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-conferenceAllen Arena, Nashville, TN

UNC Asheville

Efficiency #226

2025-26: 15-17 · 9-9 conf

Lipscomb

Efficiency #179

2025-26: 19-13 · 12-7 conf

Wed, Dec 2 · 8:00 PM ET

70.0

win 32%

Projected

75.6

win 68%

No line posted yet.

Model: LIP −5.6 · total 145.6 · 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 one

Projected total

Average D-I game

148.2

PaceAdjusted tempo: Lipscomb 69.7, UNC Asheville 66.6 → 68.0 possessions

−0.6

Lipscomb offense vs UNC Asheville defense

−0.2

UNC Asheville offense vs Lipscomb defense

−1.9

Projected total

145.6

Axis starts at 144 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Lipscomb offense vs UNC Asheville defense

−0.2

UNC Asheville offense vs Lipscomb defense

+1.9

Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors

+3.9

Lipscomb by 5.6

5.6

UNC Asheville side ◂▸ Lipscomb side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 145.5 against a projected 145.6. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Lipscomb.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 68.0, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Lipscomb is the faster team (70.5, #76 of 365) and UNC Asheville the slower (67.1, #238). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

68.0

per team, 40 min

Projected total

145.6

model

Projected team totals

70.0 / 75.6

UNC Asheville / Lipscomb

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

66.6#311

UNC Asheville

69.7#69

Lipscomb

How this game plays

what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meet

ClashUNC Asheville

Style match: ball movement

UNC Asheville creates off the dribble (assists on 40.4% of its baskets); Lipscomb breaks up passing offenses (assists on 46.2% allowed) (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 40.7% — both habits push the same way.

AdvantageLipscomb

Where Lipscomb scores: shooting

Lipscomb shoots an effective 54.1% (#67); UNC Asheville allows 51.3% (#175). Expect about 52.9%, 1.6 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.3 points per 100 possessions.

GlassLipscomb

Lipscomb gets out-rebounded

Projected offensive rebound rate of 27.6% is worth roughly -1.7 points per 100 possessions against Lipscomb's offense.

TurnoversLipscomb

Lipscomb protects the ball

Projected turnover rate of 15.5% is worth roughly +1.5 points per 100 possessions for Lipscomb's offense.

ClashUNC Asheville

Strength vs strength: free-throw rate

UNC Asheville (#60 in free-throw rate) against Lipscomb (#45 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 33.8%. Historically Lipscomb's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.50 vs 0.61).

UNC Asheville has the ball

OffenseLipscomb allowsvs D1 avg

51.0% #194

53.2% #273

+1.1 pt/100

17.4% #231

17.7% #112

-1.2 pt/100

29.8% #211

30.2% #171

-0.3 pt/100

40.0% #60

29.0% #45

-0.1 pt/100

68.4% #317

—

-0.4 pt/100

UNC Asheville net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -0.9 pts/100

Lipscomb has the ball

OffenseUNC Asheville allowsvs D1 avg

54.1% #67

51.3% #175

+2.3 pt/100

16.0% #142

15.5% #252

+1.5 pt/100

25.8% #327

31.3% #218

-1.7 pt/100

26.0% #357

38.7% #279

-0.3 pt/100

74.9% #85

—

+0.2 pt/100

Lipscomb net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +2.1 pts/100

Shot diet

Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbers

UNC Ashevilleoffense vsLipscombdefense

Share of shots by zone

UNC Asheville shoots

32.0

10.4

24.2

33.5

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	57.1%#232	62.9%#322	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	46.8%#40	43.8%#264	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	41.6%#67	35.8%#102	38.0%
Three	35.1%#110	34.3%#207	33.7%

Lipscomboffense vsUNC Ashevilledefense

Share of shots by zone

Lipscomb shoots

39.4

5.7

7.1

47.8

UNC Asheville allows

44.2

5.6

11.9

38.3

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	60.2%#114	57.3%#125	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	36.8%#246	36.4%#99	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	29.1%#361	40.9%#272	38.0%
Three	35.7%#75	32.6%#93	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 numbers

UNC Asheville

−1.3extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#249 of 365

Off reb %

29.8%

#211

Def reb %

68.7%

#218

Turnover %

17.4%

#231

Forced TO %

15.5%

#252

FT rate

40.0%

#60

FT allowed

38.7%

#279

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.2

Defensive rebounding−0.2

Ball security−0.4

Forcing turnovers−0.8

Foul shots drawn+1.3

Foul shots allowed−0.9

Lipscomb

−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

Lipscomb has more extra scoring chances per game: −0.8 (#220 of 365) to UNC Asheville’s −1.3 (#249).

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

UNC Asheville2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
0	Toyaz Solomon	F	Sr	6'9"	32-28	33.4	16.9	7.4	2.0	2.2	50.0%	36.3%	2.8	68.4%	32.1%
55	Justin Wright	G	Sr	6'2"	32-32	33.0	17.1	3.1	3.0	2.3	53.8%	37.3%	3.9	78.8%	30.6%
8	DJ Patrick	G	Sr	6'6"	29-27	33.8	9.6	4.0	0.8	1.0	53.4%	39.3%	6.1	73.2%	17.0%
5	Myles Mayfield	F	Fr	6'8"	32-15	22.9	4.5	4.3	0.8	1.2	62.5%	66.7%	0.1	42.1%	13.0%
13	Daniel Thomas	F	Fr	6'8"	30-19	20.2	2.8	4.9	0.4	0.9	45.7%	0.0%	0.1	54.3%	11.1%
1	Julian Clarke	PG	So	6'1"	26-0	10.3	1.8	0.6	0.3	0.5	58.1%	40.6%	1.2	55.6%	12.0%
44	Sage Tolentino	F	Jr	7'1"	27-3	9.3	1.1	1.8	0.3	0.3	57.9%	0.0%	0.0	80.0%	7.3%
24	Corey Jones	G	Jr	6'2"	18-1	8.7	0.7	0.5	0.5	0.2	33.3%	14.3%	0.8	0.0%	7.9%
11	Jakel Powell	G	Fr	6'5"	10-0	12.5	3.2	1.5	0.6	0.3	40.3%	28.0%	2.5	77.8%	17.0%
23	David Hermes	F	Sr	6'10"	8-4	11.5	0.5	1.3	0.1	0.4	50.0%	—	0.0	100.0%	3.9%
7	Connor Dubsky	G	Jr	6'4"	1-0	13.0	15.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	83.3%	55.6%	9.0	—	44.6%
2	Rasheed Baldwin	G	Sr	6'5"	3-1	3.3	1.0	0.3	0.0	0.3	18.8%	12.5%	2.7	—	51.7%
10	Hugo Maton	G	Fr	6'2"	2-0	3.5	3.0	1.0	0.5	0.0	100.0%	66.7%	1.5	—	24.7%
14	Brayden Rivers	SF	Fr	6'7"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
12	Mitchell Taylor	G	Jr	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.

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
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.

UNC Asheville2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
0	Toyaz Solomon	F	Sr	6'9"	32-28	33.4	16.9	7.4	2.0	2.2	50.0%	36.3%	2.8	68.4%	32.1%
55	Justin Wright	G	Sr	6'2"	32-32	33.0	17.1	3.1	3.0	2.3	53.8%	37.3%	3.9	78.8%	30.6%
8	DJ Patrick	G	Sr	6'6"	29-27	33.8	9.6	4.0	0.8	1.0	53.4%	39.3%	6.1	73.2%	17.0%
5	Myles Mayfield	F	Fr	6'8"	32-15	22.9	4.5	4.3	0.8	1.2	62.5%	66.7%	0.1	42.1%	13.0%
13	Daniel Thomas	F	Fr	6'8"	30-19	20.2	2.8	4.9	0.4	0.9	45.7%	0.0%	0.1	54.3%	11.1%
1	Julian Clarke	PG	So	6'1"	26-0	10.3	1.8	0.6	0.3	0.5	58.1%	40.6%	1.2	55.6%	12.0%
44	Sage Tolentino	F	Jr	7'1"	27-3	9.3	1.1	1.8	0.3	0.3	57.9%	0.0%	0.0	80.0%	7.3%
24	Corey Jones	G	Jr	6'2"	18-1	8.7	0.7	0.5	0.5	0.2	33.3%	14.3%	0.8	0.0%	7.9%
11	Jakel Powell	G	Fr	6'5"	10-0	12.5	3.2	1.5	0.6	0.3	40.3%	28.0%	2.5	77.8%	17.0%
23	David Hermes	F	Sr	6'10"	8-4	11.5	0.5	1.3	0.1	0.4	50.0%	—	0.0	100.0%	3.9%
7	Connor Dubsky	G	Jr	6'4"	1-0	13.0	15.0	0.0	1.0	1.0	83.3%	55.6%	9.0	—	44.6%
2	Rasheed Baldwin	G	Sr	6'5"	3-1	3.3	1.0	0.3	0.0	0.3	18.8%	12.5%	2.7	—	51.7%
10	Hugo Maton	G	Fr	6'2"	2-0	3.5	3.0	1.0	0.5	0.0	100.0%	66.7%	1.5	—	24.7%
14	Brayden Rivers	SF	Fr	6'7"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
12	Mitchell Taylor	G	Jr	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 2025-26

UNC Asheville

Against the spread

Season

14-15

Home

5-7

Road

6-7

Last 10

4-6

avg cover −2.5

Covered 2 straightCovered 1 of 5 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 5 as an underdogCovered 1 of 4 with a line of 10+

Over / under

Season

15-14

Home

4-8

Road

9-4

Last 10

6-4

avg vs total +0.8

Under in the last gameOver in 3 of 5 as a favoriteOver in 3 of 5 as an underdogOver in 2 of 4 with a line of 10+

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 7	High PointAdjEM #50	N	L 71–75	+13.0	W+9.0	147.5	U146	104.6	110.5	67.9
Mar 6	LongwoodAdjEM #248	N	W 85–82 OT	+1.0	W+4.0	141.0	O167	111.0	107.1	76.5
Feb 28	Charleston SoAdjEM #220	H	L 75–92	−4.0	L−21.0	149.5	O167	105.9	129.9	70.8
Feb 26	Gardner-WebbAdjEM #363	A	W 77–71	−12.5	L−6.5	145.5	O148	124.2	114.6	62.0
Feb 21	RadfordAdjEM #245	H	W 74–73 OT	−2.0	L−1.0	149.0	U147	104.3	102.9	71.0
Feb 19	High PointAdjEM #50	A	L 48–74	+15.0	L−11.0	152.0	U122	74.6	115.0	64.4
Feb 14	PresbyterianAdjEM #252	H	L 57–58	−4.5	L−5.5	136.5	U115	90.5	92.1	63.0
Feb 12	LongwoodAdjEM #248	A	W 79–74	+2.0	W+7.0	142.5	O153	117.1	109.7	67.5
Feb 4	SC UpstateAdjEM #284	H	W 76–67	−6.5	W+2.5	140.5	O143	112.5	99.2	67.6
Jan 31	WinthropAdjEM #116	A	L 71–84	+10.0	L−3.0	150.5	O155	109.5	129.5	64.8

Lipscomb

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	FGCUAdjEM #246	N	L 53–77	−4.5	L−28.5	150.0	U130	84.1	122.2	63.0
Feb 28	E KentuckyAdjEM #287	A	W 80–77	−2.5	W+0.5	159.0	U157	122.3	117.7	65.4
Feb 25	West GeorgiaAdjEM #304	A	L 78–84	−5.5	L−11.5	153.0	O162	110.6	119.1	70.5
Feb 21	North AlabamaAdjEM #343	H	W 73–51	−12.0	W+10.0	149.5	U124	116.8	81.6	62.5
Feb 18	BellarmineAdjEM #281	A	W 75–72	−3.5	L−0.5	155.5	U147	117.2	112.5	64.0
Feb 14	QueensAdjEM #191	A	L 81–87	+3.0	L−3.0	165.5	O168	103.2	110.9	78.5
Feb 11	E KentuckyAdjEM #287	H	W 75–61	−6.0	W+8.0	161.0	U136	114.6	93.2	65.5
Feb 7	C ArkansasAdjEM #139	H	L 78–86	−4.0	L−12.0	155.5	O164	107.3	118.3	72.7
Feb 4	Austin PeayAdjEM #141	A	L 76–87	+4.5	L−6.5	157.0	O163	105.6	120.9	71.9
Jan 31	North FloridaAdjEM #338	A	W 100–94	−11.0	L−5.0	166.5	O194	137.2	129.0	72.9

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 home

UNC AshevilleLipscomb

Efficiency

106.1

107.8

108.9

108.1

66.6

69.7

—

Shooting

51.0%

54.1%

50.1%

54.5%

35.1%

35.7%

68.4%

74.9%

40.0%

26.0%

Ball control & glass

17.4%

16.0%

15.5%

17.7%

29.8%

25.8%

31.3%

30.2%

9.3%

7.7%

10.1%

Style

33.6%

47.9%

44.9%

42.5%

10.4%

16.2%

40.4%

62.3%

24.1%

36.9%

Roster

3.00

3.04

6'6.3"

6'5.4"

82.9%

—

Offseason

roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model input

UNC Asheville

Returning minutes: 82.9%Returning production: 77.5%

Lost

Kam Taylor 34.7 mpg, 18.9 ppg · transferred to Florida St

Added

Brayden Rivers no D1 minutes last season
Mitchell Taylor no D1 minutes last season

No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.

Returns 83% 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).

Lipscomb

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.)

Head-to-head

this season and last

Date	Season	Result
Tue, Nov 11	2025-26	Lipscomb 64 – 69 UNC Asheville

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.