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-conferenceMerkert Gymnasium, South Easton, MA
Northeastern
Efficiency #274
2025-26: 7-24 · 3-17 conf
@
Stonehill
Efficiency #320
2025-26: 12-21 · 9-11 conf
Sat, Nov 21 · 5:00 PM ET
71.8
win 44%
Projected
73.5
win 56%
No line posted yet.
Model: STO −1.7 · total 145.2 · 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 oneProjected total
Average D-I game
148.2
PaceAdjusted tempo: Stonehill 67.7, Northeastern 69.8 → 69.1 possessions
+1.8
Stonehill offense vs Northeastern defense
−3.5
Northeastern offense vs Stonehill defense
−1.3
Projected total
145.2
Axis starts at 142 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Stonehill offense vs Northeastern defense
−3.5
Northeastern offense vs Stonehill defense
+1.3
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+4.0
Stonehill by 1.7
1.7
Northeastern side ◂▸ Stonehill side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the margin steps add to +1.8 against +1.7. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Stonehill.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 69.1, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Northeastern is the faster team (69.6, #108 of 365) and Stonehill the slower (66.6, #265). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
69.1
per team, 40 min
Projected total
145.2
model
Projected team totals
71.8 / 73.5
Northeastern / Stonehill
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
69.8#63
Northeastern
67.7#240
Stonehill
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageNortheastern
Where Northeastern scores: ball control
Northeastern turns it over on 16.4% of possessions (#162); Stonehill forces turnovers on 13.4% of opponent possessions (#347). Expect about 14.4%, 2.4 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.0 points per 100 possessions.
GlassNortheastern
Northeastern gets out-rebounded
Projected offensive rebound rate of 26.6% is worth roughly -2.3 points per 100 possessions against Northeastern's offense.
AdvantageStonehill
Where Stonehill struggles: ball control
Stonehill turns it over on 19.4% of possessions (#335); Northeastern forces turnovers on 16.8% of opponent possessions (#170). Expect about 18.3%, 1.5 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -1.9 points per 100 possessions.
ClashNortheastern
Style match: paint scoring
Northeastern scores 47.0% of its points in the paint; Stonehill gives up 46.6% of opponents' points in the paint (D1 average 42.8%). Expect about 45.1% — both habits push the same way.
Northeastern has the ball
OffenseStonehill allowsvs D1 avg
52.4% #130
47.8% #36
-1.6 pt/100
16.4% #162
13.4% #347
+3.0 pt/100
27.3% #286
27.1% #40
-2.3 pt/100
29.4% #324
30.3% #67
-0.7 pt/100
69.0% #299
—
-0.3 pt/100
Northeastern net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -1.9 pts/100
Stonehill has the ball
OffenseNortheastern allowsvs D1 avg
46.9% #339
56.4% #351
+0.1 pt/100
19.4% #335
16.8% #170
-1.9 pt/100
27.5% #282
30.2% #169
-1.3 pt/100
27.3% #350
41.9% #320
+0.0 pt/100
68.5% #311
—
-0.3 pt/100
Stonehill net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -3.4 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersNortheasternoffense vsStonehilldefense
Share of shots by zone
Northeastern shoots
42.0
5.9
15.1
37.1
Stonehill allows
40.9
8.7
17.9
32.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 60.6%#103 | 53.6%#33 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 36.7%#249 | 37.2%#114 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 38.7%#157 | 34.2%#54 | 38.0% |
| Three | 33.7%#187 | 33.4%#150 | 33.7% |
Stonehilloffense vsNortheasterndefense
Share of shots by zone
Stonehill shoots
42.6
4.2
12.7
40.6
Northeastern allows
43.5
6.2
14.9
35.5
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 49.6%#362 | 63.5%#335 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 28.4%#355 | 45.5%#314 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 35.1%#285 | 47.9%#364 | 38.0% |
| Three | 31.7%#294 | 35.8%#297 | 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 numbersNortheastern
−3.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#321 of 365
Off reb %
27.3%
#286
Def reb %
69.8%
#169
Turnover %
16.4%
#162
Forced TO %
16.8%
#170
FT rate
29.4%
#324
FT allowed
41.9%
#320
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.0
Defensive rebounding+0.1
Ball security+0.3
Forcing turnovers+0.1
Foul shots drawn−1.4
Foul shots allowed−1.7
Stonehill
−4.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#341 of 365
Off reb %
27.5%
#282
Def reb %
72.9%
#40
Turnover %
19.4%
#335
Forced TO %
13.4%
#347
FT rate
27.3%
#350
FT allowed
30.3%
#67
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.9
Defensive rebounding+1.1
Ball security−1.8
Forcing turnovers−2.3
Foul shots drawn−2.0
Foul shots allowed+1.3
Northeastern has more extra scoring chances per game: −3.7 (#321 of 365) to Stonehill’s −4.6 (#341).
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
Northeastern2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Mike Loughnane | G | Jr | 6'4" | 31-23 | 30.9 | 10.2 | 2.9 | 3.8 | 1.6 | 52.7% | 35.1% | 3.6 | 78.8% | 20.0% | |
| 8 | William Kermoury | G | Jr | 6'5" | 27-24 | 26.9 | 13.1 | 3.2 | 2.3 | 1.4 | 57.9% | 40.2% | 6.8 | 71.7% | 26.7% | |
| 7 | Youri Fritz | F | Sr | 6'9" | 25-23 | 25.9 | 9.8 | 5.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 59.8% | 33.3% | 0.1 | 52.1% | 22.1% | |
| 1 | Xavier Abreu | G | Fr | 6'3" | 29-9 | 21.0 | 12.6 | 2.7 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 50.3% | 28.3% | 3.2 | 75.6% | 34.8% | |
| 13 | Luca Soroa Schaller | G | So | 6'7" | 29-12 | 20.7 | 5.6 | 3.4 | 2.2 | 1.9 | 40.0% | 22.6% | 1.8 | 73.7% | 22.0% | |
| 2 | Ryan Williams | G | So | 6'4" | 28-10 | 14.7 | 7.4 | 1.1 | 1.6 | 0.6 | 62.3% | 42.5% | 2.6 | 90.9% | 24.2% | |
| 21 | Petar Pinter | C | Fr | 6'11" | 26-14 | 14.3 | 3.3 | 2.1 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 55.1% | — | 0.0 | 55.0% | 14.7% | |
| 9 | Ty Francis | F | Fr | 6'7" | 24-5 | 15.0 | 4.5 | 2.6 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 52.9% | 21.1% | 0.8 | 57.6% | 18.5% | |
| 0 | Xander Alarie | F | Fr | 6'8" | 11-11 | 27.7 | 10.3 | 7.4 | 1.5 | 2.2 | 45.3% | 26.3% | 1.7 | 85.7% | 24.1% | |
| 12 | Liam Koelsch | C | Fr | 6'9" | 26-1 | 8.6 | 1.8 | 2.3 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 65.7% | — | 0.0 | 8.7% | 12.4% | |
| 10 | Miles Newton | G | Fr | 6'3" | 9-7 | 16.8 | 5.4 | 2.0 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 58.3% | 35.3% | 1.9 | 70.0% | 18.0% | |
| 22 | Haris Elezovic | F | Sr | 6'8" | 17-0 | 8.1 | 2.2 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 45.7% | 25.0% | 0.5 | 85.7% | 18.0% | |
| 3 | LA Pratt | G | Sr | 6'5" | 3-3 | 33.0 | 17.0 | 1.7 | 3.3 | 2.0 | 51.2% | 27.3% | 3.7 | 90.9% | 31.1% |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Stonehill2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Stonehill'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | Hermann Koffi | G | So | 6'4" | 32-32 | 35.4 | 12.8 | 2.8 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 51.4% | 36.8% | 6.6 | 88.7% | 22.1% | |
| 4 | Davante Hackett | G | Jr | 6'3" | 33-11 | 27.7 | 13.6 | 4.1 | 1.5 | 1.3 | 51.0% | 34.4% | 5.6 | 73.6% | 29.8% | |
| 5 | Chas Stinson | G | Sr | 6'4" | 32-29 | 27.9 | 11.3 | 5.5 | 1.6 | 2.1 | 47.2% | 23.5% | 1.1 | 70.3% | 27.6% | |
| 1 | Rex Sunderland | G | Sr | 6'5" | 33-32 | 26.9 | 4.7 | 3.5 | 3.2 | 2.4 | 38.3% | 27.4% | 2.5 | 62.2% | 17.9% | |
| 13 | Raymond Espinal-Guzman | F | Sr | 6'8" | 33-22 | 24.1 | 6.3 | 5.1 | 1.3 | 1.6 | 43.1% | 26.3% | 2.3 | 67.3% | 20.9% | |
| 11 | Ridvan Tutic | F | Jr | 6'11" | 30-24 | 22.5 | 7.1 | 7.8 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 59.4% | — | 0.0 | 53.8% | 19.4% | |
| 33 | Ethan Meuser | F | Sr | 6'8" | 20-11 | 20.4 | 6.1 | 5.2 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 46.4% | 28.3% | 3.0 | 54.3% | 22.4% | |
| 2 | Trenton Ruth | G | So | 6'3" | 32-0 | 11.4 | 3.4 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 0.7 | 38.7% | 28.0% | 1.6 | 62.1% | 25.2% | |
| 31 | Pearse McGuinn | F | So | 6'8" | 25-1 | 9.3 | 2.7 | 1.6 | 0.3 | 0.6 | 44.1% | 25.0% | 0.6 | 78.9% | 20.9% | |
| 30 | Anthony Holden | G | Sr | 6'5" | 20-0 | 10.0 | 2.4 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 59.0% | 42.9% | 1.4 | 66.7% | 12.9% | |
| 3 | William Batchelder | G | Sr | 6'2" | 3-3 | 27.3 | 10.3 | 2.0 | 1.3 | 2.0 | 54.0% | 46.7% | 5.0 | 66.7% | 22.5% | |
| 20 | Cory Lovell | F | Jr | 6'9" | 11-0 | 5.9 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 37.5% | 0.0% | 0.2 | 33.3% | 9.2% | |
| 22 | Charlie Diamantis | G | Sr | 6'3" | 5-0 | 3.8 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.4 | 60.0% | 21.3% | |
| 15 | Norbu Jenpa | G | Fr | 6'4" | 6-0 | 2.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 35.7% | 20.0% | 0.8 | — | 32.5% | |
| 12 | Eino Montin | G | Jr | 6'1" | 2-0 | 4.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 100.0% | — | 0.0 | 0.0% | 22.8% | |
| 21 | Colin Byrne | G | Fr | 6'3" | 2-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 0.0% |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Northeastern2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Mike Loughnane | G | Jr | 6'4" | 31-23 | 30.9 | 10.2 | 2.9 | 3.8 | 1.6 | 52.7% | 35.1% | 3.6 | 78.8% | 20.0% | |
| 8 | William Kermoury | G | Jr | 6'5" | 27-24 | 26.9 | 13.1 | 3.2 | 2.3 | 1.4 | 57.9% | 40.2% | 6.8 | 71.7% | 26.7% | |
| 7 | Youri Fritz | F | Sr | 6'9" | 25-23 | 25.9 | 9.8 | 5.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 59.8% | 33.3% | 0.1 | 52.1% | 22.1% | |
| 1 | Xavier Abreu | G | Fr | 6'3" | 29-9 | 21.0 | 12.6 | 2.7 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 50.3% | 28.3% | 3.2 | 75.6% | 34.8% | |
| 13 | Luca Soroa Schaller | G | So | 6'7" | 29-12 | 20.7 | 5.6 | 3.4 | 2.2 | 1.9 | 40.0% | 22.6% | 1.8 | 73.7% | 22.0% | |
| 2 | Ryan Williams | G | So | 6'4" | 28-10 | 14.7 | 7.4 | 1.1 | 1.6 | 0.6 | 62.3% | 42.5% | 2.6 | 90.9% | 24.2% | |
| 21 | Petar Pinter | C | Fr | 6'11" | 26-14 | 14.3 | 3.3 | 2.1 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 55.1% | — | 0.0 | 55.0% | 14.7% | |
| 9 | Ty Francis | F | Fr | 6'7" | 24-5 | 15.0 | 4.5 | 2.6 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 52.9% | 21.1% | 0.8 | 57.6% | 18.5% | |
| 0 | Xander Alarie | F | Fr | 6'8" | 11-11 | 27.7 | 10.3 | 7.4 | 1.5 | 2.2 | 45.3% | 26.3% | 1.7 | 85.7% | 24.1% | |
| 12 | Liam Koelsch | C | Fr | 6'9" | 26-1 | 8.6 | 1.8 | 2.3 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 65.7% | — | 0.0 | 8.7% | 12.4% | |
| 10 | Miles Newton | G | Fr | 6'3" | 9-7 | 16.8 | 5.4 | 2.0 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 58.3% | 35.3% | 1.9 | 70.0% | 18.0% | |
| 22 | Haris Elezovic | F | Sr | 6'8" | 17-0 | 8.1 | 2.2 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 45.7% | 25.0% | 0.5 | 85.7% | 18.0% | |
| 3 | LA Pratt | G | Sr | 6'5" | 3-3 | 33.0 | 17.0 | 1.7 | 3.3 | 2.0 | 51.2% | 27.3% | 3.7 | 90.9% | 31.1% |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26Northeastern
Against the spread
Season
11-19-1
Home
2-10
Road
7-8-1
Last 10
2-8
avg cover −4.8
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 1 of 8 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
20-11
Home
9-3
Road
8-8
Last 10
4-6
avg vs total −1.4
Over 3 straightOver in 3 of 8 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7 | Drexel | N | L 77–84 | +5.0 | L−2.0 | 140.5 | O161 | 112.0 | 122.2 | 68.8 |
| Mar 6 | NC A&T | N | W 88–72 | −2.0 | W+14.0 | 152.5 | O160 | 122.9 | 100.5 | 71.6 |
| Mar 3 | Monmouth | H | L 83–89 | +4.0 | L−2.0 | 149.5 | O172 | 123.9 | 132.9 | 67.0 |
| Feb 28 | Hampton | A | L 65–76 | +4.5 | L−6.5 | 146.5 | U141 | 98.6 | 115.2 | 65.9 |
| Feb 26 | William & Mary | A | L 77–84 | +11.0 | W+4.0 | 164.5 | U161 | 96.4 | 105.1 | 79.9 |
| Feb 21 | Hofstra | H | L 68–82 | +7.5 | L−6.5 | 145.0 | O150 | 106.1 | 128.0 | 64.1 |
| Feb 19 | Drexel | H | L 61–70 | −1.0 | L−10.0 | 145.0 | U131 | 91.0 | 104.4 | 67.0 |
| Feb 12 | William & Mary | H | L 67–94 | +5.5 | L−21.5 | 167.5 | U161 | 96.2 | 135.0 | 69.7 |
| Feb 7 | Stony Brook | A | L 55–69 | +4.0 | L−10.0 | 153.5 | U124 | 82.0 | 102.9 | 67.1 |
| Feb 5 | Hofstra | A | L 63–80 | +9.0 | L−8.0 | 153.5 | U143 | 94.9 | 120.5 | 66.4 |
Stonehill
Against the spread
Season
16-15
Home
5-6
Road
11-8
Last 10
4-6
avg cover −0.6
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 7 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
10-21
Home
5-6
Road
5-14
Last 10
5-5
avg vs total +0.4
Under in the last gameOver in 4 of 7 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7 | Mercyhurst | A | L 51–56 | +4.5 | L−0.5 | 135.0 | U107 | 77.8 | 85.4 | 65.6 |
| Mar 4 | Le Moyne | A | W 81–71 | +4.5 | W+14.5 | 140.0 | O152 | 114.8 | 100.6 | 70.5 |
| Feb 28 | Mercyhurst | H | L 72–75 OT | +2.5 | L−0.5 | 138.5 | O147 | 94.0 | 97.9 | 76.6 |
| Feb 26 | Saint Francis Red Wolves | H | W 103–77 | −5.5 | W+20.5 | 140.0 | O180 | 141.0 | 105.4 | 73.0 |
| Feb 21 | Le Moyne | H | W 77–68 | +2.0 | W+11.0 | 137.0 | O145 | 109.4 | 96.6 | 70.4 |
| Feb 19 | New Haven | A | L 51–64 | +3.0 | L−10.0 | 121.0 | U115 | 77.9 | 97.8 | 65.5 |
| Feb 14 | Wagner | H | L 57–68 | −3.0 | L−14.0 | 129.5 | U125 | 86.5 | 103.2 | 65.9 |
| Feb 12 | Chicago St | A | L 55–68 | −1.5 | L−14.5 | 132.5 | U123 | 98.3 | 121.5 | 56.0 |
| Feb 7 | Long Island | A | L 54–61 | +10.0 | W+3.0 | 132.5 | U115 | 88.2 | 99.7 | 61.2 |
| Feb 5 | FDU | A | L 58–74 | +1.0 | L−15.0 | 131.0 | O132 | 91.0 | 116.1 | 63.7 |
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 homeNortheasternStonehill
Efficiency
107.7
98.2
113.7
107.4
69.8
67.7
—
—
Shooting
52.4%
46.9%
53.6%
46.5%
33.7%
31.7%
69.0%
68.5%
29.4%
27.3%
Ball control & glass
16.4%
19.4%
16.8%
13.4%
27.3%
27.5%
30.2%
27.1%
9.3%
11.2%
9.5%
13.6%
Style
37.8%
40.5%
47.0%
44.1%
15.3%
12.4%
55.7%
51.3%
33.4%
29.3%
Roster
2.26
3.23
6'6.1"
6'5.6"
90.0%
—
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputNortheastern
Returning minutes: 90.0%Returning production: 93.2%
Lost
- JB Frankel 20.0 mpg, 5.7 ppg · transferred to Boston College
Added
Nobody of note.
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 90% 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).
Stonehill
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Stonehill'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.