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-conferenceCam Henderson Center, Huntington, WV

ETSU

Efficiency #110

2025-26: 23-11 · 15-6 conf

Marshall

Efficiency #175

2025-26: 19-13 · 11-8 conf

Tue, Nov 17 · TBD

75.7

win 44%

Projected

77.5

win 56%

No line posted yet.

Model: MRSH −1.9 · total 153.2 · 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 one

Projected total

Average D-I game

148.2

PaceAdjusted tempo: Marshall 69.7, ETSU 67.4 → 68.8 possessions

+1.0

Marshall offense vs ETSU defense

+0.9

ETSU offense vs Marshall defense

+3.0

Projected total

153.2

Axis starts at 146 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Marshall offense vs ETSU defense

+0.9

ETSU offense vs Marshall defense

−3.0

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

+4.0

Marshall by 1.9

1.9

ETSU side ◂▸ Marshall side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 153.1 against a projected 153.2. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Marshall.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 68.8, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Marshall is the faster team (70.7, #66 of 365) and ETSU the slower (66.5, #268). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

68.8

per team, 40 min

Projected total

153.2

model

Projected team totals

75.7 / 77.5

ETSU / Marshall

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

67.4#257

ETSU

69.7#71

Marshall

How this game plays

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

AdvantageMarshall

Where Marshall scores: shooting

Marshall shoots an effective 54.8% (#42); ETSU allows 51.0% (#161). Expect about 53.2%, 1.9 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.8 points per 100 possessions.

ClashMarshall

Style match: 3-point volume

Marshall takes 44.3% of its shots from three; ETSU lets opponents take 47.7% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 48.6% — both habits push the same way.

AdvantageETSU

Where ETSU scores: shooting

ETSU shoots an effective 55.3% (#33); Marshall allows 50.3% (#118). Expect about 53.1%, 1.8 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.6 points per 100 possessions.

DefenseETSU

ETSU's ball-hawking

ETSU ranks #11 nationally in steal rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 11.9% of Marshall's possessions to end in a steal against this defense.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Marshall) 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 ETSU at about 38.2% of its shots from three, Marshall about 48.6%.

ClashETSU

Strength vs strength: shot-blocking exposure

ETSU (#30 in shot-blocking exposure) against Marshall (#23 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 11.1%. Historically Marshall's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.41 vs 0.68).

ETSU has the ball

OffenseMarshall allowsvs D1 avg

55.3% #33

50.3% #118

+2.6 pt/100

15.2% #78

16.3% #201

+1.5 pt/100

28.3% #252

33.8% #316

+0.1 pt/100

35.0% #180

41.1% #313

+0.4 pt/100

74.7% #93

—

+0.2 pt/100

ETSU net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +4.9 pts/100

Marshall has the ball

OffenseETSU allowsvs D1 avg

54.8% #42

51.0% #161

+2.8 pt/100

16.6% #171

18.5% #74

-1.2 pt/100

31.9% #127

27.9% #64

-0.1 pt/100

29.2% #328

36.4% #225

-0.2 pt/100

73.0% #168

—

+0.1 pt/100

Marshall net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +1.3 pts/100

Shot diet

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

ETSUoffense vsMarshalldefense

Share of shots by zone

ETSU shoots

42.8

4.8

15.4

36.9

Marshall allows

36.7

5.4

18.8

39.1

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	62.9%#52	60.2%#241	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	48.1%#21	35.8%#87	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	41.1%#77	34.0%#50	38.0%
Three	34.7%#132	33.6%#162	33.7%

Marshalloffense vsETSUdefense

Share of shots by zone

Marshall shoots

31.0

3.9

21.0

44.1

ETSU allows

36.1

3.7

12.5

47.7

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	66.8%#8	59.6%#210	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	36.8%#248	44.8%#293	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	36.9%#229	33.8%#48	38.0%
Three	36.8%#34	32.9%#110	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

ETSU

+2.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#86 of 365

Off reb %

28.3%

#252

Def reb %

72.1%

#64

Turnover %

15.2%

#78

Forced TO %

18.5%

#74

FT rate

35.0%

#180

FT allowed

36.4%

#225

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.7

Defensive rebounding+0.9

Ball security+1.1

Forcing turnovers+1.2

Foul shots drawn0.0

Foul shots allowed−0.3

Marshall

−3.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#322 of 365

Off reb %

31.9%

#127

Def reb %

66.2%

#316

Turnover %

16.6%

#171

Forced TO %

16.3%

#201

FT rate

29.2%

#328

FT allowed

41.1%

#313

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.5

Defensive rebounding−1.0

Ball security+0.1

Forcing turnovers−0.3

Foul shots drawn−1.5

Foul shots allowed−1.5

ETSU has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.2 (#86 of 365) to Marshall’s −3.7 (#322).

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

ETSU2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted ETSU'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
11	Brian Taylor II	G	Sr	6'4"	34-34	33.2	14.6	3.7	2.9	1.5	53.2%	34.9%	4.5	76.4%	26.3%
13	Blake Barkley	F	So	6'8"	32-32	28.6	14.6	5.8	1.2	1.6	62.2%	38.3%	1.5	84.0%	26.2%
15	Cam Morris III	F	Sr	6'8"	33-33	25.6	13.2	5.2	1.5	1.4	59.1%	32.3%	0.9	66.9%	28.4%
4	Jaylen Smith	G	Jr	5'11"	34-3	24.7	9.1	2.6	2.9	1.7	49.4%	34.4%	4.4	80.0%	25.3%
2	Maki Johnson	G	Jr	6'4"	34-1	22.5	5.7	3.2	0.9	0.4	57.9%	38.5%	4.0	64.3%	13.9%
5	Allen Strothers	G	Sr	6'1"	34-34	21.7	4.1	2.1	2.9	1.3	51.8%	32.1%	0.8	70.3%	13.9%
35	Jordan McCullum	F	So	6'8"	34-32	21.6	8.3	3.7	0.9	1.1	55.5%	20.5%	1.3	69.8%	22.8%
24	Isaiah Sutherland	F	Fr	6'7"	24-0	11.0	3.5	1.8	0.2	0.2	52.7%	33.9%	2.3	55.6%	19.2%
55	Milton Matthews III	G	Sr	6'3"	23-0	9.9	4.0	1.4	0.5	0.1	57.9%	38.7%	2.7	75.0%	21.1%
21	Gabe Sisk	G	Jr	6'5"	18-0	9.9	3.4	2.3	0.7	0.6	51.2%	10.0%	0.6	90.0%	20.3%
14	Brayden Crump	F	So	6'8"	11-1	15.8	6.4	3.1	0.5	0.5	54.3%	31.3%	1.5	70.0%	22.1%
30	Henry Sisemore	F	Fr	6'8"	7-0	3.0	1.1	1.6	0.3	0.1	44.4%	—	0.0	0.0%	29.3%
25	Joseph Carter	G	Fr	6'1"	6-0	2.3	0.0	0.5	0.2	0.2	0.0%	0.0%	0.7	—	23.9%
23	Frederico Whitaker Jr.	G	Fr	5'11"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
3	Maddox Huff	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.

Marshall2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
50	Jalen Speer	G	Sr	6'1"	32-32	32.5	15.7	4.1	5.5	2.4	48.7%	36.4%	7.8	83.0%	30.4%
5	Noah Otshudi	G	Sr	6'2"	31-31	31.5	14.5	3.4	3.5	2.7	48.9%	30.0%	2.3	84.5%	29.0%
3	Wilson Dubinsky	G	Sr	6'3"	32-0	18.8	5.0	3.2	1.2	0.4	49.6%	37.1%	3.3	77.4%	15.6%
15	Caleb Hollenbeck	G	Sr	6'4"	32-27	17.3	5.7	1.6	1.0	0.4	58.3%	39.7%	4.3	41.7%	17.5%
6	Landen Joseph	G	Fr	6'2"	31-6	17.8	7.9	2.5	2.1	1.2	59.2%	41.3%	3.0	70.8%	24.5%
13	Matt Van Komen	C	Sr	7'4"	22-20	20.9	7.8	7.6	0.6	1.6	73.7%	—	0.0	76.2%	18.7%
11	Erich Harding	F	So	6'10"	32-12	14.3	3.8	2.7	0.5	0.7	62.8%	0.0%	0.1	47.2%	15.5%
9	Shamarrie Hugie	G	Jr	6'6"	26-1	12.3	4.4	2.5	0.5	0.7	56.8%	41.4%	1.1	64.7%	20.4%
4	Drew Fuquay	F	Jr	6'8"	28-0	7.8	2.8	1.9	0.2	0.3	64.3%	41.7%	0.4	72.7%	17.5%
8	Bryce Slay	G	Fr	6'6"	24-0	8.7	2.1	1.1	0.6	0.3	41.3%	35.7%	1.2	81.3%	16.5%
0	Kai Spears	G	Jr	6'3"	15-0	4.9	1.2	1.1	0.4	0.1	31.3%	0.0%	0.1	88.9%	16.0%
14	Grant Moore	G	Jr	6'6"	2-0	3.0	1.5	0.5	0.0	0.5	50.0%	33.3%	1.5	—	35.8%
1	Kaiden White	G	So	6'3"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
12	Will Moore	G	So	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.

ETSU2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted ETSU'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
11	Brian Taylor II	G	Sr	6'4"	34-34	33.2	14.6	3.7	2.9	1.5	53.2%	34.9%	4.5	76.4%	26.3%
13	Blake Barkley	F	So	6'8"	32-32	28.6	14.6	5.8	1.2	1.6	62.2%	38.3%	1.5	84.0%	26.2%
15	Cam Morris III	F	Sr	6'8"	33-33	25.6	13.2	5.2	1.5	1.4	59.1%	32.3%	0.9	66.9%	28.4%
4	Jaylen Smith	G	Jr	5'11"	34-3	24.7	9.1	2.6	2.9	1.7	49.4%	34.4%	4.4	80.0%	25.3%
2	Maki Johnson	G	Jr	6'4"	34-1	22.5	5.7	3.2	0.9	0.4	57.9%	38.5%	4.0	64.3%	13.9%
5	Allen Strothers	G	Sr	6'1"	34-34	21.7	4.1	2.1	2.9	1.3	51.8%	32.1%	0.8	70.3%	13.9%
35	Jordan McCullum	F	So	6'8"	34-32	21.6	8.3	3.7	0.9	1.1	55.5%	20.5%	1.3	69.8%	22.8%
24	Isaiah Sutherland	F	Fr	6'7"	24-0	11.0	3.5	1.8	0.2	0.2	52.7%	33.9%	2.3	55.6%	19.2%
55	Milton Matthews III	G	Sr	6'3"	23-0	9.9	4.0	1.4	0.5	0.1	57.9%	38.7%	2.7	75.0%	21.1%
21	Gabe Sisk	G	Jr	6'5"	18-0	9.9	3.4	2.3	0.7	0.6	51.2%	10.0%	0.6	90.0%	20.3%
14	Brayden Crump	F	So	6'8"	11-1	15.8	6.4	3.1	0.5	0.5	54.3%	31.3%	1.5	70.0%	22.1%
30	Henry Sisemore	F	Fr	6'8"	7-0	3.0	1.1	1.6	0.3	0.1	44.4%	—	0.0	0.0%	29.3%
25	Joseph Carter	G	Fr	6'1"	6-0	2.3	0.0	0.5	0.2	0.2	0.0%	0.0%	0.7	—	23.9%
23	Frederico Whitaker Jr.	G	Fr	5'11"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
3	Maddox Huff	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.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

ETSU

Against the spread

Season

14-18

Home

8-7

Road

6-8

Last 10

4-6

avg cover −3.5

Missed the spread 5 straightCovered 3 of 8 as a favorite

Over / under

Season

17-14-1

Home

7-7-1

Road

9-5

Last 10

6-4

avg vs total +3.6

Under 2 straightOver in 4 of 8 as a favorite

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 9	FurmanAdjEM #163	N	L 61–76	−1.0	L−16.0	138.0	U137	98.6	122.9	61.8
Mar 8	W CarolinaAdjEM #217	N	W 69–67	−3.0	L−1.0	146.0	U136	105.5	102.4	65.4
Mar 7	The CitadelAdjEM #348	N	W 83–76	−15.0	L−8.0	139.0	O159	127.7	116.9	65.0
Feb 28	MercerAdjEM #161	A	L 76–82	+1.5	L−4.5	151.0	O158	119.0	128.4	63.9
Feb 25	WoffordAdjEM #235	H	L 69–72	−7.0	L−10.0	150.0	U141	103.8	108.3	66.5
Feb 21	UNC GreensboroAdjEM #301	A	W 87–75	−6.0	W+6.0	149.0	O162	130.1	112.1	66.9
Feb 18	FurmanAdjEM #163	A	W 78–69	+1.5	W+10.5	141.0	O147	114.4	101.2	68.2
Feb 14	SamfordAdjEM #202	H	L 72–82 OT	−6.0	L−16.0	145.5	O154	95.7	109.0	75.2
Feb 11	ChattanoogaAdjEM #289	H	W 73–61	−10.0	W+2.0	145.0	U134	110.3	92.2	66.2
Feb 7	VMIAdjEM #361	A	W 87–70	−14.5	W+2.5	144.0	O157	123.2	99.1	70.6

Marshall

Against the spread

Season

10-20-1

Home

4-11-1

Road

6-8

Last 10

2-8

avg cover −7.3

Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 1 of 8 as a favorite

Over / under

Season

19-12

Home

12-4

Road

7-7

Last 10

8-2

avg vs total +12.6

Under in the last gameOver in 7 of 8 as a favorite

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 8	GA SouthernAdjEM #231	N	L 78–82	−3.5	L−7.5	166.5	U160	107.7	113.3	72.4
Feb 27	GA SouthernAdjEM #231	H	L 82–99	−7.5	L−24.5	168.5	O181	114.4	138.1	71.7
Feb 24	Old DominionAdjEM #242	H	W 97–88	−8.5	W+0.5	160.5	O185	134.5	122.0	72.1
Feb 21	CoastalAdjEM #241	A	L 75–79	−2.5	L−6.5	153.5	O154	99.5	104.8	75.3
Feb 19	App StateAdjEM #180	A	W 94–93	+3.5	W+4.5	143.5	O187	141.4	139.9	66.5
Feb 16	South AlabamaAdjEM #188	H	W 84–80	−5.5	L−1.5	151.0	O164	129.8	123.6	64.7
Feb 14	GA SouthernAdjEM #231	A	L 87–101	−2.5	L−16.5	162.5	O188	112.2	130.3	77.5
Feb 11	Old DominionAdjEM #242	A	W 81–79	−3.0	L−1.0	156.0	O160	114.7	111.9	70.6
Feb 7	#23Miami OHAdjEM #66	H	L 74–90	+2.0	L−14.0	164.5	U164	104.9	127.6	70.5
Feb 4	Southern MissAdjEM #218	H	W 81–77	−10.5	L−6.5	148.5	O158	122.1	116.1	66.3

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

ETSUMarshall

Efficiency

110.1

111.3

107.0

111.2

67.4

69.7

—

Shooting

55.3%

54.8%

57.2%

54.6%

34.7%

36.8%

74.7%

73.0%

35.0%

29.2%

Ball control & glass

15.2%

16.6%

18.5%

16.3%

28.3%

31.9%

27.9%

33.8%

8.6%

10.1%

7.5%

8.1%

Style

37.8%

44.3%

46.9%

37.7%

12.2%

15.3%

50.8%

56.5%

34.9%

32.6%

Roster

3.08

3.30

6'4.7"

6'4.6"

—

85.4%

Offseason

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

ETSU

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted ETSU'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.)

Marshall

Returning minutes: 85.4%Returning production: 80.3%

Lost

Wyatt Fricks 29.1 mpg, 15.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Kaiden White no D1 minutes last season
Will Moore no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 85% 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.