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-conferenceDavid S. Mack Sports and Exhibition Complex, Hempstead, NY
Iona
Efficiency #227
2025-26: 18-14 · 10-11 conf
@
Hofstra
Efficiency #69
2025-26: 24-11 · 15-6 conf
Fri, Nov 13 · TBD
67.4
win 18%
Projected
78.0
win 82%
No line posted yet.
Model: HOF −10.6 · total 145.4 · 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: Hofstra 66.5, Iona 69.4 → 67.7 possessions
−1.4
Hofstra offense vs Iona defense
+2.7
Iona offense vs Hofstra defense
−4.0
Projected total
145.4
Axis starts at 142 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Hofstra offense vs Iona defense
+2.7
Iona offense vs Hofstra defense
+4.0
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.9
Hofstra by 10.6
10.6
Iona side ◂▸ Hofstra side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 145.5 against a projected 145.4. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Hofstra.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes
Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 67.7, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Iona is the faster team (68.4, #177 of 365) and Hofstra the slower (65.4, #319). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions
67.7
per team, 40 min
Projected total
145.4
model
Projected team totals
67.4 / 78.0
Iona / Hofstra
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
69.4#87
Iona
66.5#318
Hofstra

How this game plays

what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meet
AdvantageIona
Where Iona struggles: shooting
Iona shoots an effective 51.9% (#149); Hofstra allows 46.3% (#14). Expect about 49.1%, 2.2 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.2 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageHofstra
Where Hofstra scores: the offensive glass
Hofstra rebounds 34.7% of its own misses (#54); Iona lets opponents grab 31.2% of their own misses (#212). Expect about 33.8%, 3.4 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 (Hofstra, Iona'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 Iona at about 45.6% of its shots from three, Hofstra about 43.0%.
ClashHofstra
Strength vs strength: 3-point shooting
Hofstra (#25 in 3-point shooting) against Iona (#25 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 34.1%. Historically Hofstra's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.25 vs 0.16).
Iona has the ball
OffenseHofstra allowsvs D1 avg
51.9% #149
46.3% #14
-3.2 pt/100
17.2% #221
14.9% #292
+1.1 pt/100
27.8% #274
31.0% #201
-0.9 pt/100
29.3% #326
35.1% #182
-0.3 pt/100
70.7% #250
—
-0.2 pt/100
Iona net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -3.5 pts/100
Hofstra has the ball
OffenseIona allowsvs D1 avg
51.4% #178
48.9% #64
-1.6 pt/100
16.1% #149
16.6% #178
+0.6 pt/100
34.7% #54
31.2% #212
+2.1 pt/100
31.6% #264
28.8% #40
-0.7 pt/100
75.8% #56
—
+0.3 pt/100
Hofstra net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +0.6 pts/100

Shot diet

Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbers
Ionaoffense vsHofstradefense
Share of shots by zone
Iona shoots
Hofstra allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim55.7%#28151.9%#1558.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)37.2%#24122.3%#139.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)39.8%#11739.7%#22938.0%
Three35.1%#10532.3%#7833.7%
Hofstraoffense vsIonadefense
Share of shots by zone
Hofstra shoots
Iona allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim56.2%#26757.4%#12658.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)39.5%#18639.5%#17439.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)36.9%#22635.9%#10738.0%
Three37.1%#2530.6%#2533.7%
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
Iona
−1.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#242 of 365
Off reb %
27.8%
#274
Def reb %
68.8%
#212
Turnover %
17.2%
#221
Forced TO %
16.6%
#178
FT rate
29.3%
#326
FT allowed
28.8%
#40
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.8
Defensive rebounding−0.2
Ball security−0.3
Forcing turnovers−0.1
Foul shots drawn−1.5
Foul shots allowed+1.7
Hofstra
−0.3extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#191 of 365
Off reb %
34.7%
#54
Def reb %
69.0%
#201
Turnover %
16.1%
#149
Forced TO %
14.9%
#292
FT rate
31.6%
#264
FT allowed
35.1%
#182
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.4
Defensive rebounding−0.1
Ball security+0.4
Forcing turnovers−1.2
Foul shots drawn−0.9
Foul shots allowed0.0

Hofstra has more extra scoring chances per game: −0.3 (#191 of 365) to Iona’s −1.2 (#242).

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

Iona2025-26 numbers
#PlayerPosClHtGP-GSMPGPPGRPGAPGTOVeFG%3P%3PA/gFT%UsageStatus
5Kevon Vanderhorstat DrexelGSr6'2"33-3329.99.32.82.91.550.0%26.3%2.976.1%20.8%
95Martin Kheilat Idaho StGJr6'5"31-2729.69.12.41.20.951.7%35.3%6.178.8%18.6%
8Aiden Disuat Holy CrossFSo6'7"29-2927.410.85.10.81.650.0%29.6%2.479.7%25.4%
3Kosy AkametuGSr6'5"29-2824.311.05.00.91.547.2%30.1%3.276.7%29.1%
44Alliou FallFSo6'10"31-1318.92.74.11.11.343.9%0.0%0.150.0%13.2%
7Luke JungersFSr6'9"30-116.26.01.90.20.565.7%43.9%3.378.1%18.2%
11Sadiku Ibine Ayoat St John'sFSr6'6"30-17.71.81.00.40.349.1%31.6%0.6100.0%14.7%
22Keyshawn Mitchellat VCUFSr6'11"20-210.63.22.60.50.545.7%20.8%1.265.6%19.2%
12Oscar Hourruitiner Jr.GSo6'0"6-01.70.00.30.00.00.0%0.0%0.2—17.7%
00Ore OdutayoFFr6'8"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
10Abram WilliamsGFr6'4"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
2Daniel DoyleGFr6'3"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
24Max MoshinskiGFr6'6"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
4Micah TannenbaumGFr6'3"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
21Nathan KirkGFr6'1"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
13Oliver SassellaGFr6'5"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
1Panagiotis LefasGFr6'6"0-00.00.00.00.00.0——0.0——
Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.
Transfers in: Aiden Disu (from Holy Cross), Sadiku Ibine Ayo (from St John's), Martin Kheil (from Idaho St), Keyshawn Mitchell (from VCU), Kevon Vanderhorst (from Drexel)

Tale of the tape

national rank toned left for away, right for home
IonaHofstra
Efficiency
105.8
112.4
108.5
105.3
69.4
66.5
—
—
Shooting
51.9%
51.4%
51.2%
48.1%
35.1%
37.1%
70.7%
75.8%
29.3%
31.6%
Ball control & glass
17.2%
16.1%
16.6%
14.9%
27.8%
34.7%
31.2%
31.0%
10.7%
7.7%
11.1%
10.7%
Style
45.9%
42.8%
40.3%
35.9%
11.8%
9.0%
53.7%
48.3%
31.4%
25.2%
Roster
3.25
2.88
6'6"
6'5.4"
27.4%
—

Offseason

roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model input
Iona
Returning minutes: 27.4%Returning production: 24.8%
Lost
  • CJ Anthony 30.8 mpg, 13.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Lamin Sabally 29.4 mpg, 11.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Denver Anglin 27.2 mpg, 9.0 ppg · transferred to Merrimack
  • Toby Harris 26.2 mpg, 11.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Keshawn Williams 11.5 mpg, 4.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Khalil Badru 9.8 mpg, 3.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
  • Kevon Vanderhorst from Drexel · 29.9 mpg, 9.3 ppg last season
  • Martin Kheil from Idaho St · 27.8 mpg, 8.5 ppg last season
  • Aiden Disu from Holy Cross · 24.1 mpg, 9.5 ppg last season
  • Sadiku Ibine Ayo from St John's · 6.2 mpg, 1.4 ppg last season
  • Keyshawn Mitchell from VCU · 5.9 mpg, 1.8 ppg last season
  • Ore Odutayo no D1 minutes last season

Returns 27% of last season's minutes; lost 4 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).

Hofstra
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Hofstra'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
DateSeasonResult
Fri, Nov 72025-26Hofstra 73 – 81 Iona

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.