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-conferenceBaxter Arena, Omaha, NE
Lamar
Efficiency #236
2025-26: 12-19 · 7-15 conf
@
Omaha
Efficiency #257
2025-26: 16-17 · 9-9 conf
Tue, Nov 17 · 8:00 PM ET
70.3
win 41%
Projected
73.1
win 59%
No line posted yet.
Model: OMA −2.8 · total 143.4 · 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: Omaha 68.2, Lamar 67.0 → 66.9 possessions
−3.1
Omaha offense vs Lamar defense
−1.4
Lamar offense vs Omaha defense
−0.3
Projected total
143.4
Axis starts at 140 pointsPoints added or removed at each step
Projected margin
Even game
0.0
Omaha offense vs Lamar defense
−1.4
Lamar offense vs Omaha defense
+0.3
Home court+2.9 points per 100 possessions to the home offense, −2.9 to the visitors
+3.8
Omaha by 2.8
2.8
Lamar side ◂▸ Omaha 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 Omaha.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 66.9, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, Omaha is the faster team (68.6, #166 of 365) and Lamar the slower (65.8, #301). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
66.9
per team, 40 min
Projected total
143.4
model
Projected team totals
70.3 / 73.1
Lamar / Omaha
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
67.0#287
Lamar
68.2#193
Omaha
How this game plays
what the study found each side's numbers actually do when these two teams meetDefenseLamar
Lamar's shot-blocking
Lamar ranks #31 nationally in block rate — one of the few defensive numbers that travels. Expect about 12.1% of Omaha's two-point attempts to get blocked against this defense.
AdvantageOmaha
Where Omaha struggles: the offensive glass
Omaha rebounds 25.5% of its own misses (#331); Lamar lets opponents grab 29.4% of their own misses (#130). Expect about 26.5%, 3.9 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -2.4 points per 100 possessions.
AdvantageLamar
Where Lamar struggles: shooting
Lamar shoots an effective 47.8% (#318); Omaha allows 52.7% (#258). Expect about 50.0%, 1.3 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -1.8 points per 100 possessions.
GlassLamar
Lamar owns the glass
Projected offensive rebound rate of 33.3% is worth roughly +1.7 points per 100 possessions for Lamar's offense.
ClashLamar
Style clash: 3-point volume
Lamar rarely shoots threes (33.9% of its shots); Omaha lets opponents take 45.5% of their shots from three (D1 average 39.5%). Expect about 38.9% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.80 vs 0.64).
ClashOmaha
Style clash: ball movement
Omaha creates off the dribble (assists on 46.9% of its baskets); Lamar allows assists on 57.7% of opponents' baskets (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 52.3% — the offense's habit usually carries a bit more weight (0.65 vs 0.65).
Lamar has the ball
OffenseOmaha allowsvs D1 avg
47.8% #318
52.7% #258
-1.8 pt/100
18.1% #273
14.1% #333
+1.2 pt/100
35.7% #31
28.7% #90
+1.7 pt/100
27.9% #344
33.6% #142
-0.5 pt/100
70.7% #249
—
-0.2 pt/100
Lamar net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +0.5 pts/100
Omaha has the ball
OffenseLamar allowsvs D1 avg
52.2% #139
50.9% #153
+0.5 pt/100
16.1% #145
17.3% #130
+0.1 pt/100
25.5% #331
29.4% #130
-2.4 pt/100
34.5% #196
44.4% #347
+0.7 pt/100
73.2% #164
—
+0.1 pt/100
Omaha net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -1.1 pts/100
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot · 2025-26 numbersLamaroffense vsOmahadefense
Share of shots by zone
Lamar shoots
33.4
7.3
26.1
33.1
Omaha allows
35.1
7.8
11.8
45.4
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 53.3%#337 | 64.6%#346 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 44.1%#77 | 39.7%#182 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 38.0%#188 | 41.6%#291 | 38.0% |
| Three | 32.9%#238 | 32.9%#114 | 33.7% |
Omahaoffense vsLamardefense
Share of shots by zone
Omaha shoots
38.8
7.4
13.0
40.8
Lamar allows
39.6
5.0
17.7
37.7
D-I average
38.5
6.4
15.8
39.3
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 58.9%#165 | 59.0%#189 | 58.6% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 40.7%#155 | 32.9%#27 | 39.5% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 41.5%#71 | 33.6%#40 | 38.0% |
| Three | 34.0%#169 | 35.3%#266 | 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 numbersLamar
−2.5extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#284 of 365
Off reb %
35.7%
#31
Def reb %
70.6%
#130
Turnover %
18.1%
#273
Forced TO %
17.3%
#130
FT rate
27.9%
#344
FT allowed
44.4%
#347
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.7
Defensive rebounding+0.4
Ball security−0.9
Forcing turnovers+0.4
Foul shots drawn−1.8
Foul shots allowed−2.4
Omaha
−2.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#269 of 365
Off reb %
25.5%
#331
Def reb %
71.3%
#90
Turnover %
16.1%
#145
Forced TO %
14.1%
#333
FT rate
34.5%
#196
FT allowed
33.6%
#142
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding−1.6
Defensive rebounding+0.6
Ball security+0.5
Forcing turnovers−1.8
Foul shots drawn−0.1
Foul shots allowed+0.4
Omaha has more extra scoring chances per game: −2.0 (#269 of 365) to Lamar’s −2.5 (#284).
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
Lamar2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24 | Rob Lee Jr. | G | Jr | 6'2" | 31-30 | 28.2 | 16.0 | 3.2 | 2.0 | 1.5 | 53.6% | 40.0% | 6.0 | 81.1% | 33.5% | |
| 0 | Cody Pennebaker | G | Sr | 6'5" | 31-31 | 27.5 | 7.1 | 4.3 | 2.5 | 1.3 | 50.7% | 26.5% | 1.1 | 51.9% | 18.2% | |
| 4 | Braden East | F | So | 6'9" | 30-28 | 23.9 | 12.8 | 9.1 | 0.7 | 1.7 | 54.2% | 31.3% | 0.5 | 70.6% | 32.7% | |
| 10 | Errol White | F | Sr | 6'7" | 31-15 | 22.3 | 5.0 | 4.9 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 47.4% | — | 0.0 | 56.9% | 17.4% | |
| 3 | King-Njhsanni Wilhite | G | Jr | 6'1" | 29-16 | 21.0 | 5.8 | 1.1 | 2.5 | 1.0 | 43.0% | 34.5% | 1.9 | 65.9% | 21.2% | |
| 11 | Eian Lowe | G | Fr | 5'10" | 30-2 | 17.9 | 4.3 | 1.5 | 2.5 | 1.2 | 43.5% | 34.9% | 1.4 | 63.6% | 19.3% | |
| 32 | Janko Bulajic | C | Sr | 6'10" | 31-2 | 11.8 | 1.5 | 3.1 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 60.0% | — | 0.0 | 43.5% | 10.4% | |
| 5 | Jayden Gambrell | G | Fr | 6'3" | 30-1 | 11.2 | 4.0 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 45.3% | 32.3% | 3.1 | 71.4% | 26.5% | |
| 8 | B.B. Knight | G | Jr | 6'6" | 20-0 | 8.1 | 2.7 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 28.7% | 13.9% | 1.8 | 95.0% | 30.7% | |
| 20 | Spencer Ezewiro | F | Jr | 6'9" | 20-0 | 5.7 | 0.5 | 1.7 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 30.8% | — | 0.0 | 10.0% | 11.4% | |
| 2 | Jayden Barrs | G | So | 6'1" | 7-0 | 11.7 | 3.1 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 42.3% | 28.6% | 1.0 | — | 21.5% | |
| 12 | Christian Thomas | PF | Fr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 51 | Izuchukwu Emelife | C | Fr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Quinton Sanders | 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.
Omaha2025-26 numbers
ESPN hasn't posted Omaha'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Lance Waddles | G | Sr | 6'4" | 33-33 | 29.4 | 12.8 | 4.8 | 2.1 | 1.4 | 55.6% | 38.0% | 6.2 | 66.7% | 25.4% | |
| 32 | Tony Osburn | G | Sr | 6'2" | 29-28 | 32.8 | 11.6 | 3.0 | 2.3 | 1.0 | 53.3% | 36.8% | 6.3 | 78.6% | 20.2% | |
| 5 | Ja'Sean Glover | G | Sr | 6'5" | 31-8 | 25.9 | 11.6 | 4.0 | 2.5 | 2.0 | 49.2% | 28.3% | 3.2 | 86.7% | 27.5% | |
| 3 | Grant Stubblefield | G | Jr | 6'1" | 26-22 | 28.5 | 9.3 | 3.1 | 3.3 | 1.6 | 55.9% | 33.3% | 1.5 | 77.6% | 19.0% | |
| 11 | Paul Djobet | G | Jr | 6'7" | 20-18 | 29.9 | 17.4 | 6.6 | 1.9 | 2.4 | 58.0% | 41.5% | 4.1 | 72.0% | 33.0% | |
| 22 | Kamryn Thomas | F | Sr | 6'8" | 28-14 | 20.8 | 4.7 | 3.5 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 48.6% | 34.6% | 1.9 | 62.2% | 15.9% | |
| 44 | Brock Scholl | F | Fr | 6'8" | 33-9 | 14.5 | 4.1 | 3.3 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 44.8% | 25.0% | 0.1 | 71.1% | 17.8% | |
| 15 | Christian Richardson | C | Sr | 7'1" | 27-16 | 15.7 | 7.4 | 3.0 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 72.7% | — | 0.0 | 59.7% | 23.7% | |
| 25 | Khamani Cooper | G | Jr | 6'4" | 26-9 | 16.1 | 4.8 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 46.9% | 33.3% | 2.1 | 76.9% | 21.4% | |
| 21 | Valentino Simon | F | Sr | 6'6" | 30-8 | 12.5 | 3.7 | 3.1 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 53.6% | 0.0% | 0.1 | 64.9% | 17.0% | |
| 2 | Julian Margrave | F | Sr | 6'10" | 20-0 | 9.8 | 3.9 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 47.4% | 31.7% | 3.0 | 100.0% | 25.3% | |
| 12 | Aidan Skradis | G | So | 6'4" | 12-0 | 7.7 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 36.7% | 25.0% | 1.0 | 100.0% | 12.9% | |
| 0 | Benji Nelson | F | So | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 20 | Brandon Orgilbold | G | — | 6'0" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 10 | Deng Mayar | F | Sr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 24 | Isaac Ondekane | C | Sr | 6'8" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Rob Matos | G | Jr | 5'9" | 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.
Lamar2025-26 numbers
| # | Player | Pos | Cl | Ht | GP-GS | MPG | PPG | RPG | APG | TOV | eFG% | 3P% | 3PA/g | FT% | Usage | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24 | Rob Lee Jr. | G | Jr | 6'2" | 31-30 | 28.2 | 16.0 | 3.2 | 2.0 | 1.5 | 53.6% | 40.0% | 6.0 | 81.1% | 33.5% | |
| 0 | Cody Pennebaker | G | Sr | 6'5" | 31-31 | 27.5 | 7.1 | 4.3 | 2.5 | 1.3 | 50.7% | 26.5% | 1.1 | 51.9% | 18.2% | |
| 4 | Braden East | F | So | 6'9" | 30-28 | 23.9 | 12.8 | 9.1 | 0.7 | 1.7 | 54.2% | 31.3% | 0.5 | 70.6% | 32.7% | |
| 10 | Errol White | F | Sr | 6'7" | 31-15 | 22.3 | 5.0 | 4.9 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 47.4% | — | 0.0 | 56.9% | 17.4% | |
| 3 | King-Njhsanni Wilhite | G | Jr | 6'1" | 29-16 | 21.0 | 5.8 | 1.1 | 2.5 | 1.0 | 43.0% | 34.5% | 1.9 | 65.9% | 21.2% | |
| 11 | Eian Lowe | G | Fr | 5'10" | 30-2 | 17.9 | 4.3 | 1.5 | 2.5 | 1.2 | 43.5% | 34.9% | 1.4 | 63.6% | 19.3% | |
| 32 | Janko Bulajic | C | Sr | 6'10" | 31-2 | 11.8 | 1.5 | 3.1 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 60.0% | — | 0.0 | 43.5% | 10.4% | |
| 5 | Jayden Gambrell | G | Fr | 6'3" | 30-1 | 11.2 | 4.0 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 45.3% | 32.3% | 3.1 | 71.4% | 26.5% | |
| 8 | B.B. Knight | G | Jr | 6'6" | 20-0 | 8.1 | 2.7 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 28.7% | 13.9% | 1.8 | 95.0% | 30.7% | |
| 20 | Spencer Ezewiro | F | Jr | 6'9" | 20-0 | 5.7 | 0.5 | 1.7 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 30.8% | — | 0.0 | 10.0% | 11.4% | |
| 2 | Jayden Barrs | G | So | 6'1" | 7-0 | 11.7 | 3.1 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 42.3% | 28.6% | 1.0 | — | 21.5% | |
| 12 | Christian Thomas | PF | Fr | 6'5" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 51 | Izuchukwu Emelife | C | Fr | 6'7" | 0-0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | — | 0.0 | — | — | |
| 1 | Quinton Sanders | 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.
Trends
Last 10 games of 2025-26Lamar
Against the spread
Season
13-14-2
Home
5-7-1
Road
8-6-1
Last 10
3-7
avg cover −5.0
Missed the spread 4 straightCovered 1 of 5 as a favoriteCovered 2 of 5 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
14-15
Home
6-7
Road
7-8
Last 10
4-6
avg vs total −5.7
Under 3 straightOver in 2 of 5 as a favoriteOver in 2 of 5 as an underdog
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 2 | Hou Christian | A | L 53–75 | −2.5 | L−24.5 | 134.0 | U128 | 79.4 | 112.3 | 66.8 |
| Feb 28 | Incarnate Word | A | L 60–72 | +1.0 | L−11.0 | 138.0 | U132 | 94.4 | 113.3 | 63.6 |
| Feb 23 | Nicholls | H | L 52–53 | −3.5 | L−4.5 | 143.5 | U105 | 80.3 | 81.8 | 64.8 |
| Feb 21 | LSU N Orleans | H | L 71–77 | −5.5 | L−11.5 | 146.5 | O148 | 101.3 | 109.8 | 70.1 |
| Feb 16 | UT Rio Grande | A | L 65–70 | +6.0 | W+1.0 | 142.0 | U135 | 108.8 | 117.1 | 59.8 |
| Feb 14 | Texas A&M-CC | A | L 63–76 | +2.5 | L−10.5 | 136.0 | O139 | 93.7 | 113.1 | 67.2 |
| Feb 9 | N'Western St | H | L 68–70 | −7.5 | L−9.5 | 136.5 | O138 | 103.1 | 106.1 | 66.0 |
| Feb 7 | SF Austin | A | L 74–84 | +8.0 | L−2.0 | 139.5 | O158 | 108.7 | 123.4 | 68.1 |
| Feb 2 | SE Louisiana | H | W 73–54 | −6.0 | W+13.0 | 133.5 | U127 | 120.3 | 89.0 | 60.7 |
| Jan 31 | McNeese | H | L 63–64 | +10.5 | W+9.5 | 144.0 | U127 | 109.8 | 111.6 | 57.4 |
Omaha
Against the spread
Season
14-15
Home
6-4
Road
7-8
Last 10
6-4
avg cover −0.6
Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 3 of 4 as a favoriteCovered 3 of 6 as an underdog
Over / under
Season
13-16
Home
4-6
Road
7-8
Last 10
4-6
avg vs total +0.5
Under 3 straightOver in 1 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 7 | N Dakota St | N | L 50–74 | +8.0 | L−16.0 | 147.0 | U124 | 73.8 | 109.2 | 67.8 |
| Mar 6 | South Dakota | N | W 76–62 | −2.0 | W+12.0 | 151.5 | U138 | 117.4 | 95.8 | 64.7 |
| Feb 28 | St Thomas | A | L 53–68 | +11.5 | L−3.5 | 159.5 | U121 | 81.3 | 104.3 | 65.2 |
| Feb 25 | South Dakota | A | L 72–89 | −1.5 | L−18.5 | 153.5 | O161 | 98.3 | 121.5 | 73.3 |
| Feb 18 | Oral Roberts | H | W 80–71 | −6.5 | W+2.5 | 152.0 | U151 | 121.2 | 107.6 | 66.0 |
| Feb 15 | Denver | H | W 83–76 | −2.5 | W+4.5 | 160.5 | U159 | 125.7 | 115.1 | 66.0 |
| Feb 12 | St Thomas | H | W 98–94 | +4.5 | W+8.5 | 156.5 | O192 | 132.5 | 127.1 | 74.0 |
| Feb 7 | N Dakota St | A | L 84–92 | +9.5 | W+1.5 | 144.5 | O176 | 125.2 | 137.2 | 67.1 |
| Feb 5 | North Dakota | A | L 73–76 | +2.0 | L−1.0 | 150.0 | U149 | 107.0 | 111.4 | 68.3 |
| Jan 31 | Denver | A | W 84–82 | +2.5 | W+4.5 | 157.5 | O166 | 117.0 | 114.2 | 71.8 |
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 homeLamarOmaha
Efficiency
105.0
106.6
108.3
111.5
67.0
68.2
—
—
Shooting
47.8%
52.2%
47.0%
53.0%
32.9%
34.0%
70.7%
73.2%
27.9%
34.5%
Ball control & glass
18.1%
16.1%
17.3%
14.1%
35.7%
25.5%
29.4%
28.7%
11.4%
9.1%
8.5%
10.5%
Style
33.9%
40.9%
40.5%
41.6%
14.2%
10.2%
55.4%
46.9%
34.7%
30.1%
Roster
2.88
3.49
6'4.4"
6'5.3"
85.8%
—
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputLamar
Returning minutes: 85.8%Returning production: 84.0%
Lost
- Andrew Holifield 28.6 mpg, 11.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Christian Thomas no D1 minutes last season
- Izuchukwu Emelife no D1 minutes last season
- Quinton Sanders no D1 minutes last season
No incoming D1 transfers are listed on ESPN's roster yet — until they are, returning shares read high.
Returns 86% of last season's minutes; lost 1 of its top 5. 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).
Omaha
Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%
ESPN hasn't posted Omaha'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 last| Date | Season | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Sat, Dec 20 | 2025-26 | Omaha 85 – 82 Lamar |
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.