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-conferenceFirst Community Arena, Edwardsville, IL

N Illinois

Efficiency #341

2025-26: 9-21 · 4-14 conf

SIUE

Efficiency #229

2025-26: 19-13 · 12-9 conf

Wed, Nov 25 · TBD

63.1

win 20%

Projected

72.7

win 80%

No line posted yet.

Model: SIUE −9.6 · total 135.7 · 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: SIUE 66.4, N Illinois 68.5 → 66.5 possessions

−3.9

SIUE offense vs N Illinois defense

−1.4

N Illinois offense vs SIUE defense

−7.2

Projected total

135.7

Axis starts at 130 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

SIUE offense vs N Illinois defense

−1.4

N Illinois offense vs SIUE defense

+7.2

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

+3.8

SIUE by 9.6

9.6

N Illinois side ◂▸ SIUE 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 SIUE.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 66.5, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, N Illinois is the faster team (69.0, #149 of 365) and SIUE the slower (65.6, #314). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

66.5

per team, 40 min

Projected total

135.7

model

Projected team totals

63.1 / 72.7

N Illinois / SIUE

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

68.5#172

N Illinois

66.4#326

SIUE

How this game plays

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

AdvantageN Illinois

Where N Illinois struggles: shooting

N Illinois shoots an effective 47.6% (#324); SIUE allows 45.6% (#6). Expect about 46.2%, 5.0 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -7.2 points per 100 possessions.

TurnoversN Illinois

N Illinois turns it over

Projected turnover rate of 19.8% is worth roughly -3.7 points per 100 possessions against N Illinois's offense.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (N Illinois, SIUE'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 N Illinois at about 43.2% of its shots from three, SIUE about 35.7%.

AdvantageSIUE

Where SIUE scores: shooting

SIUE shoots an effective 49.5% (#266); N Illinois allows 55.6% (#342). Expect about 52.4%, 1.2 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +1.7 points per 100 possessions.

N Illinois has the ball

OffenseSIUE allowsvs D1 avg

47.6% #324

45.6% #6

-7.2 pt/100

21.8% #360

17.0% #148

-3.7 pt/100

30.3% #187

31.6% #235

+0.3 pt/100

38.3% #95

34.3% #159

+0.1 pt/100

65.7% #356

—

-0.6 pt/100

N Illinois net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -11.0 pts/100

SIUE has the ball

OffenseN Illinois allowsvs D1 avg

49.5% #266

55.6% #342

+1.7 pt/100

17.9% #268

16.3% #205

-0.4 pt/100

30.1% #195

30.0% #161

-0.2 pt/100

30.6% #294

38.3% #267

-0.0 pt/100

67.1% #343

—

-0.5 pt/100

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

Shot diet

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

N Illinoisoffense vsSIUEdefense

Share of shots by zone

N Illinois shoots

41.7

3.7

8.9

45.7

SIUE allows

35.7

6.8

18.9

38.6

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	51.9%#350	54.3%#45	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	31.3%#339	31.1%#20	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	32.8%#333	35.7%#99	38.0%
Three	30.9%#323	30.2%#10	33.7%

SIUEoffense vsN Illinoisdefense

Share of shots by zone

SIUE shoots

37.9

5.5

21.0

35.6

N Illinois allows

44.0

4.6

13.3

38.1

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	56.9%#241	62.9%#323	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	34.5%#294	33.9%#42	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	33.0%#329	40.6%#259	38.0%
Three	35.0%#123	36.3%#315	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

N Illinois

−3.5extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#315 of 365

Off reb %

30.3%

#187

Def reb %

70.0%

#161

Turnover %

21.8%

#360

Forced TO %

16.3%

#205

FT rate

38.3%

#95

FT allowed

38.3%

#267

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding0.0

Defensive rebounding+0.2

Ball security−3.4

Forcing turnovers−0.3

Foul shots drawn+0.8

Foul shots allowed−0.8

SIUE

−1.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#265 of 365

Off reb %

30.1%

#195

Def reb %

68.4%

#235

Turnover %

17.9%

#268

Forced TO %

17.0%

#148

FT rate

30.6%

#294

FT allowed

34.3%

#159

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.1

Defensive rebounding−0.3

Ball security−0.8

Forcing turnovers+0.2

Foul shots drawn−1.1

Foul shots allowed+0.2

SIUE has more extra scoring chances per game: −1.9 (#265 of 365) to N Illinois’s −3.5 (#315).

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

N Illinois2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
1	Makhai Valentine	G	So	6'3"	29-29	30.7	13.3	5.3	1.0	1.2	53.1%	35.8%	6.7	81.3%	24.0%
0	Gianni Cobb	G	So	6'0"	30-19	29.0	9.8	2.7	3.9	2.4	46.2%	26.8%	2.4	59.8%	24.3%
6	Taj Walters	G	Fr	6'5"	29-23	27.1	8.5	5.4	0.6	1.3	52.4%	38.3%	2.8	78.3%	18.8%
96	Gustav Winther	F	Fr	6'10"	30-21	21.2	8.1	4.2	0.9	1.4	64.5%	42.9%	0.2	54.7%	21.2%
3	Daemar Kelly	G	Jr	6'5"	29-15	20.6	5.6	3.1	1.2	1.2	35.2%	25.6%	2.8	76.7%	21.9%
7	Hassan Washington	F	Jr	6'8"	29-14	16.6	4.7	3.2	0.6	1.9	59.9%	43.8%	0.6	44.4%	20.6%
10	Jao Ituka	G	Jr	6'1"	15-0	14.1	6.9	2.5	0.9	0.3	48.9%	34.4%	4.1	81.0%	27.4%
2	Carlos Coronado	G	Fr	6'3"	20-1	10.3	3.9	0.8	0.6	1.0	41.2%	20.8%	1.2	68.9%	26.2%
8	Ladji Kante	F	Fr	6'7"	17-0	9.2	2.8	1.2	0.4	0.6	43.8%	20.0%	0.9	65.0%	21.2%
23	Jaylen Wharton	F	Jr	6'9"	18-0	7.0	2.0	1.7	0.1	0.3	45.2%	—	0.0	42.1%	20.2%
11	Isaiah Washington	G	Fr	6'5"	11-0	8.9	2.7	1.3	0.5	0.5	38.9%	11.1%	0.8	64.3%	22.3%
16	Isaiah Stewart	G	Fr	6'6"	13-0	5.5	1.2	0.9	0.3	0.2	60.0%	40.0%	0.4	66.7%	11.0%
4	JJ Taylor	F	Jr	6'8"	3-2	21.0	8.7	2.7	0.3	3.0	41.7%	11.1%	3.0	68.8%	29.3%
21	Max Laskey	G	Fr	6'5"	6-0	2.5	0.5	0.2	0.2	0.2	50.0%	33.3%	0.5	—	13.9%
15	Lataevyon Taylor	G	So	6'0"	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.

SIUE2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
5	Jack Campion	G	Sr	5'11"	32-32	27.5	8.2	3.7	5.2	2.3	43.8%	38.8%	2.1	72.8%	23.5%
33	Jo Valrie	F	Sr	6'5"	32-24	23.6	6.3	4.3	0.4	1.1	49.4%	37.3%	2.3	68.9%	18.4%
4	Darrion Baker	F	So	6'8"	32-18	20.4	7.3	4.1	0.7	1.3	58.5%	45.3%	2.3	64.7%	22.0%
9	Tyler King	G	Jr	6'4"	30-17	21.1	9.9	2.5	1.0	0.7	53.5%	36.2%	3.9	60.7%	28.2%
1	Jordan Pickett	G	Jr	6'3"	31-15	19.9	5.3	3.0	1.3	0.9	41.3%	31.1%	2.9	72.2%	20.6%
24	Kyle Thomas	F	Sr	6'10"	27-4	19.1	6.7	3.9	0.4	0.9	48.4%	33.3%	1.2	82.5%	22.7%
0	Ring Malith	G	Sr	6'9"	14-14	29.7	17.0	5.4	1.5	1.8	54.4%	32.9%	5.0	73.9%	32.2%
2	CJ Hall	G	Sr	6'2"	29-0	13.1	4.7	1.8	1.7	0.9	42.4%	33.3%	1.6	65.0%	28.1%
21	Myles Thompson	F	Sr	6'7"	8-8	28.6	10.8	6.1	1.4	2.0	47.9%	21.4%	1.8	54.3%	26.5%
7	Darius Robinson Jr.	G	Sr	6'1"	22-0	9.6	3.4	0.8	0.8	0.5	44.0%	29.2%	2.2	64.3%	25.8%
17	Corentin Efono	G	Fr	6'4"	19-0	9.4	1.3	1.2	0.8	0.6	55.3%	20.0%	0.3	66.7%	10.8%
8	Harrison Alexander	G	So	6'5"	18-0	8.2	3.5	0.8	0.3	0.4	57.7%	27.6%	1.6	60.0%	24.9%
20	Iwo Baganc	F	Fr	6'8"	9-0	5.2	2.8	1.1	0.1	0.2	71.4%	0.0%	0.3	100.0%	20.9%
11	Dehrio McCaskill	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.

N Illinois2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
1	Makhai Valentine	G	So	6'3"	29-29	30.7	13.3	5.3	1.0	1.2	53.1%	35.8%	6.7	81.3%	24.0%
0	Gianni Cobb	G	So	6'0"	30-19	29.0	9.8	2.7	3.9	2.4	46.2%	26.8%	2.4	59.8%	24.3%
6	Taj Walters	G	Fr	6'5"	29-23	27.1	8.5	5.4	0.6	1.3	52.4%	38.3%	2.8	78.3%	18.8%
96	Gustav Winther	F	Fr	6'10"	30-21	21.2	8.1	4.2	0.9	1.4	64.5%	42.9%	0.2	54.7%	21.2%
3	Daemar Kelly	G	Jr	6'5"	29-15	20.6	5.6	3.1	1.2	1.2	35.2%	25.6%	2.8	76.7%	21.9%
7	Hassan Washington	F	Jr	6'8"	29-14	16.6	4.7	3.2	0.6	1.9	59.9%	43.8%	0.6	44.4%	20.6%
10	Jao Ituka	G	Jr	6'1"	15-0	14.1	6.9	2.5	0.9	0.3	48.9%	34.4%	4.1	81.0%	27.4%
2	Carlos Coronado	G	Fr	6'3"	20-1	10.3	3.9	0.8	0.6	1.0	41.2%	20.8%	1.2	68.9%	26.2%
8	Ladji Kante	F	Fr	6'7"	17-0	9.2	2.8	1.2	0.4	0.6	43.8%	20.0%	0.9	65.0%	21.2%
23	Jaylen Wharton	F	Jr	6'9"	18-0	7.0	2.0	1.7	0.1	0.3	45.2%	—	0.0	42.1%	20.2%
11	Isaiah Washington	G	Fr	6'5"	11-0	8.9	2.7	1.3	0.5	0.5	38.9%	11.1%	0.8	64.3%	22.3%
16	Isaiah Stewart	G	Fr	6'6"	13-0	5.5	1.2	0.9	0.3	0.2	60.0%	40.0%	0.4	66.7%	11.0%
4	JJ Taylor	F	Jr	6'8"	3-2	21.0	8.7	2.7	0.3	3.0	41.7%	11.1%	3.0	68.8%	29.3%
21	Max Laskey	G	Fr	6'5"	6-0	2.5	0.5	0.2	0.2	0.2	50.0%	33.3%	0.5	—	13.9%
15	Lataevyon Taylor	G	So	6'0"	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

N Illinois

Against the spread

Season

13-15

Home

3-8

Road

10-7

Last 10

3-7

avg cover −10.6

Missed the spread 3 straightCovered 3 of 9 as an underdogCovered 1 of 4 with a line of 10+

Over / under

Season

8-20

Home

4-7

Road

4-13

Last 10

2-8

avg vs total −4.7

Under in the last gameOver in 2 of 9 as an underdogOver in 1 of 4 with a line of 10+

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 6	AkronAdjEM #48	A	L 55–94	+23.5	L−15.5	156.0	U149	79.5	135.8	69.2
Mar 3	Kent StateAdjEM #157	H	L 76–102	+10.0	L−16.0	149.5	O178	100.2	134.5	75.9
Feb 28	Ball StateAdjEM #295	H	L 43–79	−1.5	L−37.5	133.5	U122	68.4	125.7	62.8
Feb 24	ToledoAdjEM #115	A	L 69–79	+12.5	W+2.5	150.0	U148	104.3	119.5	66.1
Feb 21	OhioAdjEM #233	H	L 66–74	+5.5	L−2.5	150.0	U140	102.2	114.6	64.6
Feb 17	BuffaloAdjEM #186	A	W 72–70	+8.5	W+10.5	147.5	U142	108.1	105.1	66.6
Feb 14	C MichiganAdjEM #283	A	L 46–88	+4.5	L−37.5	146.0	U134	67.4	128.9	68.3
Feb 11	Bowling GreenAdjEM #114	H	L 52–68	+7.5	L−8.5	145.0	U120	74.6	97.6	69.7
Feb 7	Georgia StAdjEM #310	A	W 75–74	+4.5	W+5.5	142.0	O149	104.8	103.4	71.6
Jan 31	#24Miami OHAdjEM #66	A	L 61–85	+17.0	L−7.0	155.5	U146	83.2	116.0	73.3

SIUE

Against the spread

Season

15-14

Home

5-7

Road

9-6

Last 10

6-4

avg cover +3.0

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 5 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 5 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

11-18

Home

4-8

Road

5-10

Last 10

3-7

avg vs total −3.5

Over in the last gameOver in 1 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 4	E IllinoisAdjEM #317	N	L 71–77 OT	−4.5	L−10.5	128.0	O148	102.8	111.5	69.0
Feb 28	E IllinoisAdjEM #317	H	W 77–50	−6.0	W+21.0	130.0	U127	127.9	83.0	60.2
Feb 26	W IllinoisAdjEM #362	H	W 67–47	−14.0	W+6.0	135.5	U114	99.6	69.8	67.3
Feb 21	Tennessee StAdjEM #155	A	L 53–80	+4.5	L−22.5	143.5	U133	83.2	125.6	63.7
Feb 19	Tennessee TechAdjEM #298	A	L 52–62	−2.0	L−12.0	135.0	U114	77.1	92.0	67.4
Feb 14	UT MartinAdjEM #182	H	L 76–81	+1.5	L−3.5	130.0	O157	112.3	119.7	67.7
Feb 12	SE MissouriAdjEM #209	H	W 74–56	+1.0	W+19.0	137.5	U130	112.8	85.4	65.6
Feb 7	Little RockAdjEM #300	A	W 71–61	+1.5	W+11.5	133.0	U132	105.3	90.5	67.4
Feb 3	LindenwoodAdjEM #244	A	W 78–72	+4.5	W+10.5	140.5	O150	106.8	98.6	73.0
Jan 31	S IndianaAdjEM #333	A	W 58–46	−2.0	W+10.0	130.5	U104	96.1	76.2	60.4

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

N IllinoisSIUE

Efficiency

100.3

103.0

111.9

105.9

68.5

66.4

—

Shooting

47.6%

49.5%

48.5%

47.8%

30.9%

35.0%

65.7%

67.1%

38.3%

30.6%

Ball control & glass

21.8%

17.9%

16.3%

17.0%

30.3%

30.1%

30.0%

31.6%

11.7%

10.6%

14.5%

8.9%

Style

45.0%

36.2%

41.5%

42.6%

12.7%

12.1%

51.8%

50.9%

31.5%

33.4%

Roster

1.91

3.38

6'4.7"

6'4.6"

86.8%

87.8%

Offseason

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

N Illinois

Returning minutes: 86.8%Returning production: 90.1%

Lost

Dylan Ducommun 26.5 mpg, 9.3 ppg · transferred to Buffalo

Added

Lataevyon Taylor 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).

SIUE

Returning minutes: 87.8%Returning production: 82.7%

Lost

Arnas Sakenis 24.5 mpg, 8.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Dehrio McCaskill no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 88% 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.