Arkansas-Pine Bluff Golden Lions vs USC Trojans basketball preview & prediction

Sun, Nov 15 · 7:00 PM ET · Galen Center, Los Angeles, CA

Non-conferenceB1G+Galen Center, Los Angeles, CA

AR-Pine Bluff

0-2 · 0-0 conf

Efficiency #357

21USC

2-0 · 0-0 conf

Efficiency #74

Sun, Nov 15 · 7:00 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: 78.5, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw season pace, AR-Pine Bluff is the faster team (80.0, #16 of 365) and USC the slower (77.4, #35). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

78.5

per team, 40 min

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

74.5#23

AR-Pine Bluff

74.5#21

USC

How this game plays

points this game from the four factors, vs an average D-I matchup

From the four factors

USC has the ball+18.0

AR-Pine Bluff has the ball−20.4

USC has the ball

✓Shoots it welleFG% 56.3% #82 · UAPB allows 55.5% #268+6.9

✓Takes care of the ballTO% 15.5% #97 · UAPB forces 12.5% #322 · ~10 turnovers+5.0

✓Gets to the lineFTR 55.5% #23 · UAPB allows 61.8% #342 · FT 81.8% #31+3.1

✓Wins second chancesOR% 28.6% #233 · UAPB allows 48.7% #353+3.0

AR-Pine Bluff has the ball

✗Coughs it upTO% 36.3% #359 · USC forces 23.9% #41 · ~25 turnovers−13.4

✗Tough shooting lookeFG% 42.4% #300 · USC allows 48.7% #145−6.0

✗Few second chancesOR% 28.6% #233 · USC allows 31.2% #177−1.1

✓Gets to the lineFTR 36.2% #188 · USC allows 44.0% #259 · FT 65.8% #246+0.1

Shot diet

Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot

AR-Pine Bluffoffense vs#21USCdefense

Share of shots by zone

AR-Pine Bluff shoots

22.2

28.6

9.5

39.7

USC allows

33.3

6.1

26.3

34.3

D-I average

37.8

8.0

12.4

41.8

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	71.4%#38	51.5%#94	58.0%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	22.2%#266	50.0%#243	38.2%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	16.7%#298	30.8%#138	34.7%
Three	26.8%#258	35.7%#248	32.5%

#21USCoffense vsAR-Pine Bluffdefense

Share of shots by zone

USC shoots

40.6

6.9

26.7

25.7

AR-Pine Bluff allows

32.6

14.0

15.1

38.4

D-I average

37.8

8.0

12.4

41.8

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	70.7%#43	89.3%#358	58.0%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	57.1%#53	33.3%#125	38.2%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	33.3%#174	23.1%#76	34.7%
Three	38.9%#72	23.4%#35	32.5%

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

AR-Pine Bluff

−29.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#359 of 365

Off reb %

28.6%

#233

Def reb %

51.3%

#353

Turnover %

36.3%

#359

Forced TO %

12.5%

#322

FT rate

36.2%

#188

FT allowed

61.8%

#342

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−1.0

Defensive rebounding−5.7

Ball security−12.8

Forcing turnovers−3.9

Foul shots drawn−0.3

Foul shots allowed−6.2

#21USC

+8.4extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#68 of 365

Off reb %

28.6%

#233

Def reb %

68.8%

#177

Turnover %

15.5%

#97

Forced TO %

23.9%

#41

FT rate

55.5%

#23

FT allowed

44.0%

#259

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−1.0

Defensive rebounding+0.1

Ball security+1.9

Forcing turnovers+4.2

Foul shots drawn+4.7

Foul shots allowed−1.6

USC has more extra scoring chances per game: +8.4 (#68 of 365) to AR-Pine Bluff’s −29.9 (#359).

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

AR-Pine Bluff2026-27 numbers · last game: Baylor, Nov 6

#	Pos	Cl	Ht	GP-GS	MPG	Min/40, last 8	Last 3 vs before	Status	PPG	RPG	APG	TOV	eFG%	3P%	3PA/g	FT%	Usage
1	G	Sr	6'4"	2-2	34.0	37	—	Started last	13.5	5.0	2.5	6.0	50.0%	20.0%	2.5	66.7%	26.4%
22	F	Sr	6'8"	2-1	26.0	29	—	Bench	7.5	4.5	2.0	4.0	54.2%	100.0%	0.5	66.7%	20.3%
5	F	Jr	6'7"	2-1	23.5	17	—	Bench	7.5	2.0	1.0	1.5	46.9%	30.0%	5.0	—	20.1%
23	G	Fr	6'3"	2-1	22.5	22	—	Started last	5.5	1.0	1.5	3.5	41.7%	28.6%	3.5	50.0%	22.2%
10	G	Fr	6'4"	2-0	18.0	8	—	Bench	4.0	1.5	1.0	1.5	22.2%	0.0%	0.5	66.7%	20.8%
3	G	So	6'7"	2-1	17.5	16	—	Bench	2.0	3.5	0.0	3.0	15.0%	20.0%	2.5	50.0%	24.1%
9	F	Sr	6'7"	1-1	29.0	36	—	Started last	13.0	6.0	0.0	6.0	38.5%	0.0%	3.0	100.0%	33.9%
0	G	Jr	6'7"	2-1	12.0	9	—	Started last	0.0	1.5	0.0	2.0	0.0%	—	0.0	—	12.4%
4	F	Fr	6'8"	2-1	12.0	11	—	Started last	5.0	1.5	0.0	2.5	70.0%	50.0%	1.0	60.0%	25.8%
7	G	Sr	6'7"	2-0	9.5	10	—	Bench	5.5	1.0	0.5	0.5	55.6%	28.6%	3.5	50.0%	28.5%
8	G	Jr	6'7"	2-1	6.0	7	—	Bench	0.0	1.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%
6	G	Sr	6'4"	2-0	2.5	—	—	Active	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%
11	G	Jr	6'3"	1-0	4.0	—	—	Missed last	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	—	—	0.0	—	0.0%

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.

Trends

Results against the closing spread and total, last ten games

AR-Pine Bluff

Against the spread

Season

0-2

Home

0-0

Road

0-2

Last 10

0-2

avg cover −10.8

Missed the spread 2 straight

Over / under

Season

1-1

Home

0-0

Road

1-1

Last 10

1-1

avg vs total −0.5

Under in the last game

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Nov 6	BaylorAdjEM #42	A	L 53–109	+37.5	L−18.5	163.5	U162	64.6	132.9	82.0
Nov 3	#12ArkansasAdjEM #36	A	L 61–106	+42.0	L−3.0	166.5	O167	78.2	135.9	78.0
Mar 12	SouthernAdjEM #307	N	L 81–84	+5.0	W+2.0	150.5	O165	123.9	128.4	65.4
Mar 5	Alcorn StAdjEM #358	A	W 83–48	−1.0	W+34.0	144.0	U131	111.6	64.5	74.4
Mar 3	Jackson StAdjEM #354	A	L 78–81	−1.0	L−4.0	153.0	O159	112.5	116.8	69.3
Feb 28	Miss Valley StAdjEM #363	H	L 69–70	−14.0	L−15.0	147.5	U139	99.0	100.4	69.7
Feb 21	Prairie ViewAdjEM #271	H	W 84–82	−3.5	L−1.5	158.0	O166	123.7	120.8	67.9
Feb 19	Texas SouthernAdjEM #331	H	L 64–83	−1.0	L−20.0	152.5	U147	93.7	121.5	68.3
Feb 16	Alabama A&MAdjEM #332	A	L 70–82	+3.5	L−8.5	144.0	O152	110.4	129.3	63.4
Feb 14	Alabama StAdjEM #305	A	L 61–79	+3.5	L−14.5	150.0	U140	84.2	109.1	72.4

#21USC

Against the spread

Season

2-0

Home

1-0

Road

0-0

Last 10

2-0

avg cover +3.0

Covered 2 straight

Over / under

Season

1-1

Home

0-1

Road

0-0

Last 10

1-1

avg vs total +10.2

Over in the last game

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Nov 8	Wichita StAdjEM #95	N	W 93–86	−6.5	W+0.5	155.0	O179	116.9	108.1	79.5
Nov 2	MilwaukeeAdjEM #296	H	W 95–63	−26.5	W+5.5	161.5	U158	126.2	83.7	75.3
Mar 11	WashingtonAdjEM #98	N	L 79–83 OT	+3.5	L−0.5	153.0	O162	97.8	102.7	80.8
Mar 7	UCLAAdjEM #25	H	L 68–89	+5.0	L−16.0	151.0	O157	108.7	142.2	62.6
Mar 4	WashingtonAdjEM #98	A	L 72–91	+5.5	L−13.5	151.0	O163	94.7	119.7	76.0
Feb 28	#12NebraskaAdjEM #16	H	L 67–82	+5.0	L−10.0	148.5	O149	97.3	119.1	68.8
Feb 24	UCLAAdjEM #25	A	L 62–81	+7.0	L−12.0	150.5	U143	94.5	123.4	65.6
Feb 21	OregonAdjEM #92	H	L 70–71	−5.0	L−6.0	149.5	U141	99.8	101.3	70.1
Feb 18	#10IllinoisAdjEM #2	H	L 65–101	+9.0	L−27.0	152.5	O166	91.0	141.4	71.4
Feb 11	Ohio StateAdjEM #49	A	L 82–89	+8.0	W+1.0	152.5	O171	111.9	121.5	73.3

Records vs the closing line describe the past; ten games is a small sample.

Team comparison

national rank toned left for away, right for home

AR-Pine Bluff#21USC

Efficiency

96.2

110.4

114.0

101.8

74.5

14.2

-1.1

Shooting

42.4%

56.3%

43.8%

55.4%

26.8%

38.9%

65.8%

81.8%

36.2%

55.5%

Ball control & glass

36.3%

15.5%

12.5%

23.9%

28.6%

48.7%

31.2%

23.1%

9.7%

21.9%

3.6%

Style

39.0%

30.3%

43.9%

40.4%

9.6%

16.5%

43.6%

65.0%

47.3%

32.7%

Roster

2.82

2.71

6'5.9"

6'7.3"

2.7%

24.0%

Offseason

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

AR-Pine Bluff

Returning minutes: 2.7%Returning production: 1.8%

Lost

Quion Williams 36.1 mpg, 17.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Trevon Payton 33.8 mpg, 10.0 ppg · transferred to Bradley
Alex Mirhosseini 30.9 mpg, 11.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Milhan Charles 28.3 mpg, 9.9 ppg · transferred to FAU
Jaquan Scott 27.6 mpg, 15.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Ramel Lloyd Jr. 13.2 mpg, 4.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Elijah Hernandez new to D1 · 37.0 mpg, 16.0 ppg last season
Jalen Tatum from Jackson St · 8.8 mpg, 2.6 ppg last season
David Giddens from Cleveland St · 6.8 mpg, 2.5 ppg last season
Macaleab Rich from UTSA · 5.5 mpg, 3.0 ppg last season
CJ Smith from UTEP · 2.6 mpg, 0.5 ppg last season
Cedric Dixon no D1 minutes last season

Returns 3% of last season's minutes; lost 5 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).

#21USC

Returning minutes: 24.0%Returning production: 25.0%

Lost

Ezra Ausar 29.8 mpg, 14.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Chad Baker-Mazara 24.1 mpg, 15.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Kam Woods 19.6 mpg, 5.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Jordan Marsh 16.0 mpg, 6.3 ppg · transferred to Temple
Jerry Easter II 15.7 mpg, 4.0 ppg · transferred to Oregon
Terrance Williams II 12.9 mpg, 2.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Jalen Cox from Colgate · 32.1 mpg, 16.8 ppg last season
Jadis Jones from Lindenwood · 27.9 mpg, 13.0 ppg last season
Joshua Hughes from Evansville · 27.6 mpg, 9.3 ppg last season
KJ Lewis from Georgetown · 24.7 mpg, 12.2 ppg last season
Isaac Bruns from South Dakota · 19.3 mpg, 13.0 ppg last season
Aaron Hunkin-Claytor from Hawai'i · 14.5 mpg, 3.1 ppg last season

Returns 24% of last season's minutes; lost 4 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).

Head-to-head

this season and last

No meetings the last two seasons.

More games on Sun, Nov 15

Niagara at Iowa State · 1:00 PM ET
Harvard at American · 1:00 PM ET
Louisville at Memphis · 1:00 PM ET
Dartmouth at Boston U · 1:00 PM ET
Colgate at Delaware · 1:00 PM ET
Quinnipiac at C Connecticut · 1:00 PM ET
Norfolk St at Georgia St · 1:00 PM ET
Boise St vs Nebraska · 1:00 PM ET
New Hampshire at Boston College · 1:30 PM ET
William & Mary at Michigan · 2:00 PM ET
Princeton at Rhode Island · 2:00 PM ET
Bakersfield at N Dakota St · 2:00 PM ET
UAlbany at Holy Cross · 2:00 PM ET
Temple at La Salle · 2:00 PM ET
SC State at Charleston · 2:00 PM ET
Missouri vs Marquette · 2:30 PM ET
Baylor vs Texas · 3:00 PM ET
Creighton vs Iowa · 3:00 PM ET
High Point at Saint Louis · 3:00 PM ET
Cleveland St at Alabama A&M · 3:00 PM ET
Purdue FW at E Illinois · 3:00 PM ET
Chicago St at LMU · 4:00 PM ET
Mercyhurst at James Madison · 4:00 PM ET
New Mexico St vs San Diego St · 4:00 PM ET
New Haven at Penn State · 4:30 PM ET
W Michigan at S Indiana · 4:30 PM ET
Pepperdine at Oregon · 5:00 PM ET
Canisius at Buffalo · 5:30 PM ET
Cal Poly at Montana St · 6:00 PM ET
Syracuse at St John's · 7:00 PM ET
Coastal at Wisconsin · 8:00 PM ET
Texas St at UTSA · 8:00 PM ET
Florida A&M at UTEP · 8:00 PM ET
Alabama St at San José St · 9:00 PM ET

← Sat, Nov 14 · Mon, Nov 16 → · 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.