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-conferenceHart Center Arena, Worcester, MA

New Hampshire

Efficiency #340

2025-26: 9-21 · 5-12 conf

Holy Cross

Efficiency #325

2025-26: 11-22 · 6-14 conf

Sun, Nov 29 · TBD

68.3

win 33%

Projected

73.5

win 67%

No line posted yet.

Model: HC −5.2 · total 141.8 · 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: Holy Cross 67.1, New Hampshire 68.3 → 67.1 possessions

−2.7

Holy Cross offense vs New Hampshire defense

−1.2

New Hampshire offense vs Holy Cross defense

−2.5

Projected total

141.8

Axis starts at 135 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Holy Cross offense vs New Hampshire defense

−1.2

New Hampshire offense vs Holy Cross defense

+2.5

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

+3.9

Holy Cross by 5.2

5.2

New Hampshire side ◂▸ Holy Cross 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 Holy Cross.

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, New Hampshire is the faster team (67.1, #237 of 365) and Holy Cross the slower (65.8, #302). 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

141.8

model

Projected team totals

68.3 / 73.5

New Hampshire / Holy Cross

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

68.3#184

New Hampshire

67.1#280

Holy Cross

How this game plays

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

AdvantageHoly Cross

Where Holy Cross struggles: the offensive glass

Holy Cross rebounds 21.9% of its own misses (#356); New Hampshire lets opponents grab 26.9% of their own misses (#32). Expect about 22.7%, 7.7 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -4.7 points per 100 possessions.

AdvantageNew Hampshire

Where New Hampshire struggles: the offensive glass

New Hampshire rebounds 25.7% of its own misses (#329); Holy Cross lets opponents grab 27.0% of their own misses (#37). Expect about 25.5%, 4.9 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.0 points per 100 possessions.

Pace

Half-court grind

Holy Cross averages 65.8 possessions per 40, New Hampshire 67.1. Slower teams pull the pace toward themselves more than fast teams push it (0.80 vs 0.66 in five seasons of games), so expect about 66 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.

ClashHoly Cross

Style match: ball movement

Holy Cross creates off the dribble (assists on 44.7% of its baskets); New Hampshire breaks up passing offenses (assists on 48.0% allowed) (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 44.6% — both habits push the same way.

TurnoversNew Hampshire

New Hampshire protects the ball

Projected turnover rate of 14.9% is worth roughly +2.3 points per 100 possessions for New Hampshire's offense.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (New Hampshire) 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 New Hampshire at about 42.1% of its shots from three, Holy Cross about 36.0%.

New Hampshire has the ball

OffenseHoly Cross allowsvs D1 avg

46.7% #344

54.8% #324

-1.3 pt/100

16.5% #168

14.1% #332

+2.3 pt/100

25.7% #329

27.0% #37

-3.0 pt/100

28.5% #338

27.6% #30

-0.9 pt/100

65.1% #359

—

-0.6 pt/100

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

Holy Cross has the ball

OffenseNew Hampshire allowsvs D1 avg

49.8% #248

53.4% #282

+0.4 pt/100

15.3% #86

15.8% #231

+1.8 pt/100

21.9% #356

26.9% #32

-4.7 pt/100

31.5% #268

35.8% #206

-0.2 pt/100

77.2% #29

—

+0.4 pt/100

Holy Cross net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -2.3 pts/100

Shot diet

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

New Hampshireoffense vsHoly Crossdefense

Share of shots by zone

New Hampshire shoots

41.4

5.6

9.6

43.3

Holy Cross allows

41.5

6.4

13.3

38.9

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	52.2%#347	63.4%#333	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	36.6%#255	50.0%#354	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	31.4%#344	43.3%#332	38.0%
Three	30.5%#333	34.0%#181	33.7%

Holy Crossoffense vsNew Hampshiredefense

Share of shots by zone

Holy Cross shoots

33.1

8.5

22.4

36.0

New Hampshire allows

43.8

7.4

12.0

36.8

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	54.6%#310	59.3%#202	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	46.2%#49	46.2%#321	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	46.0%#7	40.6%#262	38.0%
Three	32.5%#252	34.3%#204	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

New Hampshire

−2.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#288 of 365

Off reb %

25.7%

#329

Def reb %

73.1%

#32

Turnover %

16.5%

#168

Forced TO %

15.8%

#231

FT rate

28.5%

#338

FT allowed

35.8%

#206

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−1.5

Defensive rebounding+1.2

Ball security+0.2

Forcing turnovers−0.6

Foul shots drawn−1.7

Foul shots allowed−0.2

Holy Cross

−1.3extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#248 of 365

Off reb %

21.9%

#356

Def reb %

73.0%

#37

Turnover %

15.3%

#86

Forced TO %

14.1%

#332

FT rate

31.5%

#268

FT allowed

27.6%

#30

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−2.8

Defensive rebounding+1.2

Ball security+1.0

Forcing turnovers−1.8

Foul shots drawn−0.9

Foul shots allowed+2.0

Holy Cross has more extra scoring chances per game: −1.3 (#248 of 365) to New Hampshire’s −2.6 (#288).

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

New Hampshire2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
15	Davide Poser	F	Jr	6'4"	30-30	28.5	7.0	2.9	1.6	0.7	47.6%	32.6%	5.8	66.7%	16.3%
7	John Squire	F	So	6'8"	30-30	26.7	6.1	5.7	1.4	1.2	60.0%	26.7%	0.5	62.3%	13.6%
23	Belal El Shakery	F	Jr	6'8"	29-29	26.6	11.4	8.2	1.5	2.0	43.3%	5.9%	1.2	49.1%	33.1%
0	Tyler Bike	G	Fr	5'10"	30-15	23.8	7.5	1.6	2.0	0.8	50.5%	37.5%	4.8	70.8%	19.6%
8	KiJan Robinson	G	Jr	6'3"	26-17	25.5	10.7	1.6	2.3	1.6	47.3%	30.3%	3.8	82.7%	27.1%
5	R.J. Kennedy	G	Fr	6'1"	30-5	19.6	5.3	1.8	0.8	1.1	45.6%	31.0%	2.9	70.6%	19.7%
10	Comeh Emuobor	G	Jr	6'5"	28-1	18.9	9.0	4.3	0.6	1.6	41.7%	10.7%	1.0	65.1%	35.4%
6	Giannos Xanthopoulos	C	Fr	6'10"	29-0	6.4	1.7	1.9	0.1	0.4	47.5%	30.8%	0.4	91.7%	17.6%
24	Jon O'Neill	F	So	6'9"	15-0	6.2	1.3	2.5	0.2	0.1	75.0%	—	0.0	50.0%	9.3%
4	Myles Blackley	G	Fr	6'4"	11-0	3.7	0.7	0.3	0.3	0.1	15.4%	0.0%	0.6	100.0%	21.3%
3	Dylan Saunders	F	Jr	6'8"	12-0	3.3	1.7	0.6	0.1	0.2	81.8%	60.0%	0.8	100.0%	19.8%
14	Antoni Siewruk	G	So	6'9"	5-0	3.8	1.4	1.2	0.4	0.2	50.0%	33.3%	0.6	0.0%	23.9%
11	Nick Sanford	G	So	6'1"	6-0	1.7	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.3	0.0%	—	0.0	—	17.0%

Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Holy Cross2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
21	Gabe Warren	G	Jr	6'6"	33-33	31.6	12.5	4.5	1.5	1.3	52.4%	33.7%	2.6	73.1%	23.5%
0	Tyler Boston	G	So	6'0"	32-32	32.0	14.2	3.7	3.6	1.8	49.7%	35.9%	4.0	82.3%	27.2%
2	DeAndre Williams	G	Jr	6'3"	33-18	25.5	7.9	3.2	1.8	1.4	48.1%	31.1%	2.7	81.0%	21.7%
23	Aidan Richard	F	So	6'6"	30-24	27.2	5.2	4.1	0.8	0.8	38.9%	22.3%	3.7	51.4%	16.1%
30	Joe Nugent	G	Jr	6'6"	21-21	29.7	11.8	3.6	0.7	0.9	59.1%	40.7%	5.6	87.2%	21.2%
4	John St. Germain III	G	Jr	6'1"	31-0	15.5	4.5	1.2	1.0	0.7	48.6%	36.0%	0.8	78.7%	18.8%
34	Declan Ryan	F	Jr	6'8"	26-4	13.5	4.9	2.2	0.7	1.2	55.2%	25.0%	0.5	62.5%	24.9%
1	Will Aljancic	F	Jr	6'6"	17-0	11.8	3.1	1.9	0.3	0.9	46.2%	25.0%	0.7	30.0%	21.7%
22	Chuck Hare	F	So	6'10"	24-3	7.7	2.2	1.7	0.1	0.3	46.7%	—	0.0	62.5%	19.7%
5	Jaden Kirkwood	G	Sr	6'5"	16-1	6.5	0.6	1.2	0.5	0.2	34.6%	16.7%	0.4	—	9.2%
11	Jude Haigh	G	Fr	6'5"	13-0	6.9	1.8	0.7	0.3	0.2	37.0%	27.3%	1.7	100.0%	20.8%
15	Tim Finau	F	Fr	6'11"	8-0	2.3	0.6	0.8	0.0	0.1	33.3%	0.0%	0.1	33.3%	28.7%
33	Austin Mejia	G	So	6'3"	7-0	1.7	0.0	0.1	0.1	0.1	—	—	0.0	—	4.8%
25	Ethan Clark	F	Fr	6'7"	7-0	1.4	0.0	0.6	0.0	0.1	—	—	0.0	—	5.9%
3	Ben Capron	G	Sr	6'0"	3-0	1.3	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.

New Hampshire2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
15	Davide Poser	F	Jr	6'4"	30-30	28.5	7.0	2.9	1.6	0.7	47.6%	32.6%	5.8	66.7%	16.3%
7	John Squire	F	So	6'8"	30-30	26.7	6.1	5.7	1.4	1.2	60.0%	26.7%	0.5	62.3%	13.6%
23	Belal El Shakery	F	Jr	6'8"	29-29	26.6	11.4	8.2	1.5	2.0	43.3%	5.9%	1.2	49.1%	33.1%
0	Tyler Bike	G	Fr	5'10"	30-15	23.8	7.5	1.6	2.0	0.8	50.5%	37.5%	4.8	70.8%	19.6%
8	KiJan Robinson	G	Jr	6'3"	26-17	25.5	10.7	1.6	2.3	1.6	47.3%	30.3%	3.8	82.7%	27.1%
5	R.J. Kennedy	G	Fr	6'1"	30-5	19.6	5.3	1.8	0.8	1.1	45.6%	31.0%	2.9	70.6%	19.7%
10	Comeh Emuobor	G	Jr	6'5"	28-1	18.9	9.0	4.3	0.6	1.6	41.7%	10.7%	1.0	65.1%	35.4%
6	Giannos Xanthopoulos	C	Fr	6'10"	29-0	6.4	1.7	1.9	0.1	0.4	47.5%	30.8%	0.4	91.7%	17.6%
24	Jon O'Neill	F	So	6'9"	15-0	6.2	1.3	2.5	0.2	0.1	75.0%	—	0.0	50.0%	9.3%
4	Myles Blackley	G	Fr	6'4"	11-0	3.7	0.7	0.3	0.3	0.1	15.4%	0.0%	0.6	100.0%	21.3%
3	Dylan Saunders	F	Jr	6'8"	12-0	3.3	1.7	0.6	0.1	0.2	81.8%	60.0%	0.8	100.0%	19.8%
14	Antoni Siewruk	G	So	6'9"	5-0	3.8	1.4	1.2	0.4	0.2	50.0%	33.3%	0.6	0.0%	23.9%
11	Nick Sanford	G	So	6'1"	6-0	1.7	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.3	0.0%	—	0.0	—	17.0%

Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

New Hampshire

Against the spread

Season

12-16

Home

4-7

Road

8-9

Last 10

1-9

avg cover −9.7

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 1 of 4 as a favoriteCovered 0 of 6 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

15-13

Home

7-4

Road

8-9

Last 10

6-4

avg vs total +5.4

Over 3 straightOver in 2 of 4 as a favoriteOver in 4 of 6 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 7	UMBCAdjEM #147	A	L 69–84	+13.0	L−2.0	142.0	O153	106.0	129.1	65.1
Mar 3	BryantAdjEM #347	H	W 88–83 2OT	−1.0	W+4.0	135.5	O171	112.7	106.3	78.1
Feb 28	UAlbanyAdjEM #306	A	L 61–84	+3.0	L−20.0	139.0	O145	91.0	125.3	67.0
Feb 26	BinghamtonAdjEM #354	A	L 63–65	−3.0	L−5.0	141.5	U128	100.5	103.7	62.7
Feb 21	MaineAdjEM #335	H	L 58–61	−3.5	L−6.5	136.0	U119	89.2	93.8	65.0
Feb 19	UMass LowellAdjEM #308	A	L 56–78	+3.5	L−18.5	151.0	U134	79.5	110.7	70.5
Feb 14	UMBCAdjEM #147	H	L 63–85	+2.0	L−20.0	144.0	O148	91.6	123.6	68.8
Feb 12	NJITAdjEM #331	H	L 70–76	−2.5	L−8.5	143.5	O146	104.8	113.8	66.8
Feb 7	VermontAdjEM #199	A	L 57–80	+10.0	L−13.0	138.0	U137	84.0	117.9	67.8
Jan 31	BryantAdjEM #347	A	L 84–92	+1.0	L−7.0	132.5	O176	113.6	124.4	73.9

Holy Cross

Against the spread

Season

16-15

Home

6-6

Road

9-9

Last 10

5-5

avg cover 0.0

Covered 2 straightCovered 5 of 8 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

15-16

Home

7-5

Road

8-10

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total +3.2

Under in the last gameOver in 4 of 8 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 5	LehighAdjEM #273	A	L 66–69	+5.5	W+2.5	142.5	U135	99.1	103.6	66.6
Mar 3	LafayetteAdjEM #319	A	W 82–77	+4.5	W+9.5	141.5	O159	121.4	114.0	67.5
Feb 28	Loyola MDAdjEM #313	H	L 62–76	−1.0	L−15.0	151.0	U138	97.9	120.0	63.3
Feb 25	Boston UAdjEM #237	A	L 63–78	+8.5	L−6.5	142.0	U141	99.0	122.5	63.7
Feb 22	BucknellAdjEM #334	A	W 72–63	+2.5	W+11.5	141.5	U135	109.4	95.7	65.8
Feb 18	LafayetteAdjEM #319	H	L 83–86	−2.0	L−5.0	139.5	O169	116.1	120.3	71.5
Feb 15	Loyola MDAdjEM #313	A	L 73–83	+4.5	L−5.5	145.5	O156	112.2	127.5	65.1
Feb 11	ColgateAdjEM #223	H	L 70–74	+8.0	W+4.0	143.0	O144	102.3	108.1	68.5
Feb 7	LehighAdjEM #273	H	W 76–67	+1.5	W+10.5	137.0	O143	117.2	103.3	64.8
Feb 2	Boston UAdjEM #237	H	L 64–72	+2.0	L−6.0	140.0	U136	110.1	123.9	58.1

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

New HampshireHoly Cross

Efficiency

100.1

103.6

111.6

113.1

68.3

67.1

—

Shooting

46.7%

49.8%

47.4%

50.4%

30.5%

32.5%

65.1%

77.2%

28.5%

31.5%

Ball control & glass

16.5%

15.3%

15.8%

14.1%

25.7%

21.9%

26.9%

27.0%

9.1%

9.7%

11.3%

8.3%

Style

43.1%

37.3%

45.7%

41.4%

11.4%

10.3%

44.3%

44.7%

32.9%

27.9%

Roster

2.25

2.63

6'4.4"

6'4.3"

86.4%

87.9%

Offseason

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

New Hampshire

Returning minutes: 86.4%Returning production: 86.0%

Lost

Jack Graham 28.0 mpg, 11.2 ppg · transferred to Marist

Added

Nobody of note.

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

Returns 86% 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).

Holy Cross

Returning minutes: 87.9%Returning production: 86.0%

Lost

Aiden Disu 24.1 mpg, 9.5 ppg · transferred to Iona

Added

Nobody of note.

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

Returns 88% 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.