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-conferenceNutter Center, Dayton, OH

FAU

Efficiency #122

2025-26: 18-15 · 10-10 conf

Wright St

Efficiency #119

2025-26: 23-12 · 18-5 conf

Fri, Nov 6 · 6:00 PM ET

74.0

win 36%

Projected

78.1

win 64%

No line posted yet.

Model: WRST −4.1 · total 152.1 · 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: Wright St 68.1, FAU 69.9 → 69.6 possessions

+2.8

Wright St offense vs FAU defense

+0.6

FAU offense vs Wright St defense

+0.5

Projected total

152.1

Axis starts at 146 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

Wright St offense vs FAU defense

+0.6

FAU offense vs Wright St defense

−0.5

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

+4.0

Wright St by 4.1

4.1

FAU side ◂▸ Wright St 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 Wright St.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 69.6, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, FAU is the faster team (70.2, #85 of 365) and Wright St the slower (68.9, #156). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

69.6

per team, 40 min

Projected total

152.1

model

Projected team totals

74.0 / 78.1

FAU / Wright St

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

69.9#58

FAU

68.1#205

Wright St

How this game plays

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

DefenseFAU

FAU's shot-blocking

FAU ranks #20 nationally in block rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 12.1% of Wright St's two-point attempts to get blocked against this defense.

ClashFAU

Style match: ball movement

FAU creates off the dribble (assists on 47.1% of its baskets); Wright St breaks up passing offenses (assists on 44.6% allowed) (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 43.9% — both habits push the same way.

ClashWright St

Style match: ball movement

Wright St creates off the dribble (assists on 46.9% of its baskets); FAU breaks up passing offenses (assists on 46.2% allowed) (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 44.8% — both habits push the same way.

ClashWright St

Style match: 3-point volume

Wright St rarely shoots threes (34.2% of its shots); FAU runs teams off the line (35.2% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 32.5% — both habits push the same way.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (Wright St) 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 FAU at about 35.2% of its shots from three, Wright St about 32.5%.

AdvantageFAU

Where FAU scores: shooting

FAU shoots an effective 52.2% (#135); Wright St allows 52.4% (#238). Expect about 52.4%, 1.1 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +1.6 points per 100 possessions.

FAU has the ball

OffenseWright St allowsvs D1 avg

52.2% #135

52.4% #238

+1.6 pt/100

17.6% #242

16.7% #176

-0.5 pt/100

31.6% #140

29.4% #129

+0.2 pt/100

33.3% #231

33.3% #137

-0.2 pt/100

70.3% #262

—

-0.2 pt/100

FAU net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +0.9 pts/100

Wright St has the ball

OffenseFAU allowsvs D1 avg

54.3% #56

49.5% #81

+1.2 pt/100

16.1% #147

15.5% #251

+1.5 pt/100

32.8% #91

28.3% #78

+0.4 pt/100

37.4% #120

36.2% #215

+0.2 pt/100

74.7% #92

—

+0.2 pt/100

Wright St net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +3.5 pts/100

Shot diet

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

FAUoffense vsWright Stdefense

Share of shots by zone

FAU shoots

39.6

6.3

16.2

38.0

Wright St allows

42.1

8.4

15.4

34.1

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	60.5%#110	57.5%#130	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	39.8%#179	44.1%#269	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	39.7%#121	41.4%#285	38.0%
Three	33.3%#208	34.3%#202	33.7%

Wright Stoffense vsFAUdefense

Share of shots by zone

Wright St shoots

44.9

9.3

11.8

34.0

FAU allows

45.4

6.8

12.9

34.9

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	61.1%#95	53.7%#37	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	41.2%#141	40.9%#207	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	36.7%#238	34.5%#62	38.0%
Three	36.4%#44	33.8%#169	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

FAU

−1.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#229 of 365

Off reb %

31.6%

#140

Def reb %

71.7%

#78

Turnover %

17.6%

#242

Forced TO %

15.5%

#251

FT rate

33.3%

#231

FT allowed

36.2%

#215

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.4

Defensive rebounding+0.8

Ball security−0.6

Forcing turnovers−0.8

Foul shots drawn−0.4

Foul shots allowed−0.2

Wright St

+2.7extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#68 of 365

Off reb %

32.8%

#91

Def reb %

70.6%

#129

Turnover %

16.1%

#147

Forced TO %

16.7%

#176

FT rate

37.4%

#120

FT allowed

33.3%

#137

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+0.8

Defensive rebounding+0.4

Ball security+0.4

Forcing turnovers0.0

Foul shots drawn+0.6

Foul shots allowed+0.5

Wright St has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.7 (#68 of 365) to FAU’s −1.0 (#229).

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

FAU2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted FAU'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
2	Isaiah Elohim	G	So	6'5"	32-32	28.1	12.4	4.2	1.0	0.9	52.7%	36.8%	3.3	66.0%	24.4%
18	Kanaan Carlyle	G	Jr	6'3"	28-27	31.1	14.3	3.8	2.9	2.5	49.8%	32.4%	6.4	85.4%	28.8%
25	Niccolo Moretti	G	Jr	6'1"	33-14	26.2	5.6	2.0	3.3	1.9	50.7%	26.7%	1.4	67.2%	15.5%
1	Devin Williams	F	So	6'10"	33-33	23.8	7.5	5.2	1.3	1.3	54.8%	30.6%	1.5	67.4%	19.0%
22	Devin Vanterpool	G	So	6'4"	24-24	31.2	15.8	6.3	2.4	2.1	52.5%	35.1%	6.2	78.2%	29.4%
11	Josiah Parker	G	Fr	6'7"	32-8	21.8	9.6	6.0	1.2	1.3	51.7%	16.0%	0.8	61.6%	26.6%
17	Xander Pintelon	F	Jr	6'11"	33-25	18.2	6.2	3.7	0.7	0.8	51.5%	35.2%	3.2	85.4%	19.9%
3	Amar Amkou	G	Fr	6'7"	26-1	12.7	5.5	2.2	0.4	0.7	52.0%	36.4%	1.7	79.2%	24.7%
77	Maxim Logue	F	So	6'9"	28-0	11.2	4.8	3.1	0.0	0.6	67.4%	0.0%	0.1	42.9%	22.1%
5	Yohann Sissoko	G	Fr	6'5"	27-0	11.2	3.3	1.7	1.1	0.9	47.7%	42.9%	0.8	75.7%	19.9%
9	Max Langenfeld	G	Fr	6'6"	16-1	8.2	3.5	0.9	0.5	0.5	48.1%	27.3%	2.8	66.7%	26.9%
8	Vincent Neugebauer	C	Jr	7'1"	13-0	8.1	2.5	1.6	0.2	0.4	65.0%	—	0.0	53.8%	17.2%
4	Liam Dayco-Green	G	Fr	6'2"	8-0	3.1	2.0	0.4	0.0	0.3	57.7%	45.5%	1.4	50.0%	34.3%
30	Lachlan Smith	G	Fr	6'3"	2-0	1.5	1.0	0.5	0.0	0.5	0.0%	—	0.0	100.0%	52.1%
7	Zion Sampaio	G	Fr	6'6"	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.

Wright St2025-26 numbers

#	Player	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
13	Solomon Callaghan	G	So	6'2"	33-31	28.1	10.2	1.9	1.1	0.8	56.2%	39.5%	5.4	92.6%	19.0%
3	Dominic Pangonis	G	So	6'7"	34-28	27.0	8.9	2.6	1.1	1.0	56.1%	38.5%	2.8	73.5%	18.0%
22	TJ Burch	G	So	6'1"	34-23	24.7	12.4	2.4	3.6	2.1	49.4%	34.7%	2.2	73.3%	32.4%
33	Michael Imariagbe	F	Sr	6'7"	34-31	24.1	12.0	7.1	1.8	1.8	60.1%	40.0%	0.4	68.3%	27.2%
4	Kellen Pickett	F	Fr	6'9"	35-24	22.9	8.5	5.4	1.1	1.0	59.1%	26.9%	1.5	73.0%	20.0%
20	Andrea Holden	F	So	6'6"	35-3	14.3	6.1	3.9	0.4	1.0	56.6%	0.0%	0.0	70.7%	25.0%
2	Sam Alamutu	G	Sr	6'5"	34-4	11.9	2.9	2.4	1.1	0.9	51.9%	30.0%	0.3	64.0%	17.1%
1	Bryan Etumnu	F	Sr	6'7"	17-8	11.5	3.4	2.4	0.5	0.5	44.1%	28.6%	2.1	55.6%	21.3%
5	Alex Bruskotter	G	Fr	6'8"	15-0	8.3	4.5	1.5	0.2	0.4	76.5%	60.0%	1.3	80.0%	22.5%
51	Ayden Davis	C	Fr	6'10"	3-0	8.7	5.0	1.3	0.0	0.0	92.9%	100.0%	0.3	66.7%	18.5%
15	Isaiah Williams	G	Fr	6'3"	0-0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	—
12	PJ Douglas	G	Fr	6'4"	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.

FAU2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted FAU'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
2	Isaiah Elohim	G	So	6'5"	32-32	28.1	12.4	4.2	1.0	0.9	52.7%	36.8%	3.3	66.0%	24.4%
18	Kanaan Carlyle	G	Jr	6'3"	28-27	31.1	14.3	3.8	2.9	2.5	49.8%	32.4%	6.4	85.4%	28.8%
25	Niccolo Moretti	G	Jr	6'1"	33-14	26.2	5.6	2.0	3.3	1.9	50.7%	26.7%	1.4	67.2%	15.5%
1	Devin Williams	F	So	6'10"	33-33	23.8	7.5	5.2	1.3	1.3	54.8%	30.6%	1.5	67.4%	19.0%
22	Devin Vanterpool	G	So	6'4"	24-24	31.2	15.8	6.3	2.4	2.1	52.5%	35.1%	6.2	78.2%	29.4%
11	Josiah Parker	G	Fr	6'7"	32-8	21.8	9.6	6.0	1.2	1.3	51.7%	16.0%	0.8	61.6%	26.6%
17	Xander Pintelon	F	Jr	6'11"	33-25	18.2	6.2	3.7	0.7	0.8	51.5%	35.2%	3.2	85.4%	19.9%
3	Amar Amkou	G	Fr	6'7"	26-1	12.7	5.5	2.2	0.4	0.7	52.0%	36.4%	1.7	79.2%	24.7%
77	Maxim Logue	F	So	6'9"	28-0	11.2	4.8	3.1	0.0	0.6	67.4%	0.0%	0.1	42.9%	22.1%
5	Yohann Sissoko	G	Fr	6'5"	27-0	11.2	3.3	1.7	1.1	0.9	47.7%	42.9%	0.8	75.7%	19.9%
9	Max Langenfeld	G	Fr	6'6"	16-1	8.2	3.5	0.9	0.5	0.5	48.1%	27.3%	2.8	66.7%	26.9%
8	Vincent Neugebauer	C	Jr	7'1"	13-0	8.1	2.5	1.6	0.2	0.4	65.0%	—	0.0	53.8%	17.2%
4	Liam Dayco-Green	G	Fr	6'2"	8-0	3.1	2.0	0.4	0.0	0.3	57.7%	45.5%	1.4	50.0%	34.3%
30	Lachlan Smith	G	Fr	6'3"	2-0	1.5	1.0	0.5	0.0	0.5	0.0%	—	0.0	100.0%	52.1%
7	Zion Sampaio	G	Fr	6'6"	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 2025-26

FAU

Against the spread

Season

17-14

Home

8-5

Road

6-7

Last 10

4-6

avg cover −2.4

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

Over / under

Season

17-14

Home

6-7

Road

9-4

Last 10

6-4

avg vs total −4.8

Over in the last gameOver in 3 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 12	North TexasAdjEM #151	N	L 70–74	+1.5	L−2.5	137.0	O144	97.8	103.4	71.5
Mar 11	TempleAdjEM #168	N	W 63–59	+1.0	W+5.0	144.5	U122	97.4	91.3	64.7
Mar 7	Wichita StAdjEM #60	A	L 70–88	+8.0	L−10.0	149.0	O158	99.9	125.5	70.1
Mar 1	CharlotteAdjEM #193	H	W 77–76 OT	−7.0	L−6.0	148.0	O153	106.2	104.9	72.5
Feb 26	TempleAdjEM #168	H	W 77–73	−4.5	L−0.5	146.0	O150	120.2	114.0	64.0
Feb 22	North TexasAdjEM #151	A	L 72–73	+2.5	W+1.5	140.5	O145	112.1	113.7	64.2
Feb 18	UTSAAdjEM #350	A	W 60–52	−11.5	L−3.5	157.5	U112	88.7	76.9	67.6
Feb 15	South FloridaAdjEM #36	H	L 81–83 OT	+5.0	W+3.0	166.5	U164	105.7	108.3	76.6
Feb 11	RiceAdjEM #255	A	L 73–81	−3.5	L−11.5	151.5	O154	104.8	116.2	69.7
Feb 4	TulsaAdjEM #46	H	L 76–78	+2.5	W+0.5	163.5	U154	105.4	108.2	72.1

Wright St

Against the spread

Season

19-12-2

Home

6-7-1

Road

10-4

Last 10

6-3-1

avg cover +1.4

Covered the last gameCovered 4 of 8 as a favorite, 1 pushCovered 2 of 4 with a line of 10+, 1 push

Over / under

Season

16-17

Home

7-7

Road

7-7

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total +6.2

Over in the last gameOver in 3 of 8 as a favoriteOver in 1 of 4 with a line of 10+

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 20	#3VirginiaAdjEM #15	N	L 73–82	+18.0	W+9.0	146.5	O155	112.4	126.3	64.9
Mar 10	Detroit MercyAdjEM #224	N	W 66–63	−5.0	L−2.0	153.5	U129	96.8	92.4	68.2
Mar 9	N KentuckyAdjEM #164	N	W 103–90	−1.0	W+12.0	158.0	O193	131.3	114.7	78.5
Mar 4	Cleveland StAdjEM #330	H	W 90–61	−14.5	W+14.5	161.5	U151	130.0	88.1	69.2
Feb 28	N KentuckyAdjEM #164	A	W 92–91	+3.0	W+4.0	152.5	O183	131.4	130.0	70.0
Feb 25	Purdue FWAdjEM #258	A	W 74–70	−1.0	W+3.0	152.0	U144	104.3	98.7	70.9
Feb 22	Robert MorrisAdjEM #142	H	L 68–81	−4.0	L−17.0	146.5	O149	100.6	119.9	67.6
Feb 19	IU IndyAdjEM #315	H	W 85–73	−12.0	P0.0	160.5	U158	119.3	102.5	71.2
Feb 15	Cleveland StAdjEM #330	A	W 102–90	−7.5	W+4.5	158.5	O192	137.4	121.2	74.2
Feb 12	Detroit MercyAdjEM #224	H	L 74–77	−11.5	L−14.5	153.0	U151	111.9	116.4	66.2

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

FAUWright St

Efficiency

109.1

111.2

106.7

108.5

69.9

68.1

—

Shooting

52.2%

54.3%

53.6%

54.2%

33.3%

36.4%

70.3%

74.7%

33.3%

37.4%

Ball control & glass

17.6%

16.1%

15.5%

16.7%

31.6%

32.8%

28.3%

29.4%

10.6%

9.7%

7.5%

9.1%

Style

38.2%

34.2%

45.6%

48.5%

15.6%

11.2%

47.1%

46.9%

32.3%

34.2%

Roster

2.14

2.34

6'5.9"

6'5.4"

—

79.2%

Offseason

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

FAU

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted FAU'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.)

Wright St

Returning minutes: 79.2%Returning production: 81.8%

Lost

Michael Cooper 23.4 mpg, 11.9 ppg · transferred to California
Logan Woods 18.4 mpg, 5.3 ppg · transferred to Niagara

Added

Isaiah Williams no D1 minutes last season
PJ Douglas no D1 minutes last season

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

Returns 79% 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.