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-conferenceLenovo Center, Raleigh, NC

Troy

Efficiency #136

2025-26: 22-12 · 14-6 conf

NC State

Efficiency #34

2025-26: 20-14 · 11-9 conf

Fri, Nov 13 · TBD

70.7

win 18%

Projected

81.3

win 82%

No line posted yet.

Model: NCSU −10.6 · total 152.0 · 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: NC State 69.4, Troy 66.8 → 67.9 possessions

−1.0

NC State offense vs Troy defense

+5.7

Troy offense vs NC State defense

−1.0

Projected total

152.0

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

NC State offense vs Troy defense

+5.7

Troy offense vs NC State defense

+1.0

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

+3.9

NC State by 10.6

10.6

Troy side ◂▸ NC State side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 151.9 against a projected 152.0. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help NC State.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 67.9, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, NC State is the faster team (69.5, #112 of 365) and Troy the slower (67.0, #245). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

67.9

per team, 40 min

Projected total

152.0

model

Projected team totals

70.7 / 81.3

Troy / NC State

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

66.8#303

Troy

69.4#88

NC State

How this game plays

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

AdvantageNC State

Where NC State scores: ball control

NC State turns it over on 13.1% of possessions (#8); Troy forces turnovers on 16.7% of opponent possessions (#173). Expect about 14.6%, 2.2 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.7 points per 100 possessions.

ClashTroy

Style match: 3-point volume

Troy takes 45.9% of its shots from three; NC State lets opponents take 44.9% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 48.1% — both habits push the same way.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (NC State, Troy'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 Troy at about 48.1% of its shots from three, NC State about 42.4%.

AdvantageTroy

Where Troy scores: the offensive glass

Troy rebounds 34.6% of its own misses (#58); NC State lets opponents grab 30.5% of their own misses (#181). Expect about 33.4%, 3.0 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +1.8 points per 100 possessions.

DefenseNC State

NC State's ball-hawking

NC State ranks #39 nationally in steal rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 10.9% of Troy's possessions to end in a steal against this defense.

ClashNC State

Strength vs strength: 3-point shooting

NC State (#6 in 3-point shooting) against Troy (#47 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 34.7%. Historically NC State's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.25 vs 0.16).

Troy has the ball

OffenseNC State allowsvs D1 avg

51.5% #171

52.7% #256

+1.2 pt/100

17.3% #224

18.2% #90

-1.5 pt/100

34.6% #58

30.5% #181

+1.8 pt/100

36.2% #147

36.9% #235

+0.2 pt/100

74.2% #122

—

+0.2 pt/100

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

NC State has the ball

OffenseTroy allowsvs D1 avg

55.0% #35

50.2% #111

+2.3 pt/100

13.1% #8

16.7% #173

+2.7 pt/100

28.2% #258

31.7% #243

-0.6 pt/100

35.1% #175

31.4% #92

-0.3 pt/100

76.8% #36

—

+0.4 pt/100

NC State net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +4.5 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Troyoffense vsNC Statedefense

Share of shots by zone

Troy shoots

43.6

4.2

6.1

46.1

NC State allows

38.3

5.2

11.9

44.7

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	56.3%#259	58.4%#160	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	35.5%#278	37.2%#117	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	37.3%#214	37.2%#137	38.0%
Three	33.0%#229	35.5%#281	33.7%

NC Stateoffense vsTroydefense

Share of shots by zone

NC State shoots

39.1

5.5

13.0

42.4

Troy allows

39.7

4.0

17.8

38.5

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	59.4%#148	55.3%#68	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	28.4%#354	48.6%#346	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	35.6%#273	44.6%#344	38.0%
Three	38.8%#6	31.6%#47	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

Troy

+1.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#101 of 365

Off reb %

34.6%

#58

Def reb %

68.3%

#243

Turnover %

17.3%

#224

Forced TO %

16.7%

#173

FT rate

36.2%

#147

FT allowed

31.4%

#92

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+1.3

Defensive rebounding−0.4

Ball security−0.3

Forcing turnovers0.0

Foul shots drawn+0.3

Foul shots allowed+1.0

NC State

+2.4extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#80 of 365

Off reb %

28.2%

#258

Def reb %

69.5%

#181

Turnover %

13.1%

Forced TO %

18.2%

#90

FT rate

35.1%

#175

FT allowed

36.9%

#235

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.7

Defensive rebounding0.0

Ball security+2.5

Forcing turnovers+1.0

Foul shots drawn0.0

Foul shots allowed−0.4

NC State has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.4 (#80 of 365) to Troy’s +1.9 (#101).

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

Troy2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
3	Cooper Campbell	G	So	6'1"	34-33	33.8	12.5	3.4	4.2	1.9	53.5%	39.1%	5.1	83.1%	22.5%
11	Victor Valdes	F	Jr	6'7"	33-29	29.2	14.8	4.0	4.5	3.3	44.8%	24.4%	3.8	76.1%	35.3%
2	Cobi Campbell	G	Jr	6'2"	33-31	27.9	9.0	1.8	1.5	0.9	55.3%	40.0%	5.3	81.3%	18.7%
33	Theo Seng	F	Sr	6'9"	28-26	28.6	12.7	5.8	1.1	0.9	57.1%	32.5%	2.9	76.8%	23.3%
10	Jerrell Bellamy	C	Sr	6'9"	34-8	16.6	7.9	3.4	0.4	1.2	66.1%	28.6%	0.6	61.5%	25.8%
0	Kerrington Kiel	F	So	6'5"	34-5	16.1	3.9	3.6	1.1	0.8	42.4%	27.3%	1.6	72.5%	17.6%
95	Austin Cross	G	Fr	6'3"	34-1	16.1	3.6	1.5	0.4	0.4	45.1%	30.0%	2.6	56.5%	16.1%
5	Javen Colbert	G	Fr	6'1"	19-1	5.5	1.9	0.6	0.7	0.6	51.9%	41.7%	0.6	66.7%	23.0%
25	Evan Griffin	F	Fr	6'9"	13-0	6.2	2.2	1.8	0.5	0.2	50.0%	—	0.0	50.0%	21.8%
22	Corbin Green	F	Sr	6'4"	14-1	4.1	1.4	1.2	0.3	0.4	53.6%	25.0%	0.3	44.4%	21.6%
4	Emmanuel Clarton	G	Fr	6'5"	13-1	3.9	1.6	1.1	0.4	0.7	55.6%	0.0%	0.4	25.0%	29.8%
14	Kameryn Mitchell	G	Sr	6'4"	9-1	3.1	0.6	0.6	0.1	0.1	31.3%	20.0%	0.6	—	16.6%
30	Hikaru Awata	G	Fr	5'7"	4-0	1.5	0.3	0.3	0.0	0.8	0.0%	0.0%	0.5	33.3%	87.3%
7	Javier Gilgeous-Glasgow	G	Sr	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.

NC State2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
1	Darrion Williams	F	Sr	6'6"	33-33	30.1	14.0	4.6	2.8	1.5	51.1%	40.4%	5.8	77.3%	28.0%
2	Paul McNeil Jr.	G	So	6'5"	34-32	28.7	13.8	3.6	0.8	0.4	59.7%	42.7%	7.2	82.4%	22.7%
22	Ven-Allen Lubin	F	Sr	6'9"	34-34	28.1	13.6	7.1	0.9	0.8	67.4%	27.3%	0.3	74.3%	21.8%
21	Terrance Arceneaux	G	Jr	6'6"	30-0	15.8	3.8	2.6	0.5	0.4	48.5%	32.6%	1.5	77.3%	14.8%
13	Musa Sagnia	F	Fr	6'10"	34-1	12.4	2.3	2.8	0.2	0.5	60.5%	25.0%	0.1	45.5%	11.3%
7	Alyn Breed	G	Sr	6'3"	21-7	14.8	4.5	1.9	1.3	0.4	47.3%	34.5%	1.4	89.3%	17.7%
15	Jerry Deng	F	Jr	6'9"	8-0	12.6	6.1	2.1	0.4	0.4	46.7%	32.4%	4.3	85.7%	28.9%
12	Scottie Ebube	C	Sr	6'10"	17-1	4.1	1.1	1.0	0.0	0.4	88.9%	—	0.0	23.1%	17.5%
0	Jordan Snell	G	Sr	6'3"	8-1	2.4	0.8	0.3	0.3	0.0	37.5%	28.6%	0.9	—	23.8%
45	Colt Langdon	F	Fr	6'7"	6-0	2.8	0.3	0.2	0.0	0.2	0.0%	0.0%	0.7	100.0%	25.8%
10	Jayme Kontuniemi	G	Fr	6'4"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
33	Zymicah Wilkins	F	Fr	6'9"	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.

Troy2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
3	Cooper Campbell	G	So	6'1"	34-33	33.8	12.5	3.4	4.2	1.9	53.5%	39.1%	5.1	83.1%	22.5%
11	Victor Valdes	F	Jr	6'7"	33-29	29.2	14.8	4.0	4.5	3.3	44.8%	24.4%	3.8	76.1%	35.3%
2	Cobi Campbell	G	Jr	6'2"	33-31	27.9	9.0	1.8	1.5	0.9	55.3%	40.0%	5.3	81.3%	18.7%
33	Theo Seng	F	Sr	6'9"	28-26	28.6	12.7	5.8	1.1	0.9	57.1%	32.5%	2.9	76.8%	23.3%
10	Jerrell Bellamy	C	Sr	6'9"	34-8	16.6	7.9	3.4	0.4	1.2	66.1%	28.6%	0.6	61.5%	25.8%
0	Kerrington Kiel	F	So	6'5"	34-5	16.1	3.9	3.6	1.1	0.8	42.4%	27.3%	1.6	72.5%	17.6%
95	Austin Cross	G	Fr	6'3"	34-1	16.1	3.6	1.5	0.4	0.4	45.1%	30.0%	2.6	56.5%	16.1%
5	Javen Colbert	G	Fr	6'1"	19-1	5.5	1.9	0.6	0.7	0.6	51.9%	41.7%	0.6	66.7%	23.0%
25	Evan Griffin	F	Fr	6'9"	13-0	6.2	2.2	1.8	0.5	0.2	50.0%	—	0.0	50.0%	21.8%
22	Corbin Green	F	Sr	6'4"	14-1	4.1	1.4	1.2	0.3	0.4	53.6%	25.0%	0.3	44.4%	21.6%
4	Emmanuel Clarton	G	Fr	6'5"	13-1	3.9	1.6	1.1	0.4	0.7	55.6%	0.0%	0.4	25.0%	29.8%
14	Kameryn Mitchell	G	Sr	6'4"	9-1	3.1	0.6	0.6	0.1	0.1	31.3%	20.0%	0.6	—	16.6%
30	Hikaru Awata	G	Fr	5'7"	4-0	1.5	0.3	0.3	0.0	0.8	0.0%	0.0%	0.5	33.3%	87.3%
7	Javier Gilgeous-Glasgow	G	Sr	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.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

Troy

Against the spread

Season

15-14-3

Home

6-4-1

Road

7-7-2

Last 10

4-6

avg cover −4.0

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 8 as a favoriteCovered 1 of 4 with a line of 10+

Over / under

Season

14-17-1

Home

5-6

Road

8-7-1

Last 10

2-8

avg vs total −8.2

Under 2 straightOver in 2 of 8 as a favoriteOver in 1 of 4 with a line of 10+

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 19	#4NebraskaAdjEM #17	N	L 47–76	+13.0	L−16.0	139.5	U123	77.4	125.1	60.8
Mar 9	GA SouthernAdjEM #231	N	W 77–61	−5.0	W+11.0	152.5	U138	122.0	96.7	63.1
Mar 8	Southern MissAdjEM #218	N	W 78–70	−5.5	W+2.5	143.0	O148	109.4	98.2	71.3
Feb 27	UL MonroeAdjEM #351	H	W 80–65	−18.0	L−3.0	153.5	U145	128.4	104.3	62.3
Feb 24	LouisianaAdjEM #318	H	W 78–59	−11.0	W+8.0	134.5	O137	136.6	103.3	57.1
Feb 21	South AlabamaAdjEM #188	A	L 54–65	−2.5	L−13.5	143.0	U119	92.2	111.0	58.5
Feb 18	UL MonroeAdjEM #351	A	W 77–76	−17.0	L−16.0	155.5	U153	109.0	107.6	70.6
Feb 14	Southern MissAdjEM #218	A	L 65–69	−5.0	L−9.0	144.5	U134	98.3	104.4	66.1
Feb 11	Texas StAdjEM #249	A	L 62–74	−5.0	L−17.0	140.5	U136	97.4	116.2	63.7
Feb 7	AkronAdjEM #48	H	W 79–69	+3.5	W+13.5	157.0	U148	123.2	107.6	64.1

NC State

Against the spread

Season

15-17-2

Home

8-9

Road

4-5-1

Last 10

2-7-1

avg cover −9.2

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 2 of 6 as a favoriteCovered 0 of 4 as an underdog, 1 push

Over / under

Season

21-13

Home

9-8

Road

8-2

Last 10

6-4

avg vs total +8.7

Under in the last gameOver in 3 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 3 of 4 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 17	#11TexasAdjEM #38	N	L 66–68	−1.0	L−3.0	157.5	U134	97.5	100.5	67.7
Mar 12	#10VirginiaAdjEM #15	N	L 74–81	+7.0	P0.0	152.0	O155	108.0	118.2	68.5
Mar 11	PittAdjEM #120	N	W 98–88	−9.0	W+1.0	144.5	O186	148.8	133.6	65.8
Mar 7	StanfordAdjEM #77	H	L 84–85	−9.0	L−10.0	152.5	O169	122.3	123.7	68.7
Mar 2	#1DukeAdjEM #2	H	L 64–93	+9.0	L−20.0	150.5	O157	99.3	144.3	64.5
Feb 28	Notre DameAdjEM #106	A	L 90–96 OT	−6.5	L−12.5	155.0	O186	126.1	134.5	71.4
Feb 24	#11VirginiaAdjEM #15	A	L 61–90	+6.0	L−23.0	152.0	U151	86.7	128.0	70.3
Feb 17	#16North CarolinaAdjEM #29	H	W 82–58	−7.5	W+16.5	155.5	U140	127.6	90.2	64.3
Feb 14	MiamiAdjEM #30	H	L 76–77	−5.5	L−6.5	158.0	U153	117.3	118.8	64.8
Feb 9	#24LouisvilleAdjEM #14	A	L 77–118	+7.0	L−34.0	161.5	O195	95.7	146.7	80.4

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

TroyNC State

Efficiency

110.0

117.3

108.1

105.5

66.8

69.4

—

Shooting

51.5%

55.0%

53.2%

52.6%

33.0%

38.8%

74.2%

76.8%

36.2%

35.1%

Ball control & glass

17.3%

13.1%

16.7%

18.2%

34.6%

28.2%

31.7%

30.5%

9.9%

7.4%

10.9%

9.4%

Style

45.9%

43.4%

43.0%

39.8%

13.0%

12.9%

57.5%

54.6%

26.0%

31.0%

Roster

2.69

3.11

6'4.8"

6'6.7"

82.6%

63.1%

Offseason

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

Troy

Returning minutes: 82.6%Returning production: 78.3%

Lost

Thomas Dowd 36.1 mpg, 14.4 ppg · transferred to Auburn

Added

Javier Gilgeous-Glasgow no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 83% 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).

NC State

Returning minutes: 63.1%Returning production: 61.6%

Lost

Quadir Copeland 28.9 mpg, 13.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Tre Holloman 24.0 mpg, 8.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Matt Able 21.7 mpg, 8.8 ppg · transferred to North Carolina

Added

Zymicah Wilkins no D1 minutes last season
Jayme Kontuniemi no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 63% of last season's minutes; lost 2 of its top 5.

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.