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-conferenceJames A. Rhodes Arena, Akron, OH
Tulane
Efficiency #239
2025-26: 18-15 · 9-11 conf
@
Akron
Efficiency #48
2025-26: 29-6 · 20-1 conf
Sat, Nov 14 · TBD
71.2
win 13%
Projected
84.4
win 87%
No line posted yet.
Model: AKR −13.2 · total 155.5 · 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: Akron 70.2, Tulane 68.0 → 69.8 possessions
+3.3
Akron offense vs Tulane defense
+6.6
Tulane offense vs Akron defense
−2.6
Projected total
155.5
Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Akron offense vs Tulane defense
+6.6
Tulane offense vs Akron defense
+2.6
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+4.0
Akron by 13.2
13.2
Tulane side ◂▸ Akron side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Akron.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 69.8, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Akron is the faster team (71.1, #47 of 365) and Tulane the slower (67.9, #203). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
69.8
per team, 40 min
Projected total
155.5
model
Projected team totals
71.2 / 84.4
Tulane / Akron
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
68.0#212
Tulane
70.2#38
Akron
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageAkron
Where Akron scores: shooting
Akron shoots an effective 58.2% (#9); Tulane allows 50.7% (#140). Expect about 55.0%, 3.7 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +5.2 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageTulane
Where Tulane struggles: the offensive glass
Tulane rebounds 22.8% of its own misses (#352); Akron lets opponents grab 29.9% of their own misses (#156). Expect about 24.8%, 5.6 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.4 points per 100 possessions.
GlassAkron
Akron owns the glass
Projected offensive rebound rate of 35.2% is worth roughly +2.9 points per 100 possessions for Akron's offense.
ClashTulane
Style match: 3-point volume
Tulane takes 45.0% of its shots from three; Akron lets opponents take 43.1% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 46.2% — both habits push the same way.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (Akron) 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 Tulane at about 46.2% of its shots from three, Akron about 44.4%.
DefenseTulane
Tulane's shot-blocking
Tulane ranks #29 nationally in block rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 11.3% of Akron's two-point attempts to get blocked against this defense.
Tulane has the ball
OffenseAkron allowsvs D1 avg
49.4% #275
51.2% #173
-1.6 pt/100
15.4% #97
18.3% #86
-0.3 pt/100
22.8% #352
29.9% #156
-3.4 pt/100
43.5% #14
30.4% #70
+0.2 pt/100
76.7% #40
—
+0.4 pt/100
Tulane net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -4.7 pts/100
Akron has the ball
OffenseTulane allowsvs D1 avg
58.2% #9
50.7% #140
+5.2 pt/100
15.5% #102
17.1% #140
+0.6 pt/100
33.4% #78
35.8% #352
+2.9 pt/100
29.2% #327
38.1% #262
-0.1 pt/100
75.4% #69
—
+0.3 pt/100
Akron net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +8.9 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersTulaneoffense vsAkrondefense
Share of shots by zone
Tulane shoots
37.2
4.0
14.5
44.4
Akron allows
37.8
5.5
13.5
43.2
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 59.0%#162 | 54.9%#58 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 27.0%#362 | 36.3%#96 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 32.6%#335 | 32.7%#25 | 38.0% |
| Three | 32.0%#279 | 35.5%#284 | 33.7% |
Akronoffense vsTulanedefense
Share of shots by zone
Akron shoots
38.2
4.4
12.0
45.4
Tulane allows
40.6
6.9
12.8
39.7
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 63.6%#44 | 54.5%#49 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 53.8%#3 | 42.4%#236 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 42.8%#41 | 36.8%#124 | 38.0% |
| Three | 38.2%#15 | 34.5%#216 | 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 numbersTulane
−1.5extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#255 of 365
Off reb %
22.8%
#352
Def reb %
64.2%
#352
Turnover %
15.4%
#97
Forced TO %
17.1%
#140
FT rate
43.5%
#14
FT allowed
38.1%
#262
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−2.5
Defensive rebounding−1.7
Ball security+0.9
Forcing turnovers+0.3
Foul shots drawn+2.2
Foul shots allowed−0.7
Akron
+2.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#55 of 365
Off reb %
33.4%
#78
Def reb %
70.1%
#156
Turnover %
15.5%
#102
Forced TO %
18.3%
#86
FT rate
29.2%
#327
FT allowed
30.4%
#70
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.0
Defensive rebounding+0.2
Ball security+0.9
Forcing turnovers+1.1
Foul shots drawn−1.5
Foul shots allowed+1.2
Akron has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.9 (#55 of 365) to Tulane’s −1.5 (#255).
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
Tulane2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Tulane's 2026-27 roster yet — these are last season's players.
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Rowan Brumbaugh | G | Jr | 6'4" | 33-33 | 36.1 | 19.2 | 4.9 | 3.5 | 2.3 | 52.8% | 36.0% | 5.3 | 80.4% | 29.9% | |
| 99 | Curtis Williams Jr. | G | Jr | 6'6" | 33-32 | 32.1 | 12.4 | 4.8 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 49.4% | 33.5% | 6.2 | 82.5% | 24.4% | |
| 22 | Asher Woods | G | Sr | 6'3" | 33-31 | 30.9 | 12.8 | 3.2 | 2.0 | 1.8 | 45.7% | 27.2% | 3.5 | 85.0% | 25.5% | |
| 5 | Scotty Middleton | F | Jr | 6'6" | 33-19 | 25.7 | 6.9 | 4.0 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 52.7% | 36.9% | 4.3 | 73.9% | 16.5% | |
| 0 | Tyler Ringgold | F | So | 6'8" | 32-32 | 24.8 | 9.4 | 3.9 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 49.3% | 29.9% | 2.4 | 62.8% | 24.4% | |
| 23 | Percy Daniels | C | Sr | 6'10" | 32-4 | 16.5 | 2.3 | 2.2 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 62.8% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 72.4% | 8.0% | |
| 9 | KJ Greene | G | So | 6'3" | 32-1 | 15.1 | 4.4 | 1.3 | 1.6 | 0.9 | 40.1% | 22.5% | 1.3 | 78.9% | 20.6% | |
| 1 | Josiah Moore | G | So | 6'4" | 32-2 | 12.6 | 3.7 | 1.9 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 48.4% | 15.8% | 0.6 | 67.5% | 19.3% | |
| 11 | Luke Rasmussen | G | So | 6'8" | 17-11 | 15.1 | 2.6 | 1.8 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 46.6% | 23.3% | 1.8 | 27.3% | 13.6% | |
| 55 | Davion Bradford | C | Sr | 7'0" | 11-0 | 4.0 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.2 | 75.0% | 11.7% | |
| 15 | Robert Moore | G | Fr | 6'6" | 5-0 | 2.6 | 1.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 44.4% | 25.0% | 1.6 | — | 40.0% | |
| 34 | Jake Shapiro | G | Jr | 6'1" | 5-0 | 1.2 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 112.5% | 75.0% | 0.8 | — | 38.9% | |
| 32 | Luke Cronin | F | Jr | 6'8" | 2-0 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 19.9% | |
| 77 | Vasilije Kuridza | F | Fr | 6'9" | 2-0 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 0.0% | |
| 13 | Joseph Teich | G | So | 5'10" | 2-0 | 1.0 | 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.
Akron2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | Tahj Staveskieat Incarnate Word | G | Sr | 6'1" | 31-30 | 35.3 | 17.3 | 3.9 | 4.1 | 2.7 | 52.0% | 37.3% | 6.2 | 79.8% | 31.1% | |
| 12 | Evan Mahaffey | F | Sr | 6'6" | 35-35 | 28.5 | 10.2 | 5.6 | 3.4 | 1.3 | 60.5% | 30.4% | 1.3 | 57.6% | 19.0% | |
| 10 | Max Burtonat W Michigan | F | Sr | 6'10" | 30-30 | 24.6 | 5.9 | 5.2 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 47.9% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 69.1% | 16.3% | |
| 8 | Ty Penceat Illinois St | G | Sr | 6'6" | 36-23 | 23.5 | 9.4 | 4.4 | 1.6 | 0.9 | 59.2% | 36.0% | 2.1 | 69.9% | 21.9% | |
| 4 | Buddy Hammer Jr.at North Texas | F | Sr | 6'7" | 29-0 | 14.2 | 4.1 | 2.8 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 51.5% | 31.6% | 0.7 | 77.3% | 16.9% | |
| 21 | Zach Halligan | F | Jr | 6'5" | 33-23 | 11.9 | 2.7 | 2.3 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 51.5% | 25.7% | 1.1 | 80.0% | 12.5% | |
| 23 | Marvin Musiime-Kamali | F | Jr | 6'6" | 35-0 | 8.8 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 70.0% | — | 0.0 | 65.2% | 11.1% | |
| 22 | Colin Whiteat Ohio State | F | Jr | 6'6" | 29-1 | 8.8 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 42.9% | 11.1% | 0.6 | 20.0% | 8.5% | |
| 5 | Chabi Barre | F | Sr | 6'10" | 18-0 | 6.4 | 3.1 | 2.0 | 0.1 | 0.6 | 76.2% | — | 0.0 | 77.4% | 21.9% | |
| 9 | Cody Head | G | Jr | 6'3" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 7 | Josh Henderson | G | Fr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 6 | Tai Perkins | G | Fr | 6'0" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 19 | Devan Christion | F | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Exavier Wilson | G | Fr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 15 | RJ Jones | G | Fr | 6'5" | 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.
Transfers in: Max Burton (from W Michigan), Buddy Hammer Jr. (from North Texas), Ty Pence (from Illinois St), Tahj Staveskie (from Incarnate Word), Colin White (from Ohio State)
Tulane2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Tulane's 2026-27 roster yet — these are last season's players.
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Rowan Brumbaugh | G | Jr | 6'4" | 33-33 | 36.1 | 19.2 | 4.9 | 3.5 | 2.3 | 52.8% | 36.0% | 5.3 | 80.4% | 29.9% | |
| 99 | Curtis Williams Jr. | G | Jr | 6'6" | 33-32 | 32.1 | 12.4 | 4.8 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 49.4% | 33.5% | 6.2 | 82.5% | 24.4% | |
| 22 | Asher Woods | G | Sr | 6'3" | 33-31 | 30.9 | 12.8 | 3.2 | 2.0 | 1.8 | 45.7% | 27.2% | 3.5 | 85.0% | 25.5% | |
| 5 | Scotty Middleton | F | Jr | 6'6" | 33-19 | 25.7 | 6.9 | 4.0 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 52.7% | 36.9% | 4.3 | 73.9% | 16.5% | |
| 0 | Tyler Ringgold | F | So | 6'8" | 32-32 | 24.8 | 9.4 | 3.9 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 49.3% | 29.9% | 2.4 | 62.8% | 24.4% | |
| 23 | Percy Daniels | C | Sr | 6'10" | 32-4 | 16.5 | 2.3 | 2.2 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 62.8% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 72.4% | 8.0% | |
| 9 | KJ Greene | G | So | 6'3" | 32-1 | 15.1 | 4.4 | 1.3 | 1.6 | 0.9 | 40.1% | 22.5% | 1.3 | 78.9% | 20.6% | |
| 1 | Josiah Moore | G | So | 6'4" | 32-2 | 12.6 | 3.7 | 1.9 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 48.4% | 15.8% | 0.6 | 67.5% | 19.3% | |
| 11 | Luke Rasmussen | G | So | 6'8" | 17-11 | 15.1 | 2.6 | 1.8 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 46.6% | 23.3% | 1.8 | 27.3% | 13.6% | |
| 55 | Davion Bradford | C | Sr | 7'0" | 11-0 | 4.0 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.2 | 75.0% | 11.7% | |
| 15 | Robert Moore | G | Fr | 6'6" | 5-0 | 2.6 | 1.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 44.4% | 25.0% | 1.6 | — | 40.0% | |
| 34 | Jake Shapiro | G | Jr | 6'1" | 5-0 | 1.2 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 112.5% | 75.0% | 0.8 | — | 38.9% | |
| 32 | Luke Cronin | F | Jr | 6'8" | 2-0 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 19.9% | |
| 77 | Vasilije Kuridza | F | Fr | 6'9" | 2-0 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 0.0% | |
| 13 | Joseph Teich | G | So | 5'10" | 2-0 | 1.0 | 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 2025-26Tulane
Against the spread
Season
15-17
Home
7-10
Road
6-4
Last 10
6-4
avg cover −3.0
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 4 of 8 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
14-18
Home
6-11
Road
5-5
Last 10
4-6
avg vs total −0.9
Under 2 straightOver in 3 of 8 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 12 | Charlotte | N | L 60–74 | +1.0 | L−13.0 | 144.5 | U134 | 98.3 | 121.3 | 61.0 |
| Mar 11 | Memphis | N | W 81–69 | +4.5 | W+16.5 | 150.5 | U150 | 114.8 | 97.8 | 70.5 |
| Mar 8 | Memphis | H | L 95–96 OT | +2.5 | W+1.5 | 154.0 | O191 | 122.9 | 124.2 | 77.3 |
| Mar 5 | Temple | A | L 60–89 | +5.0 | L−24.0 | 145.0 | O149 | 89.1 | 132.2 | 67.3 |
| Mar 1 | South Florida | A | L 62–90 | +15.0 | L−13.0 | 154.5 | U152 | 85.1 | 123.5 | 72.8 |
| Feb 25 | Tulsa | H | L 56–90 | +5.5 | L−28.5 | 156.5 | U146 | 84.4 | 135.6 | 66.4 |
| Feb 22 | Rice | H | W 81–75 | −5.0 | W+1.0 | 147.5 | O156 | 118.1 | 109.3 | 68.6 |
| Feb 19 | North Texas | A | W 77–71 | +6.5 | W+12.5 | 137.5 | O148 | 117.4 | 108.3 | 65.6 |
| Feb 15 | UAB | A | W 55–54 | +7.0 | W+8.0 | 152.5 | U109 | 87.7 | 86.1 | 62.7 |
| Feb 11 | Temple | H | W 77–66 | −2.0 | W+9.0 | 145.0 | U143 | 113.4 | 97.2 | 67.9 |
Akron
Against the spread
Season
17-16
Home
6-7
Road
8-4
Last 10
5-5
avg cover +0.9
Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 5 of 9 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 6 with a line of 10+
Over / under
Season
15-17-1
Home
10-3
Road
2-10
Last 10
3-7
avg vs total −3.4
Over in the last gameOver in 2 of 9 as a favoriteOver in 2 of 6 with a line of 10+
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20 | #5Texas Tech | N | L 71–91 | +6.5 | L−13.5 | 154.0 | O162 | 108.8 | 139.4 | 65.3 |
| Mar 14 | Toledo | N | W 79–76 | −8.0 | L−5.0 | 157.5 | U155 | 115.8 | 111.4 | 68.2 |
| Mar 13 | Kent State | N | W 75–68 | −6.5 | W+0.5 | 163.0 | U143 | 109.7 | 99.5 | 68.3 |
| Mar 12 | Buffalo | N | W 73–70 | −12.5 | L−9.5 | 158.0 | U143 | 105.0 | 100.7 | 69.5 |
| Mar 6 | N Illinois | H | W 94–55 | −23.5 | W+15.5 | 156.0 | U149 | 135.8 | 79.5 | 69.2 |
| Mar 3 | C Michigan | A | W 77–64 | −11.5 | W+1.5 | 158.5 | U141 | 113.2 | 94.1 | 68.0 |
| Feb 27 | Kent State | A | W 92–70 | −3.5 | W+18.5 | 165.0 | U162 | 130.7 | 99.4 | 70.4 |
| Feb 24 | Buffalo | H | W 99–85 | −15.0 | L−1.0 | 160.0 | O184 | 123.4 | 106.0 | 80.2 |
| Feb 20 | Ball State | A | W 78–65 | −14.0 | L−1.0 | 147.5 | U143 | 116.1 | 96.7 | 67.2 |
| Feb 17 | W Michigan | A | W 90–73 | −14.0 | W+3.0 | 159.0 | O163 | 132.6 | 107.5 | 67.9 |
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 homeTulaneAkron
Efficiency
106.8
116.2
110.2
106.5
68.0
70.2
—
—
Shooting
49.4%
58.2%
50.5%
58.8%
32.0%
38.2%
76.7%
75.4%
43.5%
29.2%
Ball control & glass
15.4%
15.5%
17.1%
18.3%
22.8%
33.4%
35.8%
29.9%
8.7%
9.0%
10.9%
8.4%
Style
45.0%
44.8%
37.1%
42.0%
10.8%
15.6%
54.8%
57.1%
26.0%
36.9%
Roster
2.94
3.81
6'5.5"
6'5.6"
—
25.9%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputTulane
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Tulane'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.)
Akron
Returning minutes: 25.9%Returning production: 25.3%
Lost
- Tavari Johnson 31.9 mpg, 19.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Shammah Scott 26.7 mpg, 12.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Amani Lyles 26.4 mpg, 14.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Eric Mahaffey 21.3 mpg, 7.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Sharron Young 18.6 mpg, 7.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Bowen Hardman 18.4 mpg, 7.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Tahj Staveskie from Incarnate Word · 35.3 mpg, 17.3 ppg last season
- Max Burton from W Michigan · 23.8 mpg, 5.7 ppg last season
- Ty Pence from Illinois St · 23.5 mpg, 9.4 ppg last season
- Buddy Hammer Jr. from North Texas · 12.5 mpg, 3.6 ppg last season
- Colin White from Ohio State · 7.5 mpg, 0.7 ppg last season
- Josh Henderson no D1 minutes last season
Returns 26% 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| Date | Season | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Sat, Dec 6 | 2025-26 | Akron 88 – 71 Tulane |
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.