180
Turnover %
15.1%
#76
Forced TO %
16.1%
#218
FT rate
36.2%
#146
FT allowed
36.3%
#220
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.4
Defensive rebounding+0.1
Ball security+1.1
Forcing turnovers−0.4
Foul shots drawn+0.3
Foul shots allowed−0.3

SE Louisiana has more extra scoring chances per game: −0.5 (#200 of 365) to California’s −0.6 (#208).

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

SE Louisiana2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted SE Louisiana's 2026-27 roster yet — these are last season's players.
#PlayerPosClHtGP-GSMPGPPGRPGAPGTOVeFG%3P%3PA/gFT%UsageStatus
0Jeremy ElyzeeFSo6'7"31-3129.511.14.51.81.948.9%21.2%1.770.3%25.7%
23Isaiah GainesFSr6'8"31-3128.310.66.21.61.954.9%9.1%0.463.4%23.9%
1Makhi MylesFSo6'7"31-1821.07.73.60.60.950.5%34.3%3.382.8%22.7%
10Jaiden LawrenceGJr6'4"31-1820.35.12.40.60.545.9%29.9%3.566.7%17.2%
4CJ BookerPGSo5'10"30-2220.54.71.32.00.845.4%39.7%1.972.2%17.3%
8Peter HemschemeierGFr6'5"27-1220.36.41.61.91.640.7%27.5%4.473.1%27.2%
3Ethan PickettGSr6'5"31-2117.65.12.41.31.144.4%16.0%0.868.4%21.4%
2Jalen ForrestGJr6'4"28-017.27.92.60.61.044.0%26.5%2.478.8%29.6%
5Kyle EdisonGSo6'3"25-29.83.21.50.90.843.8%23.1%1.664.9%25.4%
6Ubong-Abasi EtimCSr6'9"31-07.41.21.50.20.251.5%—0.016.7%12.1%
32Garrett ShoemakerFFr6'9"24-07.11.91.40.10.451.5%29.4%0.735.7%20.5%
12Ahmed EssahatyGSr6'2"16-010.12.21.40.80.938.9%21.1%1.258.3%21.1%
7Seth JonesGJr6'1"8-019.87.32.81.02.341.7%27.9%5.480.0%30.3%
11Amir ChaneyPGFr5'10"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
9Cody Al-NaziatGFr6'2"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Tale of the tape

national rank toned left for away, right for home
SE LouisianaCalifornia
Efficiency
102.1
111.2
109.1
105.0
67.1
68.7
—
—
Shooting
46.7%
52.7%
49.4%
50.6%
28.4%
36.9%
68.4%
77.4%
40.3%
36.2%
Ball control & glass
18.4%
15.1%
19.1%
16.1%
28.6%
26.0%
31.4%
30.5%
10.1%
7.5%
9.7%
11.1%
Style
39.5%
43.1%
43.8%
35.6%
12.2%
12.1%
51.6%
54.1%
37.4%
27.5%
Roster
2.67
2.90
6'5.1"
6'5.2"
—
20.5%

Offseason

roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model input
SE Louisiana
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted SE Louisiana'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.)

California
Returning minutes: 20.5%Returning production: 20.2%
Lost
  • Dai Dai Ames 31.9 mpg, 16.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • John Camden 30.6 mpg, 13.4 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Justin Pippen 29.0 mpg, 13.4 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Chris Bell 27.8 mpg, 14.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Milos Ilic 17.3 mpg, 3.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • DeJuan Campbell 10.3 mpg, 2.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
  • Nojus Indrusaitis from Pitt · 23.6 mpg, 9.1 ppg last season
  • Michael Cooper from Wright St · 23.4 mpg, 11.9 ppg last season
  • Jordan Ross from Georgia · 20.2 mpg, 6.5 ppg last season
  • Jake Wilkins from Georgia · 9.9 mpg, 4.8 ppg last season
  • Amier Ali from Mississippi St · 2.7 mpg, 1.2 ppg last season
  • Jorell Clark no D1 minutes last season

Returns 21% of last season's minutes; lost 4 of its top 5. Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 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.