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-conferenceJoan Perry Brock Center, Farmville, VA

Campbell

Efficiency #208

2025-26: 16-18 · 10-11 conf

Longwood

Efficiency #248

2025-26: 16-16 · 8-9 conf

Wed, Dec 2 · TBD

75.9

win 42%

Projected

78.4

win 58%

No line posted yet.

Model: LONG −2.5 · total 154.3 · 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 one

Projected total

Average D-I game

148.2

PaceAdjusted tempo: Longwood 69.0, Campbell 69.9 → 70.7 possessions

+5.1

Longwood offense vs Campbell defense

−0.3

Campbell offense vs Longwood defense

+1.3

Projected total

154.3

Axis starts at 145 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Longwood offense vs Campbell defense

−0.3

Campbell offense vs Longwood defense

−1.3

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

+4.1

Longwood by 2.5

2.5

Campbell side ◂▸ Longwood side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Longwood.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 70.7, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Campbell is the faster team (70.0, #93 of 365) and Longwood the slower (69.4, #121). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

70.7

per team, 40 min

Projected total

154.3

model

Projected team totals

75.9 / 78.4

Campbell / Longwood

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

69.9#53

Campbell

69.0#120

Longwood

How this game plays

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

ClashLongwood

Style match: 3-point volume

Longwood rarely shoots threes (34.8% of its shots); Campbell runs teams off the line (29.9% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 29.6% — both habits push the same way.

AdvantageCampbell

Where Campbell struggles: ball control

Campbell turns it over on 17.6% of possessions (#241); Longwood forces turnovers on 19.8% of opponent possessions (#29). Expect about 19.2%, 2.4 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.9 points per 100 possessions.

AdvantageLongwood

Where Longwood scores: the offensive glass

Longwood rebounds 34.6% of its own misses (#57); Campbell lets opponents grab 32.0% of their own misses (#254). Expect about 34.1%, 3.7 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.2 points per 100 possessions.

TurnoversLongwood

Longwood turns it over

Projected turnover rate of 18.2% is worth roughly -1.8 points per 100 possessions against Longwood's offense.

DefenseLongwood

Longwood's ball-hawking

Longwood ranks #34 nationally in steal rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 10.9% of Campbell's possessions to end in a steal against this defense.

Campbell has the ball

OffenseLongwood allowsvs D1 avg

50.1% #230

53.8% #293

+0.9 pt/100

17.6% #241

19.8% #29

-2.9 pt/100

33.5% #77

27.7% #58

+0.5 pt/100

43.5% #16

42.1% #326

+1.0 pt/100

72.5% #190

—

+0.0 pt/100

Campbell net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -0.5 pts/100

Longwood has the ball

OffenseCampbell allowsvs D1 avg

49.7% #254

53.9% #295

+0.6 pt/100

19.1% #326

17.0% #157

-1.8 pt/100

34.6% #57

32.0% #254

+2.2 pt/100

41.3% #40

37.0% #238

+0.5 pt/100

74.0% #136

—

+0.1 pt/100

Longwood net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +1.7 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Campbelloffense vsLongwooddefense

Share of shots by zone

Campbell shoots

45.5

9.5

8.5

36.5

Longwood allows

40.3

5.0

12.6

42.1

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	57.3%#218	63.8%#339	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	32.1%#329	32.9%#28	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	35.0%#292	39.7%#231	38.0%
Three	32.3%#267	33.8%#171	33.7%

Longwoodoffense vsCampbelldefense

Share of shots by zone

Longwood shoots

43.0

5.2

17.1

34.7

Campbell allows

45.0

9.9

15.5

29.5

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	56.6%#252	63.2%#327	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	44.0%#78	33.7%#40	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	38.9%#150	35.5%#89	38.0%
Three	31.4%#309	35.5%#277	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

Campbell

+1.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#105 of 365

Off reb %

33.5%

#77

Def reb %

68.0%

#254

Turnover %

17.6%

#241

Forced TO %

17.0%

#157

FT rate

43.5%

#16

FT allowed

37.0%

#238

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+1.0

Defensive rebounding−0.4

Ball security−0.6

Forcing turnovers+0.2

Foul shots drawn+2.2

Foul shots allowed−0.5

Longwood

+2.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#70 of 365

Off reb %

34.6%

#57

Def reb %

72.3%

#58

Turnover %

19.1%

#326

Forced TO %

19.8%

#29

FT rate

41.3%

#40

FT allowed

42.1%

#326

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+1.3

Defensive rebounding+0.9

Ball security−1.6

Forcing turnovers+2.1

Foul shots drawn+1.6

Foul shots allowed−1.8

Longwood has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.6 (#70 of 365) to Campbell’s +1.9 (#105).

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

Campbell2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Campbell'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
9	DJ Smith	G	Sr	5'11"	34-33	34.4	19.0	3.5	2.1	1.9	49.1%	33.9%	8.5	83.6%	31.0%
7	Cam Gregory	G	Sr	6'5"	34-34	33.4	8.0	3.1	2.3	1.2	52.9%	33.1%	3.7	76.5%	14.3%
2	Jeremiah Johnson	G	So	6'4"	34-31	32.4	15.2	3.5	1.9	2.1	51.9%	37.4%	3.9	86.5%	26.3%
13	Dovydas Butka	F	So	6'9"	31-31	33.9	13.9	8.5	2.6	2.4	51.0%	16.7%	1.0	55.3%	26.2%
1	Tasos Cook	G	Sr	6'2"	33-8	24.7	7.2	2.0	1.2	0.8	50.3%	35.8%	3.3	79.2%	17.0%
11	Muneer Newton	F	Sr	6'5"	34-27	19.5	6.7	4.9	0.8	1.1	70.7%	0.0%	0.0	48.4%	17.6%
0	Chris Fields Jr.	F	Jr	6'7"	27-5	18.6	9.7	6.9	1.6	2.0	46.6%	7.7%	0.5	64.6%	34.2%
22	Dominykas Butka	G	Fr	6'6"	22-0	7.2	1.9	1.4	0.4	0.5	50.0%	22.2%	0.4	62.5%	17.5%
5	Enoch Kalambay	G	Sr	6'6"	10-0	8.8	2.0	2.4	0.5	0.8	37.0%	12.5%	1.6	—	22.4%
4	Broc Bidwell	G	Sr	6'0"	11-0	5.5	2.2	0.4	0.4	0.4	61.1%	42.9%	1.3	50.0%	20.3%
15	Terren Frank	F	Sr	6'8"	6-1	8.3	1.7	0.8	0.5	0.5	33.3%	0.0%	0.2	66.7%	18.2%
32	Daniel Marcellinus	F	Fr	6'11"	2-0	3.0	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.5	—	—	0.0	—	9.8%
12	Israel Yaw	F	Sr	6'9"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
10	Klairus Amir	G	Fr	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.

Longwood2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
1	Jacoi Hutchinson	G	Jr	6'3"	31-31	28.4	12.3	3.3	3.2	1.8	46.5%	25.4%	2.2	86.2%	26.9%
77	Elijah Tucker	F	Sr	6'8"	32-32	26.3	12.5	6.8	1.1	2.7	59.0%	50.0%	0.1	71.2%	27.8%
0	Johan Nziemi	F	Sr	6'6"	29-27	25.9	10.6	6.0	1.8	2.0	51.9%	34.8%	0.8	73.1%	24.5%
3	Alphonzo Billups III	G	Jr	6'7"	32-18	23.1	8.1	2.8	1.3	1.2	54.2%	33.6%	3.8	64.3%	21.3%
24	Jaylen Benard	G	Jr	6'2"	32-0	19.8	7.3	3.7	0.9	1.0	53.2%	31.7%	3.8	56.3%	22.7%
23	Elijah Jones	F	Sr	6'7"	27-2	17.3	3.9	3.6	0.7	0.7	49.3%	31.3%	0.6	67.3%	13.9%
7	Elijah Kelly	G	Fr	6'7"	30-17	11.2	2.3	1.8	0.4	0.5	53.4%	34.2%	1.3	58.3%	13.5%
11	Jaylin Payne	F	Jr	6'8"	29-1	8.0	1.8	1.7	0.2	0.6	54.8%	0.0%	0.1	58.3%	15.6%
5	KJ McClurg	G	Sr	6'3"	4-0	14.3	2.0	2.3	0.5	0.3	13.3%	0.0%	1.5	50.0%	19.0%
8	Isaiah Kalala	F	Fr	6'9"	13-0	3.8	1.0	0.9	0.1	0.2	75.0%	—	0.0	58.3%	13.0%
30	Jerome Williams	G	Fr	6'0"	9-0	5.1	1.3	0.2	0.6	0.3	35.0%	20.0%	0.6	83.3%	19.1%
10	Gerald Burr III	G	Fr	6'2"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
35	Quadri Bashiru	F	Fr	6'10"	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.

Campbell2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Campbell'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
9	DJ Smith	G	Sr	5'11"	34-33	34.4	19.0	3.5	2.1	1.9	49.1%	33.9%	8.5	83.6%	31.0%
7	Cam Gregory	G	Sr	6'5"	34-34	33.4	8.0	3.1	2.3	1.2	52.9%	33.1%	3.7	76.5%	14.3%
2	Jeremiah Johnson	G	So	6'4"	34-31	32.4	15.2	3.5	1.9	2.1	51.9%	37.4%	3.9	86.5%	26.3%
13	Dovydas Butka	F	So	6'9"	31-31	33.9	13.9	8.5	2.6	2.4	51.0%	16.7%	1.0	55.3%	26.2%
1	Tasos Cook	G	Sr	6'2"	33-8	24.7	7.2	2.0	1.2	0.8	50.3%	35.8%	3.3	79.2%	17.0%
11	Muneer Newton	F	Sr	6'5"	34-27	19.5	6.7	4.9	0.8	1.1	70.7%	0.0%	0.0	48.4%	17.6%
0	Chris Fields Jr.	F	Jr	6'7"	27-5	18.6	9.7	6.9	1.6	2.0	46.6%	7.7%	0.5	64.6%	34.2%
22	Dominykas Butka	G	Fr	6'6"	22-0	7.2	1.9	1.4	0.4	0.5	50.0%	22.2%	0.4	62.5%	17.5%
5	Enoch Kalambay	G	Sr	6'6"	10-0	8.8	2.0	2.4	0.5	0.8	37.0%	12.5%	1.6	—	22.4%
4	Broc Bidwell	G	Sr	6'0"	11-0	5.5	2.2	0.4	0.4	0.4	61.1%	42.9%	1.3	50.0%	20.3%
15	Terren Frank	F	Sr	6'8"	6-1	8.3	1.7	0.8	0.5	0.5	33.3%	0.0%	0.2	66.7%	18.2%
32	Daniel Marcellinus	F	Fr	6'11"	2-0	3.0	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.5	—	—	0.0	—	9.8%
12	Israel Yaw	F	Sr	6'9"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
10	Klairus Amir	G	Fr	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.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

Campbell

Against the spread

Season

18-13-1

Home

6-5-1

Road

9-7

Last 10

6-4

avg cover +2.4

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

Over / under

Season

17-15

Home

6-6

Road

9-7

Last 10

3-7

avg vs total −4.3

Under in the last gameOver in 2 of 4 as a favoriteOver in 1 of 6 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 9	MonmouthAdjEM #173	N	L 64–74	+1.5	L−8.5	152.0	U138	95.2	110.1	67.2
Mar 8	UNC WilmingtonAdjEM #86	N	W 85–70	+7.5	W+22.5	149.0	O155	118.7	97.8	71.6
Mar 7	Stony BrookAdjEM #232	N	W 96–89	−3.0	W+4.0	147.0	O185	132.8	123.2	72.3
Mar 3	NC A&TAdjEM #271	H	W 90–72	−7.5	W+10.5	155.0	O162	127.3	101.8	70.7
Feb 28	TowsonAdjEM #149	A	L 67–71	+5.0	W+1.0	141.5	U138	113.2	120.0	59.2
Feb 26	DrexelAdjEM #214	A	L 60–65	+1.0	L−4.0	141.5	U125	94.2	102.0	63.7
Feb 21	UNC WilmingtonAdjEM #86	H	L 68–73	+2.5	L−2.5	150.5	U141	99.5	106.8	68.3
Feb 19	William & MaryAdjEM #127	H	W 84–83	+2.5	W+3.5	167.5	U167	113.1	111.8	74.3
Feb 15	CharlestonAdjEM #165	H	L 57–62	−2.5	L−7.5	160.0	U119	93.8	102.0	60.8
Feb 7	NC A&TAdjEM #271	A	W 79–71	−3.0	W+5.0	159.5	U150	112.6	101.2	70.2

Longwood

Against the spread

Season

13-16

Home

7-5

Road

6-8

Last 10

5-5

avg cover +1.8

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 6 as a favoriteCovered 2 of 4 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

17-12

Home

9-3

Road

7-7

Last 10

7-3

avg vs total +5.6

Over 3 straightOver in 5 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
Mar 6	UNC AshevilleAdjEM #226	N	L 82–85 OT	−1.0	L−4.0	141.0	O167	107.1	111.0	76.5
Feb 28	RadfordAdjEM #245	H	W 90–74	−2.0	W+14.0	156.0	O164	122.0	100.3	73.8
Feb 21	Charleston SoAdjEM #220	A	W 107–96 2OT	+2.5	W+13.5	154.0	O203	125.8	112.9	85.0
Feb 19	PresbyterianAdjEM #252	A	L 65–72	+2.5	L−4.5	140.0	U137	97.8	108.3	66.5
Feb 14	SC UpstateAdjEM #284	H	W 82–75 OT	−6.0	W+1.0	146.5	O157	98.0	89.6	83.7
Feb 12	UNC AshevilleAdjEM #226	H	L 74–79	−2.0	L−7.0	142.5	O153	109.7	117.1	67.5
Feb 7	WinthropAdjEM #116	A	L 74–79	+10.0	W+5.0	152.5	O153	95.7	102.2	77.3
Feb 4	Gardner-WebbAdjEM #363	A	W 86–66	−12.5	W+7.5	148.0	O152	121.1	93.0	71.0
Jan 31	High PointAdjEM #50	H	L 59–71	+10.5	L−1.5	157.0	U130	93.5	112.5	63.1
Jan 29	SC UpstateAdjEM #284	A	L 60–65	−1.5	L−6.5	147.5	U125	85.2	92.3	70.4

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

CampbellLongwood

Efficiency

109.3

105.7

110.9

109.5

69.9

69.0

—

Shooting

50.1%

49.7%

51.2%

51.1%

32.3%

31.4%

72.5%

74.0%

43.5%

41.3%

Ball control & glass

17.6%

19.1%

17.0%

19.8%

33.5%

34.6%

32.0%

27.7%

9.7%

10.9%

10.5%

9.4%

Style

36.9%

34.8%

46.3%

44.2%

16.1%

11.8%

44.9%

47.1%

22.5%

39.8%

Roster

3.22

3.25

6'4.2"

6'5.6"

—

76.6%

Offseason

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

Campbell

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted Campbell'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.)

Longwood

Returning minutes: 76.6%Returning production: 79.5%

Lost

Emanuel Richards 26.0 mpg, 9.7 ppg · transferred to E Michigan
Redd Thompson Jr. 22.1 mpg, 10.3 ppg · transferred to Mount St Marys

Added

Gerald Burr III no D1 minutes last season
Quadri Bashiru no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 77% 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 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.