North Texas Mean Green vs App State Mountaineers basketball preview & prediction

Fri, Nov 20 · 6:30 PM ET · Holmes Convocation Center, Boone, NC

Non-conferenceESPN+Holmes Convocation Center, Boone, NC
North Texas
2-0 · 0-0 conf
Efficiency #122
@
App State
2-1 · 0-0 conf
Efficiency #155
Fri, Nov 20 · 6:30 PM ET
Our projected score shows once the market opens.
No line posted yet.

Our play

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes
Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 62.5, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw season pace, North Texas is the faster team (65.7, #318 of 365) and App State the slower (59.4, #359). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions
62.5
per team, 40 min
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
68.4#311
North Texas
64.6#365
App State

How this game plays

points this game from the four factors, vs an average D-I matchup
From the four factors
App State has the ball−5.8
North Texas has the ball+5.0
App State has the ball
✗Tough shooting lookeFG% 43.9% #282 · UNT allows 45.5% #87−5.5
✓Wins second chancesOR% 41.4% #34 · UNT allows 36.8% #278+3.6
✗Coughs it upTO% 21.0% #272 · UNT forces 22.8% #56 · ~14 turnovers−3.5
✗Few trips to the lineFTR 34.0% #215 · UNT allows 38.2% #193 · FT 63.9% #272−0.4
North Texas has the ball
✓Wins second chancesOR% 41.9% #32 · APP allows 37.7% #288+3.9
✓Takes care of the ballTO% 18.3% #190 · APP forces 13.5% #302 · ~10 turnovers+2.3
✗Tough shooting lookeFG% 52.7% #143 · APP allows 43.9% #66−1.7
✓Gets to the lineFTR 39.3% #145 · APP allows 30.4% #107 · FT 81.8% #31+0.4

Shot diet

Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot
North Texasoffense vsApp Statedefense
Share of shots by zone
North Texas shoots
App State allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim73.9%#2451.4%#9358.0%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)0.0%#32333.3%#12538.2%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)50.0%#4512.5%#3434.7%
Three25.9%#28731.0%#14632.5%
App Stateoffense vsNorth Texasdefense
Share of shots by zone
App State shoots
North Texas allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim65.0%#10457.1%#16258.0%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)33.3%#18333.3%#12538.2%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)47.1%#7511.1%#3034.7%
Three25.9%#29035.7%#24832.5%
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
North Texas
+5.5extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#101 of 365
Off reb %
41.9%
#32
Def reb %
63.2%
#278
Turnover %
18.3%
#190
Forced TO %
22.8%
#56
FT rate
39.3%
#145
FT allowed
38.2%
#193
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+3.5
Defensive rebounding−1.7
Ball security0.0
Forcing turnovers+3.4
Foul shots drawn+0.5
Foul shots allowed−0.1
App State
−2.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#223 of 365
Off reb %
41.4%
#34
Def reb %
62.3%
#288
Turnover %
21.0%
#272
Forced TO %
13.5%
#302
FT rate
34.0%
#215
FT allowed
30.4%
#107
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+3.3
Defensive rebounding−2.0
Ball security−2.0
Forcing turnovers−3.3
Foul shots drawn−0.9
Foul shots allowed+2.0

North Texas has more extra scoring chances per game: +5.5 (#101 of 365) to App State’s −2.9 (#223).

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

Who has been playing, and who has not
North Texas2026-27 numbers
#PlayerPosClHtGP-GSMPGPPGRPGAPGTOVeFG%3P%3PA/gFT%UsageStatus
4GJr6'3"2-228.522.54.55.01.560.6%30.8%6.583.3%38.2%Active
10GSr6'4"2-025.59.04.52.00.550.0%0.0%1.066.7%19.3%Active
1GJr6'2"2-223.514.52.03.53.558.8%36.4%5.590.0%34.3%Active
11GFr6'7"2-021.516.07.00.00.561.1%50.0%4.090.9%30.7%Active
35FSo6'10"2-221.57.58.00.00.575.0%—0.075.0%14.0%Active
15FJr6'8"2-220.04.04.01.52.050.0%—0.0100.0%15.0%Active
3GJr6'8"2-218.010.56.50.51.056.7%42.9%3.5100.0%28.1%Active
7FFr6'10"2-012.53.54.00.50.575.0%—0.016.7%15.8%Active
5GSo6'4"2-011.54.01.50.00.038.9%20.0%2.550.0%21.4%Active
0GFr6'3"1-018.011.02.03.01.064.3%50.0%2.050.0%26.5%Missed last
24FFr6'8"2-07.52.52.00.00.0100.0%—0.033.3%12.0%Active
20FFr6'9"1-03.00.01.00.01.0——0.0—16.0%Missed last

Competitive minutes leave out garbage time (provisional rule: a second-half lead of 25+ inside 15:00, 20+ inside 10:00, 15+ inside 5:00 or 10+ inside 2:00, held to the end) and are shown per 40 minutes. Status says only whether a player appeared; the reason is not published.

Team comparison

national rank toned left for away, right for home
North TexasApp State
Efficiency
104.0
103.7
100.1
103.0
68.4
64.6
10.4
6.5
Shooting
52.7%
43.9%
65.5%
50.0%
25.9%
25.9%
81.8%
63.9%
39.3%
34.0%
Ball control & glass
18.3%
21.0%
22.8%
13.5%
41.9%
41.4%
36.8%
37.7%
13.7%
14.3%
6.9%
18.8%
Style
48.2%
54.7%
44.2%
32.8%
24.7%
12.1%
46.2%
59.0%
44.4%
43.5%
Roster
2.44
2.94
6'5.9"
6'4.5"
39.0%
23.1%

Offseason

roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model input
North Texas
Returning minutes: 43.5%Returning production: 45.4%
Lost
  • David Terrell Jr. 32.8 mpg, 13.5 ppg · transferred to SMU
  • Dylan Arnett 26.5 mpg, 7.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Demarion Watson 13.7 mpg, 2.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Buddy Hammer Jr. 12.5 mpg, 3.6 ppg · transferred to Akron
  • Cahmai Crosby 9.4 mpg, 2.7 ppg · transferred to Omaha
  • Josiah Shackleford 9.2 mpg, 4.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
  • Cash Chavis from UT Arlington · 27.1 mpg, 10.5 ppg last season
  • Amar Amkou from FAU · 10.0 mpg, 4.4 ppg last season
  • Mitchell Holmes from SMU · 4.0 mpg, 1.3 ppg last season
  • Ousmane Ndour no D1 minutes last season
  • Aeneas Alexander no D1 minutes last season
  • Marcus Zelee no D1 minutes last season

Returns 43% of last season's minutes; lost 2 of its top 5 (1 transferred).

App State
Returning minutes: 23.1%Returning production: 17.5%
Lost
  • Kasen Jennings 32.7 mpg, 15.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Alonzo Dodd 31.4 mpg, 13.8 ppg · transferred to East Texas A&M
  • Luke Wilson 28.2 mpg, 10.7 ppg · transferred to Syracuse
  • Jalen Tot 24.3 mpg, 9.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Michael Marcus Jr. 24.0 mpg, 7.8 ppg · transferred to George Mason
  • Jason Clarke Jr. 9.6 mpg, 2.5 ppg · transferred to IU Indy
Added
  • Hermann Koffi from Stonehill · 34.3 mpg, 12.5 ppg last season
  • Rrezon Elezaj from UConn · 0.1 mpg, 0.0 ppg last season
  • Jonathan Moss no D1 minutes last season
  • Ted Neal no D1 minutes last season
  • Da'Mori Lytch no D1 minutes last season
  • Jackson Love no D1 minutes last season

Returns 23% of last season's minutes; lost 5 of its top 5 (3 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
No meetings the last two seasons.

More games on Fri, Nov 20

← Thu, Nov 19 · Sat, Nov 21 → · Full season schedule

The CBB Matchups tab lays out the day's Division I slate: matchup, tip time, records and rank, and — once posted — the market spread and total (the median across books when no market line is up). 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, from our line: the same view our bets are made from.

What these numbers mean: line shopping.