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-conferenceNeutral siteImperial Arena, Nassau, BahamasBattle 4 Atlantis
Marquette
Efficiency #100
2025-26: 12-20 · 7-14 conf
vs
Texas A&M
Efficiency #43
2025-26: 22-12 · 11-8 conf
Fri, Nov 27 · 5:00 PM ET
75.3
win 35%
Projected
79.9
win 65%
No line posted yet.
Model: TA&M −4.6 · total 155.2 · 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: Texas A&M 70.5, Marquette 69.5 → 71.7 possessions
+7.4
Texas A&M offense vs Marquette defense
+2.1
Marquette offense vs Texas A&M defense
−2.5
Projected total
155.2
Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Texas A&M offense vs Marquette defense
+2.1
Marquette offense vs Texas A&M defense
+2.5
Texas A&M by 4.6
4.6
Marquette side ◂▸ Texas A&M 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 Texas A&M.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 71.7, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Texas A&M is the faster team (72.0, #24 of 365) and Marquette the slower (70.1, #91). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
71.7
per team, 40 min
Projected total
155.2
model
Projected team totals
75.3 / 79.9
Marquette / Texas A&M
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
69.5#81
Marquette
70.5#27
Texas A&M
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetPace
Track meet
Texas A&M averages 72.0 possessions per 40, Marquette 70.1. 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 72 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
ClashTexas A&M
Style match: ball movement
Texas A&M assists on 61.2% of its made baskets; Marquette allows assists on 60.2% of opponents' baskets (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 63.2% — both habits push the same way.
DefenseMarquette
Marquette's ball-hawking
Marquette ranks #8 nationally in steal rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 11.6% of Texas A&M's possessions to end in a steal against this defense.
AdvantageTexas A&M
Where Texas A&M scores: the offensive glass
Texas A&M rebounds 32.0% of its own misses (#122); Marquette lets opponents grab 34.7% of their own misses (#331). Expect about 33.6%, 3.2 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +1.9 points per 100 possessions.
ClashTexas A&M
Strength vs strength: turnover rate
Texas A&M (#52 in turnover rate) against Marquette (#38 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 17.2%. Historically Marquette's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.57 vs 0.64).
Marquette has the ball
OffenseTexas A&M allowsvs D1 avg
50.5% #215
50.7% #141
-1.1 pt/100
16.0% #144
18.4% #82
-0.7 pt/100
29.7% #216
33.0% #300
+0.5 pt/100
32.8% #243
35.3% #190
-0.1 pt/100
67.5% #332
—
-0.4 pt/100
Marquette net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -1.9 pts/100
Texas A&M has the ball
OffenseMarquette allowsvs D1 avg
53.8% #71
50.6% #131
+1.6 pt/100
14.7% #52
19.3% #38
-0.5 pt/100
32.0% #122
34.7% #331
+1.9 pt/100
37.1% #128
32.0% #104
-0.1 pt/100
73.8% #144
—
+0.1 pt/100
Texas A&M net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +3.0 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersMarquetteoffense vsTexas A&Mdefense
Share of shots by zone
Marquette shoots
46.1
4.0
7.9
42.0
Texas A&M allows
35.1
5.9
16.4
42.6
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 57.0%#238 | 62.4%#308 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 40.6%#161 | 39.2%#161 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 34.3%#306 | 38.5%#175 | 38.0% |
| Three | 31.7%#297 | 31.8%#53 | 33.7% |
Texas A&Moffense vsMarquettedefense
Share of shots by zone
Texas A&M shoots
41.5
5.6
6.9
46.1
Marquette allows
39.3
4.7
16.5
39.5
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 57.5%#213 | 60.9%#264 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 38.4%#212 | 36.3%#95 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 36.9%#228 | 35.5%#88 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.9%#63 | 32.7%#104 | 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 numbersMarquette
+1.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#137 of 365
Off reb %
29.7%
#216
Def reb %
65.3%
#331
Turnover %
16.0%
#144
Forced TO %
19.3%
#38
FT rate
32.8%
#243
FT allowed
32.0%
#104
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.2
Defensive rebounding−1.3
Ball security+0.5
Forcing turnovers+1.8
Foul shots drawn−0.6
Foul shots allowed+0.8
Texas A&M
+2.8extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#62 of 365
Off reb %
32.0%
#122
Def reb %
67.0%
#300
Turnover %
14.7%
#52
Forced TO %
18.4%
#82
FT rate
37.1%
#128
FT allowed
35.3%
#190
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.5
Defensive rebounding−0.8
Ball security+1.4
Forcing turnovers+1.1
Foul shots drawn+0.5
Foul shots allowed0.0
Texas A&M has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.8 (#62 of 365) to Marquette’s +1.0 (#137).
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
Marquette2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Nigel James Jr. | G | Fr | 6'0" | 32-29 | 29.3 | 16.4 | 3.4 | 4.9 | 2.8 | 52.0% | 34.7% | 3.8 | 69.2% | 35.0% | |
| 13 | Royce Parham | F | So | 6'8" | 31-20 | 28.8 | 12.5 | 4.9 | 0.9 | 1.4 | 58.4% | 33.3% | 3.3 | 65.0% | 23.4% | |
| 12 | Ben Gold | F | Sr | 6'11" | 31-26 | 27.3 | 8.0 | 5.8 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 49.3% | 26.4% | 4.5 | 65.3% | 17.8% | |
| 10 | Adrien Stevens | G | Fr | 6'4" | 32-23 | 26.1 | 7.9 | 2.6 | 1.6 | 1.0 | 56.6% | 37.5% | 4.5 | 71.0% | 17.4% | |
| 9 | Damarius Owens | F | So | 6'7" | 30-1 | 15.7 | 4.8 | 2.6 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 47.4% | 27.1% | 2.0 | 71.7% | 19.5% | |
| 18 | Caedin Hamilton | F | So | 6'9" | 32-17 | 13.0 | 2.9 | 2.9 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 42.3% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 67.5% | 16.9% | |
| 5 | Tre Norman | G | Jr | 6'4" | 30-0 | 8.1 | 2.2 | 1.4 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 44.1% | 11.1% | 0.3 | 64.5% | 20.5% | |
| 35 | Michael Phillips II | F | Fr | 6'6" | 28-0 | 7.9 | 2.1 | 1.3 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 46.6% | 37.0% | 1.6 | 35.7% | 19.1% | |
| 22 | Sean Jones | G | Jr | 5'10" | 8-3 | 21.4 | 6.3 | 1.4 | 3.9 | 1.5 | 40.6% | 32.1% | 3.5 | 68.8% | 21.5% | |
| 8 | Joshua Clark | F | So | 7'1" | 22-0 | 5.7 | 1.4 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 46.7% | — | 0.0 | 23.1% | 16.6% | |
| 40 | Casey O'Malley | G | Sr | 6'3" | 4-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 14.6% | |
| 42 | Braeden Brenn | F | Fr | 6'8" | 3-0 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 100.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 19.3% | |
| 41 | Jonah Lucas | G | Sr | 6'1" | 3-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.3 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 19.3% | |
| 21 | Ian Miletic | F | Fr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Nash Walker | G | Fr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 6 | Sheek Pearson | F | Fr | 6'11" | 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.
Texas A&M2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 | Ruben Dominguez | G | So | 6'6" | 34-27 | 23.4 | 10.2 | 2.3 | 1.4 | 0.4 | 57.7% | 40.0% | 6.3 | 87.1% | 20.7% | |
| 0 | Marcus Hill | G | Sr | 6'3" | 34-30 | 22.8 | 10.3 | 3.1 | 1.6 | 1.1 | 51.1% | 23.8% | 1.9 | 71.6% | 25.4% | |
| 5 | Jacari Lane | G | Sr | 6'0" | 33-28 | 19.3 | 6.1 | 1.7 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 47.8% | 30.3% | 2.7 | 86.8% | 19.2% | |
| 7 | Zach Clemence | F | Sr | 6'11" | 34-4 | 16.9 | 6.9 | 3.2 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 57.0% | 40.0% | 2.8 | 78.0% | 22.0% | |
| 6 | Ali Dibba | G | Sr | 6'5" | 34-1 | 15.8 | 5.7 | 2.8 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 48.8% | 37.0% | 1.4 | 56.5% | 21.8% | |
| 1 | Josh Holloway | G | Jr | 6'1" | 34-0 | 13.4 | 4.6 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.4 | 56.1% | 40.0% | 0.9 | 69.2% | 21.4% | |
| 33 | Federiko Federiko | F | Sr | 6'11" | 31-4 | 8.7 | 1.8 | 1.9 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 60.0% | — | 0.0 | 46.9% | 11.3% | |
| 4 | Jamie Vinson | F | So | 6'11" | 30-0 | 6.6 | 3.5 | 2.3 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 55.6% | 16.7% | 0.6 | 57.7% | 28.8% | |
| 21 | Mackenzie Mgbako | F | Jr | 6'9" | 7-7 | 18.9 | 10.4 | 4.9 | 1.3 | 1.7 | 49.2% | 34.3% | 5.0 | 88.2% | 31.0% | |
| 14 | Chris McDermott | F | So | 6'7" | 11-1 | 3.7 | 1.1 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 75.0% | 0.0% | 0.2 | 0.0% | 13.9% | |
| 10 | Jeremiah Green | G | Fr | 6'3" | 7-0 | 4.6 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 30.0% | 33.3% | 0.4 | 100.0% | 13.6% | |
| 8 | Noah Shelby | G | Jr | 6'3" | 8-0 | 2.8 | 1.3 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 30.0% | 20.0% | 1.3 | 100.0% | 27.6% |
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Marquette2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Nigel James Jr. | G | Fr | 6'0" | 32-29 | 29.3 | 16.4 | 3.4 | 4.9 | 2.8 | 52.0% | 34.7% | 3.8 | 69.2% | 35.0% | |
| 13 | Royce Parham | F | So | 6'8" | 31-20 | 28.8 | 12.5 | 4.9 | 0.9 | 1.4 | 58.4% | 33.3% | 3.3 | 65.0% | 23.4% | |
| 12 | Ben Gold | F | Sr | 6'11" | 31-26 | 27.3 | 8.0 | 5.8 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 49.3% | 26.4% | 4.5 | 65.3% | 17.8% | |
| 10 | Adrien Stevens | G | Fr | 6'4" | 32-23 | 26.1 | 7.9 | 2.6 | 1.6 | 1.0 | 56.6% | 37.5% | 4.5 | 71.0% | 17.4% | |
| 9 | Damarius Owens | F | So | 6'7" | 30-1 | 15.7 | 4.8 | 2.6 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 47.4% | 27.1% | 2.0 | 71.7% | 19.5% | |
| 18 | Caedin Hamilton | F | So | 6'9" | 32-17 | 13.0 | 2.9 | 2.9 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 42.3% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 67.5% | 16.9% | |
| 5 | Tre Norman | G | Jr | 6'4" | 30-0 | 8.1 | 2.2 | 1.4 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 44.1% | 11.1% | 0.3 | 64.5% | 20.5% | |
| 35 | Michael Phillips II | F | Fr | 6'6" | 28-0 | 7.9 | 2.1 | 1.3 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 46.6% | 37.0% | 1.6 | 35.7% | 19.1% | |
| 22 | Sean Jones | G | Jr | 5'10" | 8-3 | 21.4 | 6.3 | 1.4 | 3.9 | 1.5 | 40.6% | 32.1% | 3.5 | 68.8% | 21.5% | |
| 8 | Joshua Clark | F | So | 7'1" | 22-0 | 5.7 | 1.4 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 46.7% | — | 0.0 | 23.1% | 16.6% | |
| 40 | Casey O'Malley | G | Sr | 6'3" | 4-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 14.6% | |
| 42 | Braeden Brenn | F | Fr | 6'8" | 3-0 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 100.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 19.3% | |
| 41 | Jonah Lucas | G | Sr | 6'1" | 3-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.3 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 19.3% | |
| 21 | Ian Miletic | F | Fr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Nash Walker | G | Fr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 6 | Sheek Pearson | F | Fr | 6'11" | 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 2025-26Marquette
Against the spread
Season
11-19-2
Home
6-10-1
Road
5-7
Last 10
7-3
avg cover +5.5
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 6 of 7 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
14-18
Home
6-11
Road
6-6
Last 10
3-7
avg vs total −8.2
Over in the last gameOver in 2 of 7 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 11 | Xavier | N | L 87–89 | −4.0 | L−6.0 | 157.0 | O176 | 113.7 | 116.3 | 76.6 |
| Mar 7 | #4UConn | H | W 68–62 | +10.0 | W+16.0 | 142.5 | U130 | 101.1 | 92.2 | 67.2 |
| Mar 4 | Providence | A | W 78–56 | +4.5 | W+26.5 | 162.0 | U134 | 109.9 | 78.9 | 71.0 |
| Mar 1 | DePaul | H | L 51–62 | −4.5 | L−15.5 | 139.5 | U113 | 80.6 | 98.0 | 63.2 |
| Feb 24 | Georgetown | A | W 76–60 | +2.5 | W+18.5 | 150.5 | U136 | 116.6 | 92.0 | 65.2 |
| Feb 18 | #17St John's | H | L 70–76 | +8.5 | W+2.5 | 157.0 | U146 | 102.2 | 110.9 | 68.5 |
| Feb 14 | Xavier | A | L 88–96 | +2.0 | L−6.0 | 157.5 | O184 | 122.1 | 133.1 | 72.1 |
| Feb 10 | Villanova | A | L 74–77 | +9.5 | W+6.5 | 145.0 | O151 | 105.5 | 109.8 | 70.1 |
| Feb 7 | Butler | H | W 70–55 | −3.5 | W+11.5 | 155.5 | U125 | 104.6 | 82.2 | 66.9 |
| Jan 31 | Seton Hall | A | L 64–69 | +5.5 | W+0.5 | 143.0 | U133 | 102.8 | 110.8 | 62.3 |
Texas A&M
Against the spread
Season
19-15
Home
9-9
Road
8-3
Last 10
4-6
avg cover −4.0
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 2 of 5 as a favoriteCovered 2 of 5 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
20-14
Home
12-6
Road
6-5
Last 10
5-5
avg vs total −3.9
Over in the last gameOver in 3 of 5 as a favoriteOver in 2 of 5 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 21 | #2Houston | N | L 57–88 | +10.0 | L−21.0 | 143.0 | O145 | 87.1 | 134.5 | 65.5 |
| Mar 19 | #7Saint Mary's | N | W 63–50 | +2.5 | W+15.5 | 148.5 | U113 | 106.4 | 84.5 | 59.2 |
| Mar 12 | Oklahoma | N | L 63–83 | −2.0 | L−22.0 | 162.0 | U146 | 96.4 | 127.0 | 65.3 |
| Mar 7 | LSU | A | W 94–91 3OT | −2.5 | W+0.5 | 160.5 | O185 | 101.9 | 98.7 | 92.2 |
| Mar 3 | Kentucky | H | W 96–85 | −1.5 | W+9.5 | 162.0 | O181 | 127.3 | 112.7 | 75.4 |
| Feb 28 | Texas | H | L 70–76 | −2.5 | L−8.5 | 160.5 | U146 | 101.8 | 110.5 | 68.8 |
| Feb 25 | #20Arkansas | A | L 84–99 | +7.5 | L−7.5 | 170.0 | O183 | 108.7 | 128.1 | 77.3 |
| Feb 21 | Oklahoma | A | W 75–71 | +1.5 | W+5.5 | 165.5 | U146 | 120.1 | 113.7 | 62.5 |
| Feb 18 | Ole Miss | H | W 80–77 | −9.5 | L−6.5 | 155.0 | O157 | 116.3 | 111.9 | 68.8 |
| Feb 14 | #19Vanderbilt | A | L 69–82 | +7.5 | L−5.5 | 165.0 | U151 | 98.9 | 117.5 | 69.8 |
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 homeMarquetteTexas A&M
Efficiency
108.7
115.1
104.8
104.8
69.5
70.5
—
—
Shooting
50.5%
53.8%
52.7%
53.8%
31.7%
35.9%
67.5%
73.8%
32.8%
37.1%
Ball control & glass
16.0%
14.7%
19.3%
18.4%
29.7%
32.0%
34.7%
33.0%
9.7%
8.8%
10.0%
11.7%
Style
42.2%
46.2%
47.8%
40.4%
19.5%
12.5%
58.1%
61.2%
29.0%
41.1%
Roster
2.02
3.38
6'5.9"
6'5.2"
79.8%
64.3%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputMarquette
Returning minutes: 79.8%Returning production: 78.7%
Lost
- Chase Ross 32.9 mpg, 14.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Zaide Lowery 8.0 mpg, 2.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Sheek Pearson no D1 minutes last season
- Nash Walker no D1 minutes last season
- Ian Miletic no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 80% 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).
Texas A&M
Returning minutes: 64.3%Returning production: 58.9%
Lost
- Rashaun Agee 26.9 mpg, 14.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Rylan Griffen 24.4 mpg, 10.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Pop Isaacs 21.7 mpg, 9.5 ppg · transferred to Oklahoma
Added
Nobody of note.
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 64% of last season's minutes; lost 3 of its top 5 (1 transferred).
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.