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-conferencePrudential Center, Newark, NJ

New Hampshire

Efficiency #340

2025-26: 9-21 · 5-12 conf

Seton Hall

Efficiency #56

2025-26: 21-12 · 11-11 conf

Tue, Nov 24 · TBD

59.2

win 7%

Projected

76.4

win 93%

No line posted yet.

Model: HALL −17.2 · total 135.6 · 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: Seton Hall 66.9, New Hampshire 68.3 → 66.9 possessions

−3.2

Seton Hall offense vs New Hampshire defense

+1.9

New Hampshire offense vs Seton Hall defense

−11.4

Projected total

135.6

Axis starts at 130 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Seton Hall offense vs New Hampshire defense

+1.9

New Hampshire offense vs Seton Hall defense

+11.4

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

+3.8

Seton Hall by 17.2

17.2

New Hampshire side ◂▸ Seton Hall side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 135.5 against a projected 135.6, and the margin steps add to +17.1 against +17.2. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Seton Hall.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 66.9, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, New Hampshire is the faster team (67.1, #237 of 365) and Seton Hall the slower (66.5, #273). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

66.9

per team, 40 min

Projected total

135.6

model

Projected team totals

59.2 / 76.4

New Hampshire / Seton Hall

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

68.3#184

New Hampshire

66.9#298

Seton Hall

How this game plays

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

DefenseSeton Hall

Seton Hall's shot-blocking

Seton Hall ranks #1 nationally in block rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 16.5% of New Hampshire's two-point attempts to get blocked against this defense.

AdvantageNew Hampshire

Where New Hampshire struggles: shooting

New Hampshire shoots an effective 46.7% (#344); Seton Hall allows 47.3% (#25). Expect about 46.5%, 4.7 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -6.7 points per 100 possessions.

TurnoversNew Hampshire

New Hampshire turns it over

Projected turnover rate of 19.6% is worth roughly -3.5 points per 100 possessions against New Hampshire's offense.

DefenseSeton Hall

Seton Hall's ball-hawking

Seton Hall ranks #4 nationally in steal rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 12.1% of New Hampshire's possessions to end in a steal against this defense.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Seton Hall, New Hampshire) 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 New Hampshire at about 44.1% of its shots from three, Seton Hall about 27.7%.

GlassNew Hampshire

New Hampshire gets out-rebounded

Projected offensive rebound rate of 27.9% is worth roughly -1.5 points per 100 possessions against New Hampshire's offense.

New Hampshire has the ball

OffenseSeton Hall allowsvs D1 avg

46.7% #344

47.3% #25

-6.7 pt/100

16.5% #168

21.5% #5

-3.5 pt/100

25.7% #329

31.9% #251

-1.5 pt/100

28.5% #338

42.1% #325

+0.1 pt/100

65.1% #359

—

-0.6 pt/100

New Hampshire net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -12.3 pts/100

Seton Hall has the ball

OffenseNew Hampshire allowsvs D1 avg

47.6% #321

53.4% #282

-1.4 pt/100

16.7% #175

15.8% #231

+0.8 pt/100

35.6% #33

26.9% #32

+1.2 pt/100

35.3% #168

35.8% #206

+0.1 pt/100

72.3% #199

—

-0.0 pt/100

Seton Hall 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 numbers

New Hampshireoffense vsSeton Halldefense

Share of shots by zone

New Hampshire shoots

41.4

5.6

9.6

43.3

Seton Hall allows

39.7

3.7

14.7

41.9

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	52.2%#347	52.7%#22	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	36.6%#255	29.3%#13	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	31.4%#344	32.6%#22	38.0%
Three	30.5%#333	32.4%#87	33.7%

Seton Halloffense vsNew Hampshiredefense

Share of shots by zone

Seton Hall shoots

46.7

5.3

21.8

26.2

New Hampshire allows

43.8

7.4

12.0

36.8

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	54.5%#314	59.3%#202	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	33.7%#311	46.2%#321	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	38.9%#146	40.6%#262	38.0%
Three	30.5%#334	34.3%#204	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

New Hampshire

−2.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#288 of 365

Off reb %

25.7%

#329

Def reb %

73.1%

#32

Turnover %

16.5%

#168

Forced TO %

15.8%

#231

FT rate

28.5%

#338

FT allowed

35.8%

#206

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−1.5

Defensive rebounding+1.2

Ball security+0.2

Forcing turnovers−0.6

Foul shots drawn−1.7

Foul shots allowed−0.2

Seton Hall

+2.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#56 of 365

Off reb %

35.6%

#33

Def reb %

68.1%

#251

Turnover %

16.7%

#175

Forced TO %

21.5%

FT rate

35.3%

#168

FT allowed

42.1%

#325

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+1.7

Defensive rebounding−0.4

Ball security+0.1

Forcing turnovers+3.3

Foul shots drawn+0.1

Foul shots allowed−1.8

Seton Hall has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.9 (#56 of 365) to New Hampshire’s −2.6 (#288).

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

New Hampshire2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
15	Davide Poser	F	Jr	6'4"	30-30	28.5	7.0	2.9	1.6	0.7	47.6%	32.6%	5.8	66.7%	16.3%
7	John Squire	F	So	6'8"	30-30	26.7	6.1	5.7	1.4	1.2	60.0%	26.7%	0.5	62.3%	13.6%
23	Belal El Shakery	F	Jr	6'8"	29-29	26.6	11.4	8.2	1.5	2.0	43.3%	5.9%	1.2	49.1%	33.1%
0	Tyler Bike	G	Fr	5'10"	30-15	23.8	7.5	1.6	2.0	0.8	50.5%	37.5%	4.8	70.8%	19.6%
8	KiJan Robinson	G	Jr	6'3"	26-17	25.5	10.7	1.6	2.3	1.6	47.3%	30.3%	3.8	82.7%	27.1%
5	R.J. Kennedy	G	Fr	6'1"	30-5	19.6	5.3	1.8	0.8	1.1	45.6%	31.0%	2.9	70.6%	19.7%
10	Comeh Emuobor	G	Jr	6'5"	28-1	18.9	9.0	4.3	0.6	1.6	41.7%	10.7%	1.0	65.1%	35.4%
6	Giannos Xanthopoulos	C	Fr	6'10"	29-0	6.4	1.7	1.9	0.1	0.4	47.5%	30.8%	0.4	91.7%	17.6%
24	Jon O'Neill	F	So	6'9"	15-0	6.2	1.3	2.5	0.2	0.1	75.0%	—	0.0	50.0%	9.3%
4	Myles Blackley	G	Fr	6'4"	11-0	3.7	0.7	0.3	0.3	0.1	15.4%	0.0%	0.6	100.0%	21.3%
3	Dylan Saunders	F	Jr	6'8"	12-0	3.3	1.7	0.6	0.1	0.2	81.8%	60.0%	0.8	100.0%	19.8%
14	Antoni Siewruk	G	So	6'9"	5-0	3.8	1.4	1.2	0.4	0.2	50.0%	33.3%	0.6	0.0%	23.9%
11	Nick Sanford	G	So	6'1"	6-0	1.7	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.3	0.0%	—	0.0	—	17.0%

Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Seton Hall2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
0	Adam Clark	G	Jr	5'10"	33-33	30.7	12.7	3.0	4.9	2.6	45.0%	22.0%	1.2	74.6%	30.0%
14	AJ Staton-McCray	G	Sr	6'4"	33-33	27.5	11.8	3.2	1.4	1.3	47.7%	33.3%	4.9	87.5%	27.9%
23	Mike Williams	G	Jr	6'3"	33-31	20.9	7.0	2.6	1.5	1.0	44.8%	33.7%	3.0	75.9%	23.8%
22	Elijah Fisher	G	Sr	6'6"	33-33	20.7	6.6	2.9	0.8	0.8	48.0%	23.7%	1.2	69.6%	20.6%
6	Stephon Payne	F	Sr	6'9"	33-33	20.2	5.9	6.5	0.6	0.7	52.4%	—	0.0	51.8%	18.7%
25	Najai Hines	F	Fr	6'10"	31-0	17.9	6.5	5.5	0.6	0.8	60.2%	—	0.0	69.0%	20.1%
13	Trey Parker	G	So	6'0"	32-0	15.5	4.3	2.8	1.5	1.1	39.2%	20.5%	1.4	80.0%	22.7%
7	Josh Rivera	F	Sr	6'6"	30-0	11.7	3.3	2.0	0.5	0.4	50.0%	33.3%	0.2	53.6%	18.5%
1	Jacob Dar	G	Sr	6'7"	30-0	10.4	3.3	2.0	0.3	0.3	51.3%	19.0%	0.7	76.9%	19.1%
54	Godswill Erheriene	C	So	6'9"	10-0	4.5	0.8	0.7	0.0	0.5	60.0%	—	0.0	66.7%	15.0%
15	Jahseem Felton	G	So	6'5"	3-0	14.0	1.7	1.3	0.3	0.3	12.5%	0.0%	1.3	75.0%	16.2%
35	Assane Mbaye	C	So	7'2"	4-0	1.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0%	—	0.0	—	15.2%
41	David Gabriel	G	Sr	6'1"	3-0	1.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.3	0.0%	0.0%	0.3	—	41.4%
9	Patrick Suemnick	F	Sr	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.

New Hampshire2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
15	Davide Poser	F	Jr	6'4"	30-30	28.5	7.0	2.9	1.6	0.7	47.6%	32.6%	5.8	66.7%	16.3%
7	John Squire	F	So	6'8"	30-30	26.7	6.1	5.7	1.4	1.2	60.0%	26.7%	0.5	62.3%	13.6%
23	Belal El Shakery	F	Jr	6'8"	29-29	26.6	11.4	8.2	1.5	2.0	43.3%	5.9%	1.2	49.1%	33.1%
0	Tyler Bike	G	Fr	5'10"	30-15	23.8	7.5	1.6	2.0	0.8	50.5%	37.5%	4.8	70.8%	19.6%
8	KiJan Robinson	G	Jr	6'3"	26-17	25.5	10.7	1.6	2.3	1.6	47.3%	30.3%	3.8	82.7%	27.1%
5	R.J. Kennedy	G	Fr	6'1"	30-5	19.6	5.3	1.8	0.8	1.1	45.6%	31.0%	2.9	70.6%	19.7%
10	Comeh Emuobor	G	Jr	6'5"	28-1	18.9	9.0	4.3	0.6	1.6	41.7%	10.7%	1.0	65.1%	35.4%
6	Giannos Xanthopoulos	C	Fr	6'10"	29-0	6.4	1.7	1.9	0.1	0.4	47.5%	30.8%	0.4	91.7%	17.6%
24	Jon O'Neill	F	So	6'9"	15-0	6.2	1.3	2.5	0.2	0.1	75.0%	—	0.0	50.0%	9.3%
4	Myles Blackley	G	Fr	6'4"	11-0	3.7	0.7	0.3	0.3	0.1	15.4%	0.0%	0.6	100.0%	21.3%
3	Dylan Saunders	F	Jr	6'8"	12-0	3.3	1.7	0.6	0.1	0.2	81.8%	60.0%	0.8	100.0%	19.8%
14	Antoni Siewruk	G	So	6'9"	5-0	3.8	1.4	1.2	0.4	0.2	50.0%	33.3%	0.6	0.0%	23.9%
11	Nick Sanford	G	So	6'1"	6-0	1.7	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.3	0.0%	—	0.0	—	17.0%

Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

New Hampshire

Against the spread

Season

12-16

Home

4-7

Road

8-9

Last 10

1-9

avg cover −9.7

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 1 of 4 as a favoriteCovered 0 of 6 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

15-13

Home

7-4

Road

8-9

Last 10

6-4

avg vs total +5.4

Over 3 straightOver in 2 of 4 as a favoriteOver in 4 of 6 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 7	UMBCAdjEM #147	A	L 69–84	+13.0	L−2.0	142.0	O153	106.0	129.1	65.1
Mar 3	BryantAdjEM #347	H	W 88–83 2OT	−1.0	W+4.0	135.5	O171	112.7	106.3	78.1
Feb 28	UAlbanyAdjEM #306	A	L 61–84	+3.0	L−20.0	139.0	O145	91.0	125.3	67.0
Feb 26	BinghamtonAdjEM #354	A	L 63–65	−3.0	L−5.0	141.5	U128	100.5	103.7	62.7
Feb 21	MaineAdjEM #335	H	L 58–61	−3.5	L−6.5	136.0	U119	89.2	93.8	65.0
Feb 19	UMass LowellAdjEM #308	A	L 56–78	+3.5	L−18.5	151.0	U134	79.5	110.7	70.5
Feb 14	UMBCAdjEM #147	H	L 63–85	+2.0	L−20.0	144.0	O148	91.6	123.6	68.8
Feb 12	NJITAdjEM #331	H	L 70–76	−2.5	L−8.5	143.5	O146	104.8	113.8	66.8
Feb 7	VermontAdjEM #199	A	L 57–80	+10.0	L−13.0	138.0	U137	84.0	117.9	67.8
Jan 31	BryantAdjEM #347	A	L 84–92	+1.0	L−7.0	132.5	O176	113.6	124.4	73.9

Seton Hall

Against the spread

Season

19-14

Home

6-11

Road

9-3

Last 10

6-4

avg cover +0.6

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

Over / under

Season

12-20-1

Home

5-11-1

Road

5-7

Last 10

4-5-1

avg vs total −3.0

Over in the last gameOver in 2 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 2 of 4 as an underdog, 1 push

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 13	#13St John'sAdjEM #16	A	L 68–78	+8.0	L−2.0	136.5	O146	102.3	117.3	66.5
Mar 12	CreightonAdjEM #92	N	W 72–61	−3.0	W+8.0	135.5	U133	104.4	88.5	68.9
Mar 6	#18St John'sAdjEM #16	H	L 65–72	+5.0	L−2.0	137.0	P137	101.3	112.3	64.1
Mar 3	XavierAdjEM #129	A	W 77–68	−2.0	W+7.0	144.5	O145	121.4	107.2	63.4
Feb 28	#6UConnAdjEM #10	A	L 67–71	+13.0	W+9.0	130.0	O138	106.3	112.7	63.0
Feb 21	GeorgetownAdjEM #95	H	W 51–47	−5.5	L−1.5	136.0	U98	80.8	74.4	63.1
Feb 18	DePaulAdjEM #113	H	L 57–69	−7.0	L−19.0	129.0	U126	88.0	106.6	64.7
Feb 15	ButlerAdjEM #87	A	W 63–56	−4.0	W+3.0	138.5	U119	94.1	83.6	67.0
Feb 11	ProvidenceAdjEM #81	H	W 87–80	−5.0	W+2.0	150.5	O167	127.1	116.8	68.5
Feb 7	CreightonAdjEM #92	A	L 68–69	+2.5	W+1.5	138.5	U137	102.0	103.5	66.7

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

New HampshireSeton Hall

Efficiency

100.1

108.3

111.6

99.8

68.3

66.9

—

Shooting

46.7%

47.6%

47.4%

48.3%

30.5%

65.1%

72.3%

28.5%

35.3%

Ball control & glass

16.5%

16.7%

15.8%

21.5%

25.7%

35.6%

26.9%

31.9%

9.1%

9.4%

11.3%

8.7%

Style

43.1%

26.8%

45.7%

49.1%

11.4%

13.1%

44.3%

51.6%

32.9%

39.5%

Roster

2.25

3.21

6'4.4"

6'4.2"

86.4%

87.4%

Offseason

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

New Hampshire

Returning minutes: 86.4%Returning production: 86.0%

Lost

Jack Graham 28.0 mpg, 11.2 ppg · transferred to Marist

Added

Nobody of note.

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

Returns 86% 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).

Seton Hall

Returning minutes: 87.4%Returning production: 88.5%

Lost

Tajuan Simpkins 25.1 mpg, 9.7 ppg · transferred to Mississippi St

Added

Patrick Suemnick no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 87% 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.