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 siteRock Hill Sports & Event Center, Rock Hill, SCField of 68 Opening Day Marathon
App State
Efficiency #180
2025-26: 19-13 · 11-8 conf
vs
Merrimack
Efficiency #158
2025-26: 23-11 · 19-4 conf
Mon, Nov 2 · 6:00 AM ET
65.7
win 47%
Projected
66.5
win 53%
No line posted yet.
Model: MRMK −0.8 · total 132.3 · 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 oneProjected total
Average D-I game
148.2
PaceAdjusted tempo: Merrimack 65.8, App State 65.5 → 62.9 possessions
−11.7
Merrimack offense vs App State defense
−1.7
App State offense vs Merrimack defense
−2.5
Projected total
132.3
Axis starts at 120 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Merrimack offense vs App State defense
−1.7
App State offense vs Merrimack defense
+2.5
Merrimack by 0.8
0.8
App State side ◂▸ Merrimack 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 Merrimack.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 62.9, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, App State is the faster team (64.1, #355 of 365) and Merrimack the slower (63.7, #359). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
62.9
per team, 40 min
Projected total
132.3
model
Projected team totals
65.7 / 66.5
App State / Merrimack
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
65.5#359
App State
65.8#347
Merrimack
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetPace
Half-court grind
Merrimack averages 63.7 possessions per 40, App State 64.1. 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 62 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
AdvantageMerrimack
Where Merrimack struggles: shooting
Merrimack shoots an effective 49.1% (#288); App State allows 47.5% (#33). Expect about 48.1%, 3.2 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -4.5 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageApp State
Where App State struggles: shooting
App State shoots an effective 49.9% (#240); Merrimack allows 46.7% (#17). Expect about 48.1%, 3.1 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -4.5 points per 100 possessions.
TurnoversMerrimack
Merrimack protects the ball
Projected turnover rate of 13.9% is worth roughly +3.5 points per 100 possessions for Merrimack's offense.
GlassApp State
App State owns the glass
Projected offensive rebound rate of 36.1% is worth roughly +3.5 points per 100 possessions for App State's offense.
GlassMerrimack
Merrimack gets out-rebounded
Projected offensive rebound rate of 25.9% is worth roughly -2.8 points per 100 possessions against Merrimack's offense.
App State has the ball
OffenseMerrimack allowsvs D1 avg
49.9% #240
46.7% #17
-4.5 pt/100
15.3% #84
20.4% #16
-1.8 pt/100
32.0% #123
39.9% #365
+3.5 pt/100
39.1% #77
37.1% #239
+0.4 pt/100
64.5% #362
—
-0.7 pt/100
App State net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -3.0 pts/100
Merrimack has the ball
OffenseApp State allowsvs D1 avg
49.1% #288
47.5% #33
-4.5 pt/100
14.8% #56
14.0% #335
+3.5 pt/100
24.8% #343
29.0% #106
-2.8 pt/100
38.2% #99
31.2% #86
-0.1 pt/100
78.8% #8
—
+0.6 pt/100
Merrimack net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -3.3 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersApp Stateoffense vsMerrimackdefense
Share of shots by zone
App State shoots
37.8
4.1
12.2
45.9
Merrimack allows
41.9
4.9
20.8
32.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 59.6%#135 | 51.4%#11 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 35.5%#280 | 42.9%#247 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 36.4%#254 | 38.7%#188 | 38.0% |
| Three | 30.4%#335 | 30.3%#12 | 33.7% |
Merrimackoffense vsApp Statedefense
Share of shots by zone
Merrimack shoots
41.7
2.3
9.4
46.6
App State allows
35.5
5.0
18.7
40.8
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 53.4%#332 | 52.4%#19 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 38.5%#208 | 34.2%#46 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 33.5%#321 | 38.4%#172 | 38.0% |
| Three | 32.7%#243 | 32.2%#71 | 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 numbersApp State
+2.3extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#84 of 365
Off reb %
32.0%
#123
Def reb %
71.0%
#106
Turnover %
15.3%
#84
Forced TO %
14.0%
#335
FT rate
39.1%
#77
FT allowed
31.2%
#86
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.5
Defensive rebounding+0.5
Ball security+1.0
Forcing turnovers−1.9
Foul shots drawn+1.1
Foul shots allowed+1.0
Merrimack
−0.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#206 of 365
Off reb %
24.8%
#343
Def reb %
60.1%
#365
Turnover %
14.8%
#56
Forced TO %
20.4%
#16
FT rate
38.2%
#99
FT allowed
37.1%
#239
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.8
Defensive rebounding−3.0
Ball security+1.3
Forcing turnovers+2.5
Foul shots drawn+0.8
Foul shots allowed−0.5
App State has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.3 (#84 of 365) to Merrimack’s −0.6 (#206).
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
App State2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13 | Kasen Jennings | G | Sr | 6'5" | 32-32 | 32.7 | 15.2 | 4.3 | 2.1 | 1.6 | 46.7% | 32.2% | 5.6 | 76.9% | 31.2% | |
| 2 | Alonzo Dodd | G | Sr | 6'1" | 32-32 | 31.4 | 13.8 | 5.3 | 4.2 | 2.4 | 52.7% | 28.0% | 3.9 | 70.4% | 29.3% | |
| 9 | Jalen Tot | G | Sr | 6'1" | 31-16 | 25.1 | 9.6 | 1.9 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 48.9% | 33.6% | 7.8 | 69.8% | 25.6% | |
| 44 | Michael Marcus Jr. | F | So | 6'9" | 32-25 | 24.0 | 7.8 | 6.0 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 55.0% | 33.3% | 2.8 | 70.7% | 19.6% | |
| 4 | Eren Banks | G | Jr | 6'3" | 30-16 | 25.4 | 6.6 | 2.6 | 1.8 | 0.9 | 44.0% | 25.0% | 4.1 | 50.0% | 20.2% | |
| 23 | Chad Moodie | F | Jr | 6'8" | 32-7 | 12.6 | 2.7 | 2.7 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 58.6% | — | 0.0 | 41.5% | 14.0% | |
| 5 | Jason Clarke Jr. | G | So | 6'0" | 23-0 | 13.3 | 3.4 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 0.5 | 42.8% | 17.2% | 1.3 | 58.3% | 20.1% | |
| 21 | Andrin Njock | F | Fr | 6'6" | 21-2 | 12.0 | 3.4 | 3.2 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 57.0% | 17.6% | 0.8 | 76.7% | 16.0% | |
| 6 | Jacari Brim | G | Fr | 6'2" | 20-0 | 6.8 | 1.3 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 52.2% | 35.3% | 0.8 | 33.3% | 11.7% | |
| 14 | Cameron O'Kelley | G | So | 6'3" | 3-0 | 8.7 | 3.7 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 50.0% | 28.6% | 2.3 | 75.0% | 24.3% | |
| 33 | Grant Clayton | F | Fr | 6'7" | 2-0 | 9.5 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 66.7% | 0.0% | 0.5 | 0.0% | 25.1% | |
| 32 | Luke Ledford | G | Jr | 6'3" | 2-0 | 9.5 | 5.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 50.0% | 50.0% | 3.0 | — | 33.8% | |
| 0 | KJ Vasser | G | Jr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 7 | Ted Neal | G | Fr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 8 | Tre McKinnon | F | Fr | 6'5" | 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.
Merrimack2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Tye Dorset | G | Jr | 6'3" | 34-34 | 36.3 | 11.7 | 3.1 | 2.2 | 0.9 | 49.3% | 32.2% | 5.4 | 77.3% | 21.0% | |
| 20 | Todd Brogna | F | Sr | 6'7" | 34-34 | 29.2 | 6.1 | 4.7 | 2.4 | 1.5 | 51.6% | 35.1% | 3.9 | 70.8% | 15.5% | |
| 2 | Denver Anglinat Iona | G | Sr | 6'1" | 31-29 | 28.1 | 9.3 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 1.0 | 44.0% | 29.8% | 6.1 | 79.5% | 23.0% | |
| 5 | Elijah Wilbornat James Madison | F | Sr | 6'8" | 31-0 | 8.5 | 2.4 | 2.9 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 63.0% | — | 0.0 | 25.0% | 19.2% | |
| 0 | Dylan Veillette | F | So | 6'7" | 33-0 | 8.2 | 1.9 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 47.1% | 9.1% | 0.3 | 68.2% | 16.4% | |
| 7 | Aram Vladimir Soqui Urbanoat Fresno St | G | So | 6'4" | 13-2 | 9.5 | 2.2 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 41.4% | 27.3% | 1.7 | 66.7% | 16.3% | |
| 33 | AJ Lesburt Jr.at Brown | G | Sr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 12 | David Munro | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 14 | Jacob Moore | F | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Quinn Kwasniak | G | Fr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 24 | Amare Guerra | G | Fr | 5'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 3 | Ayden Johnson | G | Fr | 5'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Jeremiah Anderson | G | Sr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 10 | JP Skoric | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 13 | Rocco Westfield | G | Fr | 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.
Transfers in: Denver Anglin (from Iona), AJ Lesburt Jr. (from Brown), Aram Vladimir Soqui Urbano (from Fresno St), Elijah Wilborn (from James Madison)
App State2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13 | Kasen Jennings | G | Sr | 6'5" | 32-32 | 32.7 | 15.2 | 4.3 | 2.1 | 1.6 | 46.7% | 32.2% | 5.6 | 76.9% | 31.2% | |
| 2 | Alonzo Dodd | G | Sr | 6'1" | 32-32 | 31.4 | 13.8 | 5.3 | 4.2 | 2.4 | 52.7% | 28.0% | 3.9 | 70.4% | 29.3% | |
| 9 | Jalen Tot | G | Sr | 6'1" | 31-16 | 25.1 | 9.6 | 1.9 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 48.9% | 33.6% | 7.8 | 69.8% | 25.6% | |
| 44 | Michael Marcus Jr. | F | So | 6'9" | 32-25 | 24.0 | 7.8 | 6.0 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 55.0% | 33.3% | 2.8 | 70.7% | 19.6% | |
| 4 | Eren Banks | G | Jr | 6'3" | 30-16 | 25.4 | 6.6 | 2.6 | 1.8 | 0.9 | 44.0% | 25.0% | 4.1 | 50.0% | 20.2% | |
| 23 | Chad Moodie | F | Jr | 6'8" | 32-7 | 12.6 | 2.7 | 2.7 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 58.6% | — | 0.0 | 41.5% | 14.0% | |
| 5 | Jason Clarke Jr. | G | So | 6'0" | 23-0 | 13.3 | 3.4 | 1.6 | 1.4 | 0.5 | 42.8% | 17.2% | 1.3 | 58.3% | 20.1% | |
| 21 | Andrin Njock | F | Fr | 6'6" | 21-2 | 12.0 | 3.4 | 3.2 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 57.0% | 17.6% | 0.8 | 76.7% | 16.0% | |
| 6 | Jacari Brim | G | Fr | 6'2" | 20-0 | 6.8 | 1.3 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 52.2% | 35.3% | 0.8 | 33.3% | 11.7% | |
| 14 | Cameron O'Kelley | G | So | 6'3" | 3-0 | 8.7 | 3.7 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 50.0% | 28.6% | 2.3 | 75.0% | 24.3% | |
| 33 | Grant Clayton | F | Fr | 6'7" | 2-0 | 9.5 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 66.7% | 0.0% | 0.5 | 0.0% | 25.1% | |
| 32 | Luke Ledford | G | Jr | 6'3" | 2-0 | 9.5 | 5.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 50.0% | 50.0% | 3.0 | — | 33.8% | |
| 0 | KJ Vasser | G | Jr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 7 | Ted Neal | G | Fr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 8 | Tre McKinnon | F | Fr | 6'5" | 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 2025-26App State
Against the spread
Season
16-13-1
Home
7-6
Road
8-5-1
Last 10
5-5
avg cover +1.8
Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 4 of 9 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
12-18
Home
5-8
Road
5-9
Last 10
4-6
avg vs total +1.3
Over in the last gameOver in 4 of 9 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7 | Southern Miss | N | L 73–86 | −5.0 | L−18.0 | 137.5 | O159 | 106.5 | 125.4 | 68.6 |
| Feb 27 | Texas St | A | L 57–60 | −1.0 | L−4.0 | 135.0 | U117 | 93.8 | 98.7 | 60.8 |
| Feb 21 | GA Southern | H | W 89–74 | −7.5 | W+7.5 | 146.5 | O163 | 125.2 | 104.1 | 71.1 |
| Feb 19 | Marshall | H | L 93–94 | −3.5 | L−4.5 | 143.5 | O187 | 139.9 | 141.4 | 66.5 |
| Feb 14 | James Madison | A | L 58–69 | −1.5 | L−12.5 | 135.0 | U127 | 94.7 | 112.7 | 61.2 |
| Feb 11 | GA Southern | A | W 81–65 | −1.5 | W+14.5 | 144.0 | O146 | 122.2 | 98.1 | 66.3 |
| Feb 7 | E Michigan | H | W 65–60 | −7.5 | L−2.5 | 131.0 | U125 | 100.7 | 92.9 | 64.6 |
| Feb 4 | South Alabama | H | W 65–57 | −5.5 | W+2.5 | 132.0 | U122 | 111.4 | 97.7 | 58.4 |
| Jan 31 | Troy | A | W 66–44 | +8.0 | W+30.0 | 137.5 | U110 | 112.1 | 74.8 | 58.8 |
| Jan 29 | Southern Miss | A | W 70–63 | −2.0 | W+5.0 | 134.0 | U133 | 105.2 | 94.6 | 66.6 |
Merrimack
Against the spread
Season
20-14
Home
9-2
Road
9-8
Last 10
5-5
avg cover +3.8
Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 4 of 9 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
11-22-1
Home
5-6
Road
6-11
Last 10
4-6
avg vs total −3.0
Under 3 straightOver in 4 of 9 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10 | Siena | N | L 54–64 | −1.5 | L−11.5 | 128.5 | U118 | 84.9 | 100.7 | 63.6 |
| Mar 8 | Marist | N | W 58–57 | −3.0 | L−2.0 | 128.5 | U115 | 90.7 | 89.2 | 63.9 |
| Mar 6 | Sacred Heart | N | W 70–48 | −7.0 | W+15.0 | 143.0 | U118 | 114.6 | 78.6 | 61.1 |
| Mar 1 | Niagara | A | W 73–66 | −7.5 | L−0.5 | 127.0 | O139 | 120.5 | 108.9 | 60.6 |
| Feb 27 | Canisius | A | L 62–67 | −9.0 | L−14.0 | 130.0 | U129 | 102.1 | 110.3 | 60.7 |
| Feb 22 | Iona | H | W 88–86 2OT | −6.5 | L−4.5 | 137.0 | O174 | 119.0 | 116.3 | 73.9 |
| Feb 20 | Siena | H | W 79–72 OT | −2.5 | W+4.5 | 133.0 | O151 | 124.7 | 113.6 | 63.4 |
| Feb 15 | Quinnipiac | A | W 56–49 | +3.5 | W+10.5 | 142.0 | U105 | 85.8 | 75.1 | 65.3 |
| Feb 12 | Marist | H | W 81–56 | −2.5 | W+22.5 | 129.5 | O137 | 122.2 | 84.5 | 66.3 |
| Feb 7 | Rider | A | W 73–47 | −8.5 | W+17.5 | 137.5 | U120 | 127.1 | 81.8 | 57.5 |
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 homeApp StateMerrimack
Efficiency
106.6
107.2
107.0
106.3
65.5
65.8
—
—
Shooting
49.9%
49.1%
53.6%
49.1%
30.4%
32.7%
64.5%
78.8%
39.1%
38.2%
Ball control & glass
15.3%
14.8%
14.0%
20.4%
32.0%
24.8%
29.0%
39.9%
7.7%
7.2%
8.8%
13.0%
Style
45.9%
46.1%
43.1%
38.0%
12.0%
13.5%
47.8%
56.0%
27.2%
17.6%
Roster
3.17
3.46
6'3.9"
6'4.3"
85.9%
36.3%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputApp State
Returning minutes: 85.9%Returning production: 81.0%
Lost
- Luke Wilson 28.2 mpg, 10.7 ppg · transferred to Syracuse
Added
- Tre McKinnon no D1 minutes last season
- KJ Vasser no D1 minutes last season
- Ted Neal no D1 minutes last season
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).
Merrimack
Returning minutes: 36.3%Returning production: 32.9%
Lost
- Ernest Shelton 36.9 mpg, 15.9 ppg · transferred to Boston College
- Kevair Kennedy 36.8 mpg, 18.4 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Andrés Marrero 27.4 mpg, 7.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- KC Ugwuakazi 17.8 mpg, 4.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Jaylen Stinson 3.8 mpg, 0.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Aliou Cisse 2.7 mpg, 0.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Denver Anglin from Iona · 27.2 mpg, 9.0 ppg last season
- Elijah Wilborn from James Madison · 8.0 mpg, 2.2 ppg last season
- Aram Vladimir Soqui Urbano from Fresno St · 3.9 mpg, 0.9 ppg last season
- Rocco Westfield no D1 minutes last season
- JP Skoric no D1 minutes last season
- Jacob Moore no D1 minutes last season
Returns 36% of last season's minutes; lost 3 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).
Head-to-head
this season and lastNo 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.