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-conferenceNeutral siteBender Arena, Washington, DCCapital Thanksgiving Classic

Howard

Efficiency #160

2025-26: 24-11 · 13-3 conf

Radford

Efficiency #245

2025-26: 16-16 · 9-8 conf

Sat, Nov 28 · TBD

78.2

win 61%

Projected

75.0

win 39%

No line posted yet.

Model: HOW −3.2 · total 153.2 · 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: Radford 70.6, Howard 69.3 → 71.5 possessions

+7.0

Radford offense vs Howard defense

−2.6

Howard offense vs Radford defense

+0.6

Projected total

153.2

Axis starts at 145 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Radford offense vs Howard defense

−2.6

Howard offense vs Radford defense

−0.6

Howard by 3.2

3.2

Howard side ◂▸ Radford 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 Radford.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 71.5, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Radford is the faster team (72.3, #18 of 365) and Howard the slower (69.2, #131). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

71.5

per team, 40 min

Projected total

153.2

model

Projected team totals

78.2 / 75.0

Howard / Radford

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

69.3#100

Howard

70.6#24

Radford

How this game plays

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

Pace

Track meet

Radford averages 72.3 possessions per 40, Howard 69.2. 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 72 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.

AdvantageRadford

Where Radford struggles: ball control

Radford turns it over on 17.1% of possessions (#208); Howard forces turnovers on 20.7% of opponent possessions (#13). Expect about 19.5%, 2.7 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.3 points per 100 possessions.

AdvantageHoward

Where Howard struggles: ball control

Howard turns it over on 19.3% of possessions (#331); Radford forces turnovers on 18.5% of opponent possessions (#73). Expect about 19.3%, 2.5 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.1 points per 100 possessions.

GlassHoward

Howard owns the glass

Projected offensive rebound rate of 35.0% is worth roughly +2.8 points per 100 possessions for Howard's offense.

ClashRadford

Style match: ball movement

Radford creates off the dribble (assists on 45.7% of its baskets); Howard breaks up passing offenses (assists on 47.9% allowed) (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 45.2% — both habits push the same way.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Howard'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 Howard at about 34.6% of its shots from three, Radford about 41.0%.

Howard has the ball

OffenseRadford allowsvs D1 avg

50.9% #198

53.0% #271

+1.0 pt/100

19.3% #331

18.5% #73

-3.1 pt/100

35.8% #28

32.2% #267

+2.8 pt/100

43.4% #17

40.0% #301

+0.9 pt/100

74.0% #130

—

+0.1 pt/100

Howard net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +1.7 pts/100

Radford has the ball

OffenseHoward allowsvs D1 avg

51.3% #181

48.7% #53

-1.8 pt/100

17.1% #208

20.7% #13

-3.3 pt/100

29.8% #207

31.4% #223

+0.1 pt/100

42.4% #25

38.4% #270

+0.7 pt/100

71.0% #236

—

-0.1 pt/100

Radford net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -4.5 pts/100

Shot diet

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

Howardoffense vsRadforddefense

Share of shots by zone

Howard shoots

47.9

4.2

12.8

35.0

Radford allows

42.6

7.1

12.5

37.8

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	52.7%#345	57.5%#131	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	31.8%#334	39.8%#190	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	38.7%#160	42.4%#316	38.0%
Three	35.8%#68	35.5%#279	33.7%

Radfordoffense vsHowarddefense

Share of shots by zone

Radford shoots

38.3

3.9

12.8

44.9

Howard allows

42.9

7.2

15.7

34.3

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	56.8%#246	56.1%#88	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	42.6%#109	35.8%#85	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	39.2%#141	31.5%#13	38.0%
Three	33.5%#199	31.4%#41	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

Howard

+3.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#39 of 365

Off reb %

35.8%

#28

Def reb %

68.6%

#223

Turnover %

19.3%

#331

Forced TO %

20.7%

#13

FT rate

43.4%

#17

FT allowed

38.4%

#270

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+1.7

Defensive rebounding−0.3

Ball security−1.7

Forcing turnovers+2.8

Foul shots drawn+2.2

Foul shots allowed−0.8

Radford

+1.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#136 of 365

Off reb %

29.8%

#207

Def reb %

67.8%

#267

Turnover %

17.1%

#208

Forced TO %

18.5%

#73

FT rate

42.4%

#25

FT allowed

40.0%

#301

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.2

Defensive rebounding−0.5

Ball security−0.2

Forcing turnovers+1.2

Foul shots drawn+1.9

Foul shots allowed−1.2

Howard has more extra scoring chances per game: +3.9 (#39 of 365) to Radford’s +1.0 (#136).

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

Howard2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
2	Cam Gillus	G	Jr	5'11"	35-35	32.7	10.8	4.3	4.7	2.3	53.7%	39.5%	3.5	75.6%	20.3%
11	Ose Okojie	G	Sr	6'5"	35-32	25.9	10.7	3.8	1.7	1.2	58.6%	42.9%	1.0	62.0%	22.5%
4	Alex Cotton	G	Jr	6'5"	32-24	26.9	8.5	3.1	1.2	0.8	50.8%	37.1%	6.1	67.6%	18.8%
12	Cedric Taylor III	G	Jr	6'7"	24-23	32.4	17.2	6.7	3.1	2.8	50.0%	29.8%	3.9	81.2%	32.2%
32	Travelle Bryson	F	So	6'5"	31-10	18.7	8.8	3.4	0.9	0.7	50.9%	24.6%	2.2	81.6%	27.3%
13	Danas Kazakevicius	C	Fr	6'10"	34-14	14.5	3.7	2.4	1.0	1.0	48.0%	25.0%	0.1	79.5%	17.7%
0	Isaiah Brown	G	So	6'1"	33-0	10.2	2.6	1.1	1.4	1.0	41.1%	43.8%	0.5	76.6%	20.2%
23	Ed Holland III	G	Sr	6'6"	25-2	9.2	1.8	1.9	0.4	0.4	45.3%	25.0%	0.2	68.0%	13.3%
21	Calvin Robins Jr.	F	So	6'5"	32-0	6.0	1.5	1.3	0.1	0.4	63.6%	—	0.0	40.0%	15.6%
10	Jeremiah Johnson	G	Fr	6'3"	20-0	7.3	1.4	0.7	0.3	0.1	34.7%	26.3%	0.9	42.9%	16.0%
3	BJ Powell	G	Fr	6'0"	21-0	4.3	1.7	0.2	0.3	0.3	48.3%	40.0%	0.2	53.8%	25.3%
7	Julian Johnson	F	Fr	6'9"	14-0	4.0	1.3	0.7	0.1	0.2	50.0%	—	0.0	50.0%	20.2%
1	Stefan Isailovic	F	Fr	6'8"	12-0	2.8	0.8	0.4	0.0	0.2	40.0%	0.0%	0.2	62.5%	17.4%
9	River Smith	G	Fr	5'10"	11-0	2.2	0.3	0.4	0.1	0.5	100.0%	—	0.0	25.0%	18.1%
5	Shane Frazier	G	Fr	6'5"	10-0	2.4	0.9	0.1	0.1	0.1	50.0%	33.3%	0.3	50.0%	22.7%

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

Radford2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted Radford'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
10	Del Jones	G	So	6'3"	32-32	31.8	17.2	3.5	3.5	3.0	46.5%	30.9%	4.3	80.9%	33.8%
11	Dennis Parker Jr.	G	Jr	6'6"	32-32	29.3	18.3	5.9	1.3	2.3	55.8%	37.7%	5.0	65.7%	33.9%
3	Jaylon Johnson	G	Sr	6'0"	29-27	31.3	11.9	2.8	3.4	2.1	46.8%	32.4%	7.2	80.0%	24.2%
21	Tyson Brown	F	Sr	6'9"	32-32	27.6	6.5	7.3	0.7	1.3	59.4%	0.0%	0.0	43.0%	14.3%
24	Lukas Walls	G	Jr	6'5"	32-26	23.9	7.9	2.5	1.1	1.1	67.6%	45.5%	3.2	75.4%	15.5%
4	Brennan Rigsby Jr.	G	Sr	6'3"	32-3	19.0	4.6	2.3	1.3	0.5	48.1%	27.9%	2.7	75.0%	14.7%
5	Mari Jordan	G	So	6'5"	32-8	13.7	5.3	2.7	0.7	0.6	55.4%	31.8%	1.4	94.6%	19.9%
7	Frederik Erichsen	F	Fr	6'9"	32-0	13.2	5.6	2.4	0.7	0.9	54.7%	30.0%	1.6	74.3%	23.5%
6	Louie Jordan	F	Sr	6'9"	29-0	10.9	4.1	1.4	0.3	0.4	54.5%	36.0%	3.1	62.5%	20.9%
12	Gabriel Ferreira	C	Fr	6'10"	11-0	8.1	2.6	2.8	0.1	0.2	52.2%	0.0%	0.1	55.6%	18.2%
30	Warren Keel Jr.	G	Fr	6'0"	13-0	6.3	1.0	0.2	1.0	0.2	40.6%	20.0%	0.4	—	12.3%
13	Bradley Land	G	Jr	6'6"	9-0	3.9	0.9	0.7	0.1	0.3	44.4%	0.0%	0.2	0.0%	20.2%
31	Diogo Alves	G	Fr	6'2"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
1	Zion Walker	G	So	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.

Howard2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
2	Cam Gillus	G	Jr	5'11"	35-35	32.7	10.8	4.3	4.7	2.3	53.7%	39.5%	3.5	75.6%	20.3%
11	Ose Okojie	G	Sr	6'5"	35-32	25.9	10.7	3.8	1.7	1.2	58.6%	42.9%	1.0	62.0%	22.5%
4	Alex Cotton	G	Jr	6'5"	32-24	26.9	8.5	3.1	1.2	0.8	50.8%	37.1%	6.1	67.6%	18.8%
12	Cedric Taylor III	G	Jr	6'7"	24-23	32.4	17.2	6.7	3.1	2.8	50.0%	29.8%	3.9	81.2%	32.2%
32	Travelle Bryson	F	So	6'5"	31-10	18.7	8.8	3.4	0.9	0.7	50.9%	24.6%	2.2	81.6%	27.3%
13	Danas Kazakevicius	C	Fr	6'10"	34-14	14.5	3.7	2.4	1.0	1.0	48.0%	25.0%	0.1	79.5%	17.7%
0	Isaiah Brown	G	So	6'1"	33-0	10.2	2.6	1.1	1.4	1.0	41.1%	43.8%	0.5	76.6%	20.2%
23	Ed Holland III	G	Sr	6'6"	25-2	9.2	1.8	1.9	0.4	0.4	45.3%	25.0%	0.2	68.0%	13.3%
21	Calvin Robins Jr.	F	So	6'5"	32-0	6.0	1.5	1.3	0.1	0.4	63.6%	—	0.0	40.0%	15.6%
10	Jeremiah Johnson	G	Fr	6'3"	20-0	7.3	1.4	0.7	0.3	0.1	34.7%	26.3%	0.9	42.9%	16.0%
3	BJ Powell	G	Fr	6'0"	21-0	4.3	1.7	0.2	0.3	0.3	48.3%	40.0%	0.2	53.8%	25.3%
7	Julian Johnson	F	Fr	6'9"	14-0	4.0	1.3	0.7	0.1	0.2	50.0%	—	0.0	50.0%	20.2%
1	Stefan Isailovic	F	Fr	6'8"	12-0	2.8	0.8	0.4	0.0	0.2	40.0%	0.0%	0.2	62.5%	17.4%
9	River Smith	G	Fr	5'10"	11-0	2.2	0.3	0.4	0.1	0.5	100.0%	—	0.0	25.0%	18.1%
5	Shane Frazier	G	Fr	6'5"	10-0	2.4	0.9	0.1	0.1	0.1	50.0%	33.3%	0.3	50.0%	22.7%

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

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

Howard

Against the spread

Season

23-8

Home

8-3

Road

9-4

Last 10

9-1

avg cover +8.6

Covered 2 straightCovered 7 of 8 as a favoriteCovered 6 of 7 with a line of 10+

Over / under

Season

14-17

Home

6-5

Road

5-8

Last 10

6-4

avg vs total +9.8

Over 2 straightOver in 4 of 8 as a favoriteOver in 4 of 7 with a line of 10+

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 19	#1MichiganAdjEM #1	N	L 80–101	+31.0	W+10.0	151.5	O181	112.2	141.7	71.3
Mar 17	#16UMBCAdjEM #147	N	W 86–83	+1.0	W+4.0	142.5	O169	123.5	119.2	69.6
Mar 14	NC CentralAdjEM #346	N	W 70–63	−11.5	L−4.5	143.5	U133	112.4	101.2	62.3
Mar 13	SC StateAdjEM #357	N	W 78–61	−15.5	W+1.5	146.0	U139	105.9	82.8	73.6
Mar 5	Norfolk StAdjEM #305	A	W 84–76	−6.5	W+1.5	148.5	O160	121.4	109.8	69.2
Mar 2	Coppin StAdjEM #364	H	W 90–70	−18.5	W+1.5	140.0	O160	127.2	98.9	70.8
Feb 28	Morgan StAdjEM #349	A	W 84–59	−9.5	W+15.5	158.0	U143	116.6	81.9	72.0
Feb 21	NC CentralAdjEM #346	H	W 100–67	−12.5	W+20.5	143.0	O167	140.3	94.0	71.3
Feb 16	Delaware StAdjEM #358	A	W 91–59	−11.0	W+21.0	130.5	O150	126.6	82.1	71.9
Feb 14	MD EasternAdjEM #345	H	W 79–53	−11.0	W+15.0	133.0	U132	122.8	82.4	64.3

Radford

Against the spread

Season

14-15

Home

6-8

Road

8-4

Last 10

7-3

avg cover +1.0

Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 2 of 4 as a favoriteCovered 5 of 6 as an underdog

Over / under

Season

16-13

Home

9-5

Road

5-7

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total +3.0

Over 2 straightOver in 2 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 6	PresbyterianAdjEM #252	N	L 85–91 OT	−2.0	L−8.0	146.5	O176	106.4	114.0	79.8
Feb 28	LongwoodAdjEM #248	A	L 74–90	+2.0	L−14.0	156.0	O164	100.3	122.0	73.8
Feb 26	SC UpstateAdjEM #284	H	W 71–59	−8.0	W+4.0	153.0	U130	105.4	87.6	67.4
Feb 21	UNC AshevilleAdjEM #226	A	L 73–74 OT	+2.0	W+1.0	149.0	U147	102.9	104.3	71.0
Feb 19	Gardner-WebbAdjEM #363	H	W 82–70	−19.0	L−7.0	162.5	U152	118.8	101.4	69.0
Feb 14	Charleston SoAdjEM #220	H	W 90–80	−4.5	W+5.5	162.0	O170	116.7	103.8	77.1
Feb 7	High PointAdjEM #50	A	L 77–86	+15.0	W+6.0	162.0	O163	96.9	108.3	79.4
Feb 4	WinthropAdjEM #116	H	L 78–80	+4.0	W+2.0	160.5	U158	109.1	111.8	71.5
Jan 31	PresbyterianAdjEM #252	A	W 93–84 2OT	+1.5	W+10.5	152.0	O177	112.9	102.0	82.4
Jan 29	Charleston SoAdjEM #220	A	W 84–75	+1.0	W+10.0	162.5	U159	107.2	95.7	78.4

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

HowardRadford

Efficiency

106.9

107.2

106.1

110.9

69.3

70.6

—

Shooting

50.9%

51.3%

49.4%

52.3%

35.8%

33.5%

74.0%

71.0%

43.4%

42.4%

Ball control & glass

19.3%

17.1%

20.7%

18.5%

35.8%

29.8%

31.4%

32.2%

8.4%

9.7%

11.2%

9.6%

Style

34.7%

45.4%

41.5%

38.3%

16.4%

16.6%

60.3%

45.7%

26.1%

30.0%

Roster

2.71

3.01

6'4.2"

6'5"

83.9%

—

Offseason

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

Howard

Returning minutes: 83.9%Returning production: 78.0%

Lost

Bryce Harris 32.3 mpg, 17.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Nobody of note.

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

Returns 84% of last season's minutes; lost 1 of its top 5. 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).

Radford

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted Radford'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.