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.
Conference gameGallagher Center, Niagara Falls, NY
Mount St Marys
Efficiency #265
2025-26: 15-17 · 11-10 conf
@
Niagara
Efficiency #337
2025-26: 8-22 · 5-15 conf
Fri, Dec 4 · TBD
68.2
win 50%
Projected
68.2
win 50%
No line posted yet.
Model: PK · total 136.5 · 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: Niagara 65.0, Mount St Marys 68.5 → 65.2 possessions
−6.8
Niagara offense vs Mount St Marys defense
−4.4
Mount St Marys offense vs Niagara defense
−0.6
Projected total
136.5
Axis starts at 130 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Niagara offense vs Mount St Marys defense
−4.4
Mount St Marys offense vs Niagara defense
+0.6
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.8
Even game
0.0
Mount St Marys side ◂▸ Niagara side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 136.4 against a projected 136.5. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Niagara.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 65.2, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Mount St Marys is the faster team (67.7, #214 of 365) and Niagara the slower (63.1, #363). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
65.2
per team, 40 min
Projected total
136.5
model
Projected team totals
68.2 / 68.2
Mount St Marys / Niagara
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
68.5#164
Mount St Marys
65.0#364
Niagara
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetPace
Half-court grind
Niagara averages 63.1 possessions per 40, Mount St Marys 67.7. 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 64 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
AdvantageMount St Marys
Where Mount St Marys struggles: ball control
Mount St Marys turns it over on 22.4% of possessions (#364); Niagara forces turnovers on 16.6% of opponent possessions (#179). Expect about 19.9%, 3.1 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.8 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageNiagara
Where Niagara struggles: shooting
Niagara shoots an effective 50.5% (#214); Mount St Marys allows 47.2% (#23). Expect about 48.7%, 2.5 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.6 points per 100 possessions.
GlassNiagara
Niagara gets out-rebounded
Projected offensive rebound rate of 25.8% is worth roughly -2.8 points per 100 possessions against Niagara's offense.
GlassMount St Marys
Mount St Marys owns the glass
Projected offensive rebound rate of 33.0% is worth roughly +1.6 points per 100 possessions for Mount St Marys's offense.
Mount St Marys has the ball
OffenseNiagara allowsvs D1 avg
50.6% #208
52.8% #260
+0.6 pt/100
22.4% #364
16.6% #179
-3.8 pt/100
32.3% #115
32.9% #297
+1.6 pt/100
33.3% #230
33.8% #144
-0.2 pt/100
67.4% #337
—
-0.4 pt/100
Mount St Marys net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -2.3 pts/100
Niagara has the ball
OffenseMount St Marys allowsvs D1 avg
50.5% #214
47.2% #23
-3.6 pt/100
18.9% #319
15.3% #261
-0.4 pt/100
24.8% #344
29.1% #114
-2.8 pt/100
26.6% #353
37.3% #247
-0.3 pt/100
72.2% #203
—
-0.0 pt/100
Niagara net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -7.1 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersMount St Marysoffense vsNiagaradefense
Share of shots by zone
Mount St Marys shoots
42.3
4.1
10.9
42.8
Niagara allows
39.2
4.4
17.0
39.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 58.2%#188 | 58.7%#176 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 40.6%#158 | 41.5%#225 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 29.2%#359 | 40.6%#260 | 38.0% |
| Three | 32.7%#244 | 35.3%#268 | 33.7% |
Niagaraoffense vsMount St Marysdefense
Share of shots by zone
Niagara shoots
43.4
3.5
12.3
40.8
Mount St Marys allows
32.9
3.1
19.0
45.0
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 54.1%#320 | 49.4%#4 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 31.3%#339 | 38.5%#145 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 40.0%#109 | 38.1%#162 | 38.0% |
| Three | 33.7%#188 | 32.3%#81 | 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 numbersMount St Marys
−4.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#343 of 365
Off reb %
32.3%
#115
Def reb %
70.9%
#114
Turnover %
22.4%
#364
Forced TO %
15.3%
#261
FT rate
33.3%
#230
FT allowed
37.3%
#247
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.6
Defensive rebounding+0.5
Ball security−3.8
Forcing turnovers−0.9
Foul shots drawn−0.4
Foul shots allowed−0.5
Niagara
−5.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#356 of 365
Off reb %
24.8%
#344
Def reb %
67.1%
#297
Turnover %
18.9%
#319
Forced TO %
16.6%
#179
FT rate
26.6%
#353
FT allowed
33.8%
#144
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.8
Defensive rebounding−0.7
Ball security−1.5
Forcing turnovers−0.1
Foul shots drawn−2.2
Foul shots allowed+0.4
Mount St Marys has more extra scoring chances per game: −4.7 (#343 of 365) to Niagara’s −5.9 (#356).
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
Mount St Marys2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | Redd Thompson Jr.at Longwood | G | Jr | 5'11" | 32-1 | 22.1 | 10.3 | 1.6 | 2.0 | 1.7 | 49.2% | 32.9% | 4.6 | 88.0% | 28.9% | |
| 4 | Mason So | G | Sr | 6'2" | 31-16 | 18.2 | 3.9 | 2.4 | 2.3 | 1.9 | 51.5% | 35.5% | 2.0 | 78.9% | 17.4% | |
| 9 | Abdou Khadre Kebe | G | Jr | 6'7" | 22-13 | 21.9 | 7.7 | 5.6 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 47.3% | 27.8% | 3.6 | 69.0% | 24.6% | |
| 30 | Anthony Arrington Jr. | G | Sr | 6'3" | 22-2 | 19.0 | 5.7 | 2.1 | 1.1 | 1.7 | 37.8% | 21.7% | 2.7 | 50.0% | 28.3% | |
| 1 | Anastasios Rozakeas | G | Jr | 6'8" | 24-8 | 14.4 | 3.8 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 45.7% | 32.9% | 2.9 | 83.3% | 18.4% | |
| 7 | Wilguens Jr. Exacteat Drake | F | Sr | 6'6" | 18-13 | 19.4 | 7.3 | 4.5 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 45.2% | 22.2% | 2.5 | 68.3% | 27.3% | |
| 23 | Yakhya Diop | F | So | 7'0" | 31-0 | 8.8 | 1.8 | 2.8 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 50.0% | — | 0.0 | 64.7% | 16.1% | |
| 10 | Cade Ornessat Gonzaga | G | So | 6'4" | 8-0 | 2.5 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 50.0% | — | 0.0 | 20.0% | 20.2% | |
| 5 | Noah Rogers | G | Jr | 5'11" | 3-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | — | 10.1% | |
| 6 | Jaxon Hartman | G | Jr | 6'3" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 16 | Crue Gard | F | Fr | 6'11" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 3 | Julien Smith | G | Fr | 6'0" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 21 | Liam Joyce | F | Sr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 22 | Miquel Llompart | G | Jr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 12 | Noah Limol | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Ryan Brzezanski | 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.
Transfers in: Wilguens Jr. Exacte (from Drake), Cade Orness (from Gonzaga), Redd Thompson Jr. (from Longwood)
Niagara2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | Cole Farrellat Long Beach St | G | Sr | 6'5" | 32-32 | 20.7 | 6.4 | 2.2 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 43.7% | 27.5% | 1.6 | 65.4% | 21.6% | |
| 2 | Trenton Walters | G | Sr | 5'9" | 25-7 | 22.4 | 7.2 | 1.6 | 2.7 | 1.5 | 40.8% | 35.4% | 3.2 | 81.2% | 25.2% | |
| 4 | Logan Woodsat Wright St | G | Sr | 6'5" | 35-8 | 18.4 | 5.3 | 1.9 | 1.5 | 0.9 | 54.0% | 33.3% | 2.3 | 66.7% | 17.7% | |
| 8 | Bastien Rieberat Fresno St | G | Jr | 6'2" | 32-7 | 16.4 | 4.0 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 48.4% | 34.8% | 1.4 | 74.5% | 17.0% | |
| 77 | Tae Blackshearat Youngstown St | G | Sr | 6'6" | 30-0 | 14.6 | 6.8 | 1.6 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 50.0% | 32.8% | 4.0 | 76.2% | 29.7% | |
| 1 | Vukasin Todorovicat Green Bay | F | So | 6'8" | 20-0 | 9.8 | 2.9 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 42.5% | 14.3% | 0.3 | 60.0% | 24.5% | |
| 9 | Gael Dalmau | G | So | 6'6" | 8-0 | 6.8 | 1.8 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 41.2% | 26.7% | 1.9 | — | 23.8% | |
| 12 | Brian Angeletti | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 24 | Daniel Emokhare | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 5 | Fidel Rotta | F | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 7 | Jackson Redmond | G | Jr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 6 | Noah Slingerland | F | Sr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 0 | Ruey Ruey | G | Fr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 13 | Samuele Miccoli | G | So | 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.
Transfers in: Tae Blackshear (from Youngstown St), Cole Farrell (from Long Beach St), Bastien Rieber (from Fresno St), Vukasin Todorovic (from Green Bay), Logan Woods (from Wright St)
Mount St Marys2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | Redd Thompson Jr.at Longwood | G | Jr | 5'11" | 32-1 | 22.1 | 10.3 | 1.6 | 2.0 | 1.7 | 49.2% | 32.9% | 4.6 | 88.0% | 28.9% | |
| 4 | Mason So | G | Sr | 6'2" | 31-16 | 18.2 | 3.9 | 2.4 | 2.3 | 1.9 | 51.5% | 35.5% | 2.0 | 78.9% | 17.4% | |
| 9 | Abdou Khadre Kebe | G | Jr | 6'7" | 22-13 | 21.9 | 7.7 | 5.6 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 47.3% | 27.8% | 3.6 | 69.0% | 24.6% | |
| 30 | Anthony Arrington Jr. | G | Sr | 6'3" | 22-2 | 19.0 | 5.7 | 2.1 | 1.1 | 1.7 | 37.8% | 21.7% | 2.7 | 50.0% | 28.3% | |
| 1 | Anastasios Rozakeas | G | Jr | 6'8" | 24-8 | 14.4 | 3.8 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 45.7% | 32.9% | 2.9 | 83.3% | 18.4% | |
| 7 | Wilguens Jr. Exacteat Drake | F | Sr | 6'6" | 18-13 | 19.4 | 7.3 | 4.5 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 45.2% | 22.2% | 2.5 | 68.3% | 27.3% | |
| 23 | Yakhya Diop | F | So | 7'0" | 31-0 | 8.8 | 1.8 | 2.8 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 50.0% | — | 0.0 | 64.7% | 16.1% | |
| 10 | Cade Ornessat Gonzaga | G | So | 6'4" | 8-0 | 2.5 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 50.0% | — | 0.0 | 20.0% | 20.2% | |
| 5 | Noah Rogers | G | Jr | 5'11" | 3-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | — | 10.1% | |
| 6 | Jaxon Hartman | G | Jr | 6'3" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 16 | Crue Gard | F | Fr | 6'11" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 3 | Julien Smith | G | Fr | 6'0" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 21 | Liam Joyce | F | Sr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 22 | Miquel Llompart | G | Jr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 12 | Noah Limol | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Ryan Brzezanski | 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.
Transfers in: Wilguens Jr. Exacte (from Drake), Cade Orness (from Gonzaga), Redd Thompson Jr. (from Longwood)
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26Mount St Marys
Against the spread
Season
17-13-1
Home
7-5
Road
10-7-1
Last 10
6-4
avg cover +3.6
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 4 of 4 as a favoriteCovered 2 of 6 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
10-21
Home
4-8
Road
6-12
Last 10
3-7
avg vs total −6.7
Under 4 straightOver in 1 of 4 as a favoriteOver in 2 of 6 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7 | Siena | N | L 58–63 | +3.0 | L−2.0 | 135.0 | U121 | 96.1 | 104.4 | 60.3 |
| Mar 1 | Fairfield | A | W 69–47 | +3.5 | W+25.5 | 146.5 | U116 | 103.2 | 70.3 | 66.8 |
| Feb 27 | Sacred Heart | A | L 69–77 | +2.5 | L−5.5 | 150.5 | U146 | 104.7 | 116.9 | 65.9 |
| Feb 22 | Canisius | H | W 68–47 | −7.5 | W+13.5 | 137.5 | U115 | 108.5 | 75.0 | 62.6 |
| Feb 20 | Niagara | H | W 76–63 | −7.5 | W+5.5 | 131.0 | O139 | 108.6 | 90.1 | 69.9 |
| Feb 13 | Rider | A | W 65–55 | −5.0 | W+5.0 | 138.5 | U120 | 100.1 | 84.7 | 64.9 |
| Feb 7 | Iona | A | W 83–76 | +4.0 | W+11.0 | 141.0 | O159 | 131.1 | 120.0 | 63.3 |
| Feb 5 | Merrimack | H | L 70–87 | +2.0 | L−15.0 | 135.0 | O157 | 98.8 | 122.8 | 70.8 |
| Feb 1 | Manhattan | H | W 72–65 | −6.5 | W+0.5 | 146.5 | U137 | 110.1 | 99.4 | 65.4 |
| Jan 30 | Saint Peter's | A | L 58–66 | +6.0 | L−2.0 | 139.5 | U124 | 94.3 | 107.3 | 61.5 |
Niagara
Against the spread
Season
13-16
Home
7-5
Road
6-10
Last 10
6-4
avg cover +2.4
Covered 2 straightCovered 5 of 8 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
14-15
Home
6-6
Road
7-9
Last 10
6-4
avg vs total +2.7
Over 2 straightOver in 6 of 8 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 1 | Merrimack | H | L 66–73 | +7.5 | W+0.5 | 127.0 | O139 | 108.9 | 120.5 | 60.6 |
| Feb 27 | Quinnipiac | H | W 78–76 OT | +8.5 | W+10.5 | 136.0 | O154 | 113.8 | 110.9 | 68.6 |
| Feb 22 | Rider | A | L 62–67 | −2.0 | L−7.0 | 130.5 | U129 | 95.5 | 103.3 | 64.9 |
| Feb 20 | Mount St Marys | A | L 63–76 | +7.5 | L−5.5 | 131.0 | O139 | 90.1 | 108.6 | 69.9 |
| Feb 15 | Iona | H | W 70–68 | +4.5 | W+6.5 | 132.0 | O138 | 124.8 | 121.2 | 56.1 |
| Feb 13 | Manhattan | H | L 69–76 | +2.0 | L−5.0 | 135.0 | O145 | 108.9 | 119.9 | 63.4 |
| Feb 7 | Quinnipiac | A | L 55–56 | +13.5 | W+12.5 | 137.5 | U111 | 92.9 | 94.6 | 59.2 |
| Feb 3 | Canisius | H | W 65–56 | −2.0 | W+7.0 | 127.0 | U121 | 113.0 | 97.3 | 57.5 |
| Feb 1 | Marist | H | L 46–58 | +9.5 | L−2.5 | 130.0 | U104 | 75.2 | 94.8 | 61.2 |
| Jan 30 | Siena | H | L 79–82 | +10.0 | W+7.0 | 128.0 | O161 | 125.3 | 130.1 | 63.0 |
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 homeMount St MarysNiagara
Efficiency
102.5
102.5
107.8
113.6
68.5
65.0
—
—
Shooting
50.6%
50.5%
51.8%
50.5%
32.7%
33.7%
67.4%
72.2%
33.3%
26.6%
Ball control & glass
22.4%
18.9%
15.3%
16.6%
32.3%
24.8%
29.1%
32.9%
12.8%
10.4%
8.5%
9.7%
Style
42.6%
40.5%
44.8%
45.0%
12.0%
10.1%
55.2%
60.0%
31.3%
37.6%
Roster
3.33
3.67
6'4.2"
6'3.4"
32.5%
10.2%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputMount St Marys
Returning minutes: 32.5%Returning production: 25.0%
Lost
- Xavier Lipscomb 31.7 mpg, 9.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Arlandus Keyes 27.7 mpg, 11.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Luke McEldon 24.0 mpg, 11.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Trey Deveaux 23.4 mpg, 9.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Justin Amadi 19.8 mpg, 6.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Patrick Haigh 6.5 mpg, 2.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Redd Thompson Jr. from Longwood · 22.1 mpg, 10.3 ppg last season
- Wilguens Jr. Exacte from Drake · 10.3 mpg, 3.9 ppg last season
- Cade Orness from Gonzaga · 0.6 mpg, 0.1 ppg last season
- Liam Joyce no D1 minutes last season
- Crue Gard no D1 minutes last season
- Miquel Llompart no D1 minutes last season
Returns 33% of last season's minutes; lost 5 of its top 5. Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
Niagara
Returning minutes: 10.2%Returning production: 8.3%
Lost
- Reggie Prudhomme 26.4 mpg, 6.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Justin Hawkins 26.2 mpg, 8.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Justin Page 21.1 mpg, 8.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Vice Zanki 20.3 mpg, 7.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Josiah Sabino 19.6 mpg, 6.6 ppg · transferred to Manhattan
- Will Shortt 19.5 mpg, 6.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Cole Farrell from Long Beach St · 20.7 mpg, 6.4 ppg last season
- Logan Woods from Wright St · 18.4 mpg, 5.3 ppg last season
- Bastien Rieber from Fresno St · 16.4 mpg, 4.0 ppg last season
- Tae Blackshear from Youngstown St · 13.7 mpg, 6.3 ppg last season
- Vukasin Todorovic from Green Bay · 5.9 mpg, 1.7 ppg last season
- Brian Angeletti no D1 minutes last season
Returns 10% of last season's minutes; lost 5 of its top 5 (1 transferred). Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
Head-to-head
this season and last| Date | Season | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Fri, Feb 20 | 2025-26 | Niagara 63 – 76 Mount St Marys |
| Mon, Jan 19 | 2025-26 | Mount St Marys 68 – 58 Niagara |
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.