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-conferenceJones Convocation Center, Chicago, IL
SC State
Efficiency #357
2025-26: 10-22 · 8-8 conf
@
Chicago St
Efficiency #342
2025-26: 7-25 · 5-14 conf
Mon, Nov 9 · TBD
69.9
win 30%
Projected
76.0
win 70%
No line posted yet.
Model: CHST −6.1 · total 145.9 · 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: Chicago St 67.2, SC State 69.3 → 68.2 possessions
−0.2
Chicago St offense vs SC State defense
0.0
SC State offense vs Chicago St defense
−2.2
Projected total
145.9
Axis starts at 144 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Chicago St offense vs SC State defense
0.0
SC State offense vs Chicago St defense
+2.2
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.9
Chicago St by 6.1
6.1
SC State side ◂▸ Chicago St side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 145.8 against a projected 145.9. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Chicago St.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 68.2, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, SC State is the faster team (70.3, #82 of 365) and Chicago St the slower (65.8, #304). 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
145.9
model
Projected team totals
69.9 / 76.0
SC State / Chicago St
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
69.3#98
SC State
67.2#272
Chicago St
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageSC State
Where SC State struggles: ball control
SC State turns it over on 20.8% of possessions (#355); Chicago St forces turnovers on 20.1% of opponent possessions (#20). Expect about 21.2%, 4.4 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -5.4 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageChicago St
Where Chicago St struggles: shooting
Chicago St shoots an effective 45.3% (#358); SC State allows 53.9% (#296). Expect about 49.2%, 2.1 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.0 points per 100 possessions.
DefenseChicago St
Chicago St's ball-hawking
Chicago St ranks #19 nationally in steal rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 11.9% of SC State's possessions to end in a steal against this defense.
GlassSC State
SC State owns the glass
Projected offensive rebound rate of 33.3% is worth roughly +1.8 points per 100 possessions for SC State's offense.
ClashSC State
Style match: paint scoring
SC State gets only 37.2% of its points in the paint; Chicago St protects the paint (37.8% of opponents' points) (D1 average 42.8%). Expect about 39.7% — both habits push the same way.
ClashSC State
Style clash: 3-point volume
SC State rarely shoots threes (33.3% of its shots); Chicago St lets opponents take 50.8% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 41.8% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.80 vs 0.64).
SC State has the ball
OffenseChicago St allowsvs D1 avg
46.8% #341
56.7% #354
+0.3 pt/100
20.8% #355
20.1% #20
-5.4 pt/100
31.4% #146
35.0% #339
+1.8 pt/100
41.1% #47
38.0% #261
+0.6 pt/100
66.8% #344
—
-0.5 pt/100
SC State net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -3.3 pts/100
Chicago St has the ball
OffenseSC State allowsvs D1 avg
45.3% #358
53.9% #296
-3.0 pt/100
15.6% #113
18.8% #57
-0.8 pt/100
28.3% #255
37.6% #362
+1.2 pt/100
30.0% #311
51.9% #364
+0.9 pt/100
75.0% #84
—
+0.2 pt/100
Chicago St net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -1.4 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersSC Stateoffense vsChicago Stdefense
Share of shots by zone
SC State shoots
34.0
5.5
27.2
33.3
Chicago St allows
37.0
4.0
8.8
50.2
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 52.9%#342 | 64.9%#350 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 37.2%#241 | 31.0%#19 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 35.8%#267 | 44.1%#341 | 38.0% |
| Three | 34.0%#173 | 35.6%#290 | 33.7% |
Chicago Stoffense vsSC Statedefense
Share of shots by zone
Chicago St shoots
33.6
8.8
26.8
30.7
SC State allows
45.9
2.8
12.6
38.8
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 49.8%#361 | 60.2%#237 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 39.0%#195 | 30.8%#18 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 36.8%#232 | 39.2%#208 | 38.0% |
| Three | 32.1%#275 | 33.5%#155 | 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 numbersSC State
−6.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#357 of 365
Off reb %
31.4%
#146
Def reb %
62.4%
#362
Turnover %
20.8%
#355
Forced TO %
18.8%
#57
FT rate
41.1%
#47
FT allowed
51.9%
#364
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.3
Defensive rebounding−2.3
Ball security−2.7
Forcing turnovers+1.4
Foul shots drawn+1.5
Foul shots allowed−4.3
Chicago St
−1.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#232 of 365
Off reb %
28.3%
#255
Def reb %
65.0%
#339
Turnover %
15.6%
#113
Forced TO %
20.1%
#20
FT rate
30.0%
#311
FT allowed
38.0%
#261
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.7
Defensive rebounding−1.4
Ball security+0.8
Forcing turnovers+2.3
Foul shots drawn−1.3
Foul shots allowed−0.7
Chicago St has more extra scoring chances per game: −1.0 (#232 of 365) to SC State’s −6.0 (#357).
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
SC State2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Florian Tenebay | G | Sr | 6'6" | 31-25 | 22.9 | 7.0 | 2.8 | 1.9 | 1.9 | 42.0% | 25.0% | 0.9 | 72.1% | 22.3% | |
| 0 | Noah Treadwell | G | Fr | 6'5" | 31-5 | 22.6 | 9.4 | 1.4 | 0.7 | 1.3 | 51.9% | 35.3% | 6.6 | 67.7% | 25.3% | |
| 5 | Owen Bronston Jr. | G | Jr | 6'6" | 27-17 | 21.1 | 10.3 | 2.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 49.0% | 36.0% | 6.1 | 76.9% | 29.0% | |
| 4 | Cameron Clark | F | Sr | 6'10" | 25-19 | 21.4 | 8.2 | 5.0 | 0.8 | 1.7 | 46.7% | — | 0.0 | 61.9% | 26.8% | |
| 30 | Rayniel Wright | G | Jr | 6'0" | 32-4 | 16.3 | 3.3 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 2.0 | 40.0% | 25.0% | 0.3 | 50.0% | 20.7% | |
| 22 | James Morrow | G | Jr | 6'8" | 24-14 | 20.8 | 7.7 | 3.1 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 51.2% | 33.3% | 1.5 | 84.6% | 21.5% | |
| 7 | Derwin Hodge Jr. | F | Fr | 6'10" | 27-20 | 18.2 | 2.5 | 3.2 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 43.9% | — | 0.0 | 38.5% | 13.6% | |
| 55 | Chris Parker | G | Jr | 6'5" | 25-2 | 18.2 | 7.0 | 4.8 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 42.8% | 25.0% | 0.2 | 79.0% | 24.2% | |
| 15 | Tim Okojie | C | Jr | 7'1" | 32-10 | 10.9 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 42.4% | — | 0.0 | 33.3% | 10.1% | |
| 32 | Teon Tindal | C | Fr | 6'7" | 25-3 | 9.8 | 2.6 | 1.6 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 52.1% | — | 0.0 | 46.7% | 18.6% | |
| 14 | Jamal Miles | G | So | 6'4" | 21-6 | 8.4 | 1.7 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 34.1% | 14.3% | 1.3 | 50.0% | 17.8% | |
| 23 | D'Shay Knights Wright | F | So | 6'9" | 12-5 | 14.4 | 3.1 | 2.9 | 0.6 | 0.9 | 43.5% | 25.0% | 0.3 | 58.8% | 16.2% | |
| 2 | Colin McKenzie | G | Sr | 6'6" | 6-1 | 16.0 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 0.3 | 1.7 | 38.1% | 25.0% | 1.3 | — | 17.1% |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Chicago St2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Chicago St'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23 | CJ Ray | F | Sr | 6'6" | 32-27 | 31.1 | 13.5 | 4.7 | 1.5 | 1.3 | 47.8% | 37.2% | 3.5 | 85.2% | 28.3% | |
| 4 | Marcus Tankersley | G | Sr | 6'5" | 30-29 | 30.6 | 13.0 | 3.1 | 2.5 | 2.0 | 46.5% | 23.3% | 1.0 | 65.6% | 29.9% | |
| 3 | Doyel Cockrill III | G | Jr | 6'2" | 28-9 | 24.4 | 11.8 | 2.6 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 49.4% | 36.4% | 5.8 | 83.3% | 29.7% | |
| 21 | Braelon Bush | G | Sr | 5'9" | 26-9 | 25.9 | 8.5 | 1.9 | 3.1 | 1.4 | 45.6% | 27.7% | 3.9 | 91.9% | 23.3% | |
| 10 | Corey Sands | G | Sr | 6'4" | 30-20 | 17.4 | 2.8 | 1.9 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 39.4% | 25.8% | 2.1 | 73.3% | 13.1% | |
| 8 | Stephen Byard | F | Sr | 6'8" | 22-9 | 22.6 | 9.8 | 4.8 | 0.8 | 1.4 | 48.3% | 41.7% | 0.5 | 73.4% | 28.7% | |
| 9 | Malek Robinson | G | Fr | 5'11" | 32-22 | 15.4 | 3.0 | 1.6 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 36.5% | 31.8% | 0.7 | 70.4% | 15.8% | |
| 22 | Dailliss Cox | F | Sr | 6'6" | 32-21 | 15.2 | 3.1 | 3.2 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 48.4% | 33.3% | 0.3 | 69.2% | 14.0% | |
| 15 | Joseph Owens | F | Sr | 6'7" | 26-2 | 11.2 | 2.1 | 2.2 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 53.7% | — | 0.0 | 62.5% | 13.5% | |
| 11 | Lionel Larvadain III | G | So | 6'0" | 21-1 | 11.2 | 2.8 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 31.6% | 20.0% | 0.7 | 71.4% | 24.4% | |
| 5 | Chauncey Gibson | G | Jr | 6'7" | 15-4 | 15.5 | 4.9 | 2.3 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 37.8% | 26.4% | 3.5 | 42.9% | 30.0% | |
| 6 | Daniel Zatsepin | F | Jr | 6'4" | 25-2 | 8.7 | 0.9 | 1.4 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 35.2% | 50.0% | 0.1 | 50.0% | 10.1% | |
| 25 | Dakari Thomas | G | So | 6'1" | 19-0 | 5.0 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 42.9% | — | 0.0 | 63.6% | 8.3% | |
| 20 | CJ Delancy | F | Sr | 6'9" | 6-2 | 9.2 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 44.4% | — | 0.0 | 100.0% | 12.4% | |
| 1 | Deshawn Jean-Charles | G | Sr | 6'7" | 4-3 | 8.5 | 0.8 | 1.3 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0% | — | 0.0 | 75.0% | 7.7% | |
| 12 | DaJuan Bates | G | Jr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 0 | Greg Spate | G | Jr | 6'7" | 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.
SC State2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Florian Tenebay | G | Sr | 6'6" | 31-25 | 22.9 | 7.0 | 2.8 | 1.9 | 1.9 | 42.0% | 25.0% | 0.9 | 72.1% | 22.3% | |
| 0 | Noah Treadwell | G | Fr | 6'5" | 31-5 | 22.6 | 9.4 | 1.4 | 0.7 | 1.3 | 51.9% | 35.3% | 6.6 | 67.7% | 25.3% | |
| 5 | Owen Bronston Jr. | G | Jr | 6'6" | 27-17 | 21.1 | 10.3 | 2.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 49.0% | 36.0% | 6.1 | 76.9% | 29.0% | |
| 4 | Cameron Clark | F | Sr | 6'10" | 25-19 | 21.4 | 8.2 | 5.0 | 0.8 | 1.7 | 46.7% | — | 0.0 | 61.9% | 26.8% | |
| 30 | Rayniel Wright | G | Jr | 6'0" | 32-4 | 16.3 | 3.3 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 2.0 | 40.0% | 25.0% | 0.3 | 50.0% | 20.7% | |
| 22 | James Morrow | G | Jr | 6'8" | 24-14 | 20.8 | 7.7 | 3.1 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 51.2% | 33.3% | 1.5 | 84.6% | 21.5% | |
| 7 | Derwin Hodge Jr. | F | Fr | 6'10" | 27-20 | 18.2 | 2.5 | 3.2 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 43.9% | — | 0.0 | 38.5% | 13.6% | |
| 55 | Chris Parker | G | Jr | 6'5" | 25-2 | 18.2 | 7.0 | 4.8 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 42.8% | 25.0% | 0.2 | 79.0% | 24.2% | |
| 15 | Tim Okojie | C | Jr | 7'1" | 32-10 | 10.9 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 42.4% | — | 0.0 | 33.3% | 10.1% | |
| 32 | Teon Tindal | C | Fr | 6'7" | 25-3 | 9.8 | 2.6 | 1.6 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 52.1% | — | 0.0 | 46.7% | 18.6% | |
| 14 | Jamal Miles | G | So | 6'4" | 21-6 | 8.4 | 1.7 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 34.1% | 14.3% | 1.3 | 50.0% | 17.8% | |
| 23 | D'Shay Knights Wright | F | So | 6'9" | 12-5 | 14.4 | 3.1 | 2.9 | 0.6 | 0.9 | 43.5% | 25.0% | 0.3 | 58.8% | 16.2% | |
| 2 | Colin McKenzie | G | Sr | 6'6" | 6-1 | 16.0 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 0.3 | 1.7 | 38.1% | 25.0% | 1.3 | — | 17.1% |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26SC State
Against the spread
Season
13-17
Home
5-4
Road
7-12
Last 10
4-6
avg cover +1.6
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 4 of 9 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
14-15-1
Home
4-5
Road
9-9-1
Last 10
5-5
avg vs total +3.5
Under in the last gameOver in 5 of 9 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 13 | Howard | N | L 61–78 | +15.5 | L−1.5 | 146.0 | U139 | 82.8 | 105.9 | 73.6 |
| Mar 12 | Norfolk St | N | W 88–82 | +8.5 | W+14.5 | 144.5 | O170 | 116.6 | 108.6 | 75.5 |
| Mar 5 | NC Central | A | W 80–64 | +7.5 | W+23.5 | 141.5 | O144 | 114.6 | 91.7 | 69.8 |
| Mar 2 | Delaware St | A | W 61–59 | +3.0 | W+5.0 | 134.5 | U120 | 99.9 | 96.6 | 61.1 |
| Feb 28 | MD Eastern | A | L 57–69 | +6.0 | L−6.0 | 132.5 | U126 | 85.9 | 104.0 | 66.3 |
| Feb 25 | Morgan St | H | L 83–90 | +1.5 | L−5.5 | 154.5 | O173 | 113.8 | 123.4 | 73.0 |
| Feb 21 | Norfolk St | A | L 71–90 | +10.0 | L−9.0 | 140.5 | O161 | 99.5 | 126.1 | 71.4 |
| Feb 18 | NC Central | H | W 85–72 | +3.0 | W+16.0 | 137.5 | O157 | 127.4 | 107.9 | 66.7 |
| Feb 16 | Coppin St | H | L 57–59 | −5.0 | L−7.0 | 139.0 | U116 | 84.6 | 87.6 | 67.4 |
| Feb 7 | Howard | A | L 57–85 | +14.0 | L−14.0 | 142.5 | U142 | 75.9 | 113.2 | 75.1 |
Chicago St
Against the spread
Season
14-16-1
Home
6-4
Road
8-12-1
Last 10
6-4
avg cover +2.5
Covered the last gameCovered 5 of 9 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
15-16
Home
3-7
Road
12-9
Last 10
4-6
avg vs total −2.1
Over 2 straightOver in 3 of 9 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 4 | Long Island | A | L 75–79 | +11.0 | W+7.0 | 138.0 | O154 | 122.2 | 128.7 | 61.4 |
| Feb 28 | Wagner | A | L 61–80 | +5.0 | L−14.0 | 135.5 | O141 | 88.6 | 116.2 | 68.9 |
| Feb 26 | Long Island | A | L 56–73 | +11.5 | L−5.5 | 140.0 | U129 | 85.8 | 111.9 | 65.3 |
| Feb 21 | C Connecticut | H | W 70–51 | +3.0 | W+22.0 | 138.5 | U121 | 113.1 | 82.4 | 61.9 |
| Feb 19 | FDU | H | L 59–60 | +2.0 | W+1.0 | 132.0 | U119 | 111.6 | 113.5 | 52.9 |
| Feb 14 | Le Moyne | A | L 63–81 | +7.0 | L−11.0 | 146.0 | U144 | 91.5 | 117.6 | 68.9 |
| Feb 12 | Stonehill | H | W 68–55 | +1.5 | W+14.5 | 132.5 | U123 | 121.5 | 98.3 | 56.0 |
| Feb 9 | Saint Francis Red Wolves | H | W 80–75 | −3.0 | W+2.0 | 145.5 | O155 | 112.7 | 105.7 | 71.0 |
| Feb 7 | New Haven | A | W 63–57 | +5.5 | W+11.5 | 127.5 | U120 | 106.9 | 96.8 | 58.9 |
| Feb 5 | C Connecticut | A | L 67–78 | +9.0 | L−2.0 | 137.0 | O145 | 107.5 | 125.1 | 62.3 |
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 homeSC StateChicago St
Efficiency
99.4
102.4
114.5
114.4
69.3
67.2
—
—
Shooting
46.8%
45.3%
44.8%
44.0%
34.0%
32.1%
66.8%
75.0%
41.1%
30.0%
Ball control & glass
20.8%
15.6%
18.8%
20.1%
31.4%
28.3%
37.6%
35.0%
10.8%
8.4%
9.6%
8.7%
Style
33.3%
30.9%
37.2%
41.8%
13.7%
11.7%
52.6%
50.3%
44.5%
39.8%
Roster
2.66
3.49
6'6.7"
6'3.7"
86.3%
—
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputSC State
Returning minutes: 86.3%Returning production: 79.8%
Lost
- Jayden Johnson 27.4 mpg, 13.4 ppg · transferred to Bowling Green
Added
Nobody of note.
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 86% 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).
Chicago St
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Chicago St'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 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.