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-conferenceJeffery P. Hazell Athletics Center, West Haven, CT
Columbia
Efficiency #166
2025-26: 16-12 · 5-9 conf
@
New Haven
Efficiency #326
2025-26: 14-17 · 9-9 conf
Fri, Dec 4 · 6:00 PM ET
70.1
win 59%
Projected
67.4
win 41%
No line posted yet.
Model: COLU −2.8 · total 137.5 · 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: New Haven 65.7, Columbia 68.0 → 65.4 possessions
−6.4
New Haven offense vs Columbia defense
−5.4
Columbia offense vs New Haven defense
+1.1
Projected total
137.5
Axis starts at 130 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
New Haven offense vs Columbia defense
−5.4
Columbia offense vs New Haven defense
−1.1
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.8
Columbia by 2.8
2.8
Columbia side ◂▸ New Haven side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the margin steps add to −2.7 against −2.8. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help New Haven.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 65.4, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Columbia is the faster team (67.1, #236 of 365) and New Haven the slower (63.5, #360). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
65.4
per team, 40 min
Projected total
137.5
model
Projected team totals
70.1 / 67.4
Columbia / New Haven
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
68.0#211
Columbia
65.7#349
New Haven
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetAdvantageNew Haven
Where New Haven struggles: the offensive glass
New Haven rebounds 21.5% of its own misses (#359); Columbia lets opponents grab 27.2% of their own misses (#42). Expect about 22.6%, 7.8 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -4.7 points per 100 possessions.
Pace
Half-court grind
New Haven averages 63.5 possessions per 40, Columbia 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.
AdvantageColumbia
Where Columbia scores: shooting
Columbia shoots an effective 53.5% (#83); New Haven allows 51.8% (#203). Expect about 52.8%, 1.6 points above an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +2.2 points per 100 possessions.
TurnoversColumbia
Columbia turns it over
Projected turnover rate of 18.4% is worth roughly -2.1 points per 100 possessions against Columbia's offense.
Watch for noise
3-point caution
A notable season 3-point number here (New Haven) 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 Columbia at about 37.2% of its shots from three, New Haven about 37.5%.
ClashColumbia
Strength vs strength: offensive rebounding
Columbia (#23 in offensive rebounding) against New Haven (#30 in the same stat allowed) — both rank inside the national top 60. Expect about 32.6%. Historically Columbia's own number has carried a bit more weight in that exchange (0.70 vs 0.49).
Columbia has the ball
OffenseNew Haven allowsvs D1 avg
53.5% #83
51.8% #203
+2.2 pt/100
19.3% #333
17.1% #142
-2.1 pt/100
36.1% #23
26.8% #30
+1.3 pt/100
28.6% #337
27.7% #31
-0.9 pt/100
70.1% #271
—
-0.2 pt/100
Columbia net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +0.4 pts/100
New Haven has the ball
OffenseColumbia allowsvs D1 avg
48.7% #296
51.2% #168
-2.2 pt/100
17.8% #257
15.0% #288
+0.7 pt/100
21.5% #359
27.2% #42
-4.7 pt/100
31.7% #261
33.5% #140
-0.3 pt/100
70.2% #266
—
-0.2 pt/100
New Haven net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -6.8 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersColumbiaoffense vsNew Havendefense
Share of shots by zone
Columbia shoots
44.0
5.8
13.4
36.9
New Haven allows
39.2
6.2
16.7
38.0
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 58.8%#167 | 57.9%#146 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 38.0%#222 | 45.2%#305 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 39.3%#137 | 38.5%#179 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.9%#61 | 34.3%#198 | 33.7% |
New Havenoffense vsColumbiadefense
Share of shots by zone
New Haven shoots
37.9
4.4
17.0
40.6
Columbia allows
41.1
5.4
18.3
35.2
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 61.1%#92 | 55.9%#84 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 36.2%#264 | 35.6%#77 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 33.2%#327 | 42.1%#308 | 38.0% |
| Three | 30.2%#340 | 35.2%#258 | 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 numbersColumbia
−1.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#241 of 365
Off reb %
36.1%
#23
Def reb %
72.8%
#42
Turnover %
19.3%
#333
Forced TO %
15.0%
#288
FT rate
28.6%
#337
FT allowed
33.5%
#140
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.8
Defensive rebounding+1.1
Ball security−1.8
Forcing turnovers−1.1
Foul shots drawn−1.7
Foul shots allowed+0.4
New Haven
−1.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#230 of 365
Off reb %
21.5%
#359
Def reb %
73.2%
#30
Turnover %
17.8%
#257
Forced TO %
17.1%
#142
FT rate
31.7%
#261
FT allowed
27.7%
#31
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−2.9
Defensive rebounding+1.2
Ball security−0.7
Forcing turnovers+0.3
Foul shots drawn−0.8
Foul shots allowed+1.9
New Haven has more extra scoring chances per game: −1.0 (#230 of 365) to Columbia’s −1.2 (#241).
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
Columbia2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Columbia'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | Kenny Noland | G | Sr | 6'2" | 28-28 | 33.1 | 17.1 | 3.4 | 3.7 | 2.5 | 54.5% | 37.5% | 6.9 | 92.1% | 30.7% | |
| 3 | Blair Thompson | F | Sr | 6'8" | 28-28 | 31.0 | 11.4 | 4.8 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 59.9% | 40.9% | 3.9 | 64.1% | 19.5% | |
| 14 | Mason Ritter | F | So | 6'9" | 28-28 | 24.4 | 7.3 | 5.1 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 55.4% | 14.3% | 0.5 | 66.1% | 19.6% | |
| 24 | Miles Franklin | G | Fr | 6'5" | 26-22 | 23.9 | 9.5 | 4.2 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 47.9% | 22.9% | 2.7 | 64.9% | 25.9% | |
| 4 | Gerard O'Keefe | G | So | 6'3" | 27-4 | 21.6 | 8.5 | 1.9 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 60.8% | 42.4% | 3.7 | 69.6% | 20.6% | |
| 10 | Connor Igoe | F | Fr | 6'7" | 28-6 | 19.8 | 8.3 | 5.6 | 3.0 | 1.9 | 53.8% | 34.1% | 1.6 | 63.2% | 28.0% | |
| 12 | Ryan Soulis | F | So | 6'10" | 26-17 | 20.0 | 5.8 | 4.6 | 1.5 | 1.3 | 51.2% | 21.4% | 1.1 | 63.3% | 19.8% | |
| 7 | Hampton Sanders | G | Jr | 6'0" | 28-0 | 15.3 | 4.2 | 2.0 | 2.3 | 1.2 | 49.5% | 37.0% | 1.6 | 74.3% | 19.5% | |
| 22 | Richard Nweke | F | Jr | 6'7" | 20-0 | 9.1 | 3.0 | 2.4 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 51.1% | — | 0.0 | 60.9% | 20.3% | |
| 23 | Zine Eddine Bedri | F | Sr | 6'10" | 5-5 | 24.4 | 12.8 | 7.4 | 2.2 | 4.2 | 58.7% | 44.4% | 1.8 | 58.8% | 37.4% | |
| 6 | Leland Coleman | F | So | 6'7" | 15-0 | 5.2 | 1.3 | 1.5 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 33.3% | 0.0% | 0.3 | 42.9% | 22.5% | |
| 1 | Avery Brown | G | Sr | 6'4" | 3-2 | 15.0 | 4.3 | 2.0 | 0.3 | 2.0 | 50.0% | 75.0% | 1.3 | 50.0% | 25.3% | |
| 8 | Josiah Cunningham | G | So | 6'2" | 5-0 | 6.6 | 1.8 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 44.4% | 0.0% | 0.6 | 33.3% | 24.4% | |
| 0 | Edwin Bai | G | Fr | 6'2" | 4-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | — | 7.0% | |
| 21 | Dan Vessey | G | Jr | 6'3" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 5 | Nicolo Romanelli | G | Jr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Nigel Clarkson | F | So | 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.
New Haven2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23 | Najimi George | G | So | 6'4" | 30-29 | 33.7 | 11.2 | 3.6 | 1.6 | 1.6 | 46.0% | 27.8% | 3.6 | 64.0% | 24.2% | |
| 15 | Andre Pasha | F | So | 6'9" | 31-31 | 31.7 | 10.7 | 5.2 | 1.8 | 1.5 | 51.5% | 35.1% | 3.7 | 82.9% | 22.8% | |
| 5 | Stefano Faloppa | F | Jr | 6'9" | 31-31 | 26.1 | 6.2 | 4.4 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 58.0% | 35.6% | 1.9 | 70.3% | 15.1% | |
| 3 | Kheni Briggs | G | Sr | 6'3" | 28-18 | 18.3 | 6.9 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 55.4% | 34.7% | 2.6 | 72.5% | 24.6% | |
| 22 | Maison Adeleye | G | Sr | 6'3" | 31-12 | 15.9 | 4.5 | 2.1 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 47.9% | 26.4% | 1.7 | 68.4% | 20.9% | |
| 14 | Teshaun Steele | G | Fr | 6'7" | 31-0 | 15.2 | 3.9 | 3.2 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 47.3% | 17.1% | 1.1 | 71.7% | 17.1% | |
| 10 | Vere Anthony | G | Fr | 6'0" | 14-0 | 13.5 | 2.6 | 0.8 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 33.8% | 7.1% | 1.0 | 57.9% | 18.5% | |
| 21 | Zoumana Traore | G | Fr | 6'8" | 21-1 | 8.7 | 2.3 | 1.6 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 45.8% | 33.3% | 1.1 | 80.0% | 20.6% | |
| 2 | Aidan Losiewicz | G | Fr | 6'3" | 23-1 | 6.7 | 2.9 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 63.5% | 43.9% | 1.8 | 25.0% | 25.4% | |
| 20 | Tristan Burth | F | Fr | 6'8" | 19-0 | 7.2 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 48.0% | — | 0.0 | 37.5% | 16.0% | |
| 25 | Kyle Kearson | G | Sr | 6'4" | 19-2 | 6.9 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 44.2% | 33.3% | 0.8 | 25.0% | 14.5% | |
| 7 | Dior Kennedy | G | Fr | 6'2" | 6-0 | 2.8 | 1.7 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 44.4% | 0.0% | 0.3 | 50.0% | 35.9% | |
| 8 | Jagger Bascombe | G | So | 6'4" | 3-0 | 4.0 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 25.0% | 0.0% | 0.7 | — | 18.3% | |
| 12 | Timothy Coleman | F | Jr | 6'7" | 3-0 | 4.0 | 2.7 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 100.0% | 100.0% | 0.7 | — | 18.3% | |
| 4 | Dominick LaDuca | G | Fr | 5'7" | 3-0 | 2.7 | 2.7 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 133.3% | 100.0% | 0.7 | — | 20.6% | |
| 11 | Nathan Narcisse | G | So | 6'4" | 1-0 | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.0 | — | 17.3% | |
| 13 | John Oladipo | G | Fr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 6 | Justice Hanna | G | Fr | 6'0" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 31 | Matiss Ogle | G | Fr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 9 | Owen Hotaling | 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.
Columbia2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Columbia'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | Kenny Noland | G | Sr | 6'2" | 28-28 | 33.1 | 17.1 | 3.4 | 3.7 | 2.5 | 54.5% | 37.5% | 6.9 | 92.1% | 30.7% | |
| 3 | Blair Thompson | F | Sr | 6'8" | 28-28 | 31.0 | 11.4 | 4.8 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 59.9% | 40.9% | 3.9 | 64.1% | 19.5% | |
| 14 | Mason Ritter | F | So | 6'9" | 28-28 | 24.4 | 7.3 | 5.1 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 55.4% | 14.3% | 0.5 | 66.1% | 19.6% | |
| 24 | Miles Franklin | G | Fr | 6'5" | 26-22 | 23.9 | 9.5 | 4.2 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 47.9% | 22.9% | 2.7 | 64.9% | 25.9% | |
| 4 | Gerard O'Keefe | G | So | 6'3" | 27-4 | 21.6 | 8.5 | 1.9 | 1.0 | 0.6 | 60.8% | 42.4% | 3.7 | 69.6% | 20.6% | |
| 10 | Connor Igoe | F | Fr | 6'7" | 28-6 | 19.8 | 8.3 | 5.6 | 3.0 | 1.9 | 53.8% | 34.1% | 1.6 | 63.2% | 28.0% | |
| 12 | Ryan Soulis | F | So | 6'10" | 26-17 | 20.0 | 5.8 | 4.6 | 1.5 | 1.3 | 51.2% | 21.4% | 1.1 | 63.3% | 19.8% | |
| 7 | Hampton Sanders | G | Jr | 6'0" | 28-0 | 15.3 | 4.2 | 2.0 | 2.3 | 1.2 | 49.5% | 37.0% | 1.6 | 74.3% | 19.5% | |
| 22 | Richard Nweke | F | Jr | 6'7" | 20-0 | 9.1 | 3.0 | 2.4 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 51.1% | — | 0.0 | 60.9% | 20.3% | |
| 23 | Zine Eddine Bedri | F | Sr | 6'10" | 5-5 | 24.4 | 12.8 | 7.4 | 2.2 | 4.2 | 58.7% | 44.4% | 1.8 | 58.8% | 37.4% | |
| 6 | Leland Coleman | F | So | 6'7" | 15-0 | 5.2 | 1.3 | 1.5 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 33.3% | 0.0% | 0.3 | 42.9% | 22.5% | |
| 1 | Avery Brown | G | Sr | 6'4" | 3-2 | 15.0 | 4.3 | 2.0 | 0.3 | 2.0 | 50.0% | 75.0% | 1.3 | 50.0% | 25.3% | |
| 8 | Josiah Cunningham | G | So | 6'2" | 5-0 | 6.6 | 1.8 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 44.4% | 0.0% | 0.6 | 33.3% | 24.4% | |
| 0 | Edwin Bai | G | Fr | 6'2" | 4-0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.3 | — | 7.0% | |
| 21 | Dan Vessey | G | Jr | 6'3" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 5 | Nicolo Romanelli | G | Jr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Nigel Clarkson | F | So | 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.
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26Columbia
Against the spread
Season
12-13-1
Home
5-6-1
Road
7-7
Last 10
4-6
avg cover −2.9
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 6 as a favoriteCovered 1 of 4 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
14-12
Home
5-7
Road
9-5
Last 10
4-6
avg vs total −6.9
Over in the last gameOver in 3 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 1 of 4 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 6 | Harvard | A | L 71–81 | +5.0 | L−5.0 | 135.0 | O152 | 105.4 | 120.2 | 67.4 |
| Feb 28 | Yale | H | L 54–60 | +6.5 | W+0.5 | 146.0 | U114 | 89.0 | 98.9 | 60.7 |
| Feb 27 | Brown | H | W 80–62 | −5.5 | W+12.5 | 140.0 | O142 | 117.6 | 91.1 | 68.1 |
| Feb 21 | Dartmouth | H | L 63–64 | −7.0 | L−8.0 | 151.5 | U127 | 93.8 | 95.3 | 67.2 |
| Feb 14 | Princeton | A | W 75–65 | −1.5 | W+8.5 | 136.5 | O140 | 133.2 | 115.5 | 56.3 |
| Feb 13 | Penn | A | L 67–76 | +2.0 | L−7.0 | 148.0 | U143 | 95.2 | 108.0 | 70.4 |
| Feb 7 | Cornell | H | L 67–88 | +1.0 | L−20.0 | 170.5 | U155 | 101.9 | 133.9 | 65.7 |
| Jan 31 | Princeton | H | L 68–80 | −5.5 | L−17.5 | 139.0 | O148 | 109.6 | 129.0 | 62.0 |
| Jan 30 | Penn | H | W 72–67 | −5.5 | L−0.5 | 153.5 | U139 | 107.4 | 99.9 | 67.0 |
| Jan 24 | Dartmouth | A | W 79–69 | −2.0 | W+8.0 | 157.0 | U148 | 110.6 | 96.6 | 71.4 |
New Haven
Against the spread
Season
15-13
Home
6-6
Road
9-7
Last 10
6-4
avg cover +2.9
Covered the last gameCovered 5 of 7 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
8-20
Home
2-10
Road
6-10
Last 10
3-7
avg vs total +0.9
Under 3 straightOver in 3 of 7 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 28 | Le Moyne | H | W 66–59 | +2.0 | W+9.0 | 136.0 | U125 | 96.8 | 86.5 | 68.2 |
| Feb 26 | Wagner | A | L 62–65 | +2.0 | L−1.0 | 131.5 | U127 | 99.5 | 104.3 | 62.3 |
| Feb 24 | Saint Francis Red Wolves | H | L 67–73 | −7.0 | L−13.0 | 141.0 | U140 | 106.6 | 116.2 | 62.8 |
| Feb 21 | FDU | A | W 84–77 | +2.5 | W+9.5 | 124.5 | O161 | 133.7 | 122.6 | 62.8 |
| Feb 19 | Stonehill | H | W 64–51 | −3.0 | W+10.0 | 121.0 | U115 | 97.8 | 77.9 | 65.5 |
| Feb 14 | Long Island | H | W 55–52 | +7.0 | W+10.0 | 129.5 | U107 | 88.9 | 84.1 | 61.8 |
| Feb 12 | C Connecticut | H | L 76–81 | +3.0 | L−2.0 | 129.0 | O157 | 110.2 | 117.5 | 69.0 |
| Feb 7 | Chicago St | H | L 57–63 | −5.5 | L−11.5 | 127.5 | U120 | 96.8 | 106.9 | 58.9 |
| Feb 5 | Long Island | A | L 55–60 | +9.5 | W+4.5 | 136.0 | U115 | 87.1 | 95.0 | 63.1 |
| Jan 31 | Saint Francis Red Wolves | A | W 81–69 | +1.0 | W+13.0 | 131.5 | O150 | 122.4 | 104.2 | 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 homeColumbiaNew Haven
Efficiency
109.0
100.1
108.6
109.6
68.0
65.7
—
—
Shooting
53.5%
48.7%
53.2%
51.0%
35.9%
30.2%
70.1%
70.2%
28.6%
31.7%
Ball control & glass
19.3%
17.8%
15.0%
17.1%
36.1%
21.5%
27.2%
26.8%
10.1%
9.3%
9.9%
7.7%
Style
37.5%
39.8%
47.0%
45.0%
9.9%
9.8%
54.3%
49.7%
32.6%
27.6%
Roster
2.59
2.38
6'5.7"
6'5.9"
—
82.7%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputColumbia
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Columbia'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.)
New Haven
Returning minutes: 82.7%Returning production: 78.3%
Lost
- Jabri Fitzpatrick 34.5 mpg, 15.0 ppg · transferred to E Michigan
Added
- Justice Hanna no D1 minutes last season
- Matiss Ogle no D1 minutes last season
- John Oladipo no D1 minutes last season
- Owen Hotaling no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 83% 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| Date | Season | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Fri, Nov 7 | 2025-26 | Columbia 71 – 53 New Haven |
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.