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-conferenceShow Me Center, Cape Girardeau, MO
Lipscomb
Efficiency #179
2025-26: 19-13 · 12-7 conf
@
SE Missouri
Efficiency #209
2025-26: 20-13 · 15-7 conf
Mon, Nov 2 · TBD
73.1
win 39%
Projected
76.2
win 61%
No line posted yet.
Model: SEMO −3.2 · total 149.3 · 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: SE Missouri 69.4, Lipscomb 69.7 → 70.8 possessions
+5.3
SE Missouri offense vs Lipscomb defense
−2.6
Lipscomb offense vs SE Missouri defense
−1.7
Projected total
149.3
Axis starts at 146 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
SE Missouri offense vs Lipscomb defense
−2.6
Lipscomb offense vs SE Missouri defense
+1.7
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+4.1
SE Missouri by 3.2
3.2
Lipscomb side ◂▸ SE Missouri side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 149.2 against a projected 149.3. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help SE Missouri.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 70.8, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Lipscomb is the faster team (70.5, #76 of 365) and SE Missouri the slower (69.9, #98). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
70.8
per team, 40 min
Projected total
149.3
model
Projected team totals
73.1 / 76.2
Lipscomb / SE Missouri
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
69.7#69
Lipscomb
69.4#92
SE Missouri
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetPace
Track meet
SE Missouri averages 69.9 possessions per 40, Lipscomb 70.5. 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 71 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
AdvantageLipscomb
Where Lipscomb struggles: the offensive glass
Lipscomb rebounds 25.8% of its own misses (#327); SE Missouri lets opponents grab 28.2% of their own misses (#76). Expect about 26.1%, 4.3 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.6 points per 100 possessions.
ClashSE Missouri
Style match: ball movement
SE Missouri creates off the dribble (assists on 45.7% of its baskets); Lipscomb breaks up passing offenses (assists on 46.2% allowed) (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 44.1% — both habits push the same way.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (SE Missouri) 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 Lipscomb at about 42.2% of its shots from three, SE Missouri about 37.1%.
ClashLipscomb
Style clash: 3-point volume
Lipscomb takes 47.9% of its shots from three; SE Missouri runs teams off the line (33.2% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 42.2% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.80 vs 0.64).
ClashSE Missouri
Style match: paint scoring
SE Missouri scores 46.3% of its points in the paint; Lipscomb gives up 46.9% of opponents' points in the paint (D1 average 42.8%). Expect about 45.1% — both habits push the same way.
Lipscomb has the ball
OffenseSE Missouri allowsvs D1 avg
54.1% #67
48.8% #57
+0.5 pt/100
16.0% #142
18.1% #91
-0.5 pt/100
25.8% #327
28.2% #76
-2.6 pt/100
26.0% #357
48.0% #361
+0.4 pt/100
74.9% #85
—
+0.2 pt/100
Lipscomb net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -2.0 pts/100
SE Missouri has the ball
OffenseLipscomb allowsvs D1 avg
49.8% #244
53.2% #273
+0.2 pt/100
16.9% #192
17.7% #112
-0.8 pt/100
29.6% #218
30.2% #171
-0.4 pt/100
38.8% #84
29.0% #45
-0.2 pt/100
69.5% #281
—
-0.3 pt/100
SE Missouri net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -1.5 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersLipscomboffense vsSE Missouridefense
Share of shots by zone
Lipscomb shoots
39.4
5.7
7.1
47.8
SE Missouri allows
40.5
9.7
17.0
32.7
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 60.2%#114 | 53.5%#30 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 36.8%#246 | 36.6%#104 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 29.1%#361 | 41.9%#299 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.7%#75 | 33.1%#130 | 33.7% |
SE Missourioffense vsLipscombdefense
Share of shots by zone
SE Missouri shoots
43.5
6.5
14.5
35.5
Lipscomb allows
36.4
9.7
13.7
40.3
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 58.7%#168 | 62.9%#322 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 34.7%#292 | 43.8%#264 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 34.8%#295 | 35.8%#102 | 38.0% |
| Three | 30.9%#324 | 34.3%#207 | 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 numbersLipscomb
−0.8extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#220 of 365
Off reb %
25.8%
#327
Def reb %
69.8%
#171
Turnover %
16.0%
#142
Forced TO %
17.7%
#112
FT rate
26.0%
#357
FT allowed
29.0%
#45
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.5
Defensive rebounding+0.1
Ball security+0.5
Forcing turnovers+0.7
Foul shots drawn−2.3
Foul shots allowed+1.6
SE Missouri
−0.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#224 of 365
Off reb %
29.6%
#218
Def reb %
71.8%
#76
Turnover %
16.9%
#192
Forced TO %
18.1%
#91
FT rate
38.8%
#84
FT allowed
48.0%
#361
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.3
Defensive rebounding+0.8
Ball security−0.1
Forcing turnovers+1.0
Foul shots drawn+1.0
Foul shots allowed−3.3
Lipscomb has more extra scoring chances per game: −0.8 (#220 of 365) to SE Missouri’s −0.9 (#224).
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
Lipscomb2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Lipscomb'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mateo Esmeraldo | G | Jr | 6'1" | 32-32 | 30.1 | 9.9 | 3.8 | 7.0 | 1.6 | 53.2% | 36.8% | 2.7 | 82.9% | 19.0% | |
| 35 | Grant Asman | F | Sr | 6'11" | 32-32 | 27.8 | 14.3 | 5.8 | 1.8 | 1.6 | 60.8% | 36.2% | 5.1 | 76.8% | 26.3% | |
| 26 | Titas Sargiunas | F | Jr | 6'4" | 32-20 | 23.7 | 9.7 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 1.5 | 51.8% | 34.0% | 4.4 | 73.3% | 24.6% | |
| 30 | Ross Candelino | G | Jr | 6'5" | 28-13 | 24.9 | 11.2 | 5.2 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 62.4% | 42.6% | 5.5 | 69.8% | 22.3% | |
| 33 | Charlie Williams | C | Sr | 6'10" | 32-32 | 21.3 | 10.1 | 2.6 | 2.3 | 1.7 | 53.2% | 33.7% | 3.2 | 79.2% | 28.9% | |
| 7 | Ethan Duncan | G | Jr | 6'0" | 31-7 | 21.2 | 10.5 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 55.7% | 36.7% | 5.7 | 92.3% | 26.0% | |
| 6 | Or Ashkenazi | F | Fr | 6'5" | 31-24 | 19.5 | 2.9 | 2.8 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 50.7% | 39.4% | 1.1 | 75.0% | 9.4% | |
| 3 | Kennedy Okpara | F | Fr | 6'7" | 30-0 | 13.7 | 5.1 | 2.7 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 50.4% | 30.2% | 1.8 | 54.5% | 23.3% | |
| 23 | Kellan Boylan | F | Sr | 6'7" | 32-0 | 12.2 | 3.4 | 3.6 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 47.0% | 6.3% | 0.5 | 67.3% | 17.2% | |
| 24 | Cole Middleton | F | Sr | 6'6" | 29-0 | 11.9 | 4.6 | 2.1 | 0.5 | 1.2 | 46.3% | 29.4% | 0.6 | 80.0% | 26.5% | |
| 12 | Luke Carter | G | Jr | 6'1" | 7-0 | 4.0 | 2.7 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 79.2% | 71.4% | 1.0 | — | 23.1% | |
| 2 | Devyn Martin | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 15 | Josh Scott | F | Fr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Logan Suber | G | So | 6'0" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 0 | Luke Jack | F | Fr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 5 | Miles White | 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.
SE Missouri2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted SE Missouri'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | BJ Ward | G | Jr | 6'0" | 33-33 | 30.2 | 10.9 | 2.1 | 3.7 | 2.0 | 46.4% | 35.0% | 4.3 | 81.0% | 24.3% | |
| 44 | Braxton Stacker | G | Sr | 6'5" | 33-33 | 28.2 | 11.8 | 3.4 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 48.7% | 31.9% | 4.4 | 80.3% | 24.6% | |
| 10 | Luke Almodovar | G | Jr | 6'3" | 33-23 | 27.0 | 14.1 | 3.7 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 51.5% | 31.6% | 6.3 | 76.0% | 28.8% | |
| 15 | Brendan Terry | F | Sr | 6'7" | 33-24 | 25.1 | 11.3 | 5.3 | 2.0 | 1.8 | 55.8% | 34.6% | 0.8 | 61.5% | 26.6% | |
| 55 | Marqueas Bell | G | Jr | 6'3" | 33-10 | 22.1 | 9.1 | 5.2 | 1.8 | 1.4 | 53.5% | 30.8% | 0.4 | 73.9% | 23.6% | |
| 7 | Landren Blocker | G | So | 6'5" | 33-28 | 17.8 | 5.2 | 3.8 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 54.5% | 41.7% | 0.7 | 48.2% | 18.1% | |
| 4 | Troy Cole Jr. | G | Sr | 6'4" | 33-4 | 13.5 | 4.2 | 2.3 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 43.4% | 7.0% | 1.3 | 68.3% | 21.6% | |
| 18 | David Idada | C | Sr | 7'0" | 33-10 | 10.7 | 1.8 | 2.5 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 54.8% | — | 0.0 | 54.3% | 10.8% | |
| 1 | PJ Farmer | G | Fr | 6'2" | 32-0 | 9.3 | 1.9 | 1.4 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 43.1% | 10.5% | 0.6 | 58.8% | 17.1% | |
| 9 | Blaize Sagna | G | Sr | 6'3" | 27-0 | 8.9 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 41.9% | 25.0% | 1.0 | 90.0% | 11.7% | |
| 30 | Elliot Lowndes | F | Sr | 7'0" | 32-0 | 7.1 | 2.5 | 1.3 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 58.5% | 34.3% | 1.1 | 50.0% | 19.3% | |
| 25 | Jay Reynolds | G | Fr | 6'3" | 10-0 | 5.2 | 1.2 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 28.9% | 20.0% | 1.5 | 50.0% | 22.8% | |
| 3 | Trace Sadler | F | Fr | 7'1" | 12-0 | 4.0 | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 85.7% | — | 0.0 | 0.0% | 10.7% | |
| 22 | Saxton Hoepker | F | Sr | 6'8" | 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.
Lipscomb2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Lipscomb'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mateo Esmeraldo | G | Jr | 6'1" | 32-32 | 30.1 | 9.9 | 3.8 | 7.0 | 1.6 | 53.2% | 36.8% | 2.7 | 82.9% | 19.0% | |
| 35 | Grant Asman | F | Sr | 6'11" | 32-32 | 27.8 | 14.3 | 5.8 | 1.8 | 1.6 | 60.8% | 36.2% | 5.1 | 76.8% | 26.3% | |
| 26 | Titas Sargiunas | F | Jr | 6'4" | 32-20 | 23.7 | 9.7 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 1.5 | 51.8% | 34.0% | 4.4 | 73.3% | 24.6% | |
| 30 | Ross Candelino | G | Jr | 6'5" | 28-13 | 24.9 | 11.2 | 5.2 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 62.4% | 42.6% | 5.5 | 69.8% | 22.3% | |
| 33 | Charlie Williams | C | Sr | 6'10" | 32-32 | 21.3 | 10.1 | 2.6 | 2.3 | 1.7 | 53.2% | 33.7% | 3.2 | 79.2% | 28.9% | |
| 7 | Ethan Duncan | G | Jr | 6'0" | 31-7 | 21.2 | 10.5 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 55.7% | 36.7% | 5.7 | 92.3% | 26.0% | |
| 6 | Or Ashkenazi | F | Fr | 6'5" | 31-24 | 19.5 | 2.9 | 2.8 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 50.7% | 39.4% | 1.1 | 75.0% | 9.4% | |
| 3 | Kennedy Okpara | F | Fr | 6'7" | 30-0 | 13.7 | 5.1 | 2.7 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 50.4% | 30.2% | 1.8 | 54.5% | 23.3% | |
| 23 | Kellan Boylan | F | Sr | 6'7" | 32-0 | 12.2 | 3.4 | 3.6 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 47.0% | 6.3% | 0.5 | 67.3% | 17.2% | |
| 24 | Cole Middleton | F | Sr | 6'6" | 29-0 | 11.9 | 4.6 | 2.1 | 0.5 | 1.2 | 46.3% | 29.4% | 0.6 | 80.0% | 26.5% | |
| 12 | Luke Carter | G | Jr | 6'1" | 7-0 | 4.0 | 2.7 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 79.2% | 71.4% | 1.0 | — | 23.1% | |
| 2 | Devyn Martin | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 15 | Josh Scott | F | Fr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Logan Suber | G | So | 6'0" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 0 | Luke Jack | F | Fr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 5 | Miles White | 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.
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26Lipscomb
Against the spread
Season
15-15
Home
8-4
Road
7-10
Last 10
3-7
avg cover −4.8
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 8 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
16-14
Home
5-7
Road
11-6
Last 10
5-5
avg vs total −2.8
Under 2 straightOver in 3 of 8 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 6 | FGCU | N | L 53–77 | −4.5 | L−28.5 | 150.0 | U130 | 84.1 | 122.2 | 63.0 |
| Feb 28 | E Kentucky | A | W 80–77 | −2.5 | W+0.5 | 159.0 | U157 | 122.3 | 117.7 | 65.4 |
| Feb 25 | West Georgia | A | L 78–84 | −5.5 | L−11.5 | 153.0 | O162 | 110.6 | 119.1 | 70.5 |
| Feb 21 | North Alabama | H | W 73–51 | −12.0 | W+10.0 | 149.5 | U124 | 116.8 | 81.6 | 62.5 |
| Feb 18 | Bellarmine | A | W 75–72 | −3.5 | L−0.5 | 155.5 | U147 | 117.2 | 112.5 | 64.0 |
| Feb 14 | Queens | A | L 81–87 | +3.0 | L−3.0 | 165.5 | O168 | 103.2 | 110.9 | 78.5 |
| Feb 11 | E Kentucky | H | W 75–61 | −6.0 | W+8.0 | 161.0 | U136 | 114.6 | 93.2 | 65.5 |
| Feb 7 | C Arkansas | H | L 78–86 | −4.0 | L−12.0 | 155.5 | O164 | 107.3 | 118.3 | 72.7 |
| Feb 4 | Austin Peay | A | L 76–87 | +4.5 | L−6.5 | 157.0 | O163 | 105.6 | 120.9 | 71.9 |
| Jan 31 | North Florida | A | W 100–94 | −11.0 | L−5.0 | 166.5 | O194 | 137.2 | 129.0 | 72.9 |
SE Missouri
Against the spread
Season
13-16-1
Home
5-7
Road
7-7-1
Last 10
6-4
avg cover +0.8
Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 4 of 8 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
13-17
Home
6-6
Road
7-8
Last 10
3-7
avg vs total −5.5
Under 2 straightOver in 3 of 8 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 6 | Morehead St | N | L 61–66 | −4.0 | L−9.0 | 139.5 | U127 | 94.4 | 102.1 | 64.6 |
| Mar 5 | Lindenwood | N | W 68–66 | −3.0 | L−1.0 | 149.0 | U134 | 100.1 | 97.2 | 67.9 |
| Feb 28 | Tennessee Tech | H | W 89–73 | −7.5 | W+8.5 | 142.0 | O162 | 130.8 | 107.3 | 68.1 |
| Feb 26 | Tennessee St | H | L 71–79 | −3.5 | L−11.5 | 152.0 | U150 | 96.4 | 107.3 | 73.6 |
| Feb 21 | Little Rock | A | W 70–65 | −2.5 | W+2.5 | 144.0 | U135 | 102.6 | 95.3 | 68.2 |
| Feb 17 | UT Martin | A | W 56–53 OT | +2.5 | W+5.5 | 138.5 | U109 | 78.4 | 74.2 | 71.5 |
| Feb 14 | Lindenwood | A | W 73–61 | +2.0 | W+14.0 | 156.5 | U134 | 100.8 | 84.2 | 72.4 |
| Feb 12 | SIUE | A | L 56–74 | −1.0 | L−19.0 | 137.5 | U130 | 85.4 | 112.8 | 65.6 |
| Feb 7 | S Indiana | H | W 90–65 | −11.0 | W+14.0 | 140.5 | O155 | 133.2 | 96.2 | 67.6 |
| Feb 5 | Morehead St | H | W 82–70 | −7.5 | W+4.5 | 144.0 | O152 | 117.1 | 99.9 | 70.1 |
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 homeLipscombSE Missouri
Efficiency
107.8
105.2
108.1
106.8
69.7
69.4
—
—
Shooting
54.1%
49.8%
54.5%
51.8%
35.7%
30.9%
74.9%
69.5%
26.0%
38.8%
Ball control & glass
16.0%
16.9%
17.7%
18.1%
25.8%
29.6%
30.2%
28.2%
9.3%
9.9%
10.1%
9.5%
Style
47.9%
36.0%
42.5%
46.3%
16.2%
14.1%
62.3%
45.7%
36.9%
37.9%
Roster
3.04
3.25
6'5.4"
6'4.4"
—
—
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputLipscomb
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Lipscomb'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.)
SE Missouri
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted SE Missouri'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 last| Date | Season | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Sat, Nov 29 | 2025-26 | Lipscomb 88 – 77 SE Missouri |
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.