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
Mercyhurst
Efficiency #261
2025-26: 17-17 · 12-9 conf
@
Notre Dame
Efficiency #106
2025-26: 13-18 · 4-14 conf
Thu, Nov 5 · TBD
65.8
win 21%
Projected
75.2
win 79%
No line posted yet.
Model: ND −9.4 · total 141.0 · 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, Mercyhurst 66.5 → 65.6 possessions
−5.9
Notre Dame offense vs Mercyhurst defense
+2.1
Mercyhurst offense vs Notre Dame defense
−3.5
Projected total
141.0
Axis starts at 135 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Notre Dame offense vs Mercyhurst defense
+2.1
Mercyhurst offense vs Notre Dame defense
+3.5
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.8
Notre Dame by 9.4
9.4
Mercyhurst side ◂▸ Notre Dame side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 140.9 against a projected 141.0. 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: 65.6, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Notre Dame is the faster team (66.7, #259 of 365) and Mercyhurst the slower (64.6, #338). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
65.6
per team, 40 min
Projected total
141.0
model
Projected team totals
65.8 / 75.2
Mercyhurst / Notre Dame
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
66.5#321
Mercyhurst
67.4#254
Notre Dame
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetPace
Half-court grind
Notre Dame averages 66.7 possessions per 40, Mercyhurst 64.6. Slower teams pull the pace toward themselves more than fast teams push it (0.80 vs 0.66 in five seasons of games), so expect about 64 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
AdvantageMercyhurst
Where Mercyhurst scores: ball control
Mercyhurst turns it over on 14.3% of possessions (#32); Notre Dame forces turnovers on 14.0% of opponent possessions (#337). Expect about 13.6%, 3.2 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.9 points per 100 possessions.
GlassMercyhurst
Mercyhurst gets out-rebounded
Projected offensive rebound rate of 25.8% is worth roughly -2.8 points per 100 possessions against Mercyhurst's offense.
AdvantageNotre Dame
Where Notre Dame struggles: ball control
Notre Dame turns it over on 17.0% of possessions (#202); Mercyhurst forces turnovers on 18.7% of opponent possessions (#64). Expect about 18.1%, 1.3 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -1.6 points per 100 possessions.
ClashMercyhurst
Style clash: 3-point volume
Mercyhurst rarely shoots threes (31.1% of its shots); Notre Dame lets opponents take 47.4% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 37.9% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.80 vs 0.64).
ClashMercyhurst
Style clash: paint scoring
Mercyhurst scores 46.5% of its points in the paint; Notre Dame protects the paint (36.7% of opponents' points) (D1 average 42.8%). Expect about 41.6% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.25 vs 0.34).
Mercyhurst has the ball
OffenseNotre Dame allowsvs D1 avg
49.5% #269
51.8% #200
-1.1 pt/100
14.3% #32
14.0% #337
+3.9 pt/100
26.4% #312
26.7% #27
-2.8 pt/100
25.6% #361
36.2% #214
-0.5 pt/100
74.1% #129
—
+0.1 pt/100
Mercyhurst net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -0.3 pts/100
Notre Dame has the ball
OffenseMercyhurst allowsvs D1 avg
52.3% #133
50.1% #107
+0.0 pt/100
17.0% #202
18.7% #64
-1.6 pt/100
31.2% #155
29.9% #153
+0.2 pt/100
34.1% #206
42.6% #332
+0.5 pt/100
69.7% #278
—
-0.2 pt/100
Notre Dame net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -1.1 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersMercyhurstoffense vsNotre Damedefense
Share of shots by zone
Mercyhurst shoots
33.8
11.3
23.5
31.3
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 | 56.5%#256 | 62.8%#320 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 48.7%#16 | 45.0%#296 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 42.5%#43 | 39.9%#237 | 38.0% |
| Three | 32.1%#276 | 33.2%#138 | 33.7% |
Notre Dameoffense vsMercyhurstdefense
Share of shots by zone
Notre Dame shoots
31.9
4.8
20.0
43.3
Mercyhurst allows
43.4
8.0
14.4
34.3
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 62.0%#72 | 57.8%#141 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 28.2%#356 | 42.7%#245 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 37.3%#211 | 33.3%#35 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.6%#82 | 32.3%#80 | 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 numbersMercyhurst
−2.3extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#278 of 365
Off reb %
26.4%
#312
Def reb %
70.1%
#153
Turnover %
14.3%
#32
Forced TO %
18.7%
#64
FT rate
25.6%
#361
FT allowed
42.6%
#332
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.3
Defensive rebounding+0.2
Ball security+1.7
Forcing turnovers+1.3
Foul shots drawn−2.4
Foul shots allowed−1.9
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
Notre Dame has more extra scoring chances per game: −0.9 (#226 of 365) to Mercyhurst’s −2.3 (#278).
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
Mercyhurst2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Bernie Blunt III | G | Sr | 5'11" | 34-34 | 30.9 | 17.6 | 3.1 | 2.2 | 1.3 | 49.8% | 35.5% | 5.9 | 86.5% | 34.1% | |
| 11 | Jake Lemelman | G | So | 6'2" | 34-34 | 30.0 | 13.9 | 2.5 | 3.2 | 1.7 | 50.2% | 39.6% | 4.5 | 86.4% | 30.6% | |
| 7 | Deshaun Jackson Jr. | G | So | 6'2" | 34-1 | 22.4 | 6.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 1.4 | 46.8% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 65.9% | 20.6% | |
| 10 | Christian Gamble | G | Sr | 6'0" | 34-33 | 21.1 | 3.9 | 1.6 | 2.1 | 0.6 | 44.6% | 28.8% | 2.1 | 73.1% | 13.9% | |
| 5 | Mykolas Ivanauskas | F | So | 6'8" | 32-31 | 19.6 | 7.4 | 5.1 | 0.4 | 1.1 | 57.9% | 22.6% | 1.0 | 58.6% | 23.6% | |
| 1 | Sean Lang | G | Sr | 6'3" | 32-0 | 13.4 | 0.8 | 2.4 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 26.6% | 15.8% | 0.6 | 62.5% | 6.9% | |
| 3 | Cameron Johnson | F | Jr | 6'5" | 33-4 | 12.2 | 3.4 | 2.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 44.9% | 32.1% | 0.8 | 75.0% | 20.8% | |
| 15 | Kaden Fuhrmann | G | Sr | 6'5" | 32-0 | 11.6 | 3.3 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 51.6% | 31.3% | 2.5 | 87.5% | 18.6% | |
| 34 | James Thomas | F | Sr | 6'6" | 33-0 | 9.6 | 1.4 | 2.0 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 48.8% | — | 0.0 | 27.3% | 12.2% | |
| 23 | Or Faran | G | Fr | 6'5" | 9-0 | 5.2 | 1.2 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 33.3% | 28.6% | 0.8 | 33.3% | 20.8% | |
| 33 | Vladimir Pavlovic | G | Jr | 6'2" | 8-0 | 4.4 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 33.3% | 0.0% | 0.3 | — | 23.4% | |
| 2 | Brady Conner | G | Fr | 6'6" | 6-0 | 5.0 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 11.1% | 0.0% | 1.0 | 0.0% | 25.1% | |
| 13 | Chris Leman | F | Fr | 6'9" | 6-0 | 4.3 | 1.2 | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 43.8% | 33.3% | 0.5 | 0.0% | 24.3% | |
| 21 | Emilis Butkus | G | Sr | 6'6" | 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.
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)
Mercyhurst2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Bernie Blunt III | G | Sr | 5'11" | 34-34 | 30.9 | 17.6 | 3.1 | 2.2 | 1.3 | 49.8% | 35.5% | 5.9 | 86.5% | 34.1% | |
| 11 | Jake Lemelman | G | So | 6'2" | 34-34 | 30.0 | 13.9 | 2.5 | 3.2 | 1.7 | 50.2% | 39.6% | 4.5 | 86.4% | 30.6% | |
| 7 | Deshaun Jackson Jr. | G | So | 6'2" | 34-1 | 22.4 | 6.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 1.4 | 46.8% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 65.9% | 20.6% | |
| 10 | Christian Gamble | G | Sr | 6'0" | 34-33 | 21.1 | 3.9 | 1.6 | 2.1 | 0.6 | 44.6% | 28.8% | 2.1 | 73.1% | 13.9% | |
| 5 | Mykolas Ivanauskas | F | So | 6'8" | 32-31 | 19.6 | 7.4 | 5.1 | 0.4 | 1.1 | 57.9% | 22.6% | 1.0 | 58.6% | 23.6% | |
| 1 | Sean Lang | G | Sr | 6'3" | 32-0 | 13.4 | 0.8 | 2.4 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 26.6% | 15.8% | 0.6 | 62.5% | 6.9% | |
| 3 | Cameron Johnson | F | Jr | 6'5" | 33-4 | 12.2 | 3.4 | 2.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 44.9% | 32.1% | 0.8 | 75.0% | 20.8% | |
| 15 | Kaden Fuhrmann | G | Sr | 6'5" | 32-0 | 11.6 | 3.3 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 51.6% | 31.3% | 2.5 | 87.5% | 18.6% | |
| 34 | James Thomas | F | Sr | 6'6" | 33-0 | 9.6 | 1.4 | 2.0 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 48.8% | — | 0.0 | 27.3% | 12.2% | |
| 23 | Or Faran | G | Fr | 6'5" | 9-0 | 5.2 | 1.2 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 33.3% | 28.6% | 0.8 | 33.3% | 20.8% | |
| 33 | Vladimir Pavlovic | G | Jr | 6'2" | 8-0 | 4.4 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 33.3% | 0.0% | 0.3 | — | 23.4% | |
| 2 | Brady Conner | G | Fr | 6'6" | 6-0 | 5.0 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 11.1% | 0.0% | 1.0 | 0.0% | 25.1% | |
| 13 | Chris Leman | F | Fr | 6'9" | 6-0 | 4.3 | 1.2 | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 43.8% | 33.3% | 0.5 | 0.0% | 24.3% | |
| 21 | Emilis Butkus | G | Sr | 6'6" | 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 2025-26Mercyhurst
Against the spread
Season
21-11
Home
9-4
Road
12-7
Last 10
7-3
avg cover +2.3
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 4 of 5 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 5 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
16-16
Home
7-6
Road
9-10
Last 10
6-4
avg vs total +6.0
Over in the last gameOver in 3 of 5 as a favoriteOver in 3 of 5 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10 | Long Island | A | L 70–79 | +5.0 | L−4.0 | 134.0 | O149 | 105.7 | 119.3 | 66.2 |
| Mar 7 | Stonehill | H | W 56–51 | −4.5 | W+0.5 | 135.0 | U107 | 85.4 | 77.8 | 65.6 |
| Mar 4 | FDU | H | W 70–61 | −4.0 | W+5.0 | 132.5 | U131 | 108.0 | 94.2 | 64.8 |
| Feb 28 | Stonehill | A | W 75–72 OT | −2.5 | W+0.5 | 138.5 | O147 | 97.9 | 94.0 | 76.6 |
| Feb 26 | C Connecticut | A | L 78–80 | +4.0 | W+2.0 | 141.0 | O158 | 114.7 | 117.7 | 68.0 |
| Feb 21 | Long Island | H | W 91–83 | +3.5 | W+11.5 | 141.0 | O174 | 130.5 | 119.0 | 69.7 |
| Feb 19 | Wagner | H | L 80–83 OT | −3.5 | L−6.5 | 134.5 | O163 | 107.3 | 111.4 | 74.5 |
| Feb 14 | Saint Francis Red Wolves | A | W 94–79 | −2.0 | W+13.0 | 138.5 | O173 | 137.0 | 115.1 | 68.6 |
| Feb 12 | Le Moyne | A | L 57–58 | +2.5 | W+1.5 | 138.5 | U115 | 82.7 | 84.2 | 68.9 |
| Feb 7 | FDU | A | L 52–55 | +2.5 | L−0.5 | 131.0 | U107 | 95.9 | 101.4 | 54.3 |
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 homeMercyhurstNotre Dame
Efficiency
103.8
111.4
108.8
107.9
66.5
67.4
—
—
Shooting
49.5%
52.3%
50.0%
51.4%
32.1%
35.6%
74.1%
69.7%
25.6%
34.1%
Ball control & glass
14.3%
17.0%
18.7%
14.0%
26.4%
31.2%
29.9%
26.7%
7.7%
9.1%
6.3%
8.8%
Style
31.1%
43.5%
46.5%
40.2%
11.3%
9.8%
54.2%
47.4%
34.3%
31.4%
Roster
3.05
3.45
6'2.6"
6'5.8"
84.5%
34.3%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputMercyhurst
Returning minutes: 84.5%Returning production: 78.6%
Lost
- Qadir Martin 31.4 mpg, 11.6 ppg · transferred to Fairfield
Added
- Emilis Butkus no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 85% 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 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.