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 gameWilliam R. Johnson Coliseum, Nacogdoches, TX

East Texas A&M

Efficiency #311

2025-26: 11-21 · 6-16 conf

SF Austin

Efficiency #73

2025-26: 28-6 · 21-3 conf

Sat, Dec 5 · TBD

64.9

win 12%

Projected

78.8

win 88%

No line posted yet.

Model: SFA −13.9 · total 143.7 · 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: SF Austin 67.3, East Texas A&M 69.0 → 68.0 possessions

−0.8

SF Austin offense vs East Texas A&M defense

+3.1

East Texas A&M offense vs SF Austin defense

−6.8

Projected total

143.7

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

SF Austin offense vs East Texas A&M defense

+3.1

East Texas A&M offense vs SF Austin defense

+6.8

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

+3.9

SF Austin by 13.9

13.9

East Texas A&M side ◂▸ SF Austin side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the margin steps add to +13.8 against +13.9. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help SF Austin.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 68.0, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, East Texas A&M is the faster team (68.5, #171 of 365) and SF Austin the slower (66.2, #285). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

68.0

per team, 40 min

Projected total

143.7

model

Projected team totals

64.9 / 78.8

East Texas A&M / SF Austin

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

69.0#123

East Texas A&M

67.3#268

SF Austin

How this game plays

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

AdvantageEast Texas A&M

Where East Texas A&M struggles: shooting

East Texas A&M shoots an effective 49.2% (#282); SF Austin allows 47.7% (#35). Expect about 48.3%, 3.0 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -4.3 points per 100 possessions.

TurnoversEast Texas A&M

East Texas A&M turns it over

Projected turnover rate of 18.7% is worth roughly -2.4 points per 100 possessions against East Texas A&M's offense.

GlassEast Texas A&M

East Texas A&M gets out-rebounded

Projected offensive rebound rate of 26.7% is worth roughly -2.3 points per 100 possessions against East Texas A&M's offense.

AdvantageSF Austin

Where SF Austin scores: the offensive glass

SF Austin rebounds 33.8% of its own misses (#74); East Texas A&M lets opponents grab 32.8% of their own misses (#288). Expect about 33.9%, 3.5 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.1 points per 100 possessions.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (SF Austin's defense, East Texas A&M'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 East Texas A&M at about 42.3% of its shots from three, SF Austin about 38.8%.

TurnoversSF Austin

SF Austin protects the ball

Projected turnover rate of 15.5% is worth roughly +1.6 points per 100 possessions for SF Austin's offense.

East Texas A&M has the ball

OffenseSF Austin allowsvs D1 avg

49.2% #282

47.7% #35

-4.3 pt/100

19.2% #330

17.6% #116

-2.4 pt/100

25.7% #328

29.5% #131

-2.3 pt/100

32.0% #257

31.1% #85

-0.5 pt/100

67.9% #328

—

-0.4 pt/100

East Texas A&M net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -9.8 pts/100

SF Austin has the ball

OffenseEast Texas A&M allowsvs D1 avg

51.7% #160

52.9% #261

+1.5 pt/100

14.3% #29

17.0% #153

+1.6 pt/100

33.8% #74

32.8% #288

+2.1 pt/100

30.1% #306

34.5% #165

-0.3 pt/100

68.6% #310

—

-0.3 pt/100

SF Austin net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +4.6 pts/100

Shot diet

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

East Texas A&Moffense vsSF Austindefense

Share of shots by zone

East Texas A&M shoots

36.0

6.1

12.5

45.4

SF Austin allows

40.2

7.1

17.2

35.5

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	57.9%#200	53.1%#24	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	39.3%#190	43.6%#260	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	32.8%#332	39.8%#234	38.0%
Three	31.3%#313	30.3%#11	33.7%

SF Austinoffense vsEast Texas A&Mdefense

Share of shots by zone

SF Austin shoots

35.4

6.4

18.7

39.5

East Texas A&M allows

43.6

6.1

12.6

37.7

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	57.0%#240	55.1%#62	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	43.1%#102	40.4%#197	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	40.5%#94	35.4%#85	38.0%
Three	35.8%#71	37.3%#347	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

East Texas A&M

−4.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#332 of 365

Off reb %

25.7%

#328

Def reb %

67.2%

#288

Turnover %

19.2%

#330

Forced TO %

17.0%

#153

FT rate

32.0%

#257

FT allowed

34.5%

#165

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−1.5

Defensive rebounding−0.7

Ball security−1.7

Forcing turnovers+0.2

Foul shots drawn−0.8

Foul shots allowed+0.2

SF Austin

+3.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#44 of 365

Off reb %

33.8%

#74

Def reb %

70.5%

#131

Turnover %

14.3%

#29

Forced TO %

17.6%

#116

FT rate

30.1%

#306

FT allowed

31.1%

#85

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+1.1

Defensive rebounding+0.4

Ball security+1.7

Forcing turnovers+0.6

Foul shots drawn−1.3

Foul shots allowed+1.1

SF Austin has more extra scoring chances per game: +3.6 (#44 of 365) to East Texas A&M’s −4.2 (#332).

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

East Texas A&M2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
25	Gianni Hunt	G	Sr	6'4"	32-32	30.9	10.8	4.2	4.9	2.4	46.5%	31.3%	4.0	76.4%	23.9%
0	Ronnie Harrison	F	Jr	6'8"	30-28	29.5	14.7	6.1	1.8	2.3	52.3%	29.6%	3.6	65.5%	31.1%
13	Noah Pagotto	F	Jr	6'8"	32-22	26.1	10.4	5.7	1.0	1.0	59.3%	37.3%	1.6	76.8%	21.0%
8	Damian Garcia	G	Sr	6'5"	32-24	26.0	10.5	3.3	2.2	1.6	49.8%	33.3%	5.0	57.1%	26.7%
10	Josh Taylor	F	Sr	6'8"	32-12	16.8	5.1	3.6	0.8	1.0	53.4%	31.0%	0.9	55.3%	19.5%
5	Tay Mosher	F	Sr	6'7"	27-12	16.6	4.7	2.1	1.1	0.4	50.4%	31.9%	3.5	60.0%	18.1%
2	Evan Phelps	G	Jr	6'0"	30-8	14.6	1.5	0.7	1.2	1.0	29.0%	20.5%	1.3	26.7%	13.9%
6	London Fields	G	Jr	6'5"	24-10	15.3	3.5	1.6	1.0	0.6	43.3%	25.4%	2.5	70.6%	16.0%
7	Michael Folarin	F	Sr	6'10"	20-4	13.4	5.2	3.9	0.6	1.1	52.2%	0.0%	0.1	63.5%	23.2%
30	Alex McCray	G	Jr	6'1"	20-2	10.6	1.9	1.3	1.4	1.0	41.2%	22.2%	0.9	81.8%	15.3%
20	Parker Whisenhunt	G	So	6'3"	4-0	3.8	0.8	0.5	0.0	0.5	33.3%	—	0.0	50.0%	20.9%
3	Mykol Sanchez-Vega	G	Sr	6'5"	2-0	6.0	1.5	0.5	0.5	0.5	25.0%	20.0%	2.5	—	28.3%
4	Chris Adlam	G	So	6'3"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
11	Kamren Robinson	G	Fr	6'0"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
12	Kollin Tolbert	G	Jr	6'2"	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.

SF Austin2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted SF Austin'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
5	Keon Thompson	G	Sr	6'1"	34-34	29.8	18.5	4.8	4.4	2.6	52.8%	32.1%	2.5	69.3%	38.3%
1	Chrishawn Christmas	G	Sr	6'5"	34-34	29.1	6.3	6.8	1.8	0.8	54.0%	0.0%	0.1	43.1%	13.9%
11	Lateef Patrick	G	Jr	—	34-34	28.5	15.2	3.1	1.7	1.4	47.1%	33.8%	6.3	81.3%	34.0%
2	Jerald Colonel	F	Sr	6'9"	34-34	25.1	5.0	7.3	1.3	0.7	50.4%	0.0%	0.0	56.4%	13.1%
6	Narit Chotikavanic	G	So	—	34-0	22.5	9.6	2.8	0.6	0.4	56.2%	39.4%	6.5	70.3%	23.3%
0	Kam Burton	G	Jr	6'3"	34-34	18.6	7.9	1.8	0.3	0.5	59.2%	42.5%	5.3	85.2%	22.4%
21	Ahamed Mohammed	G	Sr	—	34-0	15.8	4.4	1.7	1.5	0.8	42.5%	33.3%	1.9	75.0%	20.3%
17	Gediminas Alisas	F	So	—	34-0	14.0	4.9	2.4	1.2	0.8	63.2%	0.0%	0.0	67.6%	19.7%
4	Marcus Scurry	G	Fr	—	28-0	7.3	3.1	0.5	0.4	0.4	51.9%	35.6%	1.6	58.3%	26.8%
3	Christian Green	G	Jr	—	28-0	6.9	1.0	1.3	0.3	0.3	54.2%	—	0.0	33.3%	10.8%
12	Eltramon Smith Jr.	F	So	—	16-0	7.1	1.9	1.3	0.5	0.4	40.8%	13.0%	1.4	0.0%	23.8%
7	Tichyque Musaka	F	Jr	6'11"	8-0	3.8	1.6	1.9	0.1	0.1	60.0%	0.0%	0.1	20.0%	24.9%
9	Harris Dar	G	So	—	8-0	3.3	0.5	0.5	0.1	0.3	66.7%	—	0.0	—	10.9%
8	Bryceson Melvin	G	Fr	—	4-0	5.8	1.8	2.0	0.0	0.0	23.1%	0.0%	1.0	50.0%	32.3%
10	Yohan Gutierrez	F	Fr	—	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.

East Texas A&M2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
25	Gianni Hunt	G	Sr	6'4"	32-32	30.9	10.8	4.2	4.9	2.4	46.5%	31.3%	4.0	76.4%	23.9%
0	Ronnie Harrison	F	Jr	6'8"	30-28	29.5	14.7	6.1	1.8	2.3	52.3%	29.6%	3.6	65.5%	31.1%
13	Noah Pagotto	F	Jr	6'8"	32-22	26.1	10.4	5.7	1.0	1.0	59.3%	37.3%	1.6	76.8%	21.0%
8	Damian Garcia	G	Sr	6'5"	32-24	26.0	10.5	3.3	2.2	1.6	49.8%	33.3%	5.0	57.1%	26.7%
10	Josh Taylor	F	Sr	6'8"	32-12	16.8	5.1	3.6	0.8	1.0	53.4%	31.0%	0.9	55.3%	19.5%
5	Tay Mosher	F	Sr	6'7"	27-12	16.6	4.7	2.1	1.1	0.4	50.4%	31.9%	3.5	60.0%	18.1%
2	Evan Phelps	G	Jr	6'0"	30-8	14.6	1.5	0.7	1.2	1.0	29.0%	20.5%	1.3	26.7%	13.9%
6	London Fields	G	Jr	6'5"	24-10	15.3	3.5	1.6	1.0	0.6	43.3%	25.4%	2.5	70.6%	16.0%
7	Michael Folarin	F	Sr	6'10"	20-4	13.4	5.2	3.9	0.6	1.1	52.2%	0.0%	0.1	63.5%	23.2%
30	Alex McCray	G	Jr	6'1"	20-2	10.6	1.9	1.3	1.4	1.0	41.2%	22.2%	0.9	81.8%	15.3%
20	Parker Whisenhunt	G	So	6'3"	4-0	3.8	0.8	0.5	0.0	0.5	33.3%	—	0.0	50.0%	20.9%
3	Mykol Sanchez-Vega	G	Sr	6'5"	2-0	6.0	1.5	0.5	0.5	0.5	25.0%	20.0%	2.5	—	28.3%
4	Chris Adlam	G	So	6'3"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
11	Kamren Robinson	G	Fr	6'0"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
12	Kollin Tolbert	G	Jr	6'2"	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

East Texas A&M

Against the spread

Season

13-15

Home

4-8

Road

8-7

Last 10

5-5

avg cover −1.8

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 2 of 4 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 6 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

12-15-1

Home

4-8

Road

7-7-1

Last 10

4-6

avg vs total −2.6

Over in the last gameOver in 1 of 4 as a favoriteOver in 3 of 6 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 2	Texas A&M-CCAdjEM #181	A	L 71–84	+8.0	L−5.0	137.5	O155	105.6	124.9	67.2
Feb 28	UT Rio GrandeAdjEM #109	A	L 55–63	+10.0	W+2.0	147.5	U118	95.5	109.4	57.6
Feb 23	Hou ChristianAdjEM #297	H	L 68–69	−2.0	L−3.0	139.5	U137	106.1	107.6	64.1
Feb 21	Incarnate WordAdjEM #264	H	L 73–82	−4.0	L−13.0	146.5	O155	127.6	143.4	57.2
Feb 16	SE LouisianaAdjEM #296	H	W 70–53	−1.5	W+15.5	136.5	U123	103.3	78.2	67.7
Feb 14	McNeeseAdjEM #49	H	L 54–97	+13.5	L−29.5	142.5	O151	79.3	142.4	68.1
Feb 9	SF AustinAdjEM #73	A	L 70–74	+15.0	W+11.0	144.5	U144	104.7	110.7	66.8
Feb 7	N'Western StAdjEM #299	H	W 52–48	−2.0	W+2.0	141.5	U100	78.1	72.1	66.5
Feb 4	N'Western StAdjEM #299	A	W 74–68	+3.0	W+9.0	143.0	U142	117.1	107.6	63.2
Feb 2	LSU N OrleansAdjEM #221	H	L 85–94	+2.0	L−7.0	151.0	O179	108.5	120.0	78.3

SF Austin

Against the spread

Season

23-9

Home

10-4

Road

13-3

Last 10

5-5

avg cover −2.1

Covered the last gameCovered 3 of 7 as a favorite

Over / under

Season

13-18-1

Home

5-8-1

Road

7-9

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total −0.1

Over 2 straightOver in 3 of 7 as a favorite

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 17	TulsaAdjEM #46	A	L 84–89 OT	+6.5	W+1.5	150.5	O173	107.0	113.3	78.5
Mar 11	McNeeseAdjEM #49	N	L 59–76	+3.5	L−13.5	134.5	O135	92.4	119.0	63.9
Mar 10	Texas A&M-CCAdjEM #181	N	W 60–58	−6.0	L−4.0	134.5	U118	98.0	94.7	61.3
Mar 2	Incarnate WordAdjEM #264	A	W 76–68	−7.0	W+1.0	143.5	O144	126.2	113.0	60.2
Feb 28	Hou ChristianAdjEM #297	A	W 77–56	−8.5	W+12.5	137.5	U133	122.9	89.4	62.6
Feb 23	LSU N OrleansAdjEM #221	H	L 73–77	−11.5	L−15.5	152.0	U150	107.5	113.4	67.9
Feb 21	NichollsAdjEM #250	H	W 81–78	−12.0	L−9.0	148.5	O159	122.0	117.5	66.4
Feb 16	Texas A&M-CCAdjEM #181	A	W 78–68	−5.0	W+5.0	136.5	O146	116.4	101.5	67.0
Feb 14	UT Rio GrandeAdjEM #109	A	W 66–57	+2.5	W+11.5	143.5	U123	105.5	91.1	62.6
Feb 9	East Texas A&MAdjEM #311	H	W 74–70	−15.0	L−11.0	144.5	U144	110.7	104.7	66.8

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

East Texas A&MSF Austin

Efficiency

102.4

111.2

110.3

104.5

69.0

67.3

—

Shooting

49.2%

51.7%

51.2%

50.4%

31.3%

35.8%

67.9%

68.6%

32.0%

30.1%

Ball control & glass

19.2%

14.3%

17.0%

17.6%

25.7%

33.8%

32.8%

29.5%

10.7%

8.2%

10.7%

10.1%

Style

46.2%

39.8%

41.9%

41.1%

13.4%

9.6%

62.4%

48.5%

32.7%

34.7%

Roster

3.53

3.23

6'5.8"

6'4.5"

91.3%

—

Offseason

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

East Texas A&M

Returning minutes: 91.3%Returning production: 91.8%

Lost

Vinny Sigona 17.5 mpg, 7.1 ppg · transferred to Canisius

Added

Kollin Tolbert no D1 minutes last season
Kamren Robinson no D1 minutes last season
Chris Adlam no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 91% 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).

SF Austin

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted SF Austin'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 last

Date	Season	Result
Mon, Feb 9	2025-26	East Texas A&M 70 – 74 SF Austin
Mon, Dec 29	2025-26	SF Austin 75 – 48 East Texas A&M

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.