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-conferenceChace Athletic Center, Smithfield, RIAmerica East-Metro Challenge
Fairfield
Efficiency #230
2025-26: 21-13 · 13-10 conf
@
Bryant
Efficiency #347
2025-26: 9-22 · 5-12 conf
Sun, Nov 8 · TBD
72.3
win 59%
Projected
69.6
win 41%
No line posted yet.
Model: FAIR −2.7 · 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 oneProjected total
Average D-I game
148.2
PaceAdjusted tempo: Bryant 66.3, Fairfield 68.1 → 66.1 possessions
−4.9
Bryant offense vs Fairfield defense
−4.0
Fairfield offense vs Bryant defense
+2.5
Projected total
141.8
Axis starts at 135 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Bryant offense vs Fairfield defense
−4.0
Fairfield offense vs Bryant defense
−2.5
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.8
Fairfield by 2.7
2.7
Fairfield side ◂▸ Bryant 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 Bryant.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 66.1, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Fairfield is the faster team (67.1, #239 of 365) and Bryant the slower (64.4, #347). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
66.1
per team, 40 min
Projected total
141.8
model
Projected team totals
72.3 / 69.6
Fairfield / Bryant
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
68.1#203
Fairfield
66.3#330
Bryant
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetPace
Half-court grind
Bryant averages 64.4 possessions per 40, Fairfield 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 64 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
AdvantageBryant
Where Bryant struggles: shooting
Bryant shoots an effective 46.9% (#340); Fairfield allows 51.0% (#159). Expect about 48.6%, 2.7 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.8 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageFairfield
Where Fairfield scores: ball control
Fairfield turns it over on 15.3% of possessions (#92); Bryant forces turnovers on 14.6% of opponent possessions (#316). Expect about 14.6%, 2.2 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.7 points per 100 possessions.
TurnoversBryant
Bryant turns it over
Projected turnover rate of 18.8% is worth roughly -2.5 points per 100 possessions against Bryant's offense.
GlassFairfield
Fairfield owns the glass
Projected offensive rebound rate of 34.4% is worth roughly +2.5 points per 100 possessions for Fairfield's offense.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (Bryant, Bryant'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 Fairfield at about 33.9% of its shots from three, Bryant about 43.9%.
Fairfield has the ball
OffenseBryant allowsvs D1 avg
48.8% #294
52.7% #257
-1.0 pt/100
15.3% #92
14.6% #316
+2.7 pt/100
35.8% #29
31.0% #203
+2.5 pt/100
27.7% #346
33.5% #141
-0.6 pt/100
70.5% #255
—
-0.2 pt/100
Fairfield net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +3.5 pts/100
Bryant has the ball
OffenseFairfield allowsvs D1 avg
46.9% #340
51.0% #159
-3.8 pt/100
20.2% #351
16.8% #165
-2.5 pt/100
27.7% #276
29.1% #116
-1.5 pt/100
29.4% #322
30.4% #69
-0.7 pt/100
76.0% #53
—
+0.3 pt/100
Bryant net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -8.2 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersFairfieldoffense vsBryantdefense
Share of shots by zone
Fairfield shoots
41.6
3.5
19.1
35.8
Bryant allows
45.4
5.1
13.5
36.1
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 52.7%#343 | 57.5%#128 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 47.7%#29 | 44.0%#267 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 38.6%#165 | 34.7%#65 | 38.0% |
| Three | 33.2%#216 | 36.3%#320 | 33.7% |
Bryantoffense vsFairfielddefense
Share of shots by zone
Bryant shoots
38.1
3.2
11.2
47.6
Fairfield allows
46.9
3.4
14.3
35.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 55.6%#283 | 55.7%#78 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 35.6%#277 | 51.7%#358 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 27.8%#363 | 34.0%#49 | 38.0% |
| Three | 30.0%#343 | 34.3%#200 | 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 numbersFairfield
+2.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#71 of 365
Off reb %
35.8%
#29
Def reb %
70.9%
#116
Turnover %
15.3%
#92
Forced TO %
16.8%
#165
FT rate
27.7%
#346
FT allowed
30.4%
#69
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.7
Defensive rebounding+0.5
Ball security+1.0
Forcing turnovers+0.1
Foul shots drawn−1.9
Foul shots allowed+1.2
Bryant
−5.8extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#354 of 365
Off reb %
27.7%
#276
Def reb %
69.0%
#203
Turnover %
20.2%
#351
Forced TO %
14.6%
#316
FT rate
29.4%
#322
FT allowed
33.5%
#141
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.9
Defensive rebounding−0.1
Ball security−2.4
Forcing turnovers−1.4
Foul shots drawn−1.4
Foul shots allowed+0.4
Fairfield has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.6 (#71 of 365) to Bryant’s −5.8 (#354).
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
Fairfield2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 44 | Declan Wucherpfennig | G | So | 6'7" | 34-34 | 31.6 | 12.1 | 8.5 | 1.6 | 1.2 | 55.7% | 31.7% | 1.9 | 65.7% | 22.1% | |
| 12 | Qadir Martinat Mercyhurst | F | Jr | 6'5" | 34-33 | 31.4 | 11.6 | 7.0 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 58.9% | 22.2% | 0.5 | 58.1% | 21.2% | |
| 8 | Tony Williams | G | So | 6'1" | 33-23 | 20.0 | 6.5 | 1.5 | 1.7 | 0.8 | 47.4% | 32.0% | 3.7 | 68.0% | 22.6% | |
| 1 | Eric Mejia | G | Jr | 6'3" | 34-7 | 18.9 | 4.9 | 2.2 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 38.7% | 30.6% | 1.1 | 73.3% | 20.0% | |
| 4 | Halon Rawlins | G | So | 6'6" | 33-23 | 16.9 | 3.9 | 2.6 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 39.9% | 25.0% | 2.1 | 60.9% | 19.4% | |
| 15 | Isaac Munkadi | F | Jr | 6'10" | 34-3 | 9.4 | 2.7 | 2.7 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 57.3% | 25.0% | 0.1 | 51.2% | 17.1% | |
| 88 | Marko Radunovicat Boston College | F | So | 6'6" | 18-0 | 9.2 | 2.2 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 30.8% | 23.1% | 1.4 | 70.0% | 25.6% | |
| 5 | Nasir Rodriguez | G | So | 6'4" | 22-0 | 7.2 | 2.7 | 1.3 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 36.4% | 31.6% | 1.7 | 66.7% | 32.8% | |
| 24 | Joe Ganton | G | Sr | 6'4" | 3-0 | 2.3 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 40.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 43.2% | |
| 9 | Tanner Ostop | G | Sr | 6'0" | 3-0 | 2.0 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 25.0% | 0.0% | 1.0 | — | 33.9% | |
| 13 | Noah Best | G | Sr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 33 | Peyton Smith | F | Sr | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 25 | Brayden Jones | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 0 | Cole Edelen | G | Fr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Jaden Brown | G | Fr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 3 | Jah Hatchett | G | Fr | 6'0" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 23 | Oesoemana Sacko | F | Fr | 6'8" | 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: Qadir Martin (from Mercyhurst), Marko Radunovic (from Boston College)
Bryant2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Bryant'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 99 | Timofei Rudovskii | F | Fr | 6'9" | 31-31 | 31.5 | 12.9 | 4.7 | 1.8 | 2.5 | 52.0% | 36.2% | 6.0 | 83.7% | 27.3% | |
| 0 | Ashley Sims II | F | Fr | 6'8" | 31-29 | 31.4 | 7.2 | 5.0 | 2.0 | 1.2 | 50.5% | 17.9% | 1.3 | 48.9% | 16.4% | |
| 1 | Ty Tabales | G | Fr | 6'2" | 30-28 | 27.9 | 9.1 | 2.2 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 39.4% | 26.4% | 5.9 | 80.4% | 29.1% | |
| 14 | Keegan Harvey | F | Sr | 6'11" | 31-31 | 26.5 | 11.2 | 4.9 | 1.1 | 2.0 | 60.4% | 40.0% | 2.3 | 83.2% | 24.7% | |
| 3 | Aaron Davis III | F | Jr | 6'7" | 30-16 | 23.3 | 9.5 | 3.5 | 0.7 | 1.1 | 52.6% | 36.3% | 5.3 | 67.2% | 26.2% | |
| 13 | Jakai Robinson | G | Sr | 6'5" | 30-4 | 15.9 | 3.1 | 2.0 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 40.0% | 20.0% | 0.3 | 82.0% | 13.2% | |
| 4 | Quincy Allen | G | Sr | 6'8" | 16-9 | 24.6 | 9.8 | 4.3 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 46.2% | 26.9% | 4.2 | 62.9% | 27.1% | |
| 2 | Khalil Williams | F | So | 6'5" | 22-5 | 11.4 | 2.8 | 1.6 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 32.1% | 21.3% | 2.1 | 90.9% | 27.4% | |
| 9 | Gio Sanford | F | Fr | 6'4" | 18-0 | 13.2 | 1.8 | 1.3 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 40.3% | 9.1% | 0.6 | 57.1% | 11.8% | |
| 11 | Ethane Bourgade | F | Fr | 6'9" | 20-0 | 10.1 | 1.4 | 1.8 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 30.6% | 14.3% | 0.3 | 52.9% | 13.4% | |
| 8 | Lennart Weber | F | Sr | 6'8" | 20-0 | 9.4 | 2.4 | 1.5 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 47.7% | 21.1% | 0.9 | 66.7% | 17.2% | |
| 10 | Daniel Akoue | F | Fr | 6'10" | 12-2 | 11.7 | 3.0 | 2.1 | 0.3 | 1.1 | 47.8% | 18.2% | 0.9 | 77.8% | 19.2% | |
| 7 | Joe Green | G | Fr | 6'3" | 9-0 | 4.9 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 44.4% | — | 0.0 | 100.0% | 21.2% | |
| 6 | Langston Bailey | G | So | 5'9" | 7-0 | 2.0 | 1.7 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.6 | 62.5% | 40.0% | 0.7 | 100.0% | 54.1% | |
| 21 | Frankie Vassalluzzo | G | So | 6'0" | 7-0 | 1.3 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | — | 26.6% | |
| 22 | Jason Sepe | F | So | 6'3" | 6-0 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 100.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 9.9% | |
| 5 | Jaheim Nyam | G | Jr | 6'3" | 5-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.2 | — | 47.8% | |
| 30 | Michael DeOrsey | G | Fr | 5'11" | 5-0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 23.9% | |
| 25 | Reed Woerner | 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.
Fairfield2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 44 | Declan Wucherpfennig | G | So | 6'7" | 34-34 | 31.6 | 12.1 | 8.5 | 1.6 | 1.2 | 55.7% | 31.7% | 1.9 | 65.7% | 22.1% | |
| 12 | Qadir Martinat Mercyhurst | F | Jr | 6'5" | 34-33 | 31.4 | 11.6 | 7.0 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 58.9% | 22.2% | 0.5 | 58.1% | 21.2% | |
| 8 | Tony Williams | G | So | 6'1" | 33-23 | 20.0 | 6.5 | 1.5 | 1.7 | 0.8 | 47.4% | 32.0% | 3.7 | 68.0% | 22.6% | |
| 1 | Eric Mejia | G | Jr | 6'3" | 34-7 | 18.9 | 4.9 | 2.2 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 38.7% | 30.6% | 1.1 | 73.3% | 20.0% | |
| 4 | Halon Rawlins | G | So | 6'6" | 33-23 | 16.9 | 3.9 | 2.6 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 39.9% | 25.0% | 2.1 | 60.9% | 19.4% | |
| 15 | Isaac Munkadi | F | Jr | 6'10" | 34-3 | 9.4 | 2.7 | 2.7 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 57.3% | 25.0% | 0.1 | 51.2% | 17.1% | |
| 88 | Marko Radunovicat Boston College | F | So | 6'6" | 18-0 | 9.2 | 2.2 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 30.8% | 23.1% | 1.4 | 70.0% | 25.6% | |
| 5 | Nasir Rodriguez | G | So | 6'4" | 22-0 | 7.2 | 2.7 | 1.3 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 36.4% | 31.6% | 1.7 | 66.7% | 32.8% | |
| 24 | Joe Ganton | G | Sr | 6'4" | 3-0 | 2.3 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 40.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 43.2% | |
| 9 | Tanner Ostop | G | Sr | 6'0" | 3-0 | 2.0 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 25.0% | 0.0% | 1.0 | — | 33.9% | |
| 13 | Noah Best | G | Sr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 33 | Peyton Smith | F | Sr | 6'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 25 | Brayden Jones | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 0 | Cole Edelen | G | Fr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Jaden Brown | G | Fr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 3 | Jah Hatchett | G | Fr | 6'0" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 23 | Oesoemana Sacko | F | Fr | 6'8" | 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: Qadir Martin (from Mercyhurst), Marko Radunovic (from Boston College)
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26Fairfield
Against the spread
Season
15-18
Home
5-10
Road
8-7
Last 10
7-3
avg cover +2.5
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 4 as a favoriteCovered 4 of 6 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
13-20
Home
3-12
Road
10-5
Last 10
3-7
avg vs total −4.4
Under 5 straightOver in 1 of 4 as a favoriteOver in 2 of 6 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 8 | Siena | N | L 61–76 | +1.5 | L−13.5 | 138.0 | U137 | 95.5 | 119.0 | 63.9 |
| Mar 6 | Saint Peter's | N | W 74–55 | +2.5 | W+21.5 | 137.5 | U129 | 114.7 | 85.3 | 64.5 |
| Mar 5 | Manhattan | N | W 71–60 | −4.5 | W+6.5 | 148.0 | U131 | 104.5 | 88.3 | 67.9 |
| Mar 1 | Mount St Marys | H | L 47–69 | −3.5 | L−25.5 | 146.5 | U116 | 70.3 | 103.2 | 66.8 |
| Feb 27 | Siena | H | W 72–58 | +1.0 | W+15.0 | 142.5 | U130 | 102.9 | 82.9 | 69.9 |
| Feb 22 | Quinnipiac | A | W 85–79 | +6.5 | W+12.5 | 150.5 | O164 | 124.3 | 115.5 | 68.4 |
| Feb 20 | Sacred Heart | H | W 78–68 | −5.0 | W+5.0 | 158.0 | U146 | 113.2 | 98.7 | 68.9 |
| Feb 15 | Saint Peter's | A | L 74–83 | +4.0 | L−5.0 | 142.0 | O157 | 107.6 | 120.7 | 68.8 |
| Feb 7 | Marist | H | W 63–60 | +1.0 | W+4.0 | 138.0 | U123 | 103.0 | 98.1 | 61.2 |
| Feb 5 | Sacred Heart | A | W 92–87 | −1.0 | W+4.0 | 155.0 | O179 | 129.1 | 122.1 | 71.2 |
Bryant
Against the spread
Season
11-18
Home
6-5
Road
5-13
Last 10
3-7
avg cover −3.5
Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 2 of 4 as a favoriteCovered 1 of 6 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
11-18
Home
7-4
Road
4-14
Last 10
7-3
avg vs total +10.6
Over 2 straightOver in 3 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 | Vermont | A | L 57–77 | +12.0 | L−8.0 | 131.5 | O134 | 95.9 | 129.5 | 59.5 |
| Mar 3 | New Hampshire | A | L 83–88 2OT | +1.0 | L−4.0 | 135.5 | O171 | 106.3 | 112.7 | 78.1 |
| Feb 28 | NJIT | H | W 69–52 | +1.5 | W+18.5 | 138.5 | U121 | 107.3 | 80.9 | 64.3 |
| Feb 26 | UMBC | A | L 58–70 | +10.0 | L−2.0 | 138.0 | U128 | 91.7 | 110.7 | 63.3 |
| Feb 19 | Binghamton | H | L 67–79 | −5.5 | L−17.5 | 135.0 | O146 | 110.6 | 130.4 | 60.6 |
| Feb 14 | Vermont | A | L 63–90 | +12.5 | L−14.5 | 133.0 | O153 | 94.4 | 134.8 | 66.8 |
| Feb 12 | UMass Lowell | A | L 69–88 | +4.5 | L−14.5 | 142.0 | O157 | 105.6 | 134.7 | 65.3 |
| Feb 7 | Maine | H | W 73–67 | −2.5 | W+3.5 | 128.0 | O140 | 107.7 | 98.8 | 67.8 |
| Feb 5 | UAlbany | H | L 63–65 | −1.0 | L−3.0 | 134.0 | U128 | 104.3 | 107.7 | 60.4 |
| Jan 31 | New Hampshire | H | W 92–84 | −1.0 | W+7.0 | 132.5 | O176 | 124.4 | 113.6 | 73.9 |
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 homeFairfieldBryant
Efficiency
107.4
100.5
110.4
113.4
68.1
66.3
—
—
Shooting
48.8%
46.9%
48.2%
48.7%
33.2%
30.0%
70.5%
76.0%
27.7%
29.4%
Ball control & glass
15.3%
20.2%
16.8%
14.6%
35.8%
27.7%
29.1%
31.0%
8.7%
12.2%
10.5%
8.7%
Style
35.4%
47.9%
44.5%
39.2%
12.8%
7.9%
45.2%
53.1%
31.1%
28.4%
Roster
2.44
2.17
6'5.1"
6'7.1"
50.2%
—
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputFairfield
Returning minutes: 50.2%Returning production: 45.6%
Lost
- Braden Sparks 33.3 mpg, 17.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Brandon Benjamin 29.5 mpg, 13.4 ppg · transferred to Boston College
- Deuce Turner 20.0 mpg, 8.4 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Ryan Zan 7.0 mpg, 0.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Cam Estevez 6.8 mpg, 2.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Michael Rogan 3.2 mpg, 0.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Qadir Martin from Mercyhurst · 31.4 mpg, 11.6 ppg last season
- Marko Radunovic from Boston College · 5.4 mpg, 1.3 ppg last season
- Cole Edelen no D1 minutes last season
- Jaden Brown no D1 minutes last season
- Jah Hatchett no D1 minutes last season
- Noah Best no D1 minutes last season
Returns 50% of last season's minutes; lost 3 of its top 5 (1 transferred).
Bryant
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Bryant'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 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.