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-conferenceUD Arena, Dayton, OH

Loyola MD

Efficiency #313

2025-26: 12-20 · 8-11 conf

Dayton

Efficiency #62

2025-26: 25-12 · 14-7 conf

Wed, Dec 2 · TBD

65.9

win 10%

Projected

80.9

win 90%

No line posted yet.

Model: DAY −15.0 · total 146.7 · 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: Dayton 67.8, Loyola MD 68.8 → 68.3 possessions

+0.1

Dayton offense vs Loyola MD defense

+4.7

Loyola MD offense vs Dayton defense

−6.3

Projected total

146.7

Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Dayton offense vs Loyola MD defense

+4.7

Loyola MD offense vs Dayton defense

+6.3

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

+3.9

Dayton by 15.0

15.0

Loyola MD side ◂▸ Dayton side

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the margin steps add to +14.9 against +15.0. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Dayton.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 68.3, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Loyola MD is the faster team (68.1, #194 of 365) and Dayton the slower (67.6, #216). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

68.3

per team, 40 min

Projected total

146.7

model

Projected team totals

65.9 / 80.9

Loyola MD / Dayton

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

68.8#134

Loyola MD

67.8#222

Dayton

How this game plays

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

AdvantageDayton

Where Dayton scores: shooting

Dayton shoots an effective 51.6% (#168); Loyola MD allows 54.7% (#321). Expect about 53.2%, 1.9 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.7 points per 100 possessions.

AdvantageLoyola MD

Where Loyola MD struggles: ball control

Loyola MD turns it over on 15.5% of possessions (#105); Dayton forces turnovers on 21.0% of opponent possessions (#11). Expect about 18.7%, 1.9 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.4 points per 100 possessions.

GlassDayton

Dayton gets out-rebounded

Projected offensive rebound rate of 27.3% is worth roughly -1.9 points per 100 possessions against Dayton's offense.

GlassLoyola MD

Loyola MD gets out-rebounded

Projected offensive rebound rate of 27.6% is worth roughly -1.7 points per 100 possessions against Loyola MD's offense.

DefenseDayton

Dayton's ball-hawking

Dayton ranks #23 nationally in steal rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 10.8% of Loyola MD's possessions to end in a steal against this defense.

Loyola MD has the ball

OffenseDayton allowsvs D1 avg

50.4% #219

51.0% #164

-0.9 pt/100

15.5% #105

21.0% #11

-2.4 pt/100

27.6% #279

28.8% #94

-1.7 pt/100

29.9% #312

35.5% #194

-0.3 pt/100

71.5% #223

—

-0.1 pt/100

Loyola MD net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -5.3 pts/100

Dayton has the ball

OffenseLoyola MD allowsvs D1 avg

51.6% #168

54.7% #321

+2.7 pt/100

16.9% #195

15.3% #265

+1.1 pt/100

26.9% #298

29.0% #103

-1.9 pt/100

46.2% #2

32.7% #123

+0.5 pt/100

75.4% #71

—

+0.3 pt/100

Dayton net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +2.7 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Loyola MDoffense vsDaytondefense

Share of shots by zone

Loyola MD shoots

36.6

7.1

9.0

47.2

Dayton allows

37.3

9.9

12.5

40.3

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	56.6%#251	57.9%#143	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	46.6%#44	34.8%#54	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	36.1%#262	37.1%#134	38.0%
Three	32.6%#251	35.4%#270	33.7%

Daytonoffense vsLoyola MDdefense

Share of shots by zone

Dayton shoots

42.8

6.3

9.8

41.1

Loyola MD allows

36.9

5.5

17.4

40.2

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	59.8%#122	65.1%#352	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	27.4%#360	52.3%#359	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	33.3%#326	47.3%#362	38.0%
Three	33.9%#182	32.8%#106	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

Loyola MD

−1.1extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#240 of 365

Off reb %

27.6%

#279

Def reb %

71.0%

#103

Turnover %

15.5%

#105

Forced TO %

15.3%

#265

FT rate

29.9%

#312

FT allowed

32.7%

#123

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.9

Defensive rebounding+0.5

Ball security+0.9

Forcing turnovers−1.0

Foul shots drawn−1.3

Foul shots allowed+0.6

Dayton

+5.1extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#19 of 365

Off reb %

26.9%

#298

Def reb %

71.2%

#94

Turnover %

16.9%

#195

Forced TO %

21.0%

#11

FT rate

46.2%

FT allowed

35.5%

#194

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−1.1

Defensive rebounding+0.6

Ball security−0.1

Forcing turnovers+2.9

Foul shots drawn+2.9

Foul shots allowed−0.1

Dayton has more extra scoring chances per game: +5.1 (#19 of 365) to Loyola MD’s −1.1 (#240).

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

Loyola MD2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
0	Braeden Speed	G	So	6'3"	32-32	32.7	15.3	4.4	3.8	2.0	52.3%	36.5%	4.6	82.2%	26.9%
3	Jordan Stiemke	G	Jr	6'5"	32-28	27.5	9.9	3.1	1.4	0.9	48.6%	33.7%	5.1	81.1%	22.1%
15	Tyson Commander	G	Sr	6'4"	31-17	23.5	4.1	2.6	1.1	1.2	54.8%	40.8%	1.6	72.2%	11.9%
18	Emmett Adair	F	Fr	6'9"	27-15	25.4	14.6	5.4	1.0	1.4	53.5%	31.5%	5.3	81.1%	33.2%
22	Sam Springer	F	So	6'7"	32-31	16.8	4.9	2.2	0.6	0.7	50.0%	35.1%	2.3	68.3%	18.2%
24	Sebastien Emenalo	G	Fr	6'6"	31-0	14.5	3.2	3.3	0.4	0.5	45.9%	30.9%	1.8	47.6%	16.0%
2	Troy Cicero Jr.	G	Jr	6'2"	32-0	13.9	5.8	2.2	0.7	0.5	52.5%	38.0%	3.8	77.3%	24.6%
1	Carter Berg-McLean	G	Fr	6'4"	30-0	13.9	3.3	2.5	1.6	0.7	41.9%	19.2%	0.9	76.2%	18.4%
7	Jonas Sirtautas	F	Jr	6'10"	19-12	19.3	6.5	3.6	0.6	0.9	63.3%	14.3%	0.7	47.9%	18.7%
17	Everett Barnes	F	Fr	6'9"	25-5	8.5	1.5	1.6	0.3	0.3	51.5%	40.0%	0.2	20.0%	13.6%
14	Garrett Brennan	G	Sr	6'4"	14-1	4.1	0.9	1.2	0.4	0.1	36.7%	12.5%	0.6	28.6%	18.8%
13	Ben Menker	G	So	6'5"	12-0	1.8	0.7	0.3	0.1	0.2	50.0%	33.3%	0.5	—	26.8%
5	Peter Sposito	G	Sr	6'2"	11-1	1.5	0.3	0.3	0.0	0.1	21.4%	25.0%	0.4	0.0%	30.1%
8	Goap Kodi	F	So	6'10"	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.

Dayton2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
0	Javon Bennett	G	Sr	5'10"	37-37	34.5	15.8	2.2	2.9	1.4	49.0%	34.7%	7.0	89.8%	27.3%
7	Keonte Jones	G	Sr	6'6"	37-37	30.2	7.7	5.3	2.2	1.4	53.9%	31.7%	1.1	63.1%	16.1%
29	Amael L'Etang	F	So	7'1"	33-31	25.5	11.9	5.9	1.6	2.1	55.7%	36.1%	2.9	76.5%	27.6%
4	Jordan Derkack	G	Sr	6'5"	32-14	24.8	9.2	4.8	2.5	1.7	40.9%	27.6%	1.8	72.2%	24.8%
10	Bryce Heard	G	So	6'6"	36-6	18.4	6.6	2.4	0.8	0.8	51.9%	36.6%	2.0	79.1%	20.5%
3	Jaiun Simon	F	So	6'6"	36-16	18.3	5.6	3.3	1.2	0.8	53.7%	40.0%	1.0	80.5%	17.7%
24	Jacob Conner	F	Sr	6'10"	36-8	17.0	3.2	2.3	1.1	0.6	50.0%	29.7%	1.8	63.0%	12.8%
1	Malcolm Thomas	F	Fr	6'8"	26-0	8.7	4.0	1.5	0.3	0.7	54.8%	33.3%	0.7	56.8%	29.2%
22	Damon Friery	F	Fr	6'9"	16-0	5.6	1.8	1.2	0.1	0.2	44.4%	35.3%	1.1	50.0%	22.5%
50	Sean Pouedet	G	Fr	6'2"	14-0	5.4	0.6	0.2	0.4	0.4	38.9%	25.0%	0.3	100.0%	12.9%
11	Evan Dickey	G	Jr	6'3"	4-0	2.0	0.5	0.3	0.0	0.0	0.0%	0.0%	0.3	100.0%	14.6%
33	Makai Grant	G	Jr	6'1"	6-0	1.2	0.5	0.0	0.2	0.0	37.5%	33.3%	0.5	—	33.9%
25	Will Maxwell	G	Jr	6'4"	4-0	1.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0%	0.0%	0.3	—	15.6%
8	Jaron McKie	G	Fr	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.

Loyola MD2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
0	Braeden Speed	G	So	6'3"	32-32	32.7	15.3	4.4	3.8	2.0	52.3%	36.5%	4.6	82.2%	26.9%
3	Jordan Stiemke	G	Jr	6'5"	32-28	27.5	9.9	3.1	1.4	0.9	48.6%	33.7%	5.1	81.1%	22.1%
15	Tyson Commander	G	Sr	6'4"	31-17	23.5	4.1	2.6	1.1	1.2	54.8%	40.8%	1.6	72.2%	11.9%
18	Emmett Adair	F	Fr	6'9"	27-15	25.4	14.6	5.4	1.0	1.4	53.5%	31.5%	5.3	81.1%	33.2%
22	Sam Springer	F	So	6'7"	32-31	16.8	4.9	2.2	0.6	0.7	50.0%	35.1%	2.3	68.3%	18.2%
24	Sebastien Emenalo	G	Fr	6'6"	31-0	14.5	3.2	3.3	0.4	0.5	45.9%	30.9%	1.8	47.6%	16.0%
2	Troy Cicero Jr.	G	Jr	6'2"	32-0	13.9	5.8	2.2	0.7	0.5	52.5%	38.0%	3.8	77.3%	24.6%
1	Carter Berg-McLean	G	Fr	6'4"	30-0	13.9	3.3	2.5	1.6	0.7	41.9%	19.2%	0.9	76.2%	18.4%
7	Jonas Sirtautas	F	Jr	6'10"	19-12	19.3	6.5	3.6	0.6	0.9	63.3%	14.3%	0.7	47.9%	18.7%
17	Everett Barnes	F	Fr	6'9"	25-5	8.5	1.5	1.6	0.3	0.3	51.5%	40.0%	0.2	20.0%	13.6%
14	Garrett Brennan	G	Sr	6'4"	14-1	4.1	0.9	1.2	0.4	0.1	36.7%	12.5%	0.6	28.6%	18.8%
13	Ben Menker	G	So	6'5"	12-0	1.8	0.7	0.3	0.1	0.2	50.0%	33.3%	0.5	—	26.8%
5	Peter Sposito	G	Sr	6'2"	11-1	1.5	0.3	0.3	0.0	0.1	21.4%	25.0%	0.4	0.0%	30.1%
8	Goap Kodi	F	So	6'10"	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

Loyola MD

Against the spread

Season

16-14

Home

7-5

Road

8-8

Last 10

5-5

avg cover −0.7

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 7 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

17-13

Home

6-6

Road

11-5

Last 10

7-3

avg vs total +6.9

Over in the last gameOver in 4 of 7 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 5	ColgateAdjEM #223	A	L 77–90	+5.5	L−7.5	154.0	O167	119.4	139.5	64.5
Feb 28	Holy CrossAdjEM #325	A	W 76–62	+1.0	W+15.0	151.0	U138	120.0	97.9	63.3
Feb 25	NavyAdjEM #104	H	L 51–78	+6.5	L−20.5	146.5	U129	83.8	128.1	60.9
Feb 21	ColgateAdjEM #223	A	L 98–101 OT	+8.5	W+5.5	149.5	O199	112.3	115.7	87.3
Feb 18	ArmyAdjEM #336	H	L 77–87	−4.5	L−14.5	150.0	O164	111.6	126.1	69.0
Feb 15	Holy CrossAdjEM #325	H	W 83–73	−4.5	W+5.5	145.5	O156	127.5	112.2	65.1
Feb 11	LafayetteAdjEM #319	A	W 68–54	+3.0	W+17.0	148.5	U122	103.9	82.5	65.5
Feb 7	Boston UAdjEM #237	A	L 69–78	+5.0	L−4.0	146.0	O147	99.1	112.0	69.6
Feb 4	LehighAdjEM #273	H	W 89–84 2OT	−2.5	W+2.5	149.5	O173	110.9	104.7	80.3
Jan 31	NavyAdjEM #104	A	L 71–87	+10.0	L−6.0	143.5	O158	108.8	133.3	65.3

Dayton

Against the spread

Season

17-18-2

Home

8-10

Road

6-6-1

Last 10

5-3-2

avg cover +3.0

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 2 of 6 as a favorite, 2 pushesCovered 3 of 4 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

13-24

Home

4-14

Road

6-7

Last 10

2-8

avg vs total −11.4

Under in the last gameOver in 2 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 0 of 4 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 25	Illinois StAdjEM #80	H	L 55–61	−7.0	L−13.0	140.0	U116	87.6	97.2	62.8
Mar 21	UNC WilmingtonAdjEM #86	A	W 80–61	−3.5	W+15.5	138.5	O141	125.8	95.9	63.6
Mar 18	BradleyAdjEM #117	A	W 80–66	−2.5	W+11.5	141.0	O146	133.9	110.4	59.8
Mar 15	VCUAdjEM #39	N	L 62–70	+2.5	L−5.5	138.5	U132	96.0	108.4	64.6
Mar 14	Saint LouisAdjEM #20	N	W 70–69	+5.0	W+6.0	145.5	U139	102.3	100.8	68.4
Mar 13	St BonaventureAdjEM #138	N	W 68–63	−5.0	P0.0	142.0	U131	103.3	95.7	65.8
Mar 6	VCUAdjEM #39	H	L 62–68	−1.5	L−7.5	147.0	U130	102.2	112.1	60.6
Mar 3	RichmondAdjEM #150	A	W 65–60	−5.0	P0.0	145.0	U125	105.1	97.0	61.8
Feb 27	G WashingtonAdjEM #68	A	W 68–66	+2.5	W+4.5	152.0	U134	101.7	98.7	66.9
Feb 24	#23Saint LouisAdjEM #20	H	W 77–62	+3.5	W+18.5	157.5	U139	110.9	89.3	69.4

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

Loyola MDDayton

Efficiency

105.6

109.9

114.0

102.2

68.8

67.8

—

Shooting

50.4%

51.6%

51.9%

52.1%

32.6%

33.9%

71.5%

75.4%

29.9%

46.2%

Ball control & glass

15.5%

16.9%

15.3%

21.0%

27.6%

26.9%

29.0%

28.8%

8.7%

9.9%

8.3%

11.4%

Style

47.2%

41.4%

40.4%

41.6%

10.0%

14.1%

48.8%

59.1%

37.7%

27.4%

Roster

2.26

3.13

6'5.4"

6'5.6"

90.3%

85.2%

Offseason

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

Loyola MD

Returning minutes: 90.3%Returning production: 86.5%

Lost

Jacob Theodosiou 19.7 mpg, 11.0 ppg · transferred to Duke

Added

Goap Kodi no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 90% 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).

Dayton

Returning minutes: 85.2%Returning production: 82.2%

Lost

De'Shayne Montgomery 29.8 mpg, 13.0 ppg · transferred to Louisville

Added

Jaron McKie no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 85% 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).

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.