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.
Conference gameMVP Arena, Albany, NY
Merrimack
Efficiency #158
2025-26: 23-11 · 19-4 conf
@
Siena
Efficiency #134
2025-26: 23-12 · 16-7 conf
Fri, Dec 4 · TBD
65.5
win 35%
Projected
69.9
win 65%
No line posted yet.
Model: SIE −4.4 · total 135.4 · 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: Siena 66.4, Merrimack 65.8 → 63.9 possessions
−9.6
Siena offense vs Merrimack defense
−1.3
Merrimack offense vs Siena defense
−2.0
Projected total
135.4
Axis starts at 130 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Siena offense vs Merrimack defense
−1.3
Merrimack offense vs Siena defense
+2.0
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.7
Siena by 4.4
4.4
Merrimack side ◂▸ Siena side
Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the total by 0.1: the total steps add to 135.3 against a projected 135.4. The margin is the same build seen from the home side; positive numbers help Siena.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 63.9, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Siena is the faster team (64.2, #350 of 365) and Merrimack the slower (63.7, #359). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
63.9
per team, 40 min
Projected total
135.4
model
Projected team totals
65.5 / 69.9
Merrimack / Siena
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
65.8#347
Merrimack
66.4#322
Siena
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetPace
Half-court grind
Siena averages 64.2 possessions per 40, Merrimack 63.7. 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 62 — more possessions mean more points in the total and more chances for the better team to separate.
AdvantageSiena
Where Siena struggles: shooting
Siena shoots an effective 50.4% (#222); Merrimack allows 46.7% (#17). Expect about 48.4%, 2.9 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -4.1 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageMerrimack
Where Merrimack struggles: shooting
Merrimack shoots an effective 49.1% (#288); Siena allows 48.5% (#48). Expect about 48.6%, 2.7 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.8 points per 100 possessions.
GlassSiena
Siena owns the glass
Projected offensive rebound rate of 36.0% is worth roughly +3.4 points per 100 possessions for Siena's offense.
ClashSiena
Style match: 3-point volume
Siena rarely shoots threes (32.2% of its shots); Merrimack runs teams off the line (32.6% of shots allowed from three) (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 29.2% — both habits push the same way.
DefenseMerrimack
Merrimack's shot-blocking
Merrimack ranks #15 nationally in block rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 12.5% of Siena's two-point attempts to get blocked against this defense.
Merrimack has the ball
OffenseSiena allowsvs D1 avg
49.1% #288
48.5% #48
-3.8 pt/100
14.8% #56
17.0% #152
+1.2 pt/100
24.8% #343
29.5% #133
-2.6 pt/100
38.2% #99
27.5% #27
-0.4 pt/100
78.8% #8
—
+0.6 pt/100
Merrimack net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -5.1 pts/100
Siena has the ball
OffenseMerrimack allowsvs D1 avg
50.4% #222
46.7% #17
-4.1 pt/100
15.8% #126
20.4% #16
-2.2 pt/100
31.8% #133
39.9% #365
+3.4 pt/100
33.4% #226
37.1% #239
+0.1 pt/100
77.1% #32
—
+0.4 pt/100
Siena net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -2.3 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersMerrimackoffense vsSienadefense
Share of shots by zone
Merrimack shoots
41.7
2.3
9.4
46.6
Siena allows
36.8
4.8
19.2
39.2
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 53.4%#332 | 53.4%#29 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 38.5%#208 | 44.7%#287 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 33.5%#321 | 39.7%#232 | 38.0% |
| Three | 32.7%#243 | 32.3%#82 | 33.7% |
Sienaoffense vsMerrimackdefense
Share of shots by zone
Siena shoots
40.8
5.5
22.2
31.6
Merrimack allows
41.9
4.9
20.8
32.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 57.7%#206 | 51.4%#11 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 46.5%#46 | 42.9%#247 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 44.1%#23 | 38.7%#188 | 38.0% |
| Three | 30.6%#330 | 30.3%#12 | 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 numbersMerrimack
−0.6extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#206 of 365
Off reb %
24.8%
#343
Def reb %
60.1%
#365
Turnover %
14.8%
#56
Forced TO %
20.4%
#16
FT rate
38.2%
#99
FT allowed
37.1%
#239
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.8
Defensive rebounding−3.0
Ball security+1.3
Forcing turnovers+2.5
Foul shots drawn+0.8
Foul shots allowed−0.5
Siena
+3.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#50 of 365
Off reb %
31.8%
#133
Def reb %
70.5%
#133
Turnover %
15.8%
#126
Forced TO %
17.0%
#152
FT rate
33.4%
#226
FT allowed
27.5%
#27
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+0.5
Defensive rebounding+0.4
Ball security+0.6
Forcing turnovers+0.2
Foul shots drawn−0.4
Foul shots allowed+2.0
Siena has more extra scoring chances per game: +3.2 (#50 of 365) to Merrimack’s −0.6 (#206).
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
Merrimack2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Tye Dorset | G | Jr | 6'3" | 34-34 | 36.3 | 11.7 | 3.1 | 2.2 | 0.9 | 49.3% | 32.2% | 5.4 | 77.3% | 21.0% | |
| 20 | Todd Brogna | F | Sr | 6'7" | 34-34 | 29.2 | 6.1 | 4.7 | 2.4 | 1.5 | 51.6% | 35.1% | 3.9 | 70.8% | 15.5% | |
| 2 | Denver Anglinat Iona | G | Sr | 6'1" | 31-29 | 28.1 | 9.3 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 1.0 | 44.0% | 29.8% | 6.1 | 79.5% | 23.0% | |
| 5 | Elijah Wilbornat James Madison | F | Sr | 6'8" | 31-0 | 8.5 | 2.4 | 2.9 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 63.0% | — | 0.0 | 25.0% | 19.2% | |
| 0 | Dylan Veillette | F | So | 6'7" | 33-0 | 8.2 | 1.9 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 47.1% | 9.1% | 0.3 | 68.2% | 16.4% | |
| 7 | Aram Vladimir Soqui Urbanoat Fresno St | G | So | 6'4" | 13-2 | 9.5 | 2.2 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 41.4% | 27.3% | 1.7 | 66.7% | 16.3% | |
| 33 | AJ Lesburt Jr.at Brown | G | Sr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 12 | David Munro | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 14 | Jacob Moore | F | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Quinn Kwasniak | G | Fr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 24 | Amare Guerra | G | Fr | 5'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 3 | Ayden Johnson | G | Fr | 5'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Jeremiah Anderson | G | Sr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 10 | JP Skoric | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 13 | Rocco Westfield | G | Fr | 6'2" | 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: Denver Anglin (from Iona), AJ Lesburt Jr. (from Brown), Aram Vladimir Soqui Urbano (from Fresno St), Elijah Wilborn (from James Madison)
Siena2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21 | Brendan Coyle | G | Sr | 6'7" | 35-35 | 30.5 | 8.7 | 4.6 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 46.8% | 30.0% | 6.8 | 82.1% | 19.8% | |
| 30 | Tan Yildizogluat VMI | G | Sr | 6'4" | 31-31 | 31.1 | 10.2 | 3.6 | 4.7 | 2.3 | 45.4% | 27.1% | 3.8 | 63.3% | 24.5% | |
| 2 | Isaiah Henderson | G | So | 6'6" | 28-1 | 13.8 | 3.8 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 47.1% | 30.4% | 2.5 | 75.8% | 18.8% | |
| 11 | Owen Schlager | G | So | 6'3" | 5-0 | 10.0 | 2.8 | 1.2 | 0.6 | 1.4 | 31.8% | 14.3% | 1.4 | 70.0% | 27.5% | |
| 33 | Chris Torres | G | Jr | 6'2" | 4-0 | 2.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 25.0% | — | 0.0 | — | 24.4% | |
| 12 | Reid Ducharme | G | Jr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 9 | Andrs Amn | G | Fr | 7'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Angelos Bratakos | G | Jr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 8 | Mana Martin | G | Fr | 6'6" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 22 | Pace Prosser | G | Jr | 6'2" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 3 | Parrish Edmond Jr. | G | Fr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 94 | Paul Lambert | G | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 0 | Sei'Mir Roberson | G | Fr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 13 | Tim Ibukunoluwa | G | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 5 | Trent Egbiremolen | G | Fr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 77 | Yannis Steger | G | Fr | 6'10" | 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: Tan Yildizoglu (from VMI)
Merrimack2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Tye Dorset | G | Jr | 6'3" | 34-34 | 36.3 | 11.7 | 3.1 | 2.2 | 0.9 | 49.3% | 32.2% | 5.4 | 77.3% | 21.0% | |
| 20 | Todd Brogna | F | Sr | 6'7" | 34-34 | 29.2 | 6.1 | 4.7 | 2.4 | 1.5 | 51.6% | 35.1% | 3.9 | 70.8% | 15.5% | |
| 2 | Denver Anglinat Iona | G | Sr | 6'1" | 31-29 | 28.1 | 9.3 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 1.0 | 44.0% | 29.8% | 6.1 | 79.5% | 23.0% | |
| 5 | Elijah Wilbornat James Madison | F | Sr | 6'8" | 31-0 | 8.5 | 2.4 | 2.9 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 63.0% | — | 0.0 | 25.0% | 19.2% | |
| 0 | Dylan Veillette | F | So | 6'7" | 33-0 | 8.2 | 1.9 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 47.1% | 9.1% | 0.3 | 68.2% | 16.4% | |
| 7 | Aram Vladimir Soqui Urbanoat Fresno St | G | So | 6'4" | 13-2 | 9.5 | 2.2 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 41.4% | 27.3% | 1.7 | 66.7% | 16.3% | |
| 33 | AJ Lesburt Jr.at Brown | G | Sr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 12 | David Munro | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 14 | Jacob Moore | F | Fr | 6'9" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 11 | Quinn Kwasniak | G | Fr | 6'4" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 24 | Amare Guerra | G | Fr | 5'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 3 | Ayden Johnson | G | Fr | 5'10" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Jeremiah Anderson | G | Sr | 6'1" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 10 | JP Skoric | F | Fr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 13 | Rocco Westfield | G | Fr | 6'2" | 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: Denver Anglin (from Iona), AJ Lesburt Jr. (from Brown), Aram Vladimir Soqui Urbano (from Fresno St), Elijah Wilborn (from James Madison)
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26Merrimack
Against the spread
Season
20-14
Home
9-2
Road
9-8
Last 10
5-5
avg cover +3.8
Missed the spread 2 straightCovered 4 of 9 as a favorite
Over / under
Season
11-22-1
Home
5-6
Road
6-11
Last 10
4-6
avg vs total −3.0
Under 3 straightOver in 4 of 9 as a favorite
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10 | Siena | N | L 54–64 | −1.5 | L−11.5 | 128.5 | U118 | 84.9 | 100.7 | 63.6 |
| Mar 8 | Marist | N | W 58–57 | −3.0 | L−2.0 | 128.5 | U115 | 90.7 | 89.2 | 63.9 |
| Mar 6 | Sacred Heart | N | W 70–48 | −7.0 | W+15.0 | 143.0 | U118 | 114.6 | 78.6 | 61.1 |
| Mar 1 | Niagara | A | W 73–66 | −7.5 | L−0.5 | 127.0 | O139 | 120.5 | 108.9 | 60.6 |
| Feb 27 | Canisius | A | L 62–67 | −9.0 | L−14.0 | 130.0 | U129 | 102.1 | 110.3 | 60.7 |
| Feb 22 | Iona | H | W 88–86 2OT | −6.5 | L−4.5 | 137.0 | O174 | 119.0 | 116.3 | 73.9 |
| Feb 20 | Siena | H | W 79–72 OT | −2.5 | W+4.5 | 133.0 | O151 | 124.7 | 113.6 | 63.4 |
| Feb 15 | Quinnipiac | A | W 56–49 | +3.5 | W+10.5 | 142.0 | U105 | 85.8 | 75.1 | 65.3 |
| Feb 12 | Marist | H | W 81–56 | −2.5 | W+22.5 | 129.5 | O137 | 122.2 | 84.5 | 66.3 |
| Feb 7 | Rider | A | W 73–47 | −8.5 | W+17.5 | 137.5 | U120 | 127.1 | 81.8 | 57.5 |
Siena
Against the spread
Season
20-14-1
Home
7-6
Road
8-7-1
Last 10
7-3
avg cover +2.2
Covered 5 straightCovered 4 of 6 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 4 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
11-23-1
Home
4-9
Road
7-9
Last 10
1-8-1
avg vs total −3.4
Over in 0 of 6 as a favoriteOver in 1 of 4 as an underdog, 1 push
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 19 | #1Duke | N | L 65–71 | +27.5 | W+21.5 | 136.0 | P136 | 105.0 | 114.7 | 61.9 |
| Mar 10 | Merrimack | N | W 64–54 | +1.5 | W+11.5 | 128.5 | U118 | 100.7 | 84.9 | 63.6 |
| Mar 8 | Fairfield | N | W 76–61 | −1.5 | W+13.5 | 138.0 | U137 | 119.0 | 95.5 | 63.9 |
| Mar 7 | Mount St Marys | N | W 63–58 | −3.0 | W+2.0 | 135.0 | U121 | 104.4 | 96.1 | 60.3 |
| Mar 1 | Rider | H | W 76–61 | −14.5 | W+0.5 | 137.5 | U137 | 114.2 | 91.6 | 66.6 |
| Feb 27 | Fairfield | A | L 58–72 | −1.0 | L−15.0 | 142.5 | U130 | 82.9 | 102.9 | 69.9 |
| Feb 22 | Saint Peter's | H | W 72–63 | −6.0 | W+3.0 | 136.0 | U135 | 117.3 | 102.6 | 61.4 |
| Feb 20 | Merrimack | A | L 72–79 OT | +2.5 | L−4.5 | 133.0 | O151 | 113.6 | 124.7 | 63.4 |
| Feb 15 | Marist | A | W 67–63 | +2.0 | W+6.0 | 134.0 | U130 | 102.7 | 96.5 | 65.3 |
| Feb 13 | Quinnipiac | H | L 62–74 | −4.0 | L−16.0 | 144.0 | U136 | 92.8 | 110.8 | 66.8 |
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 homeMerrimackSiena
Efficiency
107.2
108.6
106.3
106.7
65.8
66.4
—
—
Shooting
49.1%
50.4%
49.1%
52.5%
32.7%
30.6%
78.8%
77.1%
38.2%
33.4%
Ball control & glass
14.8%
15.8%
20.4%
17.0%
24.8%
31.8%
39.9%
29.5%
7.2%
10.2%
13.0%
9.5%
Style
46.1%
32.2%
38.0%
47.7%
13.5%
7.1%
56.0%
53.2%
17.6%
22.3%
Roster
3.46
3.65
6'4.3"
6'5.6"
36.3%
21.6%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputMerrimack
Returning minutes: 36.3%Returning production: 32.9%
Lost
- Ernest Shelton 36.9 mpg, 15.9 ppg · transferred to Boston College
- Kevair Kennedy 36.8 mpg, 18.4 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Andrés Marrero 27.4 mpg, 7.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- KC Ugwuakazi 17.8 mpg, 4.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Jaylen Stinson 3.8 mpg, 0.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Aliou Cisse 2.7 mpg, 0.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Denver Anglin from Iona · 27.2 mpg, 9.0 ppg last season
- Elijah Wilborn from James Madison · 8.0 mpg, 2.2 ppg last season
- Aram Vladimir Soqui Urbano from Fresno St · 3.9 mpg, 0.9 ppg last season
- Rocco Westfield no D1 minutes last season
- JP Skoric no D1 minutes last season
- Jacob Moore no D1 minutes last season
Returns 36% of last season's minutes; lost 3 of its top 5 (1 transferred). Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
Siena
Returning minutes: 21.6%Returning production: 12.4%
Lost
- Gavin Doty 36.7 mpg, 18.0 ppg · transferred to Syracuse
- Justice Shoats 35.6 mpg, 13.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Francis Folefac 28.1 mpg, 11.3 ppg · transferred to Syracuse
- Antonio Chandler 18.3 mpg, 6.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Christian Jones 17.0 mpg, 4.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Riley Mulvey 13.4 mpg, 2.9 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Tan Yildizoglu from VMI · 30.2 mpg, 9.9 ppg last season
- Paul Lambert no D1 minutes last season
- Angelos Bratakos no D1 minutes last season
- Mana Martin no D1 minutes last season
- Yannis Steger no D1 minutes last season
- Tim Ibukunoluwa no D1 minutes last season
Returns 22% of last season's minutes; lost 4 of its top 5 (2 transferred). Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).
Head-to-head
this season and last| Date | Season | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Tue, Mar 10 | 2025-26 | Siena 64 – 54 Merrimack(N) |
| Fri, Feb 20 | 2025-26 | Siena 72 – 79 Merrimack |
| Fri, Jan 9 | 2025-26 | Merrimack 63 – 59 Siena |
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.