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 siteAcrisure Arena, Palm Springs, CAAcrisure Series
SMU
Efficiency #44
2025-26: 20-14 · 9-11 conf
vs
Utah State
Efficiency #24
2025-26: 29-7 · 18-5 conf
Wed, Nov 25 · 7:00 PM ET
77.6
win 41%
Projected
80.2
win 59%
No line posted yet.
Model: USU −2.6 · total 157.9 · 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: Utah State 68.3, SMU 69.1 → 69.2 possessions
+1.8
Utah State offense vs SMU defense
+5.2
SMU offense vs Utah State defense
+2.6
Projected total
157.9
Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Utah State offense vs SMU defense
+5.2
SMU offense vs Utah State defense
−2.6
Utah State by 2.6
2.6
SMU side ◂▸ Utah State side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 157.8 against a projected 157.9. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Utah State.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 69.2, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, SMU is the faster team (70.6, #73 of 365) and Utah State the slower (68.2, #191). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
69.2
per team, 40 min
Projected total
157.9
model
Projected team totals
77.6 / 80.2
SMU / Utah State
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
69.1#108
SMU
68.3#178
Utah State
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageUtah State
Where Utah State scores: shooting
Utah State shoots an effective 56.3% (#18); SMU allows 51.6% (#189). Expect about 54.3%, 3.0 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +4.3 points per 100 possessions.
ClashUtah State
Style match: ball movement
Utah State assists on 59.9% of its made baskets; SMU allows assists on 60.9% of opponents' baskets (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 62.8% — both habits push the same way.
AdvantageSMU
Where SMU scores: the offensive glass
SMU rebounds 35.4% of its own misses (#37); Utah State lets opponents grab 32.8% of their own misses (#290). Expect about 35.0%, 4.6 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.8 points per 100 possessions.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (SMU) 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 SMU at about 37.4% of its shots from three, Utah State about 45.8%.
TurnoversSMU
SMU turns it over
Projected turnover rate of 18.4% is worth roughly -2.0 points per 100 possessions against SMU's offense.
DefenseUtah State
Utah State's ball-hawking
Utah State ranks #18 nationally in steal rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 11.4% of SMU's possessions to end in a steal against this defense.
SMU has the ball
OffenseUtah State allowsvs D1 avg
55.6% #26
49.7% #87
+2.4 pt/100
15.7% #116
20.3% #18
-2.0 pt/100
35.4% #37
32.8% #290
+2.8 pt/100
30.4% #301
39.2% #292
+0.0 pt/100
74.3% #117
—
+0.2 pt/100
SMU net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +3.4 pts/100
Utah State has the ball
OffenseSMU allowsvs D1 avg
56.3% #18
51.6% #189
+4.3 pt/100
15.1% #70
16.8% #164
+1.1 pt/100
32.7% #97
31.6% #237
+1.4 pt/100
38.8% #83
32.1% #107
+0.0 pt/100
71.0% #239
—
-0.1 pt/100
Utah State net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +6.7 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersSMUoffense vsUtah Statedefense
Share of shots by zone
SMU shoots
34.6
6.9
23.0
35.4
Utah State allows
38.4
5.3
15.9
40.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 64.0%#38 | 55.1%#63 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 48.5%#17 | 38.5%#145 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 44.1%#25 | 33.2%#33 | 38.0% |
| Three | 37.1%#27 | 34.5%#222 | 33.7% |
Utah Stateoffense vsSMUdefense
Share of shots by zone
Utah State shoots
45.1
4.7
10.4
39.8
SMU allows
31.4
4.3
16.6
47.8
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 64.3%#31 | 60.8%#263 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 45.2%#61 | 37.0%#111 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 41.6%#65 | 38.3%#169 | 38.0% |
| Three | 34.3%#155 | 34.1%#188 | 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 numbersSMU
+1.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#112 of 365
Off reb %
35.4%
#37
Def reb %
68.4%
#237
Turnover %
15.7%
#116
Forced TO %
16.8%
#164
FT rate
30.4%
#301
FT allowed
32.1%
#107
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.6
Defensive rebounding−0.3
Ball security+0.7
Forcing turnovers+0.1
Foul shots drawn−1.2
Foul shots allowed+0.8
Utah State
+3.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#43 of 365
Off reb %
32.7%
#97
Def reb %
67.2%
#290
Turnover %
15.1%
#70
Forced TO %
20.3%
#18
FT rate
38.8%
#83
FT allowed
39.2%
#292
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.8
Defensive rebounding−0.7
Ball security+1.2
Forcing turnovers+2.5
Foul shots drawn+1.0
Foul shots allowed−1.0
Utah State has more extra scoring chances per game: +3.6 (#43 of 365) to SMU’s +1.7 (#112).
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
SMU2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24 | Samet Yigitoglu | C | So | 7'2" | 34-34 | 28.9 | 10.7 | 7.9 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 62.8% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 49.5% | 20.7% | |
| 3 | Corey Washington | F | Sr | 6'6" | 34-34 | 27.8 | 11.4 | 4.9 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 56.8% | 38.8% | 3.4 | 76.9% | 21.1% | |
| 10 | Jaden Toombs | C | Fr | 6'10" | 27-5 | 20.0 | 8.3 | 4.6 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 58.6% | 23.1% | 1.0 | 65.8% | 22.8% | |
| 7 | Jermaine O'Neal Jr. | F | Fr | 6'5" | 34-2 | 15.0 | 4.5 | 2.0 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 51.1% | 37.1% | 1.8 | 91.7% | 17.8% | |
| 9 | B.J. Davis-Ray | G | Fr | 6'6" | 32-0 | 7.1 | 1.3 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 41.1% | 21.7% | 0.7 | 75.0% | 13.9% | |
| 4 | Sam Walters | F | Jr | 6'9" | 24-2 | 9.3 | 2.6 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 52.5% | 34.9% | 1.8 | 0.0% | 17.9% | |
| 13 | Mitchell Holmes | F | Fr | 6'10" | 25-0 | 5.5 | 1.7 | 0.9 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 70.4% | — | 0.0 | 100.0% | 13.1% | |
| 1 | Chance Puryear | F | Fr | 6'7" | 11-0 | 3.2 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 30.0% | 33.3% | 0.3 | 33.3% | 16.3% | |
| 22 | Nigel Walls | F | Fr | 6'10" | 9-0 | 3.3 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1 | — | 6.9% | |
| 31 | Trey Utter | G | Sr | 6'0" | 2-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 0.0% | |
| 33 | Niccolo Kalischer-Stork | G | Fr | 6'2" | 2-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | — | — | 0.0 | 0.0% | 49.3% | |
| 8 | Billy White III | 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.
Utah State2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | Mason Falslev | G | Jr | 6'4" | 36-36 | 32.0 | 16.0 | 5.7 | 3.1 | 1.5 | 57.2% | 39.0% | 3.4 | 76.4% | 27.0% | |
| 2 | MJ Collins Jr. | G | Sr | 6'4" | 36-36 | 30.8 | 17.5 | 2.5 | 1.6 | 1.0 | 58.2% | 36.1% | 6.3 | 81.0% | 28.8% | |
| 22 | Karson Templin | F | Jr | 6'9" | 36-8 | 19.1 | 8.8 | 4.2 | 0.8 | 1.0 | 55.0% | 32.8% | 1.8 | 65.5% | 26.4% | |
| 35 | Adlan Elamin | F | Fr | 6'9" | 35-28 | 19.5 | 6.7 | 3.1 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 52.1% | 30.2% | 2.7 | 83.0% | 20.5% | |
| 11 | Garry Clark | F | Sr | 6'9" | 36-1 | 16.6 | 6.9 | 4.3 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 71.6% | 14.3% | 0.2 | 53.9% | 20.3% | |
| 1 | Elijah Perryman | G | Fr | 6'2" | 36-1 | 13.9 | 4.4 | 1.6 | 3.1 | 1.4 | 50.0% | 29.6% | 1.5 | 80.0% | 23.2% | |
| 32 | Zach Keller | F | Sr | 6'10" | 35-27 | 13.6 | 3.5 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 61.0% | 47.1% | 0.5 | 55.3% | 15.0% | |
| 3 | Tucker Anderson | F | Jr | 6'9" | 25-8 | 11.7 | 3.4 | 1.2 | 0.7 | 0.1 | 53.5% | 36.0% | 2.0 | 71.4% | 16.0% | |
| 5 | Jordy Barnes | G | So | 6'4" | 17-0 | 5.5 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 31.0% | 23.1% | 0.8 | 50.0% | 17.9% | |
| 20 | Luke Kearney | F | Jr | 6'7" | 12-0 | 4.1 | 1.7 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 47.4% | 26.7% | 1.3 | 100.0% | 26.0% | |
| 4 | Brayden Boe | G | Fr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 13 | David Iweze | F | Fr | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 24 | Kingston Tosi | 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.
SMU2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24 | Samet Yigitoglu | C | So | 7'2" | 34-34 | 28.9 | 10.7 | 7.9 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 62.8% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 49.5% | 20.7% | |
| 3 | Corey Washington | F | Sr | 6'6" | 34-34 | 27.8 | 11.4 | 4.9 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 56.8% | 38.8% | 3.4 | 76.9% | 21.1% | |
| 10 | Jaden Toombs | C | Fr | 6'10" | 27-5 | 20.0 | 8.3 | 4.6 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 58.6% | 23.1% | 1.0 | 65.8% | 22.8% | |
| 7 | Jermaine O'Neal Jr. | F | Fr | 6'5" | 34-2 | 15.0 | 4.5 | 2.0 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 51.1% | 37.1% | 1.8 | 91.7% | 17.8% | |
| 9 | B.J. Davis-Ray | G | Fr | 6'6" | 32-0 | 7.1 | 1.3 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 41.1% | 21.7% | 0.7 | 75.0% | 13.9% | |
| 4 | Sam Walters | F | Jr | 6'9" | 24-2 | 9.3 | 2.6 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 52.5% | 34.9% | 1.8 | 0.0% | 17.9% | |
| 13 | Mitchell Holmes | F | Fr | 6'10" | 25-0 | 5.5 | 1.7 | 0.9 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 70.4% | — | 0.0 | 100.0% | 13.1% | |
| 1 | Chance Puryear | F | Fr | 6'7" | 11-0 | 3.2 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 30.0% | 33.3% | 0.3 | 33.3% | 16.3% | |
| 22 | Nigel Walls | F | Fr | 6'10" | 9-0 | 3.3 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1 | — | 6.9% | |
| 31 | Trey Utter | G | Sr | 6'0" | 2-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 0.0% | |
| 33 | Niccolo Kalischer-Stork | G | Fr | 6'2" | 2-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | — | — | 0.0 | 0.0% | 49.3% | |
| 8 | Billy White III | 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 2025-26SMU
Against the spread
Season
14-18-2
Home
7-10-1
Road
4-6-1
Last 10
4-6
avg cover −3.0
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 2 of 6 as a favoriteCovered 2 of 4 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
19-13-2
Home
10-8
Road
6-4-1
Last 10
5-4-1
avg vs total −1.6
Over in the last gameOver in 2 of 6 as a favorite, 1 pushOver in 3 of 4 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 18 | #11Miami OH | N | L 79–89 | −7.0 | L−17.0 | 160.5 | O168 | 119.2 | 134.3 | 66.3 |
| Mar 11 | #24Louisville | N | L 58–62 | +6.5 | W+2.5 | 163.5 | U120 | 94.4 | 100.9 | 61.5 |
| Mar 10 | Syracuse | N | W 86–69 | −4.0 | W+13.0 | 155.0 | P155 | 130.2 | 104.4 | 66.1 |
| Mar 7 | Florida St | A | L 78–91 | +1.0 | L−12.0 | 158.5 | O169 | 105.8 | 123.4 | 73.7 |
| Mar 4 | #22Miami | H | L 69–77 | −1.5 | L−9.5 | 156.5 | U146 | 99.4 | 111.0 | 69.4 |
| Feb 28 | Stanford | A | L 75–95 | +1.0 | L−19.0 | 154.5 | O170 | 116.6 | 147.6 | 64.3 |
| Feb 25 | California | A | L 69–73 | −4.0 | L−8.0 | 163.0 | U142 | 98.9 | 104.7 | 69.7 |
| Feb 21 | Boston College | H | W 94–70 | −15.5 | W+8.5 | 150.0 | O164 | 143.1 | 106.6 | 65.7 |
| Feb 17 | #21Louisville | H | W 95–85 | +4.0 | W+14.0 | 168.0 | O180 | 124.3 | 111.2 | 76.4 |
| Feb 14 | Syracuse | A | L 78–79 | −2.0 | L−3.0 | 158.0 | U157 | 119.4 | 121.0 | 65.3 |
Utah State
Against the spread
Season
15-19-1
Home
5-9
Road
4-8
Last 10
4-6
avg cover −3.5
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 4 of 9 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
20-15
Home
8-6
Road
7-5
Last 10
6-4
avg vs total +2.4
Under in the last gameOver in 6 of 9 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22 | #1Arizona | N | L 66–78 | +11.5 | L−0.5 | 154.0 | U144 | 102.5 | 121.2 | 64.4 |
| Mar 20 | #8Villanova | N | W 86–76 | −2.0 | W+8.0 | 147.5 | O162 | 126.2 | 111.5 | 68.1 |
| Mar 14 | San Diego St | N | W 73–62 | −2.5 | W+8.5 | 146.0 | U135 | 111.8 | 95.0 | 65.3 |
| Mar 13 | Nevada | N | W 79–66 | −6.5 | W+6.5 | 144.5 | O145 | 108.1 | 90.3 | 73.1 |
| Mar 12 | UNLV | N | W 80–60 | −8.5 | W+11.5 | 156.5 | U140 | 114.6 | 86.0 | 69.8 |
| Mar 7 | New Mexico | H | W 94–90 | −7.5 | L−3.5 | 156.5 | O184 | 135.8 | 130.0 | 69.2 |
| Mar 3 | UNLV | A | L 65–92 | −7.5 | L−34.5 | 156.5 | O157 | 92.5 | 130.9 | 70.3 |
| Feb 28 | Grand Canyon | H | W 74–69 | −9.5 | L−4.5 | 148.0 | U143 | 116.4 | 108.5 | 63.6 |
| Feb 25 | San Diego St | A | L 72–89 | −1.0 | L−18.0 | 147.0 | O161 | 103.5 | 128.0 | 69.5 |
| Feb 21 | Nevada | A | L 77–80 | −5.0 | L−8.0 | 148.0 | O157 | 114.2 | 118.7 | 67.4 |
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 homeSMUUtah State
Efficiency
117.0
117.8
106.7
103.7
69.1
68.3
—
—
Shooting
55.6%
56.3%
55.6%
59.6%
37.1%
34.3%
74.3%
71.0%
30.4%
38.8%
Ball control & glass
15.7%
15.1%
16.8%
20.3%
35.4%
32.7%
31.6%
32.8%
9.3%
8.0%
7.5%
9.8%
Style
35.9%
40.8%
43.7%
47.4%
13.4%
16.2%
54.9%
59.9%
22.4%
37.8%
Roster
2.18
2.95
6'9"
6'6.4"
53.0%
78.0%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputSMU
Returning minutes: 53.0%Returning production: 45.5%
Lost
- Boopie Miller 34.1 mpg, 18.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Jaron Pierre Jr. 33.2 mpg, 17.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- B.J. Edwards 27.4 mpg, 10.5 ppg · transferred to Oklahoma
Added
- Billy White III 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 (1 transferred).
Utah State
Returning minutes: 78.0%Returning production: 78.3%
Lost
- Drake Allen 24.8 mpg, 7.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Kolby King 19.3 mpg, 7.5 ppg · transferred to Auburn
Added
- Kingston Tosi no D1 minutes last season
- David Iweze no D1 minutes last season
- Brayden Boe no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 78% of last season's minutes; lost 2 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).
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.