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-conferencePurcell Pavilion, South Bend, IN
TCU
Efficiency #51
2025-26: 23-12 · 12-8 conf
@
Notre Dame
Efficiency #106
2025-26: 13-18 · 4-14 conf
Sat, Dec 5 · TBD
73.0
win 51%
Projected
72.8
win 49%
No line posted yet.
Model: TCU −0.2 · total 145.7 · 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: Notre Dame 67.4, TCU 68.4 → 67.6 possessions
−1.6
Notre Dame offense vs TCU defense
−2.5
TCU offense vs Notre Dame defense
+1.6
Projected total
145.7
Axis starts at 142 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Notre Dame offense vs TCU defense
−2.5
TCU offense vs Notre Dame defense
−1.6
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.9
TCU by 0.2
0.2
TCU side ◂▸ Notre Dame 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 Notre Dame.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 67.6, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, TCU is the faster team (69.4, #117 of 365) and Notre Dame the slower (66.7, #259). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
67.6
per team, 40 min
Projected total
145.7
model
Projected team totals
73.0 / 72.8
TCU / Notre Dame
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
68.4#173
TCU
67.4#254
Notre Dame
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageTCU
Where TCU scores: ball control
TCU turns it over on 15.3% of possessions (#87); Notre Dame forces turnovers on 14.0% of opponent possessions (#337). Expect about 14.1%, 2.6 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.2 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageNotre Dame
Where Notre Dame struggles: ball control
Notre Dame turns it over on 17.0% of possessions (#202); TCU forces turnovers on 19.6% of opponent possessions (#32). Expect about 18.7%, 1.9 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.3 points per 100 possessions.
DefenseTCU
TCU's shot-blocking
TCU ranks #35 nationally in block rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 11.3% of Notre Dame's two-point attempts to get blocked against this defense.
ClashNotre Dame
Style clash: ball movement
Notre Dame creates off the dribble (assists on 47.4% of its baskets); TCU allows assists on 61.4% of opponents' baskets (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 55.0% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.65 vs 0.65).
TCU has the ball
OffenseNotre Dame allowsvs D1 avg
50.4% #221
51.8% #200
-0.3 pt/100
15.3% #87
14.0% #337
+3.2 pt/100
34.0% #67
26.7% #27
+0.4 pt/100
37.5% #112
36.2% #214
+0.2 pt/100
70.4% #257
—
-0.2 pt/100
TCU net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +3.4 pts/100
Notre Dame has the ball
OffenseTCU allowsvs D1 avg
52.3% #133
51.2% #172
+0.8 pt/100
17.0% #202
19.6% #32
-2.3 pt/100
31.2% #155
29.1% #112
-0.0 pt/100
34.1% #206
30.5% #72
-0.4 pt/100
69.7% #278
—
-0.2 pt/100
Notre Dame net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -2.2 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersTCUoffense vsNotre Damedefense
Share of shots by zone
TCU shoots
38.4
8.8
16.1
36.7
Notre Dame allows
28.2
6.7
17.3
47.8
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 57.8%#204 | 62.8%#320 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 44.8%#68 | 45.0%#296 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 35.1%#286 | 39.9%#237 | 38.0% |
| Three | 33.2%#220 | 33.2%#138 | 33.7% |
Notre Dameoffense vsTCUdefense
Share of shots by zone
Notre Dame shoots
31.9
4.8
20.0
43.3
TCU allows
38.4
6.4
16.8
38.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 62.0%#72 | 60.3%#242 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 28.2%#356 | 35.0%#58 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 37.3%#211 | 39.2%#206 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.6%#82 | 33.5%#158 | 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 numbersTCU
+6.5extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#10 of 365
Off reb %
34.0%
#67
Def reb %
70.9%
#112
Turnover %
15.3%
#87
Forced TO %
19.6%
#32
FT rate
37.5%
#112
FT allowed
30.5%
#72
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.2
Defensive rebounding+0.5
Ball security+1.0
Forcing turnovers+2.0
Foul shots drawn+0.6
Foul shots allowed+1.2
Notre Dame
−0.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#226 of 365
Off reb %
31.2%
#155
Def reb %
73.3%
#27
Turnover %
17.0%
#202
Forced TO %
14.0%
#337
FT rate
34.1%
#206
FT allowed
36.2%
#214
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.3
Defensive rebounding+1.3
Ball security−0.1
Forcing turnovers−1.9
Foul shots drawn−0.2
Foul shots allowed−0.2
TCU has more extra scoring chances per game: +6.5 (#10 of 365) to Notre Dame’s −0.9 (#226).
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
TCU2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | Brock Harding | G | Jr | 6'0" | 35-35 | 31.8 | 8.0 | 2.9 | 5.6 | 1.9 | 43.1% | 28.4% | 3.3 | 64.6% | 19.4% | |
| 1 | Jayden Pierre | G | Sr | 6'0" | 35-35 | 30.4 | 10.1 | 2.1 | 2.8 | 1.3 | 50.2% | 35.1% | 4.2 | 81.8% | 20.7% | |
| 15 | David Punch | F | So | 6'7" | 34-34 | 29.7 | 14.1 | 6.8 | 2.0 | 1.7 | 51.8% | 23.9% | 1.4 | 65.3% | 28.3% | |
| 5 | Micah Robinson | F | So | 6'6" | 35-13 | 26.9 | 10.9 | 4.7 | 1.7 | 1.3 | 46.9% | 33.3% | 3.9 | 75.9% | 25.0% | |
| 24 | Xavier Edmonds | F | Jr | 6'8" | 35-34 | 22.9 | 12.7 | 6.5 | 1.2 | 1.9 | 61.4% | 43.6% | 1.6 | 64.4% | 30.3% | |
| 55 | Tanner Toolson | G | Jr | 6'5" | 35-1 | 20.9 | 7.7 | 3.2 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 43.5% | 29.1% | 2.9 | 72.6% | 23.1% | |
| 00 | Jace Posey | G | So | 6'5" | 26-0 | 11.8 | 4.8 | 2.4 | 0.2 | 0.7 | 46.0% | 15.4% | 0.5 | 68.1% | 26.2% | |
| 23 | Vianney Salatchoum | C | Sr | 6'10" | 23-0 | 5.3 | 1.1 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 52.2% | — | 0.0 | 66.7% | 15.0% | |
| 7 | Kayden Edwards | G | Fr | 6'2" | 13-0 | 6.8 | 3.5 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 57.9% | 43.5% | 1.8 | 25.0% | 28.6% | |
| 8 | RJ Jones | G | So | 6'2" | 8-0 | 7.1 | 2.9 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 55.0% | 35.3% | 2.1 | 50.0% | 23.7% | |
| 6 | Ashton Simmons | G | Fr | 6'3" | 5-0 | 3.8 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 35.7% | 25.0% | 0.8 | — | 29.2% | |
| 32 | Malick Diallo | C | So | 6'9" | 1-1 | 7.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 14.8% | |
| 33 | Trey Stuart | G | Sr | 6'2" | 5-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.4 | — | 22.6% | |
| 22 | Adam Stewart | C | So | 6'11" | 4-0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 100.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 13.8% | |
| 30 | Drew McElroy | G | Jr | 6'2" | 3-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | — | 18.5% |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Notre Dame2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | Braeden Shrewsberry | G | Sr | 6'4" | 31-31 | 32.7 | 11.9 | 3.1 | 1.9 | 1.1 | 53.2% | 40.2% | 7.1 | 77.8% | 21.8% | |
| 23 | Ethan Robertsat Penn | G | Sr | 6'5" | 23-23 | 30.5 | 16.9 | 3.9 | 2.3 | 1.8 | 46.9% | 40.4% | 4.3 | 79.9% | 33.0% | |
| 5 | Devin Brownat Davidson | G | So | 6'6" | 34-27 | 23.4 | 6.4 | 3.4 | 1.6 | 1.0 | 48.3% | 31.0% | 2.6 | 63.2% | 19.1% | |
| 51 | Logan Duncombat Winthrop | C | Sr | 6'10" | 32-28 | 24.3 | 18.3 | 8.9 | 1.6 | 1.9 | 60.0% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 73.5% | 36.9% | |
| 2 | Logan Imes | G | Sr | 6'4" | 31-10 | 21.1 | 4.7 | 3.2 | 1.7 | 1.2 | 46.2% | 32.5% | 2.5 | 52.4% | 17.7% | |
| 3 | Braeden Smithat Gonzaga | G | Sr | 6'0" | 35-18 | 17.1 | 5.1 | 2.2 | 3.6 | 1.1 | 52.9% | 33.3% | 1.5 | 80.5% | 18.5% | |
| 6 | Brady Koehler | F | So | 6'10" | 30-13 | 15.9 | 5.6 | 3.2 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 53.6% | 38.2% | 1.8 | 73.9% | 21.2% | |
| 4 | Bryce Ruglass Dortchat Rutgers | F | Jr | 6'9" | 31-3 | 14.5 | 2.1 | 3.2 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 61.0% | — | 0.0 | 53.6% | 8.9% | |
| 0 | Brady Stevens | G | Jr | 6'4" | 5-0 | 2.4 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 33.3% | 0.0% | 0.2 | 50.0% | 23.3% | |
| 22 | Luke Devine | F | So | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 15 | Tommy Ahneman | C | So | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 44 | Gan-Erdene Solongo | C | Fr | 7'0" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 8 | Jake Burow | G | Fr | 6'3" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 10 | Jonathan Sanderson | G | Fr | 6'3" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 12 | Nick Shrewsberry | G | Fr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 7 | Yoro Diallo | F | Sr | 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.
Transfers in: Devin Brown (from Davidson), Logan Duncomb (from Winthrop), Ethan Roberts (from Penn), Bryce Ruglass Dortch (from Rutgers), Braeden Smith (from Gonzaga)
TCU2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | Brock Harding | G | Jr | 6'0" | 35-35 | 31.8 | 8.0 | 2.9 | 5.6 | 1.9 | 43.1% | 28.4% | 3.3 | 64.6% | 19.4% | |
| 1 | Jayden Pierre | G | Sr | 6'0" | 35-35 | 30.4 | 10.1 | 2.1 | 2.8 | 1.3 | 50.2% | 35.1% | 4.2 | 81.8% | 20.7% | |
| 15 | David Punch | F | So | 6'7" | 34-34 | 29.7 | 14.1 | 6.8 | 2.0 | 1.7 | 51.8% | 23.9% | 1.4 | 65.3% | 28.3% | |
| 5 | Micah Robinson | F | So | 6'6" | 35-13 | 26.9 | 10.9 | 4.7 | 1.7 | 1.3 | 46.9% | 33.3% | 3.9 | 75.9% | 25.0% | |
| 24 | Xavier Edmonds | F | Jr | 6'8" | 35-34 | 22.9 | 12.7 | 6.5 | 1.2 | 1.9 | 61.4% | 43.6% | 1.6 | 64.4% | 30.3% | |
| 55 | Tanner Toolson | G | Jr | 6'5" | 35-1 | 20.9 | 7.7 | 3.2 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 43.5% | 29.1% | 2.9 | 72.6% | 23.1% | |
| 00 | Jace Posey | G | So | 6'5" | 26-0 | 11.8 | 4.8 | 2.4 | 0.2 | 0.7 | 46.0% | 15.4% | 0.5 | 68.1% | 26.2% | |
| 23 | Vianney Salatchoum | C | Sr | 6'10" | 23-0 | 5.3 | 1.1 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 52.2% | — | 0.0 | 66.7% | 15.0% | |
| 7 | Kayden Edwards | G | Fr | 6'2" | 13-0 | 6.8 | 3.5 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 57.9% | 43.5% | 1.8 | 25.0% | 28.6% | |
| 8 | RJ Jones | G | So | 6'2" | 8-0 | 7.1 | 2.9 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 55.0% | 35.3% | 2.1 | 50.0% | 23.7% | |
| 6 | Ashton Simmons | G | Fr | 6'3" | 5-0 | 3.8 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 35.7% | 25.0% | 0.8 | — | 29.2% | |
| 32 | Malick Diallo | C | So | 6'9" | 1-1 | 7.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 14.8% | |
| 33 | Trey Stuart | G | Sr | 6'2" | 5-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.4 | — | 22.6% | |
| 22 | Adam Stewart | C | So | 6'11" | 4-0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 100.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 13.8% | |
| 30 | Drew McElroy | G | Jr | 6'2" | 3-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | — | 18.5% |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26TCU
Against the spread
Season
19-14-2
Home
9-10
Road
7-3
Last 10
6-2-2
avg cover +1.8
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 4 of 6 as a favorite, 1 pushCovered 2 of 4 as an underdog, 1 push
Over / under
Season
15-20
Home
8-11
Road
4-6
Last 10
3-7
avg vs total −1.9
Under 2 straightOver in 2 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 1 of 4 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 21 | #1Duke | N | L 58–81 | +12.0 | L−11.0 | 140.5 | U139 | 83.6 | 116.8 | 69.3 |
| Mar 19 | #8Ohio State | N | W 66–64 | +2.0 | W+4.0 | 146.0 | U130 | 105.7 | 102.5 | 62.4 |
| Mar 12 | #14Kansas | N | L 73–78 | +5.0 | P0.0 | 146.5 | O151 | 97.9 | 104.6 | 74.6 |
| Mar 11 | Oklahoma St | N | W 95–88 | −7.0 | P0.0 | 158.0 | O183 | 137.8 | 127.6 | 69.0 |
| Mar 7 | Cincinnati | H | W 73–63 | −2.5 | W+7.5 | 139.5 | U136 | 115.1 | 99.3 | 63.4 |
| Mar 3 | #10Texas Tech | A | W 73–65 | +8.0 | W+16.0 | 148.5 | U138 | 114.1 | 101.6 | 64.0 |
| Feb 28 | Kansas St | A | W 77–68 | −3.0 | W+6.0 | 159.5 | U145 | 106.8 | 94.3 | 72.1 |
| Feb 24 | Arizona St | H | W 90–78 | −6.5 | W+5.5 | 149.0 | O168 | 120.1 | 104.1 | 75.0 |
| Feb 21 | West Virginia | H | W 60–54 | −4.5 | W+1.5 | 133.5 | U114 | 99.6 | 89.6 | 60.3 |
| Feb 17 | UCF | A | L 71–82 | −1.0 | L−12.0 | 155.0 | U153 | 99.8 | 115.2 | 71.2 |
Notre Dame
Against the spread
Season
15-16
Home
8-9
Road
6-5
Last 10
4-6
avg cover −2.9
Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 3 of 7 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
22-9
Home
14-3
Road
8-3
Last 10
9-1
avg vs total +10.1
Over 8 straightOver in 6 of 7 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7 | Boston College | A | L 69–77 | −2.5 | L−10.5 | 142.0 | O146 | 91.7 | 102.4 | 75.2 |
| Mar 4 | Stanford | H | L 78–86 | +1.0 | L−7.0 | 147.0 | O164 | 122.9 | 135.5 | 63.5 |
| Feb 28 | NC State | H | W 96–90 OT | +6.5 | W+12.5 | 155.0 | O186 | 134.5 | 126.1 | 71.4 |
| Feb 24 | #1Duke | H | L 56–100 | +17.0 | L−27.0 | 142.0 | O156 | 78.3 | 139.8 | 71.5 |
| Feb 21 | Pitt | A | L 68–73 | +2.5 | L−2.5 | 139.0 | O141 | 108.4 | 116.4 | 62.7 |
| Feb 14 | Georgia Tech | H | W 89–74 | −6.0 | W+9.0 | 150.0 | O163 | 129.3 | 107.5 | 68.8 |
| Feb 10 | SMU | A | L 81–89 | +10.5 | W+2.5 | 154.0 | O170 | 117.2 | 128.8 | 69.1 |
| Feb 7 | Florida St | H | L 79–82 | −1.0 | L−4.0 | 153.0 | O161 | 109.1 | 113.2 | 72.4 |
| Feb 4 | #24Louisville | A | L 65–76 | +18.0 | W+7.0 | 155.5 | U141 | 94.1 | 110.0 | 69.1 |
| Jan 31 | Syracuse | A | L 72–86 | +5.0 | L−9.0 | 147.5 | O158 | 107.1 | 127.9 | 67.2 |
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 homeTCUNotre Dame
Efficiency
111.5
111.4
101.9
107.9
68.4
67.4
—
—
Shooting
50.4%
52.3%
50.8%
51.4%
33.2%
35.6%
70.4%
69.7%
37.5%
34.1%
Ball control & glass
15.3%
17.0%
19.6%
14.0%
34.0%
31.2%
29.1%
26.7%
8.7%
9.1%
9.8%
8.8%
Style
36.8%
43.5%
45.4%
40.2%
17.2%
9.8%
57.3%
47.4%
30.5%
31.4%
Roster
2.79
3.45
6'4.1"
6'5.8"
88.6%
34.3%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputTCU
Returning minutes: 88.6%Returning production: 90.1%
Lost
- Liutauras Lelevicius 23.0 mpg, 7.8 ppg · transferred to Clemson
Added
Nobody of note.
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 89% 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).
Notre Dame
Returning minutes: 34.3%Returning production: 29.4%
Lost
- Cole Certa 26.9 mpg, 12.8 ppg · transferred to Clemson
- Carson Towt 26.0 mpg, 5.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Jalen Haralson 23.2 mpg, 14.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Garrett Sundra 17.9 mpg, 3.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Sir Mohammed 16.4 mpg, 5.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Markus Burton 9.7 mpg, 6.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Ethan Roberts from Penn · 23.4 mpg, 13.0 ppg last season
- Devin Brown from Davidson · 23.4 mpg, 6.4 ppg last season
- Logan Duncomb from Winthrop · 22.9 mpg, 17.2 ppg last season
- Braeden Smith from Gonzaga · 17.1 mpg, 5.1 ppg last season
- Bryce Ruglass Dortch from Rutgers · 13.2 mpg, 1.9 ppg last season
- Nick Shrewsberry no D1 minutes last season
Returns 34% of last season's minutes; lost 3 of its top 5 (1 transferred). 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Fri, Dec 5 | 2025-26 | Notre Dame 87 – 85 TCU |
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.