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 gameNIU Convocation Center, Dekalb, IL
Milwaukee
Efficiency #262
2025-26: 12-20 · 8-13 conf
@
N Illinois
Efficiency #341
2025-26: 9-21 · 4-14 conf
Sat, Dec 5 · TBD
73.8
win 52%
Projected
73.4
win 48%
No line posted yet.
Model: MILW −0.5 · total 147.2 · 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 one
Projected total
Average D-I game
148.2
PaceAdjusted tempo: N Illinois 68.5, Milwaukee 68.5 → 68.6 possessions
+0.7
N Illinois offense vs Milwaukee defense
−3.0
Milwaukee offense vs N Illinois defense
+1.4
Projected total
147.2
Axis starts at 144 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
N Illinois offense vs Milwaukee defense
−3.0
Milwaukee offense vs N Illinois defense
−1.4
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.9
Milwaukee by 0.5
0.5
Milwaukee side ◂▸ N Illinois side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 147.3 against a projected 147.2. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help N Illinois.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes
Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 68.6, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Milwaukee is the faster team (69.1, #143 of 365) and N Illinois the slower (69.0, #149). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions
68.6
per team, 40 min
Projected total
147.2
model
Projected team totals
73.8 / 73.4
Milwaukee / N Illinois
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
68.5#168
Milwaukee
68.5#172
N Illinois

How this game plays

what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meet
AdvantageN Illinois
Where N Illinois struggles: ball control
N Illinois turns it over on 21.8% of possessions (#360); Milwaukee forces turnovers on 15.8% of opponent possessions (#228). Expect about 19.0%, 2.3 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 (N Illinois, 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 Milwaukee at about 37.3% of its shots from three, N Illinois about 44.4%.
AdvantageMilwaukee
Where Milwaukee scores: shooting
Milwaukee shoots an effective 49.9% (#242); N Illinois allows 55.6% (#342). Expect about 52.7%, 1.4 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.0 points per 100 possessions.
Milwaukee has the ball
OffenseN Illinois allowsvs D1 avg
49.9% #242
55.6% #342
+2.0 pt/100
15.2% #81
16.3% #205
+1.5 pt/100
33.0% #88
30.0% #161
+1.0 pt/100
32.1% #256
38.3% #267
+0.1 pt/100
68.7% #307
—
-0.3 pt/100
Milwaukee net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +4.2 pts/100
N Illinois has the ball
OffenseMilwaukee allowsvs D1 avg
47.6% #324
55.5% #340
+0.0 pt/100
21.8% #360
15.8% #228
-2.8 pt/100
30.3% #187
29.2% #121
-0.4 pt/100
38.3% #95
35.9% #208
+0.3 pt/100
65.7% #356
—
-0.6 pt/100
N Illinois net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -3.5 pts/100

Shot diet

Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbers
Milwaukeeoffense vsN Illinoisdefense
Share of shots by zone
Milwaukee shoots
N Illinois allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim55.2%#29562.9%#32358.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)41.2%#14033.9%#4239.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)39.7%#12440.6%#25938.0%
Three32.3%#26636.3%#31533.7%
N Illinoisoffense vsMilwaukeedefense
Share of shots by zone
N Illinois shoots
Milwaukee allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim51.9%#35061.6%#28758.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)31.3%#33946.9%#33039.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)32.8%#33338.7%#18938.0%
Three30.9%#32336.5%#32933.7%
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
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
N Illinois
−3.5extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#315 of 365
Off reb %
30.3%
#187
Def reb %
70.0%
#161
Turnover %
21.8%
#360
Forced TO %
16.3%
#205
FT rate
38.3%
#95
FT allowed
38.3%
#267
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding0.0
Defensive rebounding+0.2
Ball security−3.4
Forcing turnovers−0.3
Foul shots drawn+0.8
Foul shots allowed−0.8

Milwaukee has more extra scoring chances per game: +0.9 (#146 of 365) to N Illinois’s −3.5 (#315).

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

Milwaukee2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Milwaukee's 2026-27 roster yet — these are last season's players.
#PlayerPosClHtGP-GSMPGPPGRPGAPGTOVeFG%3P%3PA/gFT%UsageStatus
29Aaron FranklinGSr6'5"32-2225.26.86.31.20.759.4%34.5%0.944.4%15.2%
5Isaiah DorceusGJr6'0"31-1622.25.51.53.71.743.8%32.5%2.565.7%20.0%
8Stevie ElamGFr6'3"25-1226.210.54.70.80.550.2%35.4%5.881.1%22.5%
1Amar AugillardGSr6'5"31-2420.812.62.61.11.847.7%32.4%5.783.3%38.3%
2Josh DixonGFr6'1"32-1218.59.01.11.61.344.5%31.2%2.987.1%33.0%
24Esyah Pippa-WhiteGJr6'2"32-1518.54.41.82.31.035.3%23.9%2.856.9%20.4%
11Chandler JacksonFJr6'7"24-923.09.72.80.91.157.5%32.9%2.979.4%23.1%
3Danilo JovanovichFSr6'8"17-1730.212.46.12.21.061.8%53.8%0.871.0%20.7%
22Faizon FieldsFSr6'10"21-2021.26.75.60.41.062.0%66.7%0.158.9%17.5%
25Sekou KonnehFFr6'9"31-313.46.44.70.30.756.1%11.1%0.357.1%27.2%
12Seth HubbardGSr6'4"9-930.716.63.32.11.150.4%35.9%4.375.8%29.6%
34Tate MackenzieFJr6'10"18-17.00.91.20.10.345.5%—0.050.0%10.3%
9Simeon MurchisonFSo6'9"16-05.41.30.90.10.350.0%—0.085.7%14.2%
23Austin VillarrealGSo6'1"4-01.80.51.00.00.025.0%0.0%0.8—30.6%
00John Lovelace Jr.GSr6'8"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
10Ned RenfreeGFr6'2"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Tale of the tape

national rank toned left for away, right for home
MilwaukeeN Illinois
Efficiency
107.1
100.3
112.2
111.9
68.5
68.5
—
—
Shooting
49.9%
47.6%
50.8%
48.5%
32.3%
30.9%
68.7%
65.7%
32.1%
38.3%
Ball control & glass
15.2%
21.8%
15.8%
16.3%
33.0%
30.3%
29.2%
30.0%
8.4%
11.7%
9.5%
14.5%
Style
38.1%
45.0%
44.2%
41.5%
16.7%
12.7%
48.1%
51.8%
35.0%
31.5%
Roster
2.89
1.91
6'4.7"
6'4.7"
—
86.8%

Offseason

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

N Illinois
Returning minutes: 86.8%Returning production: 90.1%
Lost
  • Dylan Ducommun 26.5 mpg, 9.3 ppg · transferred to Buffalo
Added
  • Lataevyon Taylor no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 87% 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).

Head-to-head

this season and last
No 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.