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 gameLakefront Arena, New Orleans, LA

UT Rio Grande

Efficiency #109

2025-26: 19-14 · 15-9 conf

LSU N Orleans

Efficiency #221

2025-26: 15-18 · 13-11 conf

Sat, Dec 5 · TBD

75.2

win 49%

Projected

75.4

win 51%

No line posted yet.

Model: NOLA −0.2 · total 150.7 · 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: LSU N Orleans 69.8, UT Rio Grande 67.7 → 69.2 possessions

+1.9

LSU N Orleans offense vs UT Rio Grande defense

−1.6

UT Rio Grande offense vs LSU N Orleans defense

+2.2

Projected total

150.7

Axis starts at 147 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Projected margin

Even game

0.0

LSU N Orleans offense vs UT Rio Grande defense

−1.6

UT Rio Grande offense vs LSU N Orleans defense

−2.2

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

+4.0

LSU N Orleans by 0.2

0.2

UT Rio Grande side ◂▸ LSU N Orleans 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 LSU N Orleans.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 69.2, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw 2025-26 season pace, LSU N Orleans is the faster team (69.7, #107 of 365) and UT Rio Grande the slower (66.5, #274). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (study weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

69.2

per team, 40 min

Projected total

150.7

model

Projected team totals

75.2 / 75.4

UT Rio Grande / LSU N Orleans

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

67.7#238

UT Rio Grande

69.8#61

LSU N Orleans

How this game plays

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

AdvantageLSU N Orleans

Where LSU N Orleans struggles: shooting

LSU N Orleans shoots an effective 49.6% (#258); UT Rio Grande allows 47.8% (#38). Expect about 48.5%, 2.7 points below an average D1 matchup — worth roughly -3.9 points per 100 possessions.

ClashUT Rio Grande

Style match: ball movement

UT Rio Grande assists on 59.9% of its made baskets; LSU N Orleans allows assists on 60.3% of opponents' baskets (D1 average 52.4%). Expect about 62.4% — both habits push the same way.

GlassLSU N Orleans

LSU N Orleans owns the glass

Projected offensive rebound rate of 34.9% is worth roughly +2.7 points per 100 possessions for LSU N Orleans's offense.

TurnoversLSU N Orleans

LSU N Orleans turns it over

Projected turnover rate of 18.5% is worth roughly -2.2 points per 100 possessions against LSU N Orleans's offense.

Watch for noise

3-point caution

A notable season 3-point number here (UT Rio Grande, UT Rio Grande's defense) 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 UT Rio Grande at about 43.3% of its shots from three, LSU N Orleans about 34.0%.

UT Rio Grande has the ball

OffenseLSU N Orleans allowsvs D1 avg

54.8% #44

49.0% #71

+1.2 pt/100

18.5% #295

14.9% #302

+0.3 pt/100

28.2% #257

34.5% #325

+0.3 pt/100

28.9% #332

39.5% #296

-0.0 pt/100

76.3% #45

—

+0.3 pt/100

UT Rio Grande net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: +2.1 pts/100

LSU N Orleans has the ball

OffenseUT Rio Grande allowsvs D1 avg

49.6% #258

47.8% #38

-3.9 pt/100

20.5% #353

16.3% #203

-2.2 pt/100

35.6% #34

32.1% #266

+2.7 pt/100

46.4% #1

38.9% #283

+1.0 pt/100

74.3% #114

—

+0.2 pt/100

LSU N Orleans net across the four factors + FT%, vs. a D1-average matchup: -2.2 pts/100

Shot diet

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

UT Rio Grandeoffense vsLSU N Orleansdefense

Share of shots by zone

UT Rio Grande shoots

36.2

5.1

14.6

44.1

LSU N Orleans allows

37.6

5.7

17.1

39.7

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	61.8%#79	54.3%#46	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	38.6%#206	36.9%#108	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	38.9%#148	41.2%#280	38.0%
Three	36.8%#35	32.4%#86	33.7%

LSU N Orleansoffense vsUT Rio Grandedefense

Share of shots by zone

LSU N Orleans shoots

41.8

5.8

19.2

33.2

UT Rio Grande allows

37.8

5.4

19.3

37.5

D-I average

38.5

6.4

15.8

39.3

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	56.9%#244	56.5%#102	58.6%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	43.8%#86	46.2%#321	39.5%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	38.4%#177	32.7%#23	38.0%
Three	31.8%#287	30.4%#16	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

UT Rio Grande

−5.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#347 of 365

Off reb %

28.2%

#257

Def reb %

67.9%

#266

Turnover %

18.5%

#295

Forced TO %

16.3%

#203

FT rate

28.9%

#332

FT allowed

38.9%

#283

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.7

Defensive rebounding−0.5

Ball security−1.2

Forcing turnovers−0.3

Foul shots drawn−1.6

Foul shots allowed−1.0

LSU N Orleans

−1.5extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#256 of 365

Off reb %

35.6%

#34

Def reb %

65.5%

#325

Turnover %

20.5%

#353

Forced TO %

14.9%

#302

FT rate

46.4%

FT allowed

39.5%

#296

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding+1.7

Defensive rebounding−1.2

Ball security−2.5

Forcing turnovers−1.3

Foul shots drawn+2.9

Foul shots allowed−1.1

LSU N Orleans has more extra scoring chances per game: −1.5 (#256 of 365) to UT Rio Grande’s −5.2 (#347).

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

UT Rio Grande2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted UT Rio Grande'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
10	Marvin McGhee III	G	Sr	6'4"	33-33	29.6	10.9	5.1	0.9	0.7	60.5%	43.3%	5.5	87.0%	18.9%
4	Koree Cotton	G	Jr	6'6"	33-33	27.1	13.9	5.3	2.5	2.4	55.7%	40.3%	4.1	78.1%	31.3%
0	Jaylen Washington	G	So	5'10"	33-21	26.8	10.2	2.3	4.2	1.5	56.0%	31.4%	1.5	84.6%	22.3%
33	Filip Brankovic	F	Jr	6'8"	32-32	24.0	13.0	4.4	1.9	1.5	58.2%	33.3%	3.3	83.6%	30.7%
13	Julien Gomez	G	Fr	6'2"	33-21	22.5	7.5	3.2	1.5	0.9	59.9%	43.7%	2.6	78.2%	18.8%
5	Zae Blake	G	Sr	6'1"	30-6	19.0	4.8	2.8	1.4	0.9	45.6%	31.6%	2.6	75.9%	18.3%
1	Always Wright	G	Jr	6'3"	33-12	15.2	2.9	1.6	1.9	1.3	43.7%	22.6%	0.9	60.9%	17.5%
3	Dane Christensen	F	So	6'7"	27-3	13.4	3.7	2.5	0.9	0.6	48.8%	33.3%	1.8	59.3%	18.4%
12	Kwo Agwa	F	Sr	6'6"	30-0	11.2	3.6	1.9	0.9	0.5	66.4%	55.6%	0.3	47.8%	18.0%
22	Jalen Ricks	G	Sr	6'7"	21-0	8.7	2.8	1.4	0.5	0.4	42.1%	27.9%	2.0	71.4%	24.0%
21	Marshal Destremau	F	Jr	6'9"	21-1	7.7	2.7	2.0	0.3	0.6	45.6%	36.8%	0.9	72.7%	24.5%
7	Kye Dickson	F	Sr	6'7"	6-3	18.2	9.2	3.7	0.3	1.0	59.7%	41.7%	2.0	60.0%	26.5%
35	Mustafo Vanjov	C	Sr	7'0"	3-0	8.3	3.0	1.3	0.3	0.3	100.0%	—	0.0	50.0%	13.6%
30	Luis Ramirez	G	Jr	6'2"	3-0	3.3	1.7	0.7	0.3	0.0	83.3%	50.0%	0.7	—	17.1%

Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

LSU N Orleans2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted LSU N Orleans'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
22	Coleton Benson	G	Sr	6'2"	33-33	34.3	16.2	3.0	1.7	1.8	51.0%	35.9%	7.5	92.8%	26.5%
5	Jakevion Buckley	G	Sr	6'2"	32-29	33.9	13.8	4.7	5.6	4.1	43.2%	31.2%	2.9	77.1%	30.1%
23	MJ Thomas	F	So	6'8"	32-30	26.8	10.8	8.0	1.5	1.8	53.6%	66.7%	0.1	73.3%	23.7%
6	TJ Cope	G	Jr	6'7"	32-20	21.3	8.3	2.9	0.8	1.3	57.5%	24.1%	0.9	68.7%	21.5%
9	Churchill Abass	C	Jr	6'10"	33-27	20.1	8.4	5.7	0.5	1.6	63.1%	0.0%	0.1	56.7%	23.9%
25	Enzo Boudouma	F	Fr	6'9"	32-6	18.3	5.3	3.1	0.8	0.9	45.2%	27.0%	2.3	72.3%	18.9%
21	Kedrick Osby	F	Jr	6'7"	32-7	17.2	4.9	2.2	0.2	0.5	50.8%	40.0%	1.7	75.8%	16.9%
99	Panagiotis Pagonis	F	Fr	6'9"	30-7	17.6	4.1	3.1	1.0	0.7	39.8%	24.5%	1.6	72.0%	16.6%
3	Irish Coquia	G	Jr	6'2"	25-3	9.6	2.7	0.7	1.2	0.8	45.9%	34.1%	1.6	84.6%	20.8%
15	Jamal Chretien II	G	Fr	6'6"	14-3	9.1	1.4	0.7	0.2	0.2	36.4%	15.4%	0.9	75.0%	12.1%
11	Mathok Majok	C	Jr	7'4"	16-0	4.9	2.2	1.6	0.0	0.2	73.7%	—	0.0	53.8%	20.8%
0	Hercy Miller	G	Sr	6'3"	9-0	5.6	1.6	0.6	0.6	0.6	26.9%	0.0%	0.9	0.0%	36.3%
7	Grant Kemp	G	Sr	5'9"	7-0	4.9	1.3	1.1	0.6	0.4	18.2%	0.0%	0.4	71.4%	29.1%
20	William Patterson	C	So	7'2"	7-0	4.3	0.3	0.7	0.0	0.3	20.0%	—	0.0	—	13.0%
13	Vieux Sanneh	F	Fr	6'5"	2-0	6.0	1.0	0.5	0.0	0.0	0.0%	—	0.0	100.0%	14.6%
10	Eze Nwakamma	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.

UT Rio Grande2025-26 numbers

ESPN hasn't posted UT Rio Grande'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
10	Marvin McGhee III	G	Sr	6'4"	33-33	29.6	10.9	5.1	0.9	0.7	60.5%	43.3%	5.5	87.0%	18.9%
4	Koree Cotton	G	Jr	6'6"	33-33	27.1	13.9	5.3	2.5	2.4	55.7%	40.3%	4.1	78.1%	31.3%
0	Jaylen Washington	G	So	5'10"	33-21	26.8	10.2	2.3	4.2	1.5	56.0%	31.4%	1.5	84.6%	22.3%
33	Filip Brankovic	F	Jr	6'8"	32-32	24.0	13.0	4.4	1.9	1.5	58.2%	33.3%	3.3	83.6%	30.7%
13	Julien Gomez	G	Fr	6'2"	33-21	22.5	7.5	3.2	1.5	0.9	59.9%	43.7%	2.6	78.2%	18.8%
5	Zae Blake	G	Sr	6'1"	30-6	19.0	4.8	2.8	1.4	0.9	45.6%	31.6%	2.6	75.9%	18.3%
1	Always Wright	G	Jr	6'3"	33-12	15.2	2.9	1.6	1.9	1.3	43.7%	22.6%	0.9	60.9%	17.5%
3	Dane Christensen	F	So	6'7"	27-3	13.4	3.7	2.5	0.9	0.6	48.8%	33.3%	1.8	59.3%	18.4%
12	Kwo Agwa	F	Sr	6'6"	30-0	11.2	3.6	1.9	0.9	0.5	66.4%	55.6%	0.3	47.8%	18.0%
22	Jalen Ricks	G	Sr	6'7"	21-0	8.7	2.8	1.4	0.5	0.4	42.1%	27.9%	2.0	71.4%	24.0%
21	Marshal Destremau	F	Jr	6'9"	21-1	7.7	2.7	2.0	0.3	0.6	45.6%	36.8%	0.9	72.7%	24.5%
7	Kye Dickson	F	Sr	6'7"	6-3	18.2	9.2	3.7	0.3	1.0	59.7%	41.7%	2.0	60.0%	26.5%
35	Mustafo Vanjov	C	Sr	7'0"	3-0	8.3	3.0	1.3	0.3	0.3	100.0%	—	0.0	50.0%	13.6%
30	Luis Ramirez	G	Jr	6'2"	3-0	3.3	1.7	0.7	0.3	0.0	83.3%	50.0%	0.7	—	17.1%

Rosters come from ESPN and are still filling in; incoming transfers and freshmen may be missing.

Trends

Last 10 games of 2025-26

UT Rio Grande

Against the spread

Season

18-13

Home

5-8

Road

11-5

Last 10

7-3

avg cover +6.0

Covered 3 straightCovered 5 of 8 as a favorite

Over / under

Season

13-18

Home

3-10

Road

8-8

Last 10

5-5

avg vs total +3.9

Over 2 straightOver in 4 of 8 as a favorite

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 10	McNeeseAdjEM #49	N	L 80–84 3OT	+7.0	W+3.0	141.0	O164	93.8	98.4	85.3
Mar 9	NichollsAdjEM #250	N	W 86–68	−5.5	W+12.5	143.5	O154	128.6	101.7	66.9
Mar 2	N'Western StAdjEM #299	H	W 74–62	−9.0	W+3.0	139.0	U136	114.6	96.0	64.6
Feb 28	East Texas A&MAdjEM #311	H	W 63–55	−10.0	L−2.0	147.5	U118	109.4	95.5	57.6
Feb 23	McNeeseAdjEM #49	A	L 68–75	+12.0	W+5.0	146.0	U143	98.7	108.8	68.9
Feb 21	SE LouisianaAdjEM #296	A	W 96–75	−4.0	W+17.0	139.5	O171	150.4	117.5	63.8
Feb 16	LamarAdjEM #236	H	W 70–65	−6.0	L−1.0	142.0	U135	117.1	108.8	59.8
Feb 14	SF AustinAdjEM #73	H	L 57–66	−2.5	L−11.5	143.5	U123	91.1	105.5	62.6
Feb 9	NichollsAdjEM #250	A	W 92–72	−3.0	W+17.0	147.5	O164	133.4	104.4	69.0
Feb 7	LSU N OrleansAdjEM #221	A	W 95–76	−1.5	W+17.5	151.0	O171	127.5	102.0	74.5

LSU N Orleans

Against the spread

Season

18-14-1

Home

7-4

Road

10-9-1

Last 10

6-3-1

avg cover +2.7

Missed the spread in the last gameCovered 5 of 8 as an underdog, 1 push

Over / under

Season

19-14

Home

9-2

Road

10-10

Last 10

4-6

avg vs total −3.3

Under 2 straightOver in 3 of 8 as an underdog

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Mar 9	Texas A&M-CCAdjEM #181	N	L 61–74	+2.0	L−11.0	147.5	U135	104.8	127.1	58.2
Mar 8	Hou ChristianAdjEM #297	N	W 73–60	−4.0	W+9.0	143.0	U133	103.3	84.9	70.7
Mar 2	SE LouisianaAdjEM #296	H	L 78–82	−7.0	L−11.0	144.0	O160	104.8	110.2	74.4
Feb 28	McNeeseAdjEM #49	H	L 63–66	+10.0	W+7.0	150.5	U129	97.5	102.1	64.6
Feb 23	SF AustinAdjEM #73	A	W 77–73	+11.5	W+15.5	152.0	U150	113.4	107.5	67.9
Feb 21	LamarAdjEM #236	A	W 77–71	+5.5	W+11.5	146.5	O148	109.8	101.3	70.1
Feb 16	Incarnate WordAdjEM #264	A	W 78–64	+2.0	W+16.0	153.5	U142	120.9	99.2	64.5
Feb 14	Hou ChristianAdjEM #297	A	L 60–61	+1.0	P0.0	149.0	U121	96.6	98.2	62.1
Feb 9	Texas A&M-CCAdjEM #181	H	W 84–78 OT	+1.5	W+7.5	147.0	O162	96.5	89.6	87.1
Feb 7	UT Rio GrandeAdjEM #109	H	L 76–95	+1.5	L−17.5	151.0	O171	102.0	127.5	74.5

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

UT Rio GrandeLSU N Orleans

Efficiency

109.6

108.2

106.5

110.5

67.7

69.8

—

Shooting

54.8%

49.6%

54.5%

50.6%

36.8%

31.8%

76.3%

74.3%

28.9%

46.4%

Ball control & glass

18.5%

20.5%

16.3%

14.9%

28.2%

35.6%

32.1%

34.5%

9.7%

11.1%

10.2%

9.7%

Style

43.7%

33.7%

41.4%

42.7%

10.8%

12.4%

59.9%

52.5%

33.8%

31.8%

Roster

2.92

2.84

6'3.9"

6'5.9"

—

Offseason

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

UT Rio Grande

Returning minutes: 97.8%Returning production: 98.1%

ESPN hasn't posted UT Rio Grande's roster for this season yet — no movement to show.

Returns 98% 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.)

LSU N Orleans

Returning minutes: 100.0%Returning production: 100.0%

ESPN hasn't posted LSU N Orleans'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, Feb 7	2025-26	UT Rio Grande 95 – 76 LSU N Orleans
Mon, Dec 29	2025-26	LSU N Orleans 85 – 69 UT Rio Grande

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.