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 siteAcrisure Arena, Palm Springs, CAAcrisure Series
Arizona St
Efficiency #93
2025-26: 17-16 · 8-12 conf
vs
LSU
Efficiency #72
2025-26: 15-17 · 3-16 conf
Wed, Nov 25 · 2:00 PM ET
76.2
win 44%
Projected
77.8
win 56%
No line posted yet.
Model: LSU −1.7 · total 154.0 · 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: LSU 67.9, Arizona St 69.5 → 69.1 possessions
+1.7
LSU offense vs Arizona St defense
+2.9
Arizona St offense vs LSU defense
+1.2
Projected total
154.0
Axis starts at 145 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
LSU offense vs Arizona St defense
+2.9
Arizona St offense vs LSU defense
−1.2
LSU by 1.7
1.7
Arizona St side ◂▸ LSU 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 LSU.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 69.1, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Arizona St is the faster team (70.6, #71 of 365) and LSU the slower (68.6, #168). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
69.1
per team, 40 min
Projected total
154.0
model
Projected team totals
76.2 / 77.8
Arizona St / LSU
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
69.5#79
Arizona St
67.9#219
LSU
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageLSU
Where LSU scores: the offensive glass
LSU rebounds 33.1% of its own misses (#87); Arizona St lets opponents grab 34.9% of their own misses (#337). Expect about 34.5%, 4.1 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.5 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageArizona St
Where Arizona St scores: ball control
Arizona St turns it over on 17.1% of possessions (#213); LSU forces turnovers on 13.9% of opponent possessions (#338). Expect about 15.1%, 1.6 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.0 points per 100 possessions.
DefenseArizona St
Arizona St's shot-blocking
Arizona St ranks #30 nationally in block rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 11.2% of LSU's two-point attempts to get blocked against this defense.
Arizona St has the ball
OffenseLSU allowsvs D1 avg
51.1% #190
50.9% #150
-0.4 pt/100
17.1% #213
13.9% #338
+2.0 pt/100
29.8% #206
31.7% #239
+0.1 pt/100
39.5% #66
37.8% #256
+0.5 pt/100
75.3% #73
—
+0.3 pt/100
Arizona St net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +2.5 pts/100
LSU has the ball
OffenseArizona St allowsvs D1 avg
52.8% #111
52.4% #235
+2.1 pt/100
15.6% #107
18.5% #77
-0.5 pt/100
33.1% #87
34.9% #337
+2.5 pt/100
40.9% #49
34.3% #160
+0.3 pt/100
76.4% #43
—
+0.3 pt/100
LSU net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +4.7 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersArizona Stoffense vsLSUdefense
Share of shots by zone
Arizona St shoots
35.6
7.8
18.0
38.6
LSU allows
39.5
6.9
16.5
37.1
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 59.9%#119 | 56.4%#98 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 42.0%#122 | 34.2%#47 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 38.4%#177 | 39.9%#241 | 38.0% |
| Three | 33.4%#202 | 35.4%#271 | 33.7% |
LSUoffense vsArizona Stdefense
Share of shots by zone
LSU shoots
40.3
9.4
15.8
34.5
Arizona St allows
37.3
7.7
15.6
39.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 62.8%#56 | 59.3%#204 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 37.3%#240 | 43.1%#253 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 39.8%#115 | 39.2%#209 | 38.0% |
| Three | 33.1%#225 | 35.0%#249 | 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 numbersArizona St
+0.8extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#149 of 365
Off reb %
29.8%
#206
Def reb %
65.1%
#337
Turnover %
17.1%
#213
Forced TO %
18.5%
#77
FT rate
39.5%
#66
FT allowed
34.3%
#160
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.2
Defensive rebounding−1.4
Ball security−0.2
Forcing turnovers+1.2
Foul shots drawn+1.1
Foul shots allowed+0.2
LSU
+0.3extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#170 of 365
Off reb %
33.1%
#87
Def reb %
68.3%
#239
Turnover %
15.6%
#107
Forced TO %
13.9%
#338
FT rate
40.9%
#49
FT allowed
37.8%
#256
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.9
Defensive rebounding−0.3
Ball security+0.8
Forcing turnovers−1.9
Foul shots drawn+1.5
Foul shots allowed−0.7
Arizona St has more extra scoring chances per game: +0.8 (#149 of 365) to LSU’s +0.3 (#170).
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
Arizona St2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Arizona St'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 | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | Maurice Odum | G | Sr | 6'2" | 33-33 | 33.8 | 16.4 | 3.1 | 5.7 | 3.2 | 51.3% | 37.7% | 7.2 | 82.9% | 29.7% | |
| 35 | Massamba Diop | C | Fr | 7'1" | 33-33 | 29.7 | 13.6 | 5.8 | 1.1 | 1.9 | 58.2% | 30.8% | 0.8 | 71.5% | 24.8% | |
| 2 | Anthony Johnson | G | Sr | 6'3" | 33-5 | 24.8 | 13.2 | 3.2 | 1.7 | 2.2 | 49.7% | 32.9% | 2.4 | 76.1% | 31.7% | |
| 15 | Noah Meeusen | G | So | 6'5" | 30-11 | 27.3 | 5.9 | 3.2 | 2.6 | 1.3 | 49.0% | 31.0% | 3.3 | 82.9% | 14.2% | |
| 1 | Santiago Trouet | F | So | 6'11" | 31-30 | 25.7 | 8.1 | 6.1 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 46.1% | 20.8% | 0.8 | 78.3% | 19.5% | |
| 14 | Andrija Grbovic | F | Jr | 6'11" | 33-27 | 19.9 | 6.8 | 2.9 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 51.9% | 35.0% | 3.7 | 78.9% | 19.4% | |
| 4 | Bryce Ford | G | Jr | 6'4" | 27-20 | 22.4 | 6.9 | 1.6 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 47.3% | 31.4% | 3.8 | 82.9% | 18.6% | |
| 23 | Allen Mukeba | F | Sr | 6'8" | 33-6 | 16.4 | 5.5 | 3.5 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 56.1% | 25.0% | 0.1 | 53.2% | 19.9% | |
| 8 | Marcus Adams Jr. | F | Jr | 6'8" | 14-0 | 11.7 | 3.6 | 2.4 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 43.9% | 29.6% | 1.9 | 70.0% | 19.7% | |
| 12 | Trevor Best | G | So | 6'3" | 17-0 | 6.1 | 1.4 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 36.4% | 16.7% | 0.7 | 63.6% | 18.1% | |
| 11 | Kash Polk | F | Fr | 6'10" | 1-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 0.0% | |
| 3 | Adante' Holiman | G | Sr | 5'11" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 24 | Dame Salane | C | Fr | 7'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 70 | Jovan Icitovic | F | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 22 | Quentin McCoy | G | So | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 7 | Vijay Wallace | G | Jr | 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.
LSU2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | Pablo Tamba | F | Sr | 6'7" | 32-32 | 28.6 | 7.9 | 7.3 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 64.1% | 32.0% | 0.8 | 60.7% | 14.6% | |
| 2 | Jalen Reece | G | Fr | 6'0" | 32-10 | 23.8 | 5.8 | 1.8 | 3.6 | 1.3 | 42.2% | 29.9% | 2.4 | 72.3% | 18.6% | |
| 1 | Mike Nwoko | F | Jr | 6'10" | 32-29 | 21.9 | 13.4 | 5.9 | 0.8 | 1.8 | 61.0% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 76.1% | 31.9% | |
| 4 | Rashad King | G | Sr | 6'6" | 32-9 | 18.7 | 5.8 | 2.1 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 47.5% | 29.5% | 2.8 | 78.6% | 20.5% | |
| 11 | Dedan Thomas Jr. | G | Jr | 6'1" | 16-15 | 29.4 | 15.3 | 2.7 | 6.5 | 1.6 | 49.4% | 30.2% | 2.7 | 83.3% | 29.5% | |
| 7 | PJ Carter | G | Sr | 6'4" | 25-1 | 10.8 | 4.2 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 49.5% | 33.7% | 3.4 | 85.7% | 23.1% | |
| 0 | Mazi Mosley | G | Fr | 6'5" | 18-0 | 6.7 | 1.9 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 48.6% | 38.5% | 1.4 | 0.0% | 20.0% | |
| 9 | Jalen Reed | F | Jr | 6'10" | 6-0 | 17.8 | 9.5 | 5.7 | 0.7 | 1.8 | 61.4% | 42.9% | 1.2 | 66.7% | 28.5% | |
| 16 | Ron Zipper | G | Fr | 6'5" | 9-0 | 3.6 | 2.2 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 53.6% | 41.7% | 1.3 | 83.3% | 35.5% | |
| 14 | Jaden Bobbett | G | Sr | 6'1" | 6-0 | 1.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.2 | — | 23.9% | |
| 5 | Marcus Vaughn | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 13 | Matt Gilhool | F | Fr | 6'11" | 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.
Arizona St2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Arizona St'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 | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | Maurice Odum | G | Sr | 6'2" | 33-33 | 33.8 | 16.4 | 3.1 | 5.7 | 3.2 | 51.3% | 37.7% | 7.2 | 82.9% | 29.7% | |
| 35 | Massamba Diop | C | Fr | 7'1" | 33-33 | 29.7 | 13.6 | 5.8 | 1.1 | 1.9 | 58.2% | 30.8% | 0.8 | 71.5% | 24.8% | |
| 2 | Anthony Johnson | G | Sr | 6'3" | 33-5 | 24.8 | 13.2 | 3.2 | 1.7 | 2.2 | 49.7% | 32.9% | 2.4 | 76.1% | 31.7% | |
| 15 | Noah Meeusen | G | So | 6'5" | 30-11 | 27.3 | 5.9 | 3.2 | 2.6 | 1.3 | 49.0% | 31.0% | 3.3 | 82.9% | 14.2% | |
| 1 | Santiago Trouet | F | So | 6'11" | 31-30 | 25.7 | 8.1 | 6.1 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 46.1% | 20.8% | 0.8 | 78.3% | 19.5% | |
| 14 | Andrija Grbovic | F | Jr | 6'11" | 33-27 | 19.9 | 6.8 | 2.9 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 51.9% | 35.0% | 3.7 | 78.9% | 19.4% | |
| 4 | Bryce Ford | G | Jr | 6'4" | 27-20 | 22.4 | 6.9 | 1.6 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 47.3% | 31.4% | 3.8 | 82.9% | 18.6% | |
| 23 | Allen Mukeba | F | Sr | 6'8" | 33-6 | 16.4 | 5.5 | 3.5 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 56.1% | 25.0% | 0.1 | 53.2% | 19.9% | |
| 8 | Marcus Adams Jr. | F | Jr | 6'8" | 14-0 | 11.7 | 3.6 | 2.4 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 43.9% | 29.6% | 1.9 | 70.0% | 19.7% | |
| 12 | Trevor Best | G | So | 6'3" | 17-0 | 6.1 | 1.4 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 36.4% | 16.7% | 0.7 | 63.6% | 18.1% | |
| 11 | Kash Polk | F | Fr | 6'10" | 1-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | 0.0% | |
| 3 | Adante' Holiman | G | Sr | 5'11" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 24 | Dame Salane | C | Fr | 7'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 70 | Jovan Icitovic | F | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 22 | Quentin McCoy | G | So | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 7 | Vijay Wallace | G | Jr | 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 2025-26Arizona St
Against the spread
Season
20-12-1
Home
10-4-1
Road
5-6
Last 10
6-4
avg cover +0.2
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 4 of 8 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
15-17-1
Home
4-11
Road
7-4
Last 10
3-7
avg vs total −6.8
Under in the last gameOver in 3 of 8 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 11 | #7Iowa State | N | L 42–91 | +12.5 | L−36.5 | 149.5 | U133 | 61.1 | 132.3 | 68.8 |
| Mar 10 | Baylor | N | W 83–79 | +5.0 | W+9.0 | 152.5 | O162 | 117.3 | 111.6 | 70.8 |
| Mar 7 | #6Iowa State | A | L 65–86 | +16.5 | L−4.5 | 148.0 | O151 | 89.1 | 117.9 | 73.0 |
| Mar 3 | #14Kansas | H | W 70–60 | +6.0 | W+16.0 | 150.0 | U130 | 96.7 | 82.8 | 72.4 |
| Feb 28 | Utah | H | W 73–60 | −7.0 | W+6.0 | 150.5 | U133 | 124.8 | 102.6 | 58.5 |
| Feb 24 | TCU | A | L 78–90 | +6.5 | L−5.5 | 149.0 | O168 | 104.1 | 120.1 | 75.0 |
| Feb 21 | Baylor | A | L 68–73 | +8.5 | W+3.5 | 158.0 | U141 | 104.0 | 111.6 | 65.4 |
| Feb 17 | #13Texas Tech | H | W 72–67 | +7.5 | W+12.5 | 155.5 | U139 | 108.9 | 101.3 | 66.1 |
| Feb 10 | Oklahoma St | H | W 85–76 | −2.5 | W+6.5 | 163.0 | U161 | 113.8 | 101.7 | 74.7 |
| Feb 7 | Colorado | A | L 70–78 | +3.5 | L−4.5 | 158.0 | U148 | 106.7 | 118.9 | 65.6 |
LSU
Against the spread
Season
18-14
Home
7-10
Road
8-2
Last 10
5-5
avg cover −3.1
Covered the last gameCovered 5 of 9 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
15-15-2
Home
7-8-2
Road
5-5
Last 10
6-4
avg vs total +10.2
Over 3 straightOver in 6 of 9 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 11 | Kentucky | N | L 82–87 | +9.0 | W+4.0 | 151.5 | O169 | 116.8 | 123.9 | 70.2 |
| Mar 7 | Texas A&M | H | L 91–94 3OT | +2.5 | L−0.5 | 160.5 | O185 | 98.7 | 101.9 | 92.2 |
| Mar 3 | Auburn | A | L 74–88 | +10.5 | L−3.5 | 155.5 | O162 | 109.8 | 130.6 | 67.4 |
| Feb 28 | Oklahoma | H | L 67–83 | −2.0 | L−18.0 | 156.0 | U150 | 102.6 | 127.1 | 65.3 |
| Feb 25 | Ole Miss | A | W 106–99 2OT | +2.0 | W+9.0 | 147.0 | O205 | 125.8 | 117.5 | 84.3 |
| Feb 21 | #25Alabama | H | L 83–90 | +7.5 | W+0.5 | 172.0 | O173 | 116.9 | 126.7 | 71.0 |
| Feb 17 | Texas | A | L 85–88 | +11.0 | W+8.0 | 151.0 | O173 | 123.9 | 128.3 | 68.6 |
| Feb 14 | Tennessee | A | L 63–73 | +14.5 | W+4.5 | 143.5 | U136 | 107.7 | 124.8 | 58.5 |
| Feb 10 | #21Arkansas | H | L 62–91 | +5.0 | L−24.0 | 159.0 | U153 | 83.1 | 122.0 | 74.6 |
| Feb 7 | Georgia | H | L 71–83 | +1.0 | L−11.0 | 161.5 | U154 | 107.7 | 125.9 | 65.9 |
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 homeArizona StLSU
Efficiency
110.9
114.7
106.4
107.9
69.5
67.9
—
—
Shooting
51.1%
52.8%
51.7%
54.5%
33.4%
33.1%
75.3%
76.4%
39.5%
40.9%
Ball control & glass
17.1%
15.6%
18.5%
13.9%
29.8%
33.1%
34.9%
31.7%
10.5%
9.5%
9.6%
8.3%
Style
38.4%
34.5%
41.8%
46.3%
16.3%
13.4%
53.0%
52.5%
32.3%
29.8%
Roster
2.82
2.99
6'7"
6'5.1"
—
60.6%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputArizona St
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Arizona St'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.)
LSU
Returning minutes: 60.6%Returning production: 60.9%
Lost
- Marquel Sutton 31.4 mpg, 13.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Max Mackinnon 30.9 mpg, 15.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Robert Miller III 18.8 mpg, 5.9 ppg · transferred to Miami
Added
- Matt Gilhool no D1 minutes last season
- Marcus Vaughn no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 61% of last season's minutes; lost 2 of its top 5.
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.