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-conferenceSchar Center, Elon, NC
Chattanooga
Efficiency #289
2025-26: 13-19 · 7-12 conf
@
Elon
Efficiency #228
2025-26: 14-18 · 6-13 conf
Fri, Nov 13 · TBD
73.3
win 29%
Projected
79.8
win 71%
No line posted yet.
Model: ELON −6.5 · total 153.1 · 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: Elon 68.0, Chattanooga 68.1 → 67.8 possessions
−1.2
Elon offense vs Chattanooga defense
+4.4
Chattanooga offense vs Elon defense
+1.8
Projected total
153.1
Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Elon offense vs Chattanooga defense
+4.4
Chattanooga offense vs Elon defense
−1.8
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.9
Elon by 6.5
6.5
Chattanooga side ◂▸ Elon side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 153.2 against a projected 153.1. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Elon.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 67.8, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Elon is the faster team (67.9, #205 of 365) and Chattanooga the slower (67.6, #218). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
67.8
per team, 40 min
Projected total
153.1
model
Projected team totals
73.3 / 79.8
Chattanooga / Elon
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
68.1#204
Chattanooga
68.0#209
Elon
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageChattanooga
Where Chattanooga scores: shooting
Chattanooga shoots an effective 54.2% (#60); Elon allows 54.0% (#300). Expect about 54.3%, 3.1 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +4.3 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageElon
Where Elon scores: ball control
Elon turns it over on 15.9% of possessions (#134); Chattanooga forces turnovers on 13.2% of opponent possessions (#350). Expect about 14.0%, 2.8 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.4 points per 100 possessions.
ClashChattanooga
Style match: 3-point volume
Chattanooga takes 49.2% of its shots from three; Elon lets opponents take 44.5% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 50.5% — both habits push the same way.
GlassChattanooga
Chattanooga gets out-rebounded
Projected offensive rebound rate of 25.9% is worth roughly -2.8 points per 100 possessions against Chattanooga's offense.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (Elon'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 Chattanooga at about 50.5% of its shots from three, Elon about 45.5%.
TurnoversChattanooga
Chattanooga protects the ball
Projected turnover rate of 15.2% is worth roughly +1.9 points per 100 possessions for Chattanooga's offense.
Chattanooga has the ball
OffenseElon allowsvs D1 avg
54.2% #60
54.0% #300
+4.3 pt/100
14.4% #38
16.4% #193
+1.9 pt/100
21.8% #358
33.5% #307
-2.8 pt/100
29.7% #319
34.6% #169
-0.4 pt/100
77.4% #26
—
+0.4 pt/100
Chattanooga net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +3.6 pts/100
Elon has the ball
OffenseChattanooga allowsvs D1 avg
52.2% #137
51.7% #195
+1.1 pt/100
15.9% #134
13.2% #350
+3.4 pt/100
32.2% #116
31.7% #240
+1.2 pt/100
33.5% #222
42.6% #335
+0.5 pt/100
71.4% #225
—
-0.1 pt/100
Elon net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +6.0 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersChattanoogaoffense vsElondefense
Share of shots by zone
Chattanooga shoots
28.2
6.1
16.3
49.4
Elon allows
35.8
5.7
14.1
44.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 61.8%#78 | 61.8%#297 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 52.6%#4 | 42.7%#241 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 47.8%#2 | 35.1%#82 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.0%#116 | 36.5%#328 | 33.7% |
Elonoffense vsChattanoogadefense
Share of shots by zone
Elon shoots
44.9
3.1
9.2
42.8
Chattanooga allows
38.0
4.8
13.3
43.8
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 58.0%#198 | 58.7%#173 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 36.5%#256 | 42.9%#247 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 29.9%#354 | 34.6%#63 | 38.0% |
| Three | 34.3%#154 | 34.2%#195 | 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 numbersChattanooga
−7.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#359 of 365
Off reb %
21.8%
#358
Def reb %
68.3%
#240
Turnover %
14.4%
#38
Forced TO %
13.2%
#350
FT rate
29.7%
#319
FT allowed
42.6%
#335
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−2.8
Defensive rebounding−0.4
Ball security+1.6
Forcing turnovers−2.4
Foul shots drawn−1.4
Foul shots allowed−1.9
Elon
−0.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#186 of 365
Off reb %
32.2%
#116
Def reb %
66.5%
#307
Turnover %
15.9%
#134
Forced TO %
16.4%
#193
FT rate
33.5%
#222
FT allowed
34.6%
#169
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.6
Defensive rebounding−0.9
Ball security+0.6
Forcing turnovers−0.2
Foul shots drawn−0.4
Foul shots allowed+0.2
Elon has more extra scoring chances per game: −0.2 (#186 of 365) to Chattanooga’s −7.2 (#359).
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
Chattanooga2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Chattanooga'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | Jordan Frison | G | Jr | 6'0" | 32-29 | 29.9 | 16.4 | 3.3 | 4.0 | 1.7 | 62.9% | 45.5% | 3.5 | 82.0% | 28.0% | |
| 0 | Tate Darner | G | Fr | 6'4" | 30-18 | 27.5 | 9.9 | 4.4 | 1.7 | 1.1 | 56.9% | 37.9% | 4.7 | 73.6% | 20.2% | |
| 1 | Brennan Watkins | G | Sr | 6'0" | 32-22 | 25.2 | 10.2 | 2.8 | 1.8 | 1.2 | 62.3% | 45.6% | 4.7 | 88.6% | 20.8% | |
| 11 | Billy Smith | G | Sr | 6'7" | 32-16 | 23.0 | 8.4 | 2.8 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 50.4% | 34.0% | 5.9 | 69.2% | 23.5% | |
| 10 | Teddy Washington Jr. | G | Sr | 6'2" | 31-20 | 21.9 | 9.0 | 3.3 | 1.4 | 1.0 | 46.0% | 23.1% | 3.4 | 77.9% | 26.5% | |
| 34 | Makai Richards | C | Sr | 6'10" | 32-13 | 13.1 | 3.4 | 3.1 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 58.8% | 33.3% | 0.1 | 76.7% | 16.2% | |
| 21 | Collin Mulholland | F | So | 6'10" | 23-9 | 17.2 | 7.6 | 3.4 | 1.7 | 1.0 | 48.6% | 21.7% | 2.6 | 81.6% | 28.4% | |
| 3 | Jikari Johnson | G | Sr | 6'4" | 29-7 | 13.5 | 6.7 | 2.2 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 54.4% | 35.2% | 3.0 | 78.3% | 26.8% | |
| 55 | Parker Robison | G | So | 6'0" | 27-1 | 10.7 | 1.3 | 1.5 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 37.5% | 9.5% | 0.8 | 62.5% | 10.1% | |
| 13 | Houston Holland | G | So | 6'3" | 27-4 | 10.5 | 2.0 | 1.7 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 59.8% | 50.0% | 0.8 | 75.0% | 11.5% | |
| 30 | Josh Bowman | F | Fr | 6'9" | 23-8 | 12.0 | 3.2 | 2.5 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 50.8% | 22.2% | 0.4 | 42.9% | 18.7% | |
| 2 | Sebastian Hartmann | G | Jr | 6'6" | 7-6 | 22.4 | 7.0 | 5.0 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 60.0% | 43.5% | 3.3 | 70.0% | 18.1% | |
| 7 | Sean Cusano | G | Jr | 6'9" | 6-4 | 13.7 | 4.2 | 2.7 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 47.9% | 10.0% | 1.7 | 66.7% | 18.2% | |
| 23 | Latif Diouf | F | So | 6'9" | 5-3 | 14.4 | 4.8 | 2.6 | 1.8 | 0.8 | 64.7% | 40.0% | 1.0 | 50.0% | 18.2% | |
| 6 | Ryan Lopez | G | Jr | 5'8" | 5-0 | 5.6 | 3.4 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 62.5% | 50.0% | 2.0 | 50.0% | 30.1% | |
| 20 | Liam Vitters | G | So | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 4 | Zach Bleshoy | G | Fr | 6'4" | 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.
Elon2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Elon'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Chandler Cuthrell | F | Sr | 6'8" | 32-32 | 28.2 | 19.8 | 6.5 | 1.7 | 2.2 | 51.9% | 25.5% | 3.3 | 72.9% | 40.7% | |
| 11 | Randall Pettus II | G | Jr | 6'3" | 32-31 | 27.3 | 11.0 | 3.1 | 1.2 | 1.8 | 48.7% | 35.4% | 5.9 | 76.2% | 26.7% | |
| 0 | Bryson Cokley | G | So | 6'6" | 32-12 | 27.0 | 12.3 | 3.8 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 55.7% | 39.2% | 4.9 | 80.0% | 25.1% | |
| 12 | Isaac Harrell | F | Jr | 6'8" | 32-31 | 25.8 | 7.4 | 3.6 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 56.3% | 35.7% | 3.5 | 72.1% | 15.4% | |
| 3 | Ja'Juan Carr | G | Sr | 6'2" | 32-31 | 25.1 | 7.5 | 2.7 | 4.3 | 1.3 | 48.5% | 30.0% | 1.9 | 71.4% | 19.9% | |
| 6 | Kacper Klaczek | F | Sr | 6'8" | 24-22 | 28.0 | 11.4 | 6.0 | 2.8 | 1.8 | 61.0% | 44.9% | 2.9 | 64.2% | 23.1% | |
| 22 | Ned Hull | G | So | 6'3" | 32-0 | 17.9 | 4.5 | 1.8 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 53.2% | 35.8% | 3.0 | 86.7% | 15.7% | |
| 8 | DeMarco Johnson | G | Fr | 6'4" | 30-0 | 15.3 | 3.0 | 2.3 | 2.4 | 1.2 | 50.0% | 21.7% | 0.8 | 57.1% | 15.6% | |
| 5 | Caleb Middleton | C | So | 6'11" | 29-0 | 10.2 | 3.1 | 3.4 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 55.6% | — | 0.0 | 66.7% | 17.6% | |
| 33 | Bryson Spell | F | Sr | 6'9" | 23-1 | 6.9 | 1.3 | 0.9 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 36.4% | 0.0% | 0.4 | 83.3% | 17.4% | |
| 4 | Iker Garmendia | F | Fr | 6'9" | 15-0 | 4.5 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 25.0% | 20.0% | 0.7 | 64.3% | 26.5% | |
| 13 | Savion Taylor | G | Fr | 6'4" | 1-0 | 4.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 3.0 | — | 42.7% | |
| 25 | Alex Olander | F | So | 6'4" | 2-0 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 0.0% | |
| 14 | Alex Brabec | G | Fr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 10 | Austin Williams | G | Sr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Trey O'Neil | G | So | 6'1" | 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.
Chattanooga2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Chattanooga'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | Jordan Frison | G | Jr | 6'0" | 32-29 | 29.9 | 16.4 | 3.3 | 4.0 | 1.7 | 62.9% | 45.5% | 3.5 | 82.0% | 28.0% | |
| 0 | Tate Darner | G | Fr | 6'4" | 30-18 | 27.5 | 9.9 | 4.4 | 1.7 | 1.1 | 56.9% | 37.9% | 4.7 | 73.6% | 20.2% | |
| 1 | Brennan Watkins | G | Sr | 6'0" | 32-22 | 25.2 | 10.2 | 2.8 | 1.8 | 1.2 | 62.3% | 45.6% | 4.7 | 88.6% | 20.8% | |
| 11 | Billy Smith | G | Sr | 6'7" | 32-16 | 23.0 | 8.4 | 2.8 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 50.4% | 34.0% | 5.9 | 69.2% | 23.5% | |
| 10 | Teddy Washington Jr. | G | Sr | 6'2" | 31-20 | 21.9 | 9.0 | 3.3 | 1.4 | 1.0 | 46.0% | 23.1% | 3.4 | 77.9% | 26.5% | |
| 34 | Makai Richards | C | Sr | 6'10" | 32-13 | 13.1 | 3.4 | 3.1 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 58.8% | 33.3% | 0.1 | 76.7% | 16.2% | |
| 21 | Collin Mulholland | F | So | 6'10" | 23-9 | 17.2 | 7.6 | 3.4 | 1.7 | 1.0 | 48.6% | 21.7% | 2.6 | 81.6% | 28.4% | |
| 3 | Jikari Johnson | G | Sr | 6'4" | 29-7 | 13.5 | 6.7 | 2.2 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 54.4% | 35.2% | 3.0 | 78.3% | 26.8% | |
| 55 | Parker Robison | G | So | 6'0" | 27-1 | 10.7 | 1.3 | 1.5 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 37.5% | 9.5% | 0.8 | 62.5% | 10.1% | |
| 13 | Houston Holland | G | So | 6'3" | 27-4 | 10.5 | 2.0 | 1.7 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 59.8% | 50.0% | 0.8 | 75.0% | 11.5% | |
| 30 | Josh Bowman | F | Fr | 6'9" | 23-8 | 12.0 | 3.2 | 2.5 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 50.8% | 22.2% | 0.4 | 42.9% | 18.7% | |
| 2 | Sebastian Hartmann | G | Jr | 6'6" | 7-6 | 22.4 | 7.0 | 5.0 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 60.0% | 43.5% | 3.3 | 70.0% | 18.1% | |
| 7 | Sean Cusano | G | Jr | 6'9" | 6-4 | 13.7 | 4.2 | 2.7 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 47.9% | 10.0% | 1.7 | 66.7% | 18.2% | |
| 23 | Latif Diouf | F | So | 6'9" | 5-3 | 14.4 | 4.8 | 2.6 | 1.8 | 0.8 | 64.7% | 40.0% | 1.0 | 50.0% | 18.2% | |
| 6 | Ryan Lopez | G | Jr | 5'8" | 5-0 | 5.6 | 3.4 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 62.5% | 50.0% | 2.0 | 50.0% | 30.1% | |
| 20 | Liam Vitters | G | So | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 4 | Zach Bleshoy | G | Fr | 6'4" | 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 2025-26Chattanooga
Against the spread
Season
12-17
Home
4-8
Road
7-8
Last 10
4-6
avg cover −0.7
Missed the spread 3 straightCovered 1 of 6 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 4 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
16-13
Home
5-7
Road
9-6
Last 10
7-3
avg vs total +9.8
Over 6 straightOver in 6 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 1 of 4 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 6 | The Citadel | N | L 85–88 | −7.5 | L−10.5 | 147.5 | O173 | 133.9 | 138.7 | 63.5 |
| Feb 28 | VMI | H | W 86–79 | −11.5 | L−4.5 | 155.0 | O165 | 135.7 | 124.6 | 63.4 |
| Feb 26 | UNC Greensboro | H | L 80–85 | −3.5 | L−8.5 | 157.5 | O165 | 104.3 | 110.8 | 76.7 |
| Feb 21 | The Citadel | A | W 93–72 | −4.0 | W+17.0 | 144.0 | O165 | 128.9 | 99.8 | 72.1 |
| Feb 19 | Mercer | A | W 94–90 | +10.0 | W+14.0 | 151.5 | O184 | 144.7 | 138.6 | 65.0 |
| Feb 14 | W Carolina | H | L 76–81 | −2.0 | L−7.0 | 151.5 | O157 | 110.4 | 117.6 | 68.9 |
| Feb 11 | ETSU | A | L 61–73 | +10.0 | L−2.0 | 145.0 | U134 | 92.2 | 110.3 | 66.2 |
| Feb 7 | The Citadel | H | L 71–78 | −9.5 | L−16.5 | 141.0 | O149 | 104.4 | 114.7 | 68.0 |
| Feb 5 | Mercer | H | W 79–75 | +4.5 | W+8.5 | 155.0 | U154 | 109.5 | 104.0 | 72.2 |
| Feb 1 | Furman | A | L 70–75 | +7.5 | W+2.5 | 145.5 | U145 | 106.4 | 114.0 | 65.8 |
Elon
Against the spread
Season
11-19
Home
3-11
Road
8-7
Last 10
2-8
avg cover −7.7
Missed the spread 3 straightCovered 0 of 4 as a favoriteCovered 2 of 6 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
16-14
Home
9-5
Road
7-8
Last 10
3-7
avg vs total −6.3
Under 4 straightOver in 3 of 4 as a favoriteOver in 0 of 6 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7 | William & Mary | N | L 62–72 | +5.5 | L−4.5 | 163.5 | U134 | 91.6 | 106.4 | 67.7 |
| Mar 3 | UNC Wilmington | H | L 57–76 | +5.0 | L−14.0 | 145.5 | U133 | 85.2 | 113.6 | 66.9 |
| Feb 28 | Monmouth | A | L 57–73 | +3.5 | L−12.5 | 153.0 | U130 | 90.3 | 115.7 | 63.1 |
| Feb 26 | Towson | A | L 56–58 | +5.5 | W+3.5 | 144.0 | U114 | 90.9 | 94.1 | 61.6 |
| Feb 21 | NC A&T | H | L 82–102 | −8.0 | L−28.0 | 152.5 | O184 | 121.1 | 150.6 | 67.7 |
| Feb 14 | William & Mary | A | W 81–78 | +8.0 | W+11.0 | 165.5 | U159 | 113.8 | 109.6 | 71.2 |
| Feb 12 | UNC Wilmington | A | L 54–65 | +8.0 | L−3.0 | 149.5 | U119 | 89.7 | 108.0 | 60.2 |
| Feb 7 | Drexel | H | L 77–82 | −5.0 | L−10.0 | 138.0 | O159 | 113.9 | 121.3 | 67.6 |
| Feb 5 | Hampton | A | L 79–87 2OT | −1.5 | L−9.5 | 142.5 | O166 | 100.1 | 110.2 | 78.9 |
| Jan 31 | Stony Brook | H | L 68–72 | −5.5 | L−9.5 | 147.5 | U140 | 98.5 | 104.3 | 69.0 |
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 homeChattanoogaElon
Efficiency
106.9
109.8
113.5
112.7
68.1
68.0
—
—
Shooting
54.2%
52.2%
55.8%
52.8%
35.0%
34.3%
77.4%
71.4%
29.7%
33.5%
Ball control & glass
14.4%
15.9%
13.2%
16.4%
21.8%
32.2%
31.7%
33.5%
8.3%
9.4%
7.7%
11.2%
Style
49.2%
43.2%
36.2%
44.1%
12.7%
11.6%
55.6%
54.6%
39.4%
33.3%
Roster
2.97
2.96
6'3.9"
6'5.8"
—
—
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputChattanooga
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Chattanooga'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.)
Elon
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Elon'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.