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-conferencePatrick Gymnasium, Burlington, VTAmerica East-Metro Challenge
Quinnipiac
Efficiency #190
2025-26: 19-13 · 12-9 conf
@
Vermont
Efficiency #199
2025-26: 22-12 · 14-5 conf
Sun, Nov 8 · 2:00 PM ET
71.0
win 38%
Projected
74.7
win 62%
No line posted yet.
Model: UVM −3.6 · total 145.7 · 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: Vermont 66.5, Quinnipiac 70.1 → 68.3 possessions
−0.1
Vermont offense vs Quinnipiac defense
−1.4
Quinnipiac offense vs Vermont defense
−1.1
Projected total
145.7
Axis starts at 144 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Vermont offense vs Quinnipiac defense
−1.4
Quinnipiac offense vs Vermont defense
+1.1
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.9
Vermont by 3.6
3.6
Quinnipiac side ◂▸ Vermont side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 145.6 against a projected 145.7. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Vermont.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 68.3, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Quinnipiac is the faster team (69.7, #101 of 365) and Vermont the slower (64.4, #346). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
68.3
per team, 40 min
Projected total
145.7
model
Projected team totals
71.0 / 74.7
Quinnipiac / Vermont
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
70.1#45
Quinnipiac
66.5#317
Vermont
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageQuinnipiac
Where Quinnipiac struggles: shooting
Quinnipiac shoots an effective 48.2% (#310); Vermont allows 50.4% (#121). Expect about 49.0%, 2.3 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.2 points per 100 possessions.
Pace
Tempo tug-of-war
Vermont averages 64.4 possessions per 40, Quinnipiac 69.7. 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 66 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
TurnoversQuinnipiac
Quinnipiac protects the ball
Projected turnover rate of 15.0% is worth roughly +2.2 points per 100 possessions for Quinnipiac's offense.
ClashVermont
Style clash: 3-point volume
Vermont takes 44.6% of its shots from three; Quinnipiac runs teams off the line (35.4% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 41.0% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.80 vs 0.64).
ClashVermont
Strength vs strength: 2-point shooting
Vermont (#47 in 2-point shooting) against Quinnipiac (#28 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 51.6%. Historically Vermont's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.61 vs 0.55).
Quinnipiac has the ball
OffenseVermont allowsvs D1 avg
48.2% #310
50.4% #121
-3.2 pt/100
15.9% #130
14.8% #305
+2.2 pt/100
34.1% #65
23.0% #2
-0.6 pt/100
33.8% #217
36.4% #226
+0.0 pt/100
69.1% #297
—
-0.3 pt/100
Quinnipiac net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -1.9 pts/100
Vermont has the ball
OffenseQuinnipiac allowsvs D1 avg
53.1% #95
48.9% #65
-0.2 pt/100
14.3% #35
17.4% #127
+1.2 pt/100
26.2% #318
32.0% #253
-1.3 pt/100
31.1% #279
30.6% #75
-0.6 pt/100
71.9% #213
—
-0.0 pt/100
Vermont net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -0.9 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersQuinnipiacoffense vsVermontdefense
Share of shots by zone
Quinnipiac shoots
44.1
2.8
20.0
33.1
Vermont allows
33.7
7.7
18.0
40.7
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 54.9%#301 | 57.1%#118 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 30.0%#349 | 41.9%#230 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 31.1%#346 | 35.1%#80 | 38.0% |
| Three | 34.0%#171 | 35.3%#267 | 33.7% |
Vermontoffense vsQuinnipiacdefense
Share of shots by zone
Vermont shoots
36.8
5.9
12.8
44.5
Quinnipiac allows
43.0
5.5
16.5
35.0
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 62.5%#61 | 52.6%#20 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 48.0%#23 | 35.1%#60 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 40.3%#104 | 35.1%#81 | 38.0% |
| Three | 33.3%#208 | 34.9%#242 | 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 numbersQuinnipiac
+2.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#66 of 365
Off reb %
34.1%
#65
Def reb %
68.0%
#253
Turnover %
15.9%
#130
Forced TO %
17.4%
#127
FT rate
33.8%
#217
FT allowed
30.6%
#75
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.2
Defensive rebounding−0.4
Ball security+0.6
Forcing turnovers+0.5
Foul shots drawn−0.3
Foul shots allowed+1.2
Vermont
+0.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#174 of 365
Off reb %
26.2%
#318
Def reb %
77.0%
#2
Turnover %
14.3%
#35
Forced TO %
14.8%
#305
FT rate
31.1%
#279
FT allowed
36.4%
#226
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.4
Defensive rebounding+2.5
Ball security+1.7
Forcing turnovers−1.3
Foul shots drawn−1.0
Foul shots allowed−0.3
Quinnipiac has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.7 (#66 of 365) to Vermont’s +0.2 (#174).
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
Quinnipiac2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21 | Keith McKnight | F | So | 6'7" | 32-4 | 24.8 | 11.0 | 5.9 | 1.1 | 1.3 | 55.4% | 26.7% | 0.5 | 62.5% | 24.9% | |
| 12 | Holden Pierre-Louisat Cleveland St | F | Fr | 6'8" | 30-21 | 15.6 | 3.3 | 2.7 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 56.4% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 38.7% | 16.0% | |
| 9 | Nate Guerengomba | G | Jr | 6'4" | 29-4 | 14.1 | 2.5 | 1.7 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 37.2% | 17.6% | 0.6 | 60.0% | 14.3% | |
| 4 | Tai Turnage | G | So | 6'0" | 30-0 | 12.6 | 3.6 | 1.3 | 2.1 | 0.4 | 38.2% | 33.3% | 1.8 | 81.1% | 20.1% | |
| 3 | Nas Hartat La Salle | F | So | 6'10" | 20-3 | 10.6 | 2.3 | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 37.2% | — | 0.0 | 61.9% | 16.1% | |
| 13 | Braylan Ritvo | F | So | 6'8" | 8-0 | 6.5 | 1.5 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 40.0% | 33.3% | 0.8 | 0.0% | 16.9% | |
| 34 | Akintola Akinniyi | F | Sr | 6'7" | 5-0 | 3.8 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 25.0% | — | 0.0 | 0.0% | 13.9% | |
| 10 | Christopher Skenderi | F | So | 6'7" | 4-0 | 3.3 | 3.3 | 1.5 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 92.9% | 75.0% | 1.0 | — | 36.8% | |
| 1 | Jayden Reid | F | So | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Ali Diouf | F | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 0 | Lucas Sekasi | G | Jr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 2 | Malik Fields | G | Fr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 24 | Mike Parrotta | G | Sr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 17 | Nedas Cholevinskas | F | Fr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 5 | Tayeshawn Cunningham-Pemberton | G | Sr | 6'3" | 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: Nas Hart (from La Salle), Holden Pierre-Louis (from Cleveland St)
Vermont2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | TJ Hurley | G | Sr | 6'5" | 34-34 | 30.9 | 15.0 | 3.5 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 58.1% | 38.5% | 6.0 | 87.3% | 25.8% | |
| 20 | TJ Long | G | Sr | 6'4" | 29-17 | 29.6 | 12.1 | 4.8 | 1.1 | 1.1 | 48.2% | 31.4% | 6.5 | 79.7% | 26.7% | |
| 19 | Gus Yalden | F | So | 6'9" | 31-30 | 25.5 | 16.1 | 5.8 | 2.1 | 1.7 | 56.1% | 34.7% | 3.8 | 67.3% | 37.9% | |
| 34 | Noah Barnett | F | So | 6'9" | 31-25 | 22.3 | 5.8 | 3.6 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 66.8% | 50.0% | 0.1 | 64.1% | 13.3% | |
| 24 | Ben Johnson | G | Sr | 6'3" | 34-17 | 18.2 | 5.4 | 2.1 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 59.7% | 42.2% | 3.2 | 72.2% | 16.2% | |
| 21 | Lucas Mari | G | Fr | 6'6" | 30-8 | 20.0 | 4.9 | 4.0 | 1.7 | 1.2 | 46.5% | 26.3% | 2.5 | 70.0% | 18.8% | |
| 2 | Ben Michaels | F | So | 6'8" | 31-11 | 13.1 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 38.3% | 9.1% | 0.7 | 62.5% | 13.2% | |
| 1 | Momo Nkugwa | G | Fr | 6'3" | 29-0 | 13.1 | 3.0 | 2.3 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 54.9% | 25.0% | 1.1 | 47.4% | 15.0% | |
| 4 | Jackson Skipper | F | Sr | 6'7" | 29-1 | 8.5 | 1.8 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 43.9% | 27.3% | 1.1 | 76.9% | 17.6% | |
| 0 | David Simon | F | So | 6'11" | 18-0 | 10.6 | 3.4 | 2.2 | 0.3 | 0.6 | 70.7% | 57.1% | 0.4 | 36.4% | 18.6% | |
| 32 | Trey Woodyard | F | Sr | 6'6" | 4-0 | 8.0 | 1.5 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 42.9% | 40.0% | 1.3 | — | 13.6% | |
| 12 | Ben Wesson | G | Fr | 6'4" | 7-0 | 2.3 | 1.9 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 85.7% | 66.7% | 0.4 | 50.0% | 32.4% | |
| 25 | Sincere Clemons | G | Fr | 6'2" | 6-0 | 2.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | 50.0% | 26.3% | |
| 15 | Drew Bessette | F | Fr | 6'8" | 5-0 | 2.4 | 0.4 | 1.4 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 25.0% | 0.0% | 0.6 | — | 19.0% | |
| 13 | Chris Kuzemka | G | Sr | 6'0" | 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.
Quinnipiac2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21 | Keith McKnight | F | So | 6'7" | 32-4 | 24.8 | 11.0 | 5.9 | 1.1 | 1.3 | 55.4% | 26.7% | 0.5 | 62.5% | 24.9% | |
| 12 | Holden Pierre-Louisat Cleveland St | F | Fr | 6'8" | 30-21 | 15.6 | 3.3 | 2.7 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 56.4% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 38.7% | 16.0% | |
| 9 | Nate Guerengomba | G | Jr | 6'4" | 29-4 | 14.1 | 2.5 | 1.7 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 37.2% | 17.6% | 0.6 | 60.0% | 14.3% | |
| 4 | Tai Turnage | G | So | 6'0" | 30-0 | 12.6 | 3.6 | 1.3 | 2.1 | 0.4 | 38.2% | 33.3% | 1.8 | 81.1% | 20.1% | |
| 3 | Nas Hartat La Salle | F | So | 6'10" | 20-3 | 10.6 | 2.3 | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 37.2% | — | 0.0 | 61.9% | 16.1% | |
| 13 | Braylan Ritvo | F | So | 6'8" | 8-0 | 6.5 | 1.5 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 40.0% | 33.3% | 0.8 | 0.0% | 16.9% | |
| 34 | Akintola Akinniyi | F | Sr | 6'7" | 5-0 | 3.8 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 25.0% | — | 0.0 | 0.0% | 13.9% | |
| 10 | Christopher Skenderi | F | So | 6'7" | 4-0 | 3.3 | 3.3 | 1.5 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 92.9% | 75.0% | 1.0 | — | 36.8% | |
| 1 | Jayden Reid | F | So | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Ali Diouf | F | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 0 | Lucas Sekasi | G | Jr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 2 | Malik Fields | G | Fr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 24 | Mike Parrotta | G | Sr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 17 | Nedas Cholevinskas | F | Fr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 5 | Tayeshawn Cunningham-Pemberton | G | Sr | 6'3" | 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: Nas Hart (from La Salle), Holden Pierre-Louis (from Cleveland St)
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26Quinnipiac
Against the spread
Season
12-18-1
Home
3-10-1
Road
9-7
Last 10
2-7-1
avg cover −4.9
Missed the spread 5 straightCovered 1 of 9 as a favorite, 1 push
Over / under
Season
12-19
Home
5-9
Road
6-10
Last 10
4-6
avg vs total −2.4
Over in the last gameOver in 4 of 9 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7 | Marist | N | L 75–77 | −2.0 | L−4.0 | 134.5 | O152 | 102.6 | 105.4 | 73.1 |
| Mar 1 | Canisius | A | W 67–63 | −8.0 | L−4.0 | 138.5 | U130 | 100.9 | 94.8 | 66.4 |
| Feb 27 | Niagara | A | L 76–78 OT | −8.5 | L−10.5 | 136.0 | O154 | 110.9 | 113.8 | 68.6 |
| Feb 22 | Fairfield | H | L 79–85 | −6.5 | L−12.5 | 150.5 | O164 | 115.5 | 124.3 | 68.4 |
| Feb 15 | Merrimack | H | L 49–56 | −3.5 | L−10.5 | 142.0 | U105 | 75.1 | 85.8 | 65.3 |
| Feb 13 | Siena | A | W 74–62 | +4.0 | W+16.0 | 144.0 | U136 | 110.8 | 92.8 | 66.8 |
| Feb 7 | Niagara | H | W 56–55 | −13.5 | L−12.5 | 137.5 | U111 | 94.6 | 92.9 | 59.2 |
| Feb 5 | Canisius | H | W 75–60 | −15.0 | P0.0 | 142.0 | U135 | 102.2 | 81.8 | 73.3 |
| Feb 1 | Fairfield | A | W 72–65 | −2.0 | W+5.0 | 155.0 | U137 | 104.8 | 94.6 | 68.7 |
| Jan 30 | Sacred Heart | H | L 91–98 | −9.0 | L−16.0 | 156.5 | O189 | 120.4 | 129.7 | 75.6 |
Vermont
Against the spread
Season
14-18
Home
8-6
Road
5-10
Last 10
4-6
avg cover −0.2
Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 4 of 9 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 5 with a line of 10+
Over / under
Season
17-15
Home
6-8
Road
8-7
Last 10
3-7
avg vs total −3.8
Under 2 straightOver in 3 of 9 as a favoriteOver in 3 of 5 with a line of 10+
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 14 | UMBC | A | L 59–74 | +1.5 | L−13.5 | 134.5 | U133 | 92.1 | 115.5 | 64.0 |
| Mar 10 | NJIT | H | W 63–54 | −11.5 | L−2.5 | 135.0 | U117 | 99.6 | 85.4 | 63.2 |
| Mar 7 | Bryant | H | W 77–57 | −12.0 | W+8.0 | 131.5 | O134 | 129.5 | 95.9 | 59.5 |
| Mar 3 | UAlbany | H | W 69–56 | −9.0 | W+4.0 | 137.0 | U125 | 112.9 | 91.7 | 61.1 |
| Feb 26 | UMass Lowell | H | W 66–64 | −9.0 | L−7.0 | 146.5 | U130 | 101.5 | 98.4 | 65.0 |
| Feb 21 | NJIT | A | W 70–64 | −6.5 | L−0.5 | 142.0 | U134 | 110.2 | 100.8 | 63.5 |
| Feb 19 | UMBC | A | L 62–75 | −2.0 | L−15.0 | 142.0 | U137 | 92.1 | 111.4 | 67.3 |
| Feb 14 | Bryant | H | W 90–63 | −12.5 | W+14.5 | 133.0 | O153 | 134.8 | 94.4 | 66.8 |
| Feb 12 | Binghamton | A | W 73–65 | −11.0 | L−3.0 | 136.0 | O138 | 111.3 | 99.1 | 65.6 |
| Feb 7 | New Hampshire | H | W 80–57 | −10.0 | W+13.0 | 138.0 | U137 | 117.9 | 84.0 | 67.8 |
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 homeQuinnipiacVermont
Efficiency
106.0
108.2
106.8
109.4
70.1
66.5
—
—
Shooting
48.2%
53.1%
46.7%
55.7%
34.0%
33.3%
69.1%
71.9%
33.8%
31.1%
Ball control & glass
15.9%
14.3%
17.4%
14.8%
34.1%
26.2%
32.0%
23.0%
9.4%
8.3%
11.2%
8.3%
Style
33.7%
44.6%
43.5%
41.8%
15.7%
5.5%
49.4%
47.9%
29.9%
34.4%
Roster
1.99
2.78
6'5.8"
6'6.1"
25.8%
85.8%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputQuinnipiac
Returning minutes: 25.8%Returning production: 25.9%
Lost
- Grant Randall 31.7 mpg, 11.4 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Amarri Monroe 31.3 mpg, 14.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Asim Jones 28.8 mpg, 12.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Jaden Zimmerman 26.3 mpg, 12.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Spence Wewe 16.5 mpg, 2.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Samson Reilly 7.8 mpg, 3.8 ppg · transferred to Sacred Heart
Added
- Holden Pierre-Louis from Cleveland St · 14.2 mpg, 3.0 ppg last season
- Nas Hart from La Salle · 6.6 mpg, 1.4 ppg last season
- Ali Diouf no D1 minutes last season
- Jayden Reid no D1 minutes last season
- Nedas Cholevinskas no D1 minutes last season
- Mike Parrotta no D1 minutes last season
Returns 26% of last season's minutes; lost 4 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).
Vermont
Returning minutes: 85.8%Returning production: 85.6%
Lost
- Sean Blake 28.6 mpg, 9.9 ppg · transferred to Ball State
Added
- Chris Kuzemka no D1 minutes last season
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).
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.