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.

Conference gameUW-Milwaukee Panther Arena, Milwaukee, WI

Wright St

Efficiency #119

2025-26: 23-12 · 18-5 conf

Milwaukee

Efficiency #262

2025-26: 12-20 · 8-13 conf

Thu, Dec 3 · TBD

76.4

win 55%

Projected

75.1

win 45%

No line posted yet.

Model: WRST −1.3 · total 151.5 · 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 one

Projected total

Average D-I game

148.2

PaceAdjusted tempo: Milwaukee 68.5, Wright St 68.1 → 68.2 possessions

−0.2

Milwaukee offense vs Wright St defense

−0.9

Wright St offense vs Milwaukee defense

+4.4

Projected total

151.5

Axis starts at 144 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Milwaukee offense vs Wright St defense

−0.9

Wright St offense vs Milwaukee defense

−4.4

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

+3.9

Wright St by 1.3

1.3

Wright St side ◂▸ Milwaukee side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the margin steps add to −1.4 against −1.3. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Milwaukee.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 68.2, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Milwaukee is the faster team (69.1, #143 of 365) and Wright St the slower (68.9, #156). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

68.2

per team, 40 min

Projected total

151.5

model

Projected team totals

76.4 / 75.1

Wright St / Milwaukee

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

68.1#205

Wright St

68.5#168

Milwaukee

How this game plays

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

AdvantageWright St

Where Wright St scores: shooting

Wright St shoots an effective 54.3% (#56); Milwaukee allows 55.5% (#340). Expect about 55.2%, 3.9 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +5.6 points per 100 possessions.

ClashMilwaukee

Style match: ball movement

Milwaukee creates off the dribble (assists on 48.1% of its baskets); Wright St breaks up passing offenses (assists on 44.6% allowed) (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 44.6% — both habits push the same way.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Wright St, Milwaukee'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 Wright St at about 35.7% of its shots from three, Milwaukee about 35.2%.

Wright St has the ball

OffenseMilwaukee allowsvs D1 avg

54.3% #56

55.5% #340

+5.6 pt/100

16.1% #147

15.8% #228

+1.2 pt/100

32.8% #91

29.2% #121

+0.7 pt/100

37.4% #120

35.9% #208

+0.2 pt/100

74.7% #92

—

+0.2 pt/100

Wright St net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +7.9 pts/100

Milwaukee has the ball

OffenseWright St allowsvs D1 avg

49.9% #242

52.4% #238

-0.3 pt/100

15.2% #81

16.7% #176

+1.2 pt/100

33.0% #88

29.4% #129

+0.8 pt/100

32.1% #256

33.3% #137

-0.3 pt/100

68.7% #307

—

-0.3 pt/100

Milwaukee net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +1.0 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Wright Stoffense vsMilwaukeedefense

Share of shots by zone

Wright St shoots

44.9

9.3

11.8

34.0

Milwaukee allows

41.9

5.8

12.1

40.1

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	61.1%#95	61.6%#287	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	41.2%#141	46.9%#330	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	36.7%#238	38.7%#189	38.0%
Three	36.4%#44	36.5%#329	33.7%

Milwaukeeoffense vsWright Stdefense

Share of shots by zone

Milwaukee shoots

39.4

5.6

17.0

38.1

Wright St allows

42.1

8.4

15.4

34.1

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	55.2%#295	57.5%#130	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	41.2%#140	44.1%#269	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	39.7%#124	41.4%#285	38.0%
Three	32.3%#266	34.3%#202	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

Wright St

+2.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#68 of 365

Off reb %

32.8%

#91

Def reb %

70.6%

#129

Turnover %

16.1%

#147

Forced TO %

16.7%

#176

FT rate

37.4%

#120

FT allowed

33.3%

#137

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.8

Defensive rebounding+0.4

Ball security+0.4

Forcing turnovers0.0

Foul shots drawn+0.6

Foul shots allowed+0.5

Milwaukee

+0.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#146 of 365

Off reb %

33.0%

#88

Def reb %

70.8%

#121

Turnover %

15.2%

#81

Forced TO %

15.8%

#228

FT rate

32.1%

#256

FT allowed

35.9%

#208

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.9

Defensive rebounding+0.4

Ball security+1.1

Forcing turnovers−0.6

Foul shots drawn−0.8

Foul shots allowed−0.2

Wright St has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.7 (#68 of 365) to Milwaukee’s +0.9 (#146).

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

Wright St2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
13	Solomon Callaghan	G	So	6'2"	33-31	28.1	10.2	1.9	1.1	0.8	56.2%	39.5%	5.4	92.6%	19.0%
3	Dominic Pangonis	G	So	6'7"	34-28	27.0	8.9	2.6	1.1	1.0	56.1%	38.5%	2.8	73.5%	18.0%
22	TJ Burch	G	So	6'1"	34-23	24.7	12.4	2.4	3.6	2.1	49.4%	34.7%	2.2	73.3%	32.4%
33	Michael Imariagbe	F	Sr	6'7"	34-31	24.1	12.0	7.1	1.8	1.8	60.1%	40.0%	0.4	68.3%	27.2%
4	Kellen Pickett	F	Fr	6'9"	35-24	22.9	8.5	5.4	1.1	1.0	59.1%	26.9%	1.5	73.0%	20.0%
20	Andrea Holden	F	So	6'6"	35-3	14.3	6.1	3.9	0.4	1.0	56.6%	0.0%	0.0	70.7%	25.0%
2	Sam Alamutu	G	Sr	6'5"	34-4	11.9	2.9	2.4	1.1	0.9	51.9%	30.0%	0.3	64.0%	17.1%
1	Bryan Etumnu	F	Sr	6'7"	17-8	11.5	3.4	2.4	0.5	0.5	44.1%	28.6%	2.1	55.6%	21.3%
5	Alex Bruskotter	G	Fr	6'8"	15-0	8.3	4.5	1.5	0.2	0.4	76.5%	60.0%	1.3	80.0%	22.5%
51	Ayden Davis	C	Fr	6'10"	3-0	8.7	5.0	1.3	0.0	0.0	92.9%	100.0%	0.3	66.7%	18.5%
15	Isaiah Williams	G	Fr	6'3"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
12	PJ Douglas	G	Fr	6'4"	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.

Milwaukee2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Milwaukee'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
29	Aaron Franklin	G	Sr	6'5"	32-22	25.2	6.8	6.3	1.2	0.7	59.4%	34.5%	0.9	44.4%	15.2%
5	Isaiah Dorceus	G	Jr	6'0"	31-16	22.2	5.5	1.5	3.7	1.7	43.8%	32.5%	2.5	65.7%	20.0%
8	Stevie Elam	G	Fr	6'3"	25-12	26.2	10.5	4.7	0.8	0.5	50.2%	35.4%	5.8	81.1%	22.5%
1	Amar Augillard	G	Sr	6'5"	31-24	20.8	12.6	2.6	1.1	1.8	47.7%	32.4%	5.7	83.3%	38.3%
2	Josh Dixon	G	Fr	6'1"	32-12	18.5	9.0	1.1	1.6	1.3	44.5%	31.2%	2.9	87.1%	33.0%
24	Esyah Pippa-White	G	Jr	6'2"	32-15	18.5	4.4	1.8	2.3	1.0	35.3%	23.9%	2.8	56.9%	20.4%
11	Chandler Jackson	F	Jr	6'7"	24-9	23.0	9.7	2.8	0.9	1.1	57.5%	32.9%	2.9	79.4%	23.1%
3	Danilo Jovanovich	F	Sr	6'8"	17-17	30.2	12.4	6.1	2.2	1.0	61.8%	53.8%	0.8	71.0%	20.7%
22	Faizon Fields	F	Sr	6'10"	21-20	21.2	6.7	5.6	0.4	1.0	62.0%	66.7%	0.1	58.9%	17.5%
25	Sekou Konneh	F	Fr	6'9"	31-3	13.4	6.4	4.7	0.3	0.7	56.1%	11.1%	0.3	57.1%	27.2%
12	Seth Hubbard	G	Sr	6'4"	9-9	30.7	16.6	3.3	2.1	1.1	50.4%	35.9%	4.3	75.8%	29.6%
34	Tate Mackenzie	F	Jr	6'10"	18-1	7.0	0.9	1.2	0.1	0.3	45.5%	—	0.0	50.0%	10.3%
9	Simeon Murchison	F	So	6'9"	16-0	5.4	1.3	0.9	0.1	0.3	50.0%	—	0.0	85.7%	14.2%
23	Austin Villarreal	G	So	6'1"	4-0	1.8	0.5	1.0	0.0	0.0	25.0%	0.0%	0.8	—	30.6%
00	John Lovelace Jr.	G	Sr	6'8"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
10	Ned Renfree	G	Fr	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.

Wright St2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
13	Solomon Callaghan	G	So	6'2"	33-31	28.1	10.2	1.9	1.1	0.8	56.2%	39.5%	5.4	92.6%	19.0%
3	Dominic Pangonis	G	So	6'7"	34-28	27.0	8.9	2.6	1.1	1.0	56.1%	38.5%	2.8	73.5%	18.0%
22	TJ Burch	G	So	6'1"	34-23	24.7	12.4	2.4	3.6	2.1	49.4%	34.7%	2.2	73.3%	32.4%
33	Michael Imariagbe	F	Sr	6'7"	34-31	24.1	12.0	7.1	1.8	1.8	60.1%	40.0%	0.4	68.3%	27.2%
4	Kellen Pickett	F	Fr	6'9"	35-24	22.9	8.5	5.4	1.1	1.0	59.1%	26.9%	1.5	73.0%	20.0%
20	Andrea Holden	F	So	6'6"	35-3	14.3	6.1	3.9	0.4	1.0	56.6%	0.0%	0.0	70.7%	25.0%
2	Sam Alamutu	G	Sr	6'5"	34-4	11.9	2.9	2.4	1.1	0.9	51.9%	30.0%	0.3	64.0%	17.1%
1	Bryan Etumnu	F	Sr	6'7"	17-8	11.5	3.4	2.4	0.5	0.5	44.1%	28.6%	2.1	55.6%	21.3%
5	Alex Bruskotter	G	Fr	6'8"	15-0	8.3	4.5	1.5	0.2	0.4	76.5%	60.0%	1.3	80.0%	22.5%
51	Ayden Davis	C	Fr	6'10"	3-0	8.7	5.0	1.3	0.0	0.0	92.9%	100.0%	0.3	66.7%	18.5%
15	Isaiah Williams	G	Fr	6'3"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
12	PJ Douglas	G	Fr	6'4"	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

Wright St

Against the spread

Season

19-12-2

Home

6-7-1

Road

10-4

Last 10

6-3-1

avg cover +1.4

Covered the last gameCovered 4 of 8 as a favorite, 1 pushCovered 2 of 4 with a line of 10+, 1 push

Over / under

Season

16-17

Home

7-7

Road

7-7

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total +6.2

Over in the last gameOver in 3 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 20	#3VirginiaAdjEM #15	N	L 73–82	+18.0	W+9.0	146.5	O155	112.4	126.3	64.9
Mar 10	Detroit MercyAdjEM #224	N	W 66–63	−5.0	L−2.0	153.5	U129	96.8	92.4	68.2
Mar 9	N KentuckyAdjEM #164	N	W 103–90	−1.0	W+12.0	158.0	O193	131.3	114.7	78.5
Mar 4	Cleveland StAdjEM #330	H	W 90–61	−14.5	W+14.5	161.5	U151	130.0	88.1	69.2
Feb 28	N KentuckyAdjEM #164	A	W 92–91	+3.0	W+4.0	152.5	O183	131.4	130.0	70.0
Feb 25	Purdue FWAdjEM #258	A	W 74–70	−1.0	W+3.0	152.0	U144	104.3	98.7	70.9
Feb 22	Robert MorrisAdjEM #142	H	L 68–81	−4.0	L−17.0	146.5	O149	100.6	119.9	67.6
Feb 19	IU IndyAdjEM #315	H	W 85–73	−12.0	P0.0	160.5	U158	119.3	102.5	71.2
Feb 15	Cleveland StAdjEM #330	A	W 102–90	−7.5	W+4.5	158.5	O192	137.4	121.2	74.2
Feb 12	Detroit MercyAdjEM #224	H	L 74–77	−11.5	L−14.5	153.0	U151	111.9	116.4	66.2

Milwaukee

Against the spread

Season

11-19-1

Home

6-8

Road

5-11-1

Last 10

4-6

avg cover −4.8

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 2 of 5 as a favoriteCovered 2 of 5 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

14-17

Home

6-8

Road

8-9

Last 10

4-6

avg vs total −0.8

Under 3 straightOver in 4 of 5 as a favoriteOver in 0 of 5 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 4	Detroit MercyAdjEM #224	A	L 63–84	+1.0	L−20.0	151.5	U147	93.7	124.9	67.2
Feb 25	Youngstown StAdjEM #204	H	W 78–65	+1.0	W+14.0	148.5	U143	113.9	94.9	68.5
Feb 22	OaklandAdjEM #172	A	L 70–81	+6.5	L−4.5	160.0	U151	107.1	123.9	65.4
Feb 20	Detroit MercyAdjEM #224	A	L 86–91	−1.0	L−6.0	153.0	O177	122.5	129.7	70.2
Feb 15	Green BayAdjEM #222	H	W 75–72	−2.5	W+0.5	145.5	O147	121.8	117.0	61.6
Feb 10	IU IndyAdjEM #315	A	W 92–88	−2.0	W+2.0	158.0	O180	118.7	113.6	77.5
Feb 7	N KentuckyAdjEM #164	A	L 62–67	+7.0	W+2.0	156.5	U129	99.1	107.1	62.6
Feb 4	Detroit MercyAdjEM #224	H	L 63–76	−6.0	L−19.0	159.0	U139	98.6	119.0	63.9
Feb 1	Cleveland StAdjEM #330	H	L 88–90	−10.0	L−12.0	160.5	O178	126.5	129.3	69.6
Jan 30	Wright StAdjEM #119	H	L 69–76	+2.5	L−4.5	151.5	U145	94.8	104.4	72.8

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

Wright StMilwaukee

Efficiency

111.2

107.1

108.5

112.2

68.1

68.5

—

Shooting

54.3%

49.9%

54.2%

50.8%

36.4%

32.3%

74.7%

68.7%

37.4%

32.1%

Ball control & glass

16.1%

15.2%

16.7%

15.8%

32.8%

33.0%

29.4%

29.2%

9.7%

8.4%

9.1%

9.5%

Style

34.2%

38.1%

48.5%

44.2%

11.2%

16.7%

46.9%

48.1%

34.2%

35.0%

Roster

2.34

2.89

6'5.4"

6'4.7"

79.2%

—

Offseason

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

Wright St

Returning minutes: 79.2%Returning production: 81.8%

Lost

Michael Cooper 23.4 mpg, 11.9 ppg · transferred to California
Logan Woods 18.4 mpg, 5.3 ppg · transferred to Niagara

Added

Isaiah Williams no D1 minutes last season
PJ Douglas no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 79% 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).

Milwaukee

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted Milwaukee'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.)

Head-to-head

this season and last

Date	Season	Result
Fri, Jan 30	2025-26	Wright St 76 – 69 Milwaukee
Thu, Jan 1	2025-26	Milwaukee 70 – 76 Wright St

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.