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

James Madison

Efficiency #206

2025-26: 18-15 · 10-10 conf

Elon

Efficiency #228

2025-26: 14-18 · 6-13 conf

Thu, Dec 3 · TBD

74.1

win 40%

Projected

77.1

win 60%

No line posted yet.

Model: ELON −3.0 · total 151.2 · 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: Elon 68.0, James Madison 67.4 → 67.1 possessions

−2.7

Elon offense vs James Madison defense

+2.4

James Madison offense vs Elon defense

+3.3

Projected total

151.2

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Elon offense vs James Madison defense

+2.4

James Madison offense vs Elon defense

−3.3

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

+3.9

Elon by 3.0

3.0

James Madison side ◂▸ Elon 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 Elon.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 67.1, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Elon is the faster team (67.9, #205 of 365) and James Madison the slower (67.0, #242). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

67.1

per team, 40 min

Projected total

151.2

model

Projected team totals

74.1 / 77.1

James Madison / Elon

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

67.4#259

James Madison

68.0#209

Elon

How this game plays

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

AdvantageElon

Where Elon scores: ball control

Elon turns it over on 15.9% of possessions (#134); James Madison forces turnovers on 12.8% of opponent possessions (#360). Expect about 13.7%, 3.0 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.7 points per 100 possessions.

AdvantageJames Madison

Where James Madison scores: shooting

James Madison shoots an effective 53.1% (#97); Elon allows 54.0% (#300). Expect about 53.7%, 2.5 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.5 points per 100 possessions.

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 James Madison at about 45.1% of its shots from three, Elon about 41.6%.

James Madison has the ball

OffenseElon allowsvs D1 avg

53.1% #97

54.0% #300

+3.5 pt/100

17.3% #226

16.4% #193

-0.1 pt/100

30.6% #175

33.5% #307

+1.0 pt/100

35.9% #153

34.6% #169

+0.0 pt/100

70.3% #263

—

-0.2 pt/100

James Madison net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +4.3 pts/100

Elon has the ball

OffenseJames Madison allowsvs D1 avg

52.2% #137

49.0% #66

-0.9 pt/100

15.9% #134

12.8% #360

+3.7 pt/100

32.2% #116

29.5% #134

+0.5 pt/100

33.5% #222

40.8% #310

+0.3 pt/100

71.4% #225

—

-0.1 pt/100

Elon net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +3.6 pts/100

Shot diet

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

James Madisonoffense vsElondefense

Share of shots by zone

James Madison shoots

40.6

6.7

11.1

41.6

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	61.1%#91	61.8%#297	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	42.1%#118	42.7%#241	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	30.2%#352	35.1%#82	38.0%
Three	35.4%#94	36.5%#328	33.7%

Elonoffense vsJames Madisondefense

Share of shots by zone

Elon shoots

44.9

3.1

9.2

42.8

James Madison allows

37.1

6.6

18.3

38.0

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	58.0%#198	56.6%#103	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	36.5%#256	37.6%#128	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	29.9%#354	38.5%#182	38.0%
Three	34.3%#154	32.7%#101	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

James Madison

−3.8extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#327 of 365

Off reb %

30.6%

#175

Def reb %

70.5%

#134

Turnover %

17.3%

#226

Forced TO %

12.8%

#360

FT rate

35.9%

#153

FT allowed

40.8%

#310

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.1

Defensive rebounding+0.4

Ball security−0.4

Forcing turnovers−2.7

Foul shots drawn+0.2

Foul shots allowed−1.4

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 James Madison’s −3.8 (#327).

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

James Madison2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
10	Cliff Davis	G	Sr	6'2"	33-33	31.3	15.6	3.1	1.7	1.2	55.1%	37.8%	7.9	87.1%	27.5%
2	Bradley Douglas	G	Sr	6'1"	32-18	27.6	12.1	2.0	3.5	2.3	50.2%	35.6%	4.7	73.3%	29.2%
3	Eddie Ricks III	F	Jr	6'7"	32-20	26.8	7.1	5.6	1.6	0.9	53.8%	27.8%	1.7	78.7%	15.3%
13	Preston Fowler	F	Fr	6'8"	33-14	23.1	6.2	4.6	0.9	0.5	49.1%	29.8%	3.7	72.3%	16.9%
33	Gabe Newhof	F	Sr	6'9"	33-33	18.9	8.1	3.7	0.3	0.8	61.3%	—	0.0	53.5%	23.9%
0	Christian Brown	F	Fr	6'8"	33-0	13.3	3.0	3.8	0.4	0.9	57.0%	33.3%	0.1	56.8%	15.7%
12	Kose Egbule	G	Sr	6'2"	22-15	16.2	3.7	2.0	1.8	1.4	41.5%	31.4%	1.6	69.7%	20.0%
1	Paul Jones III	G	So	6'4"	20-0	11.2	2.8	0.8	0.7	0.7	41.2%	29.5%	2.2	64.3%	20.2%
11	Paul Lewis	G	Jr	6'2"	14-1	11.8	2.5	0.9	1.8	0.7	28.6%	25.0%	1.1	78.6%	20.8%
5	Justin Taylor	G	Sr	6'6"	18-1	7.7	1.0	0.6	0.2	0.2	45.5%	66.7%	0.2	57.1%	9.0%
23	Ike Cornish	G	Sr	6'6"	6-0	11.0	3.5	2.3	0.7	1.0	56.7%	35.7%	2.3	44.4%	23.5%
4	Chance Lundy	G	Sr	6'0"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
15	Josh Stephen	G	Sr	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.

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
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.

James Madison2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
10	Cliff Davis	G	Sr	6'2"	33-33	31.3	15.6	3.1	1.7	1.2	55.1%	37.8%	7.9	87.1%	27.5%
2	Bradley Douglas	G	Sr	6'1"	32-18	27.6	12.1	2.0	3.5	2.3	50.2%	35.6%	4.7	73.3%	29.2%
3	Eddie Ricks III	F	Jr	6'7"	32-20	26.8	7.1	5.6	1.6	0.9	53.8%	27.8%	1.7	78.7%	15.3%
13	Preston Fowler	F	Fr	6'8"	33-14	23.1	6.2	4.6	0.9	0.5	49.1%	29.8%	3.7	72.3%	16.9%
33	Gabe Newhof	F	Sr	6'9"	33-33	18.9	8.1	3.7	0.3	0.8	61.3%	—	0.0	53.5%	23.9%
0	Christian Brown	F	Fr	6'8"	33-0	13.3	3.0	3.8	0.4	0.9	57.0%	33.3%	0.1	56.8%	15.7%
12	Kose Egbule	G	Sr	6'2"	22-15	16.2	3.7	2.0	1.8	1.4	41.5%	31.4%	1.6	69.7%	20.0%
1	Paul Jones III	G	So	6'4"	20-0	11.2	2.8	0.8	0.7	0.7	41.2%	29.5%	2.2	64.3%	20.2%
11	Paul Lewis	G	Jr	6'2"	14-1	11.8	2.5	0.9	1.8	0.7	28.6%	25.0%	1.1	78.6%	20.8%
5	Justin Taylor	G	Sr	6'6"	18-1	7.7	1.0	0.6	0.2	0.2	45.5%	66.7%	0.2	57.1%	9.0%
23	Ike Cornish	G	Sr	6'6"	6-0	11.0	3.5	2.3	0.7	1.0	56.7%	35.7%	2.3	44.4%	23.5%
4	Chance Lundy	G	Sr	6'0"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
15	Josh Stephen	G	Sr	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

James Madison

Against the spread

Season

13-19

Home

5-9

Road

6-9

Last 10

6-4

avg cover +1.6

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 4 of 8 as a favorite

Over / under

Season

15-17

Home

4-10

Road

8-7

Last 10

4-6

avg vs total +2.2

Over 2 straightOver in 4 of 8 as a favorite

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 5	Southern MissAdjEM #218	N	L 80–86	−2.0	L−8.0	143.5	O166	111.1	119.4	72.0
Mar 4	LouisianaAdjEM #318	N	W 87–72	−6.5	W+8.5	135.0	O159	122.3	101.2	71.2
Feb 27	CoastalAdjEM #241	H	L 68–69	−6.0	L−7.0	142.0	U137	107.0	108.6	63.5
Feb 25	GA SouthernAdjEM #231	H	W 82–66	−5.5	W+10.5	153.5	U148	116.4	93.7	70.4
Feb 21	Georgia StAdjEM #310	A	W 80–65	−2.5	W+12.5	142.5	O145	119.4	97.0	67.0
Feb 18	CoastalAdjEM #241	A	W 67–65	−1.0	W+1.0	141.5	U132	102.2	99.1	65.6
Feb 14	App StateAdjEM #180	H	W 69–58	+1.5	W+12.5	135.0	U127	112.7	94.7	61.2
Feb 12	Georgia StAdjEM #310	H	W 81–79 OT	−6.0	L−4.0	144.0	O160	109.5	106.8	74.0
Feb 7	ToledoAdjEM #115	H	W 73–71	+1.0	W+3.0	152.0	U144	109.6	106.6	66.6
Feb 4	LouisianaAdjEM #318	H	L 61–64	−9.5	L−12.5	132.0	U125	107.7	113.0	56.6

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 & MaryAdjEM #127	N	L 62–72	+5.5	L−4.5	163.5	U134	91.6	106.4	67.7
Mar 3	UNC WilmingtonAdjEM #86	H	L 57–76	+5.0	L−14.0	145.5	U133	85.2	113.6	66.9
Feb 28	MonmouthAdjEM #173	A	L 57–73	+3.5	L−12.5	153.0	U130	90.3	115.7	63.1
Feb 26	TowsonAdjEM #149	A	L 56–58	+5.5	W+3.5	144.0	U114	90.9	94.1	61.6
Feb 21	NC A&TAdjEM #271	H	L 82–102	−8.0	L−28.0	152.5	O184	121.1	150.6	67.7
Feb 14	William & MaryAdjEM #127	A	W 81–78	+8.0	W+11.0	165.5	U159	113.8	109.6	71.2
Feb 12	UNC WilmingtonAdjEM #86	A	L 54–65	+8.0	L−3.0	149.5	U119	89.7	108.0	60.2
Feb 7	DrexelAdjEM #214	H	L 77–82	−5.0	L−10.0	138.0	O159	113.9	121.3	67.6
Feb 5	HamptonAdjEM #268	A	L 79–87 2OT	−1.5	L−9.5	142.5	O166	100.1	110.2	78.9
Jan 31	Stony BrookAdjEM #232	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 home

James MadisonElon

Efficiency

109.2

109.8

110.7

112.7

67.4

68.0

—

Shooting

53.1%

52.2%

53.2%

52.8%

35.4%

34.3%

70.3%

71.4%

35.9%

33.5%

Ball control & glass

17.3%

15.9%

12.8%

16.4%

30.6%

32.2%

29.5%

33.5%

9.5%

9.4%

11.1%

11.2%

Style

42.5%

43.2%

43.8%

44.1%

13.9%

11.6%

48.3%

54.6%

34.8%

33.3%

Roster

3.09

2.96

6'4.9"

6'5.8"

83.4%

—

Offseason

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

James Madison

Returning minutes: 83.4%Returning production: 78.2%

Lost

Justin McBride 25.5 mpg, 14.3 ppg · transferred to Kentucky
Elijah Wilborn 8.0 mpg, 2.2 ppg · transferred to Merrimack

Added

Josh Stephen no D1 minutes last season
Chance Lundy no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 83% 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).

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 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.