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-conferenceACC NetworkLenovo Center, Raleigh, NCACC/SEC Men's Challenge
South Carolina
Efficiency #123
2025-26: 13-19 · 4-15 conf
@
NC State
Efficiency #34
2025-26: 20-14 · 11-9 conf
Tue, Dec 1 · 7:00 PM ET
71.4
win 19%
Projected
81.8
win 81%
No line posted yet.
Model: NCSU −10.3 · total 153.2 · 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 oneProjected total
Average D-I game
148.2
PaceAdjusted tempo: NC State 69.4, South Carolina 67.6 → 68.7 possessions
+0.9
NC State offense vs South Carolina defense
+5.2
South Carolina offense vs NC State defense
−1.2
Projected total
153.2
Axis starts at 145 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
NC State offense vs South Carolina defense
+5.2
South Carolina offense vs NC State defense
+1.2
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+4.0
NC State by 10.3
10.3
South Carolina 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 153.1 against a projected 153.2, and the margin steps add to +10.4 against +10.3. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help NC State.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 68.7, 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 South Carolina the slower (68.0, #202). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
68.7
per team, 40 min
Projected total
153.2
model
Projected team totals
71.4 / 81.8
South Carolina / NC State
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
67.6#241
South Carolina
69.4#88
NC State
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageNC State
Where NC State scores: ball control
NC State turns it over on 13.1% of possessions (#8); South Carolina forces turnovers on 14.6% of opponent possessions (#314). Expect about 13.3%, 3.5 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +4.3 points per 100 possessions.
ClashSouth Carolina
Style match: 3-point volume
South Carolina takes 44.4% of its shots from three; NC State lets opponents take 44.9% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 46.9% — both habits push the same way.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (NC State, South Carolina) 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 South Carolina at about 46.9% of its shots from three, NC State about 40.3%.
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 10.7% of South Carolina'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 South Carolina (#56 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).
ClashNC State
Style clash: 3-point volume
NC State takes 43.4% of its shots from three; South Carolina runs teams off the line (35.8% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 40.3% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.80 vs 0.64).
South Carolina has the ball
OffenseNC State allowsvs D1 avg
50.3% #226
52.7% #256
+0.2 pt/100
14.5% #42
18.2% #90
+0.5 pt/100
27.2% #289
30.5% #181
-1.3 pt/100
36.7% #137
36.9% #235
+0.2 pt/100
78.1% #14
—
+0.5 pt/100
South Carolina net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +0.2 pts/100
NC State has the ball
OffenseSouth Carolina allowsvs D1 avg
55.0% #35
51.6% #188
+3.3 pt/100
13.1% #8
14.6% #314
+4.3 pt/100
28.2% #258
32.1% #263
-0.4 pt/100
35.1% #175
34.0% #151
-0.1 pt/100
76.8% #36
—
+0.4 pt/100
NC State net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +7.4 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersSouth Carolinaoffense vsNC Statedefense
Share of shots by zone
South Carolina shoots
33.0
7.1
15.4
44.5
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 | 59.7%#130 | 58.4%#160 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 38.8%#200 | 37.2%#117 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 43.4%#32 | 37.2%#137 | 38.0% |
| Three | 31.1%#317 | 35.5%#281 | 33.7% |
NC Stateoffense vsSouth Carolinadefense
Share of shots by zone
NC State shoots
39.1
5.5
13.0
42.4
South Carolina allows
38.5
7.1
18.2
36.2
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 59.4%#148 | 63.9%#340 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 28.4%#354 | 35.3%#65 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 35.6%#273 | 40.5%#258 | 38.0% |
| Three | 38.8%#6 | 31.8%#56 | 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 numbersSouth Carolina
−0.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#203 of 365
Off reb %
27.2%
#289
Def reb %
67.9%
#263
Turnover %
14.5%
#42
Forced TO %
14.6%
#314
FT rate
36.7%
#137
FT allowed
34.0%
#151
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.0
Defensive rebounding−0.5
Ball security+1.6
Forcing turnovers−1.4
Foul shots drawn+0.4
Foul shots allowed+0.3
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%
#8
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 South Carolina’s −0.6 (#203).
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
South Carolina2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15 | Eli Ellis | G | Fr | 6'0" | 28-0 | 26.9 | 8.6 | 2.8 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 44.2% | 28.0% | 2.9 | 87.9% | 20.8% | |
| 10 | Myles Stute | G | Sr | 6'7" | 27-24 | 23.3 | 5.6 | 3.7 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 47.6% | 30.9% | 4.1 | 64.0% | 16.8% | |
| 31 | Elijah Strong | F | Jr | 6'8" | 32-18 | 17.1 | 10.0 | 2.3 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 49.3% | 27.8% | 3.0 | 75.9% | 36.1% | |
| 13 | Grant Polk | G | Fr | 6'6" | 30-0 | 12.9 | 3.8 | 1.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 51.5% | 32.9% | 2.6 | 90.9% | 17.1% | |
| 6 | EJ Walker | F | Fr | 6'7" | 22-6 | 15.9 | 2.9 | 2.7 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 49.1% | 24.1% | 1.3 | 47.1% | 13.9% | |
| 24 | Nordin Kapic | F | Sr | 6'8" | 22-4 | 10.8 | 3.9 | 2.0 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 52.1% | 34.0% | 2.1 | 69.2% | 21.7% | |
| 20 | Hayden Assemian | F | Fr | 6'6" | 24-4 | 9.8 | 2.4 | 2.5 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 69.4% | — | 0.0 | 57.1% | 13.7% | |
| 0 | Jordan Butler | F | Jr | 7'0" | 25-4 | 8.9 | 2.8 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 53.4% | 25.0% | 0.8 | 77.4% | 17.1% | |
| 14 | Eli Sparkman | G | Sr | 6'0" | 12-0 | 3.5 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 42.9% | 28.6% | 0.6 | — | 9.7% | |
| 7 | Abu Yarmah | G | Fr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 23 | Cam Scott | G | So | 6'6" | 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 | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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.
South Carolina2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15 | Eli Ellis | G | Fr | 6'0" | 28-0 | 26.9 | 8.6 | 2.8 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 44.2% | 28.0% | 2.9 | 87.9% | 20.8% | |
| 10 | Myles Stute | G | Sr | 6'7" | 27-24 | 23.3 | 5.6 | 3.7 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 47.6% | 30.9% | 4.1 | 64.0% | 16.8% | |
| 31 | Elijah Strong | F | Jr | 6'8" | 32-18 | 17.1 | 10.0 | 2.3 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 49.3% | 27.8% | 3.0 | 75.9% | 36.1% | |
| 13 | Grant Polk | G | Fr | 6'6" | 30-0 | 12.9 | 3.8 | 1.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 51.5% | 32.9% | 2.6 | 90.9% | 17.1% | |
| 6 | EJ Walker | F | Fr | 6'7" | 22-6 | 15.9 | 2.9 | 2.7 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 49.1% | 24.1% | 1.3 | 47.1% | 13.9% | |
| 24 | Nordin Kapic | F | Sr | 6'8" | 22-4 | 10.8 | 3.9 | 2.0 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 52.1% | 34.0% | 2.1 | 69.2% | 21.7% | |
| 20 | Hayden Assemian | F | Fr | 6'6" | 24-4 | 9.8 | 2.4 | 2.5 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 69.4% | — | 0.0 | 57.1% | 13.7% | |
| 0 | Jordan Butler | F | Jr | 7'0" | 25-4 | 8.9 | 2.8 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 53.4% | 25.0% | 0.8 | 77.4% | 17.1% | |
| 14 | Eli Sparkman | G | Sr | 6'0" | 12-0 | 3.5 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 42.9% | 28.6% | 0.6 | — | 9.7% | |
| 7 | Abu Yarmah | G | Fr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 23 | Cam Scott | G | So | 6'6" | 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 2025-26South Carolina
Against the spread
Season
14-17-1
Home
6-12-1
Road
7-3
Last 10
5-5
avg cover +0.1
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 5 of 10 as an underdogCovered 3 of 5 with a line of 10+
Over / under
Season
15-16-1
Home
9-10
Road
3-6-1
Last 10
3-7
avg vs total −2.5
Over in the last gameOver in 3 of 10 as an underdogOver in 1 of 5 with a line of 10+
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 11 | Oklahoma | N | L 74–86 | +8.0 | L−4.0 | 149.0 | O160 | 116.1 | 134.9 | 63.8 |
| Mar 7 | Ole Miss | A | W 64–61 | +7.0 | W+10.0 | 147.0 | U125 | 96.5 | 92.0 | 66.3 |
| Mar 3 | #23Tennessee | H | L 59–78 | +11.0 | L−8.0 | 142.0 | U137 | 95.8 | 126.6 | 61.6 |
| Feb 28 | Georgia | A | L 68–87 | +12.5 | L−6.5 | 159.0 | U155 | 107.0 | 136.9 | 63.5 |
| Feb 24 | Kentucky | H | L 63–72 | +7.5 | L−1.5 | 151.0 | U135 | 87.7 | 100.3 | 71.8 |
| Feb 21 | Mississippi St | H | W 97–89 | +1.0 | W+9.0 | 152.0 | O186 | 133.7 | 122.7 | 72.5 |
| Feb 17 | #12Florida | A | L 62–76 | +23.0 | W+9.0 | 155.0 | U138 | 92.5 | 113.4 | 67.0 |
| Feb 14 | Alabama | A | L 75–89 | +18.0 | W+4.0 | 169.5 | U164 | 99.1 | 117.6 | 75.7 |
| Feb 7 | Missouri | H | L 59–78 | +3.0 | L−16.0 | 147.0 | U137 | 90.0 | 119.0 | 65.5 |
| Feb 3 | Texas | A | L 75–84 | +13.5 | W+4.5 | 149.5 | O159 | 109.9 | 123.1 | 68.3 |
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 | #11Texas | N | L 66–68 | −1.0 | L−3.0 | 157.5 | U134 | 97.5 | 100.5 | 67.7 |
| Mar 12 | #10Virginia | N | L 74–81 | +7.0 | P0.0 | 152.0 | O155 | 108.0 | 118.2 | 68.5 |
| Mar 11 | Pitt | N | W 98–88 | −9.0 | W+1.0 | 144.5 | O186 | 148.8 | 133.6 | 65.8 |
| Mar 7 | Stanford | H | L 84–85 | −9.0 | L−10.0 | 152.5 | O169 | 122.3 | 123.7 | 68.7 |
| Mar 2 | #1Duke | H | L 64–93 | +9.0 | L−20.0 | 150.5 | O157 | 99.3 | 144.3 | 64.5 |
| Feb 28 | Notre Dame | A | L 90–96 OT | −6.5 | L−12.5 | 155.0 | O186 | 126.1 | 134.5 | 71.4 |
| Feb 24 | #11Virginia | A | L 61–90 | +6.0 | L−23.0 | 152.0 | U151 | 86.7 | 128.0 | 70.3 |
| Feb 17 | #16North Carolina | H | W 82–58 | −7.5 | W+16.5 | 155.5 | U140 | 127.6 | 90.2 | 64.3 |
| Feb 14 | Miami | H | L 76–77 | −5.5 | L−6.5 | 158.0 | U153 | 117.3 | 118.8 | 64.8 |
| Feb 9 | #24Louisville | 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 homeSouth CarolinaNC State
Efficiency
109.7
117.3
107.3
105.5
67.6
69.4
—
—
Shooting
50.3%
55.0%
53.2%
52.6%
31.1%
38.8%
78.1%
76.8%
36.7%
35.1%
Ball control & glass
14.5%
13.1%
14.6%
18.2%
27.2%
28.2%
32.1%
30.5%
9.3%
7.4%
11.1%
9.4%
Style
44.4%
43.4%
39.4%
39.8%
8.7%
12.9%
52.9%
54.6%
35.7%
31.0%
Roster
2.25
3.11
6'5.7"
6'6.7"
52.6%
63.1%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputSouth Carolina
Returning minutes: 52.6%Returning production: 42.7%
Lost
- Meechie Johnson 31.5 mpg, 17.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Kobe Knox 29.9 mpg, 10.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Mike Sharavjamts 29.7 mpg, 10.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Christ Essandoko 4.9 mpg, 1.3 ppg · transferred to Bowling Green
Added
- Abu Yarmah no D1 minutes last season
- Cam Scott no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 53% of last season's minutes; lost 3 of its top 5.
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 lastNo 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.