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-conferenceLeo D. Mahoney Arena, Fairfield, CTMahoney Classic
C Connecticut
Efficiency #277
2025-26: 18-12 · 12-7 conf
@
Fairfield
Efficiency #230
2025-26: 21-13 · 13-10 conf
Sun, Nov 29 · 2:00 PM ET
70.2
win 31%
Projected
76.0
win 69%
No line posted yet.
Model: FAIR −5.8 · total 146.3 · 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: Fairfield 68.1, C Connecticut 66.7 → 66.5 possessions
−4.0
Fairfield offense vs C Connecticut defense
+2.0
C Connecticut offense vs Fairfield defense
0.0
Projected total
146.3
Axis starts at 142 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Fairfield offense vs C Connecticut defense
+2.0
C Connecticut offense vs Fairfield defense
0.0
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.8
Fairfield by 5.8
5.8
C Connecticut side ◂▸ Fairfield side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 146.2 against a projected 146.3. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Fairfield.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 66.5, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Fairfield is the faster team (67.1, #239 of 365) and C Connecticut the slower (65.2, #325). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
66.5
per team, 40 min
Projected total
146.3
model
Projected team totals
70.2 / 76.0
C Connecticut / Fairfield
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
66.7#308
C Connecticut
68.1#203
Fairfield
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetPace
Half-court grind
Fairfield averages 67.1 possessions per 40, C Connecticut 65.2. 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 65 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
AdvantageFairfield
Where Fairfield scores: ball control
Fairfield turns it over on 15.3% of possessions (#92); C Connecticut forces turnovers on 14.0% of opponent possessions (#336). Expect about 14.2%, 2.6 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly +3.2 points per 100 possessions.
GlassFairfield
Fairfield owns the glass
Projected offensive rebound rate of 34.2% is worth roughly +2.3 points per 100 possessions for Fairfield's offense.
ClashC Connecticut
Style match: 3-point volume
C Connecticut rarely shoots threes (34.9% of its shots); Fairfield runs teams off the line (35.9% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 33.5% — both habits push the same way.
AdvantageC Connecticut
Where C Connecticut struggles: the offensive glass
C Connecticut rebounds 27.5% of its own misses (#281); Fairfield lets opponents grab 29.1% of their own misses (#116). Expect about 27.7%, 2.7 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -1.6 points per 100 possessions.
C Connecticut has the ball
OffenseFairfield allowsvs D1 avg
51.6% #165
51.0% #159
+0.1 pt/100
16.2% #153
16.8% #165
+0.3 pt/100
27.5% #281
29.1% #116
-1.6 pt/100
31.2% #276
30.4% #69
-0.6 pt/100
76.7% #38
—
+0.4 pt/100
C Connecticut net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -1.4 pts/100
Fairfield has the ball
OffenseC Connecticut allowsvs D1 avg
48.8% #294
50.2% #113
-2.8 pt/100
15.3% #92
14.0% #336
+3.2 pt/100
35.8% #29
30.4% #179
+2.3 pt/100
27.7% #346
26.9% #22
-1.0 pt/100
70.5% #255
—
-0.2 pt/100
Fairfield net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +1.4 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersC Connecticutoffense vsFairfielddefense
Share of shots by zone
C Connecticut shoots
34.6
6.0
24.9
34.5
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 | 59.0%#163 | 55.7%#78 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 54.1%#2 | 51.7%#358 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 36.8%#231 | 34.0%#49 | 38.0% |
| Three | 35.8%#69 | 34.3%#200 | 33.7% |
Fairfieldoffense vsC Connecticutdefense
Share of shots by zone
Fairfield shoots
41.6
3.5
19.1
35.8
C Connecticut allows
41.3
7.1
12.7
38.9
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 52.7%#343 | 54.5%#50 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 47.7%#29 | 47.7%#338 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 38.6%#165 | 42.0%#302 | 38.0% |
| Three | 33.2%#216 | 33.4%#146 | 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 numbersC Connecticut
−1.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#243 of 365
Off reb %
27.5%
#281
Def reb %
69.6%
#179
Turnover %
16.2%
#153
Forced TO %
14.0%
#336
FT rate
31.2%
#276
FT allowed
26.9%
#22
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−0.9
Defensive rebounding+0.1
Ball security+0.4
Forcing turnovers−1.9
Foul shots drawn−1.0
Foul shots allowed+2.1
Fairfield
+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
Fairfield has more extra scoring chances per game: +2.6 (#71 of 365) to C Connecticut’s −1.2 (#243).
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
C Connecticut2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted C Connecticut'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 | Darin Smith Jr. | F | So | 6'7" | 30-30 | 32.7 | 20.7 | 5.4 | 1.2 | 1.6 | 51.9% | 37.6% | 5.0 | 89.8% | 35.9% | |
| 1 | Jay Rodgers | G | Sr | 6'3" | 30-28 | 29.2 | 11.0 | 2.2 | 6.9 | 2.7 | 48.9% | 36.2% | 3.1 | 81.7% | 27.0% | |
| 34 | Max Frazier | F | Jr | 6'9" | 30-30 | 28.2 | 12.0 | 7.2 | 0.9 | 1.3 | 65.8% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 60.0% | 22.7% | |
| 24 | James Jones | G | So | 6'6" | 26-23 | 28.8 | 4.2 | 5.6 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 42.5% | 28.6% | 1.1 | 59.1% | 11.8% | |
| 6 | Melo Sanchez | G | Sr | 6'4" | 29-26 | 24.8 | 9.6 | 2.1 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 59.7% | 42.8% | 4.8 | 80.0% | 21.5% | |
| 0 | Elijah Parker | G | Fr | 6'3" | 29-2 | 14.6 | 2.4 | 2.0 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 45.5% | 26.9% | 0.9 | 42.1% | 14.1% | |
| 22 | Daniel James | F | So | 6'8" | 28-5 | 12.6 | 3.5 | 3.1 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 56.3% | 31.8% | 0.8 | 73.9% | 16.2% | |
| 3 | Roddy Jones | G | Fr | 6'1" | 23-0 | 10.7 | 4.3 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 56.3% | 38.8% | 3.5 | 100.0% | 22.7% | |
| 13 | Ashton Reynolds | G | Fr | 6'4" | 23-1 | 10.1 | 3.7 | 2.0 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 50.8% | 31.6% | 0.8 | 81.5% | 21.6% | |
| 2 | Nico Ashley | F | Sr | 6'7" | 18-1 | 9.8 | 3.3 | 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 58.0% | 25.0% | 0.7 | 69.2% | 19.6% | |
| 12 | Gabe Spinelli | G | Sr | 6'3" | 11-0 | 14.7 | 4.7 | 1.7 | 1.1 | 0.9 | 53.7% | 44.4% | 0.8 | 100.0% | 19.3% | |
| 10 | Ja'Kobe Williams | G | Sr | 6'3" | 7-4 | 18.1 | 3.3 | 2.9 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 28.6% | 20.0% | 1.4 | 70.0% | 17.9% | |
| 11 | Jayden Mott | F | So | 6'8" | 14-0 | 8.9 | 1.9 | 1.9 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 47.9% | 33.3% | 0.2 | 40.0% | 18.7% | |
| 15 | Adam Fox | G | Fr | 6'5" | 2-0 | 5.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 50.0% | 33.3% | 1.5 | — | 14.0% | |
| 20 | Corsley Edwards Jr. | G | Fr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 23 | Rashawn Tibby | 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.
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)
C Connecticut2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted C Connecticut'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 | Darin Smith Jr. | F | So | 6'7" | 30-30 | 32.7 | 20.7 | 5.4 | 1.2 | 1.6 | 51.9% | 37.6% | 5.0 | 89.8% | 35.9% | |
| 1 | Jay Rodgers | G | Sr | 6'3" | 30-28 | 29.2 | 11.0 | 2.2 | 6.9 | 2.7 | 48.9% | 36.2% | 3.1 | 81.7% | 27.0% | |
| 34 | Max Frazier | F | Jr | 6'9" | 30-30 | 28.2 | 12.0 | 7.2 | 0.9 | 1.3 | 65.8% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 60.0% | 22.7% | |
| 24 | James Jones | G | So | 6'6" | 26-23 | 28.8 | 4.2 | 5.6 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 42.5% | 28.6% | 1.1 | 59.1% | 11.8% | |
| 6 | Melo Sanchez | G | Sr | 6'4" | 29-26 | 24.8 | 9.6 | 2.1 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 59.7% | 42.8% | 4.8 | 80.0% | 21.5% | |
| 0 | Elijah Parker | G | Fr | 6'3" | 29-2 | 14.6 | 2.4 | 2.0 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 45.5% | 26.9% | 0.9 | 42.1% | 14.1% | |
| 22 | Daniel James | F | So | 6'8" | 28-5 | 12.6 | 3.5 | 3.1 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 56.3% | 31.8% | 0.8 | 73.9% | 16.2% | |
| 3 | Roddy Jones | G | Fr | 6'1" | 23-0 | 10.7 | 4.3 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 56.3% | 38.8% | 3.5 | 100.0% | 22.7% | |
| 13 | Ashton Reynolds | G | Fr | 6'4" | 23-1 | 10.1 | 3.7 | 2.0 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 50.8% | 31.6% | 0.8 | 81.5% | 21.6% | |
| 2 | Nico Ashley | F | Sr | 6'7" | 18-1 | 9.8 | 3.3 | 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 58.0% | 25.0% | 0.7 | 69.2% | 19.6% | |
| 12 | Gabe Spinelli | G | Sr | 6'3" | 11-0 | 14.7 | 4.7 | 1.7 | 1.1 | 0.9 | 53.7% | 44.4% | 0.8 | 100.0% | 19.3% | |
| 10 | Ja'Kobe Williams | G | Sr | 6'3" | 7-4 | 18.1 | 3.3 | 2.9 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 28.6% | 20.0% | 1.4 | 70.0% | 17.9% | |
| 11 | Jayden Mott | F | So | 6'8" | 14-0 | 8.9 | 1.9 | 1.9 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 47.9% | 33.3% | 0.2 | 40.0% | 18.7% | |
| 15 | Adam Fox | G | Fr | 6'5" | 2-0 | 5.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 50.0% | 33.3% | 1.5 | — | 14.0% | |
| 20 | Corsley Edwards Jr. | G | Fr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 23 | Rashawn Tibby | 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.
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26C Connecticut
Against the spread
Season
14-14
Home
3-9
Road
11-5
Last 10
4-6
avg cover −4.0
Missed the spread 5 straightCovered 4 of 9 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
16-12
Home
9-3
Road
7-9
Last 10
5-5
avg vs total +1.2
Under 2 straightOver in 5 of 9 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 4 | Wagner | H | L 60–70 | −3.5 | L−13.5 | 138.5 | U130 | 97.7 | 114.0 | 61.4 |
| Feb 28 | Saint Francis Red Wolves | H | W 69–64 | −8.0 | L−3.0 | 153.0 | U133 | 106.3 | 98.6 | 64.9 |
| Feb 26 | Mercyhurst | H | W 80–78 | −4.0 | L−2.0 | 141.0 | O158 | 117.7 | 114.7 | 68.0 |
| Feb 21 | Chicago St | A | L 51–70 | −3.0 | L−22.0 | 138.5 | U121 | 82.4 | 113.1 | 61.9 |
| Feb 19 | Le Moyne | H | W 78–77 | −3.5 | L−2.5 | 146.5 | O155 | 110.2 | 108.8 | 70.8 |
| Feb 14 | FDU | A | W 63–57 | −1.0 | W+5.0 | 134.0 | U120 | 111.5 | 100.9 | 56.5 |
| Feb 12 | New Haven | A | W 81–76 | −3.0 | W+2.0 | 129.0 | O157 | 117.5 | 110.2 | 69.0 |
| Feb 7 | Wagner | H | W 84–67 | −5.0 | W+12.0 | 136.5 | O151 | 127.9 | 102.0 | 65.7 |
| Feb 5 | Chicago St | H | W 78–67 | −9.0 | W+2.0 | 137.0 | O145 | 125.1 | 107.5 | 62.3 |
| Jan 31 | Long Island | H | L 59–80 | +2.5 | L−18.5 | 143.0 | U139 | 89.1 | 120.8 | 66.2 |
Fairfield
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 |
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 homeC ConnecticutFairfield
Efficiency
106.6
107.4
112.6
110.4
66.7
68.1
—
—
Shooting
51.6%
48.8%
50.5%
48.2%
35.8%
33.2%
76.7%
70.5%
31.2%
27.7%
Ball control & glass
16.2%
15.3%
14.0%
16.8%
27.5%
35.8%
30.4%
29.1%
9.6%
8.7%
6.5%
10.5%
Style
34.9%
35.4%
42.0%
44.5%
9.6%
12.8%
50.9%
45.2%
29.0%
31.1%
Roster
2.67
2.44
6'5.5"
6'5.1"
—
50.2%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputC Connecticut
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted C Connecticut'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.)
Fairfield
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).
Head-to-head
this season and last| Date | Season | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Thu, Dec 18 | 2025-26 | Fairfield 84 – 70 C Connecticut |
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.