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-conferenceTrask Coliseum, Wilmington, NC
St Thomas
Efficiency #84
2025-26: 24-10 · 13-5 conf
@
UNC Wilmington
Efficiency #86
2025-26: 27-7 · 15-4 conf
Wed, Nov 25 · TBD
71.7
win 37%
Projected
75.6
win 63%
No line posted yet.
Model: UNCW −3.8 · total 147.3 · 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: UNC Wilmington 66.7, St Thomas 69.0 → 67.4 possessions
−2.0
UNC Wilmington offense vs St Thomas defense
+0.5
St Thomas offense vs UNC Wilmington defense
+0.5
Projected total
147.3
Axis starts at 145 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
UNC Wilmington offense vs St Thomas defense
+0.5
St Thomas offense vs UNC Wilmington defense
−0.5
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.9
UNC Wilmington by 3.8
3.8
St Thomas side ◂▸ UNC Wilmington side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 147.2 against a projected 147.3, and the margin steps add to +3.9 against +3.8. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help UNC Wilmington.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 67.4, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, St Thomas is the faster team (69.7, #104 of 365) and UNC Wilmington the slower (66.1, #291). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
67.4
per team, 40 min
Projected total
147.3
model
Projected team totals
71.7 / 75.6
St Thomas / UNC Wilmington
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
69.0#122
St Thomas
66.7#307
UNC Wilmington
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageSt Thomas
Where St Thomas struggles: the offensive glass
St Thomas rebounds 22.6% of its own misses (#353); UNC Wilmington lets opponents grab 27.6% of their own misses (#51). Expect about 23.6%, 6.8 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -4.2 points per 100 possessions.
ClashSt Thomas
Strength vs strength: eFG%
St Thomas (#5 in eFG%) against UNC Wilmington (#30 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 53.7%. Historically St Thomas's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.58 vs 0.51).
TurnoversSt Thomas
St Thomas protects the ball
Projected turnover rate of 14.2% is worth roughly +3.1 points per 100 possessions for St Thomas's offense.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (UNC Wilmington's defense) 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 St Thomas at about 47.0% of its shots from three, UNC Wilmington about 40.0%.
ClashUNC Wilmington
Strength vs strength: offensive rebounding
UNC Wilmington (#40 in offensive rebounding) against St Thomas (#25 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 32.0%. Historically UNC Wilmington's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.70 vs 0.49).
ClashSt Thomas
Style clash: paint scoring
St Thomas scores 46.5% of its points in the paint; UNC Wilmington protects the paint (39.1% of opponents' points) (D1 average 42.8%). Expect about 42.4% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.25 vs 0.34).
St Thomas has the ball
OffenseUNC Wilmington allowsvs D1 avg
58.9% #5
47.5% #30
+3.5 pt/100
14.3% #36
14.9% #295
+3.1 pt/100
22.6% #353
27.6% #51
-4.2 pt/100
33.8% #220
31.7% #99
-0.3 pt/100
68.7% #305
—
-0.3 pt/100
St Thomas net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +1.8 pts/100
UNC Wilmington has the ball
OffenseSt Thomas allowsvs D1 avg
50.4% #220
50.7% #139
-1.1 pt/100
14.8% #57
17.0% #149
+1.1 pt/100
35.3% #40
26.6% #25
+1.0 pt/100
40.4% #54
30.7% #78
+0.0 pt/100
68.7% #306
—
-0.3 pt/100
UNC Wilmington net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +0.6 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersSt Thomasoffense vsUNC Wilmingtondefense
Share of shots by zone
St Thomas shoots
44.3
3.7
5.5
46.5
UNC Wilmington allows
31.4
8.2
18.0
42.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 68.5%#3 | 58.8%#182 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 46.6%#44 | 32.6%#25 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 36.8%#234 | 39.3%#215 | 38.0% |
| Three | 36.0%#57 | 29.7%#6 | 33.7% |
UNC Wilmingtonoffense vsSt Thomasdefense
Share of shots by zone
UNC Wilmington shoots
35.7
9.4
16.2
38.7
St Thomas allows
39.8
4.7
14.0
41.5
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 59.5%#145 | 58.4%#158 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 32.1%#327 | 33.8%#41 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 34.2%#308 | 37.9%#156 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.0%#124 | 31.7%#52 | 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 numbersSt Thomas
+1.5extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#120 of 365
Off reb %
22.6%
#353
Def reb %
73.4%
#25
Turnover %
14.3%
#36
Forced TO %
17.0%
#149
FT rate
33.8%
#220
FT allowed
30.7%
#78
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−2.5
Defensive rebounding+1.3
Ball security+1.7
Forcing turnovers+0.2
Foul shots drawn−0.3
Foul shots allowed+1.2
UNC Wilmington
+5.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#23 of 365
Off reb %
35.3%
#40
Def reb %
72.4%
#51
Turnover %
14.8%
#57
Forced TO %
14.9%
#295
FT rate
40.4%
#54
FT allowed
31.7%
#99
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.6
Defensive rebounding+1.0
Ball security+1.3
Forcing turnovers−1.2
Foul shots drawn+1.4
Foul shots allowed+0.9
UNC Wilmington has more extra scoring chances per game: +5.0 (#23 of 365) to St Thomas’s +1.5 (#120).
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
St Thomas2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted St Thomas'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23 | Nick Janowski | G | Fr | 6'4" | 34-34 | 31.5 | 16.1 | 5.1 | 2.1 | 1.3 | 57.0% | 33.9% | 5.4 | 64.1% | 27.6% | |
| 4 | Nolan Minessale | G | So | 6'5" | 34-34 | 31.0 | 19.8 | 4.6 | 4.3 | 2.2 | 55.4% | 30.6% | 4.2 | 75.0% | 34.7% | |
| 32 | Carter Bjerke | F | Jr | 6'9" | 34-34 | 24.9 | 9.4 | 3.4 | 1.2 | 0.7 | 67.3% | 44.9% | 5.2 | 58.8% | 17.9% | |
| 34 | Ben Oosterbaan | F | So | 6'6" | 34-34 | 24.0 | 7.6 | 4.2 | 1.6 | 0.8 | 59.5% | 36.8% | 3.1 | 69.2% | 16.9% | |
| 0 | Isaiah Johnson-Arigu | F | So | 6'7" | 33-0 | 21.4 | 10.5 | 4.0 | 1.1 | 1.3 | 60.0% | 32.5% | 2.4 | 66.7% | 26.2% | |
| 11 | Austin Herro | G | So | 6'3" | 27-24 | 23.9 | 5.5 | 4.0 | 3.5 | 1.3 | 60.2% | 37.8% | 1.4 | 72.0% | 13.8% | |
| 12 | Ryan Dufault | G | Sr | 6'0" | 33-9 | 17.7 | 5.7 | 2.3 | 1.8 | 0.7 | 68.9% | 33.3% | 0.3 | 66.0% | 15.6% | |
| 2 | Jermaine Coleman | G | So | 6'7" | 34-0 | 13.9 | 4.4 | 1.9 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 54.7% | 34.0% | 3.0 | 64.7% | 17.7% | |
| 1 | Hayden Tibbits | G | So | 5'11" | 26-1 | 11.0 | 3.1 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 53.9% | 34.1% | 1.7 | 52.4% | 16.2% | |
| 3 | Ryan Lafferty | G | So | 6'5" | 11-0 | 13.5 | 1.0 | 1.9 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 45.8% | 20.0% | 0.5 | 0.0% | 9.5% | |
| 5 | Tim Franks | G | Fr | 6'5" | 16-0 | 4.0 | 2.1 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 66.7% | 60.0% | 0.6 | 71.4% | 22.6% | |
| 10 | Tommy Humphries Jr. | G | So | 6'5" | 9-0 | 4.2 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 34.6% | 25.0% | 0.4 | 33.3% | 20.4% | |
| 15 | Adam Tauer | G | So | 6'3" | 12-0 | 2.8 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 40.0% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 50.0% | 11.3% | |
| 20 | Jack Tauer | G | Sr | 6'2" | 11-0 | 1.7 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 75.0% | 100.0% | 0.1 | 0.0% | 9.9% | |
| 24 | Kyle Counts | F | Fr | 6'7" | 5-0 | 3.8 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 83.3% | 50.0% | 0.4 | — | 12.3% | |
| 13 | Luka Momcilovic | F | Fr | 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.
UNC Wilmington2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted UNC Wilmington'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Nolan Hodge | G | Sr | 6'7" | 34-34 | 32.3 | 14.2 | 4.6 | 1.6 | 1.0 | 52.7% | 39.3% | 6.9 | 76.8% | 25.1% | |
| 7 | Greedy Williams | G | Sr | 6'5" | 34-34 | 30.6 | 9.1 | 2.7 | 4.1 | 1.7 | 49.3% | 34.3% | 2.1 | 77.4% | 19.3% | |
| 5 | Noah Ross | G | Sr | 6'7" | 34-34 | 29.2 | 9.4 | 5.1 | 1.9 | 0.8 | 47.0% | 25.6% | 2.3 | 69.4% | 21.1% | |
| 8 | Christian May | G | Sr | 6'5" | 33-31 | 29.6 | 10.6 | 5.5 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 51.3% | 35.2% | 5.5 | 64.7% | 23.9% | |
| 2 | Patrick Wessler | F | Jr | 7'1" | 34-34 | 26.7 | 13.6 | 9.5 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 59.9% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 55.8% | 28.6% | |
| 1 | Madison Durr | G | Sr | 6'5" | 34-0 | 21.6 | 10.3 | 2.8 | 2.2 | 1.2 | 42.6% | 31.9% | 2.0 | 75.4% | 30.1% | |
| 22 | Gavin Walsh | F | Jr | 6'8" | 15-3 | 26.0 | 9.5 | 6.5 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 49.2% | 32.6% | 3.1 | 45.8% | 24.0% | |
| 13 | Makoi Mabor Makoi | F | So | 6'11" | 33-0 | 8.7 | 1.5 | 2.6 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 48.8% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 80.0% | 13.7% | |
| 0 | Jahnathan Lamothe | G | Jr | 6'4" | 19-0 | 15.0 | 5.4 | 1.7 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 54.6% | 40.3% | 3.5 | 53.3% | 21.9% | |
| 10 | Grady Whitt | G | So | 6'3" | 7-0 | 4.4 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 30.0% | 20.0% | 0.7 | 50.0% | 13.9% | |
| 12 | Makel Smith | G | So | 6'1" | 8-0 | 3.6 | 2.0 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 66.7% | 40.0% | 1.3 | 0.0% | 27.7% | |
| 14 | JoJo Fullwood | G | Sr | 6'2" | 8-0 | 3.0 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 50.0% | 15.9% | |
| 35 | Adam Tokpah | F | Fr | 6'11" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 3 | CJ Luster II | G | Sr | 6'3" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 24 | Matija Prodanovic | 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.
St Thomas2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted St Thomas'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23 | Nick Janowski | G | Fr | 6'4" | 34-34 | 31.5 | 16.1 | 5.1 | 2.1 | 1.3 | 57.0% | 33.9% | 5.4 | 64.1% | 27.6% | |
| 4 | Nolan Minessale | G | So | 6'5" | 34-34 | 31.0 | 19.8 | 4.6 | 4.3 | 2.2 | 55.4% | 30.6% | 4.2 | 75.0% | 34.7% | |
| 32 | Carter Bjerke | F | Jr | 6'9" | 34-34 | 24.9 | 9.4 | 3.4 | 1.2 | 0.7 | 67.3% | 44.9% | 5.2 | 58.8% | 17.9% | |
| 34 | Ben Oosterbaan | F | So | 6'6" | 34-34 | 24.0 | 7.6 | 4.2 | 1.6 | 0.8 | 59.5% | 36.8% | 3.1 | 69.2% | 16.9% | |
| 0 | Isaiah Johnson-Arigu | F | So | 6'7" | 33-0 | 21.4 | 10.5 | 4.0 | 1.1 | 1.3 | 60.0% | 32.5% | 2.4 | 66.7% | 26.2% | |
| 11 | Austin Herro | G | So | 6'3" | 27-24 | 23.9 | 5.5 | 4.0 | 3.5 | 1.3 | 60.2% | 37.8% | 1.4 | 72.0% | 13.8% | |
| 12 | Ryan Dufault | G | Sr | 6'0" | 33-9 | 17.7 | 5.7 | 2.3 | 1.8 | 0.7 | 68.9% | 33.3% | 0.3 | 66.0% | 15.6% | |
| 2 | Jermaine Coleman | G | So | 6'7" | 34-0 | 13.9 | 4.4 | 1.9 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 54.7% | 34.0% | 3.0 | 64.7% | 17.7% | |
| 1 | Hayden Tibbits | G | So | 5'11" | 26-1 | 11.0 | 3.1 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 53.9% | 34.1% | 1.7 | 52.4% | 16.2% | |
| 3 | Ryan Lafferty | G | So | 6'5" | 11-0 | 13.5 | 1.0 | 1.9 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 45.8% | 20.0% | 0.5 | 0.0% | 9.5% | |
| 5 | Tim Franks | G | Fr | 6'5" | 16-0 | 4.0 | 2.1 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 66.7% | 60.0% | 0.6 | 71.4% | 22.6% | |
| 10 | Tommy Humphries Jr. | G | So | 6'5" | 9-0 | 4.2 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 34.6% | 25.0% | 0.4 | 33.3% | 20.4% | |
| 15 | Adam Tauer | G | So | 6'3" | 12-0 | 2.8 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 40.0% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 50.0% | 11.3% | |
| 20 | Jack Tauer | G | Sr | 6'2" | 11-0 | 1.7 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 75.0% | 100.0% | 0.1 | 0.0% | 9.9% | |
| 24 | Kyle Counts | F | Fr | 6'7" | 5-0 | 3.8 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 83.3% | 50.0% | 0.4 | — | 12.3% | |
| 13 | Luka Momcilovic | F | Fr | 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.
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26St Thomas
Against the spread
Season
15-16
Home
6-6
Road
8-7
Last 10
6-4
avg cover +3.5
Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 5 of 8 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 4 with a line of 10+
Over / under
Season
15-15-1
Home
7-5
Road
7-7-1
Last 10
3-7
avg vs total −5.8
Under 6 straightOver in 3 of 8 as a favoriteOver 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 17 | Seattle U | A | L 52–67 | +2.0 | L−13.0 | 145.5 | U119 | 74.2 | 95.5 | 70.1 |
| Mar 7 | North Dakota | N | L 66–67 | −11.5 | L−12.5 | 153.5 | U133 | 102.4 | 104.0 | 64.4 |
| Mar 5 | S Dakota St | N | W 80–67 | −5.0 | W+8.0 | 150.0 | U147 | 124.5 | 104.3 | 64.3 |
| Feb 28 | Omaha | H | W 68–53 | −11.5 | W+3.5 | 159.5 | U121 | 104.3 | 81.3 | 65.2 |
| Feb 26 | N Dakota St | H | W 84–62 | −3.0 | W+19.0 | 155.5 | U146 | 128.8 | 95.1 | 65.2 |
| Feb 21 | Denver | A | L 80–82 | −4.0 | L−6.0 | 168.5 | U162 | 116.8 | 119.7 | 68.5 |
| Feb 14 | Kansas City | A | W 104–64 | −13.0 | W+27.0 | 153.5 | O168 | 142.9 | 87.9 | 72.8 |
| Feb 12 | Omaha | A | L 94–98 | −4.5 | L−8.5 | 156.5 | O192 | 127.1 | 132.5 | 74.0 |
| Feb 7 | Oral Roberts | H | W 92–75 | −15.5 | W+1.5 | 152.0 | O167 | 122.6 | 99.9 | 75.1 |
| Feb 4 | S Dakota St | A | W 77–62 | +1.0 | W+16.0 | 157.0 | U139 | 123.4 | 99.3 | 62.4 |
UNC Wilmington
Against the spread
Season
16-15-1
Home
8-8-1
Road
8-6
Last 10
7-3
avg cover −0.8
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 6 of 8 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
18-14
Home
8-9
Road
9-5
Last 10
5-5
avg vs total −4.2
Over in the last gameOver in 4 of 8 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 21 | Dayton | H | L 61–80 | +3.5 | L−15.5 | 138.5 | O141 | 95.9 | 125.8 | 63.6 |
| Mar 17 | Yale | A | W 68–67 | +4.5 | W+5.5 | 148.5 | U135 | 104.5 | 103.0 | 65.1 |
| Mar 8 | Campbell | N | L 70–85 | −7.5 | L−22.5 | 149.0 | O155 | 97.8 | 118.7 | 71.6 |
| Mar 3 | Elon | A | W 76–57 | −5.0 | W+14.0 | 145.5 | U133 | 113.6 | 85.2 | 66.9 |
| Mar 1 | Charleston | H | L 76–79 | −5.0 | L−8.0 | 147.0 | O155 | 117.9 | 122.6 | 64.5 |
| Feb 26 | NC A&T | H | W 88–65 | −13.5 | W+9.5 | 147.5 | O153 | 136.2 | 100.6 | 64.6 |
| Feb 21 | Campbell | A | W 73–68 | −2.5 | W+2.5 | 150.5 | U141 | 106.8 | 99.5 | 68.3 |
| Feb 19 | Monmouth | H | W 79–69 | −7.5 | W+2.5 | 145.0 | O148 | 109.7 | 95.8 | 72.0 |
| Feb 14 | Hofstra | H | W 70–66 | −2.5 | W+1.5 | 137.5 | U136 | 114.7 | 108.2 | 61.0 |
| Feb 12 | Elon | H | W 65–54 | −8.0 | W+3.0 | 149.5 | U119 | 108.0 | 89.7 | 60.2 |
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 homeSt ThomasUNC Wilmington
Efficiency
111.9
110.7
107.0
105.8
69.0
66.7
—
—
Shooting
58.9%
50.4%
63.0%
49.1%
36.0%
35.0%
68.7%
68.7%
33.8%
40.4%
Ball control & glass
14.3%
14.8%
17.0%
14.9%
22.6%
35.3%
26.6%
27.6%
7.7%
7.8%
8.3%
7.9%
Style
46.3%
38.8%
46.5%
40.4%
12.6%
10.0%
56.7%
51.7%
32.7%
25.5%
Roster
2.13
3.66
6'4.9"
6'7"
—
—
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputSt Thomas
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted St Thomas'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.)
UNC Wilmington
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted UNC Wilmington'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 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.