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-conferenceMcCamish Pavilion, Atlanta, GA
The Citadel
Efficiency #348
2025-26: 11-22 · 8-12 conf
@
Georgia Tech
Efficiency #201
2025-26: 11-20 · 2-16 conf
Wed, Dec 9 · TBD
67.8
win 15%
Projected
79.9
win 85%
No line posted yet.
Model: GT −12.2 · total 147.7 · 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: Georgia Tech 70.6, The Citadel 66.2 → 68.5 possessions
+0.5
Georgia Tech offense vs The Citadel defense
+3.6
The Citadel offense vs Georgia Tech defense
−4.6
Projected total
147.7
Axis starts at 144 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Georgia Tech offense vs The Citadel defense
+3.6
The Citadel offense vs Georgia Tech defense
+4.6
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.9
Georgia Tech by 12.2
12.2
The Citadel side ◂▸ Georgia Tech side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the margin steps add to +12.1 against +12.2. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Georgia Tech.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 68.5, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Georgia Tech is the faster team (71.6, #30 of 365) and The Citadel the slower (64.7, #335). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
68.5
per team, 40 min
Projected total
147.7
model
Projected team totals
67.8 / 79.9
The Citadel / Georgia Tech
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
66.2#333
The Citadel
70.6#23
Georgia Tech
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageGeorgia Tech
Where Georgia Tech scores: shooting
Georgia Tech shoots an effective 50.0% (#234); The Citadel allows 57.5% (#361). Expect about 53.7%, 2.5 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.5 points per 100 possessions.
Pace
Tempo tug-of-war
Georgia Tech averages 71.6 possessions per 40, The Citadel 64.7. 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 68 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
ClashThe Citadel
Style match: 3-point volume
The Citadel takes 47.8% of its shots from three; Georgia Tech lets opponents take 44.4% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 49.3% — both habits push the same way.
AdvantageThe Citadel
Where The Citadel struggles: shooting
The Citadel shoots an effective 49.5% (#265); Georgia Tech allows 49.9% (#94). Expect about 49.6%, 1.7 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.4 points per 100 possessions.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (The Citadel'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 The Citadel at about 49.3% of its shots from three, Georgia Tech about 37.4%.
ClashGeorgia Tech
Style clash: 3-point volume
Georgia Tech rarely shoots threes (33.2% of its shots); The Citadel lets opponents take 44.1% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 37.4% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.80 vs 0.64).
The Citadel has the ball
OffenseGeorgia Tech allowsvs D1 avg
49.5% #265
49.9% #94
-2.4 pt/100
16.3% #157
15.6% #245
+1.3 pt/100
27.9% #270
30.7% #189
-1.0 pt/100
30.0% #309
34.2% #156
-0.4 pt/100
66.5% #349
—
-0.5 pt/100
The Citadel net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -3.0 pts/100
Georgia Tech has the ball
OffenseThe Citadel allowsvs D1 avg
50.0% #234
57.5% #361
+3.5 pt/100
18.6% #306
14.7% #307
+0.3 pt/100
29.9% #203
31.5% #227
+0.1 pt/100
33.3% #229
33.3% #136
-0.2 pt/100
71.1% #235
—
-0.1 pt/100
Georgia Tech net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +3.6 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersThe Citadeloffense vsGeorgia Techdefense
Share of shots by zone
The Citadel shoots
34.0
7.3
11.4
47.3
Georgia Tech allows
33.7
5.6
16.9
43.8
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 59.4%#147 | 56.8%#108 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 40.4%#167 | 38.1%#140 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 38.0%#186 | 37.1%#133 | 38.0% |
| Three | 32.0%#283 | 33.1%#134 | 33.7% |
Georgia Techoffense vsThe Citadeldefense
Share of shots by zone
Georgia Tech shoots
40.1
6.8
20.3
32.8
The Citadel allows
40.5
3.7
11.3
44.5
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 57.1%#237 | 65.8%#355 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 33.3%#312 | 42.1%#233 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 35.6%#270 | 43.4%#334 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.1%#109 | 36.6%#335 | 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 numbersThe Citadel
−2.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#299 of 365
Off reb %
27.9%
#270
Def reb %
68.5%
#227
Turnover %
16.3%
#157
Forced TO %
14.7%
#307
FT rate
30.0%
#309
FT allowed
33.3%
#136
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.8
Defensive rebounding−0.3
Ball security+0.3
Forcing turnovers−1.3
Foul shots drawn−1.3
Foul shots allowed+0.5
Georgia Tech
−2.4extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#280 of 365
Off reb %
29.9%
#203
Def reb %
69.3%
#189
Turnover %
18.6%
#306
Forced TO %
15.6%
#245
FT rate
33.3%
#229
FT allowed
34.2%
#156
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.1
Defensive rebounding0.0
Ball security−1.3
Forcing turnovers−0.8
Foul shots drawn−0.4
Foul shots allowed+0.3
Georgia Tech has more extra scoring chances per game: −2.4 (#280 of 365) to The Citadel’s −2.9 (#299).
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
The Citadel2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted The Citadel'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 | Braxton Williams | F | Sr | 6'6" | 33-24 | 29.3 | 14.6 | 3.2 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 49.5% | 34.2% | 7.0 | 77.7% | 32.8% | |
| 8 | Sola Adebisi | F | Sr | 6'7" | 30-30 | 32.2 | 10.0 | 5.8 | 1.5 | 1.4 | 63.8% | 33.3% | 1.6 | 67.1% | 17.3% | |
| 14 | Carter Kingsbury | G | Jr | 6'5" | 31-30 | 29.1 | 8.0 | 3.9 | 2.2 | 1.5 | 50.2% | 29.0% | 3.0 | 74.4% | 19.1% | |
| 5 | Eze Wali | G | So | 6'1" | 33-32 | 25.3 | 5.7 | 3.5 | 2.3 | 1.2 | 42.1% | 28.7% | 2.4 | 67.8% | 18.1% | |
| 1 | Christian Moore | F | So | 6'6" | 31-23 | 25.0 | 11.2 | 3.1 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 54.1% | 38.7% | 5.3 | 67.2% | 27.1% | |
| 4 | Logan Applegate | G | Sr | 6'2" | 33-3 | 15.7 | 6.5 | 2.2 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 50.0% | 31.8% | 4.7 | 77.8% | 25.7% | |
| 22 | Keynan Davis | G | Jr | 6'5" | 32-8 | 12.7 | 4.8 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 44.7% | 26.5% | 2.6 | 60.3% | 26.2% | |
| 3 | Marcos Gonzales | G | Fr | 6'3" | 28-0 | 13.2 | 4.5 | 1.7 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 46.8% | 28.6% | 0.8 | 61.9% | 27.1% | |
| 11 | Dante Kearse | F | So | 6'4" | 33-0 | 10.9 | 3.6 | 1.8 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 58.4% | 41.5% | 1.6 | 60.0% | 19.3% | |
| 23 | Simeon German | F | Sr | 6'10" | 28-15 | 10.1 | 1.8 | 2.7 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 43.6% | — | 0.0 | 16.7% | 16.3% | |
| 7 | Gabe Hernandez | G | Jr | 5'11" | 18-0 | 8.1 | 2.1 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 40.5% | 18.2% | 0.6 | 80.0% | 20.5% | |
| 25 | Cassius Bonjasky | F | Jr | 6'7" | 18-0 | 6.3 | 2.3 | 1.4 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 60.7% | 33.3% | 0.3 | 70.0% | 19.5% | |
| 15 | Chase Williams | F | Fr | 6'8" | 8-0 | 3.9 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 33.3% | — | 0.0 | — | 8.6% | |
| 30 | Logan Menefee | F | Fr | 6'10" | 6-0 | 3.7 | 0.7 | 1.2 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 22.2% | — | 0.0 | — | 29.2% | |
| 24 | Rowan Irelan | G | So | 6'3" | 4-0 | 3.3 | 2.3 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 64.3% | 42.9% | 1.8 | — | 35.2% | |
| 2 | Jameson Heck | G | Fr | 5'7" | 4-0 | 2.3 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.0 | — | 25.2% | |
| 12 | Aidan Alexander | F | Fr | 6'4" | 4-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.0 | — | 34.9% | |
| 13 | Jack Walter | G | Fr | 6'2" | 2-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.5 | — | 29.1% |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Georgia Tech2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | Nasir Whitlockat Lehigh | G | Sr | 6'2" | 35-35 | 35.0 | 20.5 | 3.5 | 3.3 | 2.7 | 54.2% | 43.3% | 5.1 | 78.8% | 34.4% | |
| 0 | Colby Garlandat San José St | G | Sr | 6'1" | 29-27 | 35.1 | 20.3 | 3.3 | 4.6 | 2.1 | 53.0% | 37.2% | 3.2 | 84.8% | 33.3% | |
| 12 | Kam Craft | G | Sr | 6'6" | 29-14 | 21.3 | 7.3 | 2.1 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 49.5% | 36.4% | 4.4 | 76.5% | 20.3% | |
| 8 | Cole Kirouac | C | So | 7'0" | 23-0 | 11.5 | 1.7 | 2.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 63.3% | — | 0.0 | 0.0% | 8.6% | |
| 30 | Courtland Muldrewat Washington | G | So | 6'3" | 18-1 | 14.1 | 3.6 | 2.1 | 1.6 | 0.4 | 45.8% | 21.1% | 1.1 | 55.0% | 17.9% | |
| 7 | Jackson Fieldsat West Virginia | F | Sr | 6'9" | 9-0 | 14.2 | 4.3 | 3.4 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 57.1% | 25.0% | 0.9 | 70.0% | 17.7% | |
| 14 | Jackson McVeyat Georgia | C | So | 7'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 10 | Tylis Jordanat Ole Miss | F | So | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 35 | Cody Cross | G | Fr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 9 | Haiden Harper | G | Fr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 6 | Ilja Kurucs | F | Fr | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 2 | Kaiden Bailey | G | Fr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Kayden Allen | G | Fr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 5 | Moustapha Diop | F | Fr | 6'11" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Vctor Valds | F | Sr | 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.
Transfers in: Jackson Fields (from West Virginia), Colby Garland (from San José St), Tylis Jordan (from Ole Miss), Jackson McVey (from Georgia), Courtland Muldrew (from Washington), Nasir Whitlock (from Lehigh)
The Citadel2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted The Citadel'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 | Braxton Williams | F | Sr | 6'6" | 33-24 | 29.3 | 14.6 | 3.2 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 49.5% | 34.2% | 7.0 | 77.7% | 32.8% | |
| 8 | Sola Adebisi | F | Sr | 6'7" | 30-30 | 32.2 | 10.0 | 5.8 | 1.5 | 1.4 | 63.8% | 33.3% | 1.6 | 67.1% | 17.3% | |
| 14 | Carter Kingsbury | G | Jr | 6'5" | 31-30 | 29.1 | 8.0 | 3.9 | 2.2 | 1.5 | 50.2% | 29.0% | 3.0 | 74.4% | 19.1% | |
| 5 | Eze Wali | G | So | 6'1" | 33-32 | 25.3 | 5.7 | 3.5 | 2.3 | 1.2 | 42.1% | 28.7% | 2.4 | 67.8% | 18.1% | |
| 1 | Christian Moore | F | So | 6'6" | 31-23 | 25.0 | 11.2 | 3.1 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 54.1% | 38.7% | 5.3 | 67.2% | 27.1% | |
| 4 | Logan Applegate | G | Sr | 6'2" | 33-3 | 15.7 | 6.5 | 2.2 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 50.0% | 31.8% | 4.7 | 77.8% | 25.7% | |
| 22 | Keynan Davis | G | Jr | 6'5" | 32-8 | 12.7 | 4.8 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 44.7% | 26.5% | 2.6 | 60.3% | 26.2% | |
| 3 | Marcos Gonzales | G | Fr | 6'3" | 28-0 | 13.2 | 4.5 | 1.7 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 46.8% | 28.6% | 0.8 | 61.9% | 27.1% | |
| 11 | Dante Kearse | F | So | 6'4" | 33-0 | 10.9 | 3.6 | 1.8 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 58.4% | 41.5% | 1.6 | 60.0% | 19.3% | |
| 23 | Simeon German | F | Sr | 6'10" | 28-15 | 10.1 | 1.8 | 2.7 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 43.6% | — | 0.0 | 16.7% | 16.3% | |
| 7 | Gabe Hernandez | G | Jr | 5'11" | 18-0 | 8.1 | 2.1 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 40.5% | 18.2% | 0.6 | 80.0% | 20.5% | |
| 25 | Cassius Bonjasky | F | Jr | 6'7" | 18-0 | 6.3 | 2.3 | 1.4 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 60.7% | 33.3% | 0.3 | 70.0% | 19.5% | |
| 15 | Chase Williams | F | Fr | 6'8" | 8-0 | 3.9 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 33.3% | — | 0.0 | — | 8.6% | |
| 30 | Logan Menefee | F | Fr | 6'10" | 6-0 | 3.7 | 0.7 | 1.2 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 22.2% | — | 0.0 | — | 29.2% | |
| 24 | Rowan Irelan | G | So | 6'3" | 4-0 | 3.3 | 2.3 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 64.3% | 42.9% | 1.8 | — | 35.2% | |
| 2 | Jameson Heck | G | Fr | 5'7" | 4-0 | 2.3 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.0 | — | 25.2% | |
| 12 | Aidan Alexander | F | Fr | 6'4" | 4-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.0 | — | 34.9% | |
| 13 | Jack Walter | G | Fr | 6'2" | 2-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.5 | — | 29.1% |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26The Citadel
Against the spread
Season
15-15
Home
6-6
Road
7-8
Last 10
5-5
avg cover +0.2
Covered 3 straightCovered 5 of 10 as an underdogCovered 3 of 6 with a line of 10+
Over / under
Season
15-14-1
Home
6-5-1
Road
7-8
Last 10
6-4
avg vs total +6.0
Over 3 straightOver in 6 of 10 as an underdogOver in 3 of 6 with a line of 10+
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7 | ETSU | N | L 76–83 | +15.0 | W+8.0 | 139.0 | O159 | 116.9 | 127.7 | 65.0 |
| Mar 6 | Chattanooga | N | W 88–85 | +7.5 | W+10.5 | 147.5 | O173 | 138.7 | 133.9 | 63.5 |
| Feb 28 | Wofford | A | W 93–90 OT | +12.0 | W+15.0 | 148.0 | O183 | 126.1 | 122.1 | 73.7 |
| Feb 25 | Furman | A | L 51–72 | +15.5 | L−5.5 | 143.5 | U123 | 85.2 | 120.3 | 59.8 |
| Feb 21 | Chattanooga | H | L 72–93 | +4.0 | L−17.0 | 144.0 | O165 | 99.8 | 128.9 | 72.1 |
| Feb 19 | Samford | H | L 75–78 | +10.5 | W+7.5 | 144.0 | O153 | 105.8 | 110.0 | 70.9 |
| Feb 14 | Mercer | H | L 54–70 | +12.0 | L−4.0 | 147.5 | U124 | 87.6 | 113.6 | 61.6 |
| Feb 11 | W Carolina | A | L 49–87 | +9.5 | L−28.5 | 146.5 | U136 | 78.5 | 139.3 | 62.4 |
| Feb 7 | Chattanooga | A | W 78–71 | +9.5 | W+16.5 | 141.0 | O149 | 114.7 | 104.4 | 68.0 |
| Feb 5 | Samford | A | L 64–78 | +13.5 | L−0.5 | 146.0 | U142 | 98.9 | 120.5 | 64.7 |
Georgia Tech
Against the spread
Season
13-18
Home
5-14
Road
8-2
Last 10
3-7
avg cover −4.2
Covered the last gameCovered 3 of 10 as an underdogCovered 2 of 4 with a line of 10+
Over / under
Season
18-13
Home
10-9
Road
7-3
Last 10
6-4
avg vs total +4.0
Over in the last gameOver in 6 of 10 as an underdogOver in 3 of 4 with a line of 10+
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7 | Clemson | A | L 76–79 | +17.5 | W+14.5 | 144.5 | O155 | 114.9 | 119.4 | 66.2 |
| Mar 4 | California | H | L 65–76 | +2.0 | L−9.0 | 156.0 | U141 | 86.5 | 101.1 | 75.2 |
| Feb 28 | Florida St | H | L 71–80 | +6.0 | L−3.0 | 159.5 | U151 | 109.8 | 123.7 | 64.7 |
| Feb 21 | #21Louisville | A | L 70–87 | +23.5 | W+6.5 | 166.5 | U157 | 95.1 | 118.2 | 73.6 |
| Feb 18 | #14Virginia | H | L 68–94 | +13.5 | L−12.5 | 149.5 | O162 | 86.0 | 118.8 | 79.1 |
| Feb 14 | Notre Dame | A | L 74–89 | +6.0 | L−9.0 | 150.0 | O163 | 107.5 | 129.3 | 68.8 |
| Feb 11 | Wake Forest | H | L 67–83 | +3.5 | L−12.5 | 158.0 | U150 | 102.5 | 127.0 | 65.4 |
| Feb 7 | Stanford | A | L 72–95 | +8.5 | L−14.5 | 151.5 | O167 | 99.2 | 130.9 | 72.6 |
| Feb 4 | California | A | L 85–90 | +8.5 | W+3.5 | 152.0 | O175 | 110.3 | 116.8 | 77.1 |
| Jan 31 | #16North Carolina | H | L 75–91 | +10.0 | L−6.0 | 160.0 | O166 | 104.3 | 126.6 | 71.9 |
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 homeThe CitadelGeorgia Tech
Efficiency
102.8
106.1
116.1
107.4
66.2
70.6
—
—
Shooting
49.5%
50.0%
51.0%
48.7%
32.0%
35.1%
66.5%
71.1%
30.0%
33.3%
Ball control & glass
16.3%
18.6%
14.7%
15.6%
27.9%
29.9%
31.5%
30.7%
9.6%
11.3%
10.7%
10.8%
Style
47.8%
33.2%
40.6%
45.7%
10.3%
12.2%
50.6%
59.9%
33.7%
31.5%
Roster
2.98
3.70
6'4.8"
6'3.5"
—
14.2%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputThe Citadel
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted The Citadel'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.)
Georgia Tech
Returning minutes: 14.2%Returning production: 10.3%
Lost
- Kowacie Reeves Jr. 28.3 mpg, 14.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Lamar Washington 26.6 mpg, 8.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Jaeden Mustaf 26.0 mpg, 9.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Akai Fleming 24.7 mpg, 10.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Baye Ndongo 23.7 mpg, 10.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Chas Kelley III 16.1 mpg, 4.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Nasir Whitlock from Lehigh · 35.0 mpg, 20.5 ppg last season
- Colby Garland from San José St · 30.9 mpg, 17.8 ppg last season
- Courtland Muldrew from Washington · 7.7 mpg, 2.0 ppg last season
- Jackson Fields from West Virginia · 3.7 mpg, 1.1 ppg last season
- Haiden Harper no D1 minutes last season
- Vctor Valds no D1 minutes last season
Returns 14% of last season's minutes; lost 5 of its top 5. 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.