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-conferenceMaples Pavilion, Stanford, CA

E Washington

Efficiency #189

2025-26: 14-19 · 12-8 conf

Stanford

Efficiency #77

2025-26: 20-13 · 9-10 conf

Mon, Nov 2 · TBD

72.1

win 22%

Projected

80.9

win 78%

No line posted yet.

Model: STAN −8.8 · total 153.1 · 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: Stanford 68.1, E Washington 68.6 → 68.4 possessions

+0.1

Stanford offense vs E Washington defense

+4.8

E Washington offense vs Stanford defense

−0.1

Projected total

153.1

Axis starts at 146 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Stanford offense vs E Washington defense

+4.8

E Washington offense vs Stanford defense

+0.1

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

+3.9

Stanford by 8.8

8.8

E Washington side ◂▸ Stanford side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 153.0 against a projected 153.1. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Stanford.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 68.4, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, E Washington is the faster team (68.9, #154 of 365) and Stanford the slower (67.9, #209). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

68.4

per team, 40 min

Projected total

153.1

model

Projected team totals

72.1 / 80.9

E Washington / Stanford

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

68.6#158

E Washington

68.1#201

Stanford

How this game plays

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

AdvantageStanford

Where Stanford scores: shooting

Stanford shoots an effective 51.5% (#173); E Washington allows 54.9% (#326). Expect about 53.2%, 2.0 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.8 points per 100 possessions.

ClashE Washington

Style match: 3-point volume

E Washington rarely shoots threes (34.7% of its shots); Stanford runs teams off the line (33.4% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 31.8% — both habits push the same way.

AdvantageE Washington

Where E Washington scores: shooting

E Washington shoots an effective 53.7% (#75); Stanford allows 51.0% (#158). Expect about 52.6%, 1.3 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +1.8 points per 100 possessions.

TurnoversE Washington

E Washington turns it over

Projected turnover rate of 18.1% is worth roughly -1.6 points per 100 possessions against E Washington's offense.

E Washington has the ball

OffenseStanford allowsvs D1 avg

53.7% #75

51.0% #158

+1.8 pt/100

17.7% #251

18.0% #97

-1.6 pt/100

31.3% #153

29.8% #149

+0.2 pt/100

36.1% #148

40.3% #305

+0.5 pt/100

74.3% #118

—

+0.2 pt/100

E Washington net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +1.0 pts/100

Stanford has the ball

OffenseE Washington allowsvs D1 avg

51.5% #173

54.9% #326

+2.8 pt/100

15.5% #103

16.2% #211

+1.4 pt/100

32.5% #109

30.8% #194

+1.0 pt/100

35.5% #165

37.3% #246

+0.2 pt/100

73.2% #163

—

+0.1 pt/100

Stanford net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +5.4 pts/100

Shot diet

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

E Washingtonoffense vsStanforddefense

Share of shots by zone

E Washington shoots

41.4

6.3

18.8

33.5

Stanford allows

42.1

6.8

18.0

33.1

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	59.7%#132	58.2%#153	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	42.9%#105	38.8%#155	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	44.4%#21	39.9%#242	38.0%
Three	35.9%#62	32.9%#118	33.7%

Stanfordoffense vsE Washingtondefense

Share of shots by zone

Stanford shoots

39.5

6.7

10.0

43.8

E Washington allows

41.1

5.9

13.4

39.5

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	53.8%#321	60.5%#252	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	39.0%#193	44.9%#294	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	42.1%#53	46.8%#358	38.0%
Three	35.2%#103	35.2%#261	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

E Washington

−1.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#231 of 365

Off reb %

31.3%

#153

Def reb %

69.2%

#194

Turnover %

17.7%

#251

Forced TO %

16.2%

#211

FT rate

36.1%

#148

FT allowed

37.3%

#246

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.3

Defensive rebounding−0.1

Ball security−0.6

Forcing turnovers−0.3

Foul shots drawn+0.3

Foul shots allowed−0.5

Stanford

+1.5extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#121 of 365

Off reb %

32.5%

#109

Def reb %

70.2%

#149

Turnover %

15.5%

#103

Forced TO %

18.0%

#97

FT rate

35.5%

#165

FT allowed

40.3%

#305

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.7

Defensive rebounding+0.3

Ball security+0.9

Forcing turnovers+0.9

Foul shots drawn+0.1

Foul shots allowed−1.3

Stanford has more extra scoring chances per game: +1.5 (#121 of 365) to E Washington’s −1.0 (#231).

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

E Washington2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted E Washington'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
2	Isaiah Moses	G	Sr	6'0"	33-33	33.4	17.8	3.0	4.2	2.9	53.1%	41.3%	4.8	93.4%	30.8%
4	Alton Hamilton IV	F	Jr	6'8"	33-23	28.1	13.5	5.7	2.2	2.1	60.1%	36.4%	1.3	75.9%	25.8%
15	Kiree Huie	F	Sr	6'9"	33-32	25.3	12.8	5.2	0.8	2.0	54.8%	0.0%	0.0	58.0%	30.6%
12	Straton Rogers	G	Sr	6'5"	33-14	22.0	5.8	4.6	1.1	0.5	61.4%	28.6%	0.2	65.1%	13.4%
22	Jojo Anderson	G	Sr	6'1"	33-8	21.7	7.4	1.8	2.2	1.2	51.7%	36.8%	2.1	67.9%	21.0%
21	Johnny Radford	G	Sr	6'1"	33-11	18.8	6.5	2.0	0.9	0.7	49.2%	37.7%	3.9	82.6%	20.9%
1	Tyler Powell	G	Sr	6'5"	33-17	16.5	4.8	2.0	0.6	0.6	55.8%	36.8%	2.6	72.7%	16.9%
33	Emmett Marquardt	F	So	6'9"	30-11	15.9	5.5	2.8	0.8	0.9	54.5%	35.8%	2.7	86.4%	20.5%
5	Elijah Thomas	G	Sr	6'6"	30-4	10.9	1.9	1.4	0.3	0.3	38.9%	19.0%	1.4	75.0%	12.8%
11	Cole Scherer	G	Fr	6'2"	29-12	7.8	2.1	1.0	0.4	0.3	41.9%	24.3%	1.3	71.4%	20.7%
35	Shaumba Ngoyi	F	So	6'9"	20-0	4.3	0.6	0.9	0.1	0.3	50.0%	—	0.0	0.0%	12.9%
10	Maddox Monson	G	Sr	6'2"	11-0	3.9	1.0	0.5	0.1	0.2	42.3%	30.0%	0.9	—	19.6%
0	Angelo Winkel	F	Sr	6'8"	4-0	5.0	1.8	0.5	0.3	0.8	66.7%	—	0.0	75.0%	22.2%
55	Alan Gballou	F	Fr	6'7"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
9	Andrew Cook	G	Sr	6'4"	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.

Stanford2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
5	Benny Gealer	G	Sr	6'1"	33-31	29.5	10.9	2.5	1.7	0.7	60.3%	41.0%	6.4	89.5%	18.7%
52	Aidan Cammann	F	So	6'10"	33-15	21.7	6.5	3.8	1.4	1.1	50.0%	26.8%	1.2	70.5%	18.5%
11	Ryan Agarwal	G	Jr	6'6"	32-19	22.3	5.9	4.1	0.8	1.2	46.0%	34.9%	3.4	69.6%	19.5%
4	AJ Rohosy	F	Sr	6'9"	33-28	20.5	7.6	5.6	0.7	1.0	55.4%	—	0.0	37.8%	23.5%
25	Jeremy Dent-Smith	G	Sr	6'1"	33-4	20.1	8.2	1.8	1.5	1.2	49.0%	37.9%	4.6	82.9%	26.6%
10	Chisom Okpara	F	Sr	6'8"	17-17	28.5	13.9	3.9	2.2	2.6	44.2%	30.4%	3.3	73.0%	32.3%
15	Oskar Giltay	F	Fr	6'10"	32-5	14.6	3.3	4.1	0.3	0.7	62.7%	—	0.0	57.5%	13.8%
2	Donavin Young	F	So	6'8"	21-9	15.4	2.5	2.7	0.7	0.4	45.6%	29.6%	1.3	50.0%	12.5%
24	Jaylen Thompson	F	So	6'7"	20-6	11.2	2.3	1.2	0.3	0.3	50.0%	21.1%	0.9	66.7%	14.5%
20	Cameron Grant	F	So	6'7"	20-0	10.4	2.1	1.3	0.4	0.3	36.0%	24.5%	2.6	100.0%	17.8%
12	Kristers Skrinda	F	Fr	6'10"	9-0	6.1	0.8	1.6	0.1	0.1	38.9%	25.0%	0.4	—	10.2%
33	Evan Stinson	F	So	6'7"	4-0	5.3	1.8	0.5	0.3	0.3	50.0%	25.0%	1.0	100.0%	18.5%
3	Tallis Toure	F	So	6'11"	2-0	3.5	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.0	0.0%	—	0.0	—	7.4%
13	Ethan Kitch	G	So	6'2"	3-0	1.0	1.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	75.0%	50.0%	0.7	—	37.9%
0	Anthony Batson Jr.	G	So	6'3"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
6	Myles Jones	G	Fr	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.

E Washington2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted E Washington'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
2	Isaiah Moses	G	Sr	6'0"	33-33	33.4	17.8	3.0	4.2	2.9	53.1%	41.3%	4.8	93.4%	30.8%
4	Alton Hamilton IV	F	Jr	6'8"	33-23	28.1	13.5	5.7	2.2	2.1	60.1%	36.4%	1.3	75.9%	25.8%
15	Kiree Huie	F	Sr	6'9"	33-32	25.3	12.8	5.2	0.8	2.0	54.8%	0.0%	0.0	58.0%	30.6%
12	Straton Rogers	G	Sr	6'5"	33-14	22.0	5.8	4.6	1.1	0.5	61.4%	28.6%	0.2	65.1%	13.4%
22	Jojo Anderson	G	Sr	6'1"	33-8	21.7	7.4	1.8	2.2	1.2	51.7%	36.8%	2.1	67.9%	21.0%
21	Johnny Radford	G	Sr	6'1"	33-11	18.8	6.5	2.0	0.9	0.7	49.2%	37.7%	3.9	82.6%	20.9%
1	Tyler Powell	G	Sr	6'5"	33-17	16.5	4.8	2.0	0.6	0.6	55.8%	36.8%	2.6	72.7%	16.9%
33	Emmett Marquardt	F	So	6'9"	30-11	15.9	5.5	2.8	0.8	0.9	54.5%	35.8%	2.7	86.4%	20.5%
5	Elijah Thomas	G	Sr	6'6"	30-4	10.9	1.9	1.4	0.3	0.3	38.9%	19.0%	1.4	75.0%	12.8%
11	Cole Scherer	G	Fr	6'2"	29-12	7.8	2.1	1.0	0.4	0.3	41.9%	24.3%	1.3	71.4%	20.7%
35	Shaumba Ngoyi	F	So	6'9"	20-0	4.3	0.6	0.9	0.1	0.3	50.0%	—	0.0	0.0%	12.9%
10	Maddox Monson	G	Sr	6'2"	11-0	3.9	1.0	0.5	0.1	0.2	42.3%	30.0%	0.9	—	19.6%
0	Angelo Winkel	F	Sr	6'8"	4-0	5.0	1.8	0.5	0.3	0.8	66.7%	—	0.0	75.0%	22.2%
55	Alan Gballou	F	Fr	6'7"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
9	Andrew Cook	G	Sr	6'4"	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

E Washington

Against the spread

Season

19-13

Home

6-5

Road

12-6

Last 10

8-2

avg cover +7.0

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 5 of 6 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 4 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

19-13

Home

4-7

Road

13-5

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total +3.5

Over 3 straightOver in 4 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 1 of 4 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 10	IdahoAdjEM #156	N	L 68–81	+2.5	L−10.5	148.0	O149	95.1	113.2	71.5
Mar 9	Weber StAdjEM #203	N	W 84–79	−3.5	W+1.5	154.5	O163	121.1	113.9	69.3
Mar 2	IdahoAdjEM #156	H	L 81–85	−3.0	L−7.0	150.5	O166	121.0	127.0	66.9
Feb 28	N ArizonaAdjEM #329	H	W 88–57	−9.5	W+21.5	147.0	U145	138.6	89.7	63.5
Feb 26	N ColoradoAdjEM #146	H	W 82–72	+1.0	W+11.0	157.0	U154	122.8	107.8	66.8
Feb 21	Portland StAdjEM #145	A	W 67–55	+6.0	W+18.0	146.5	U122	101.1	83.0	66.3
Feb 19	Sacramento StAdjEM #280	A	W 102–94	−3.0	W+5.0	161.5	O196	140.2	129.2	72.8
Feb 14	Weber StAdjEM #203	H	W 84–66	−3.0	W+15.0	155.0	U150	122.3	96.1	68.7
Feb 12	Idaho StAdjEM #253	H	W 88–75	−3.5	W+9.5	147.5	O163	133.7	114.0	65.8
Feb 7	Montana StAdjEM #130	A	W 72–71	+5.0	W+6.0	148.0	U143	111.0	109.5	64.9

Stanford

Against the spread

Season

16-15-2

Home

9-8-1

Road

4-5-1

Last 10

5-4-1

avg cover +3.9

Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 4 of 6 as a favorite, 1 pushCovered 1 of 4 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

15-18

Home

9-9

Road

5-5

Last 10

6-4

avg vs total +4.8

Over in the last gameOver in 4 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 2 of 4 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Apr 2	West VirginiaAdjEM #58	N	L 77–82 OT	+2.0	L−3.0	135.5	O159	104.9	111.7	73.4
Mar 10	PittAdjEM #120	N	L 63–64	−5.0	L−6.0	136.5	U127	107.6	109.3	58.6
Mar 7	NC StateAdjEM #34	A	W 85–84	+9.0	W+10.0	152.5	O169	123.7	122.3	68.7
Mar 4	Notre DameAdjEM #106	A	W 86–78	−1.0	W+7.0	147.0	O164	135.5	122.9	63.5
Feb 28	SMUAdjEM #44	H	W 95–75	−1.0	W+19.0	154.5	O170	147.6	116.6	64.3
Feb 25	PittAdjEM #120	H	W 75–67	−8.0	P0.0	138.5	O142	122.1	109.1	61.4
Feb 21	CaliforniaAdjEM #79	A	L 66–72	+1.0	L−5.0	148.0	U138	95.2	103.8	69.3
Feb 14	Wake ForestAdjEM #76	A	L 63–68	+4.0	L−1.0	149.0	U131	100.1	108.1	62.9
Feb 11	Boston CollegeAdjEM #187	A	W 70–64	−3.0	W+3.0	139.5	U134	102.2	93.4	68.5
Feb 7	Georgia TechAdjEM #201	H	W 95–72	−8.5	W+14.5	151.5	O167	130.9	99.2	72.6

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

E WashingtonStanford

Efficiency

110.8

112.4

111.6

106.0

68.6

68.1

—

Shooting

53.7%

51.5%

53.6%

50.5%

35.9%

35.2%

74.3%

73.2%

36.1%

35.5%

Ball control & glass

17.7%

15.5%

16.2%

18.0%

31.3%

32.5%

30.8%

29.8%

10.6%

7.3%

7.9%

9.5%

Style

34.7%

44.0%

44.2%

40.3%

9.8%

12.9%

49.0%

45.8%

37.4%

33.7%

Roster

3.59

3.04

6'4.6"

6'6.2"

—

83.6%

Offseason

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

E Washington

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted E Washington'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.)

Stanford

Returning minutes: 83.6%Returning production: 73.5%

Lost

Ebuka Okorie 33.0 mpg, 21.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Myles Jones no D1 minutes last season
Anthony Batson Jr. no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 84% of last season's minutes; lost 1 of its top 5. 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 last

No 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.