Incarnate Word Cardinals vs UTEP Miners basketball final score

Sun, Nov 8 · 7:00 PM ET · Don Haskins Center, El Paso, TX

Non-conferenceMW+Don Haskins Center, El Paso, TX

Incarnate Word

0-2 · 0-0 conf

Efficiency #318

UTEP

0-1 · 0-0 conf

Efficiency #276

Final

6079

Final score

Projected 64.3 – 79.2

UIW win 10%UTEP win 90%

MarketClose

Spread

UTEP −13.5

open UTEP −10.5

Total

142.5

open 143.5

Our line

UTEP −14.9

as of Sun, Nov 8 · 6:51 PM ET

Our play

How our line is built

each step, from an even game to our line

Spread

Even game

0.0

UTEPrated 0.6 above average

+0.6

Incarnate Wordrated 10.1 below average

+10.1

Home court

+4.2

Our line

UTEP −14.9

◂ Incarnate Word sideUTEP side ▸

The spread is seen from the home side: a plus moves it toward UTEP. Our total joins once both teams have played 3 games.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes

Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 69.9, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw season pace, Incarnate Word is the faster team (74.8, #75 of 365) and UTEP the slower (73.5, #100). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions

69.9

per team, 40 min

Market total

142.5

Market close · open 143.5

Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent

71.0#168

Incarnate Word

69.6#262

UTEP

How this game plays

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

Our line

UTEP −14.9

Four factors 11.3Not in these stats 3.6

From the four factors

UTEP has the ball−0.3

Incarnate Word has the ball−11.6

UTEP has the ball

✗Tough shooting lookeFG% 44.3% #265 · UIW allows 49.6% #163−3.8

✓Takes care of the ballTO% 9.5% #7 · UIW forces 20.1% #104 · ~10 turnovers+3.2

✓Wins second chancesOR% 30.4% #195 · UIW allows 37.8% #278+0.9

✗Few trips to the lineFTR 34.3% #203 · UIW allows 41.3% #223 · FT 58.3% #316−0.6

Incarnate Word has the ball

✗Coughs it upTO% 26.8% #339 · UTEP forces 19.0% #138 · ~17 turnovers−4.7

✗Tough shooting lookeFG% 39.4% #317 · UTEP allows 54.0% #229−4.3

✗Few second chancesOR% 20.8% #320 · UTEP allows 26.9% #111−4.2

✓Gets to the lineFTR 47.1% #79 · UTEP allows 66.0% #341 · FT 65.3% #243+1.6

Shot diet

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

Incarnate Wordoffense vsUTEPdefense

Share of shots by zone

Incarnate Word shoots

38.5

11.5

7.7

42.3

UTEP allows

36.0

10.0

12.0

42.0

D-I average

38.0

7.9

12.4

41.6

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	43.3%#313	77.8%#338	58.0%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	11.1%#298	80.0%#334	38.0%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	33.3%#165	50.0%#269	34.9%
Three	24.4%#294	19.0%#15	32.3%

UTEPoffense vsIncarnate Worddefense

Share of shots by zone

UTEP shoots

40.3

4.5

11.9

43.3

Incarnate Word allows

43.1

4.9

12.7

39.2

D-I average

38.0

7.9

12.4

41.6

FG% by zone

Zone			D-I avg
Rim	55.6%#210	52.3%#101	58.0%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)	0.0%#302	40.0%#185	38.0%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)	25.0%#237	53.8%#302	34.9%
Three	26.7%#253	30.4%#142	32.3%

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

Incarnate Word

−8.8extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#289 of 365

Off reb %

20.8%

#320

Def reb %

62.2%

#278

Turnover %

26.8%

#339

Forced TO %

20.1%

#104

FT rate

47.1%

#79

FT allowed

41.3%

#223

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−3.6

Defensive rebounding−2.1

Ball security−6.1

Forcing turnovers+1.3

Foul shots drawn+2.5

Foul shots allowed−0.9

UTEP

−0.3extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#177 of 365

Off reb %

30.4%

#195

Def reb %

73.1%

#111

Turnover %

9.5%

Forced TO %

19.0%

#138

FT rate

34.3%

#203

FT allowed

66.0%

#341

Where the chances come from (per game)

Offensive rebounding−0.4

Defensive rebounding+1.6

Ball security+6.2

Forcing turnovers+0.6

Foul shots drawn−0.8

Foul shots allowed−7.4

UTEP has more extra scoring chances per game: −0.3 (#177 of 365) to Incarnate Word’s −8.8 (#289).

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

Incarnate Word2026-27 numbers through Sun, Nov 8 · last game: Chicago St, Nov 5

#	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
24	G	Sr	6'3"	3-3	32.7	34	—	Started last	9.0	1.0	1.7	2.7	50.0%	33.3%	5.0	75.0%	18.4%
5	G	Sr	6'0"	3-2	29.7	35	—	Started last	9.7	2.0	2.3	1.0	30.4%	18.8%	5.3	80.0%	23.6%
21	F	Jr	6'9"	3-3	29.3	35	—	Started last	12.3	6.3	0.3	2.7	58.6%	—	0.0	33.3%	25.6%
0	F	So	6'7"	3-3	28.0	27	—	Started last	7.3	5.3	0.7	1.3	35.2%	25.0%	4.0	50.0%	22.4%
3	G	Jr	6'1"	2-2	33.0	36	—	Started last	11.5	2.5	4.0	5.0	28.9%	23.1%	6.5	75.0%	29.1%
1	G	Fr	6'4"	3-0	16.7	10	—	Bench	4.0	3.7	0.3	1.7	50.0%	37.5%	2.7	50.0%	18.6%
8	F	Fr	6'6"	3-1	12.3	9	—	Bench	2.0	3.3	1.0	1.3	100.0%	—	0.0	40.0%	12.5%
35	C	Fr	7'0"	3-0	12.0	5	—	Bench	2.7	2.3	0.0	0.0	42.9%	—	0.0	66.7%	12.9%
6	G	Jr	6'5"	2-1	12.0	2	—	Bench	3.0	1.5	1.0	1.0	33.3%	0.0%	2.0	—	27.0%
10	G	Jr	6'1"	3-0	5.7	4	—	Bench	0.7	0.0	0.0	1.3	25.0%	—	0.0	—	25.1%
7	F	Jr	6'8"	3-0	3.7	4	—	Bench	0.7	0.3	0.0	0.3	—	—	0.0	66.7%	11.9%

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, entering this game

Incarnate Word

Against the spread

Season

0-2

Home

0-1

Road

0-1

Last 10

0-2

avg cover −12.0

Missed the spread 2 straight

Over / under

Season

0-2

Home

0-1

Road

0-1

Last 10

0-2

avg vs total −17.2

Under 2 straight

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Nov 5	Chicago StAdjEM #338	H	L 54–66	−8.5	L−20.5	143.5	U120	71.7	87.6	75.3
Nov 2	Oklahoma StAdjEM #46	A	L 60–91	+27.5	L−3.5	162.0	U151	80.8	122.6	74.2
Mar 2	SF AustinAdjEM #97	H	L 68–76	+7.0	L−1.0	143.5	O144	113.0	126.2	60.2
Feb 28	LamarAdjEM #228	H	W 72–60	−1.0	W+11.0	138.0	U132	113.3	94.4	63.6
Feb 23	N'Western StAdjEM #334	A	L 49–54	+2.5	L−2.5	138.0	U103	81.6	89.9	60.1
Feb 21	East Texas A&MAdjEM #221	A	W 82–73	+4.0	W+13.0	146.5	O155	143.4	127.6	57.2
Feb 16	LSU N OrleansAdjEM #272	H	L 64–78	−2.0	L−16.0	153.5	U142	99.2	120.9	64.5
Feb 14	NichollsAdjEM #232	H	L 83–91	−1.5	L−9.5	149.0	O174	126.5	138.7	65.6
Feb 9	SE LouisianaAdjEM #288	A	L 62–74	+1.0	L−11.0	137.5	U136	101.5	121.1	61.1
Feb 7	McNeeseAdjEM #62	A	L 64–81	+17.5	W+0.5	146.0	U145	103.1	130.5	62.1

UTEP

Against the spread

Season

0-1

Home

0-0

Road

0-0

Last 10

0-1

avg cover −12.0

Missed the spread in the last game

Over / under

Season

1-0

Home

0-0

Road

0-0

Last 10

1-0

avg vs total +10.0

Over in the last game

Last 10 games, newest first

Date	Opponent	Site	Result			Total		PPP for	PPP vs	Pace
Nov 2	N KentuckyAdjEM #174	N	L 76–84	−4.0	L−12.0	150.0	O160	103.3	114.2	73.5
Mar 7	Jax StateAdjEM #192	H	L 61–64	−1.0	L−4.0	139.0	U125	91.1	95.6	67.0
Mar 5	Kennesaw StAdjEM #150	H	W 78–71	+3.5	W+10.5	149.0	P149	104.1	94.7	74.9
Feb 28	Western KYAdjEM #124	A	L 65–97	+9.0	L−23.0	146.5	O162	90.2	134.7	72.0
Feb 26	MTSUAdjEM #243	A	L 67–77	+8.5	L−1.5	139.5	O144	98.2	112.8	68.3
Feb 21	New Mexico StAdjEM #234	A	L 63–67	+7.0	W+3.0	143.0	U130	108.2	115.0	58.3
Feb 14	LibertyAdjEM #146	H	L 64–73	+6.5	L−2.5	138.5	U137	104.3	118.9	61.4
Feb 11	Jax StateAdjEM #192	A	W 69–64	+6.5	W+11.5	135.5	U133	115.3	107.0	59.8
Feb 7	New Mexico StAdjEM #234	H	W 91–88 OT	+1.5	W+4.5	138.0	O179	111.7	108.0	81.5
Feb 4	Sam HoustonAdjEM #129	A	L 66–70	+10.0	W+6.0	144.5	U136	94.6	100.4	69.7

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

Incarnate WordUTEP

Efficiency

98.3

100.5

109.6

107.4

71.0

69.6

-0.2

-1.1

Shooting

39.4%

44.3%

41.3%

47.5%

24.4%

26.7%

65.3%

58.3%

47.1%

34.3%

Ball control & glass

26.8%

9.5%

20.1%

19.0%

20.8%

30.4%

37.8%

26.9%

12.7%

4.1%

20.6%

5.0%

Style

39.4%

42.9%

43.9%

44.7%

22.8%

1.3%

52.8%

59.3%

27.0%

33.5%

Roster

2.77

2.56

6'4.5"

6'6.6"

0.0%

Offseason

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

Incarnate Word

Returning minutes: 0.5%Returning production: 0.6%

Lost

Tahj Staveskie 35.3 mpg, 17.3 ppg · transferred to Akron
Davion Bailey 34.4 mpg, 18.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Harold Woods 30.3 mpg, 8.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Jordan Pyke 22.1 mpg, 11.0 ppg · transferred to Arkansas St
Love Bettis 16.5 mpg, 4.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Marcus Glover 15.4 mpg, 3.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Ismail Habib from S Indiana · 29.1 mpg, 13.3 ppg last season
Jayden Thomas new to D1 · 28.0 mpg, 4.0 ppg last season
Mekhi Conner from Sacred Heart · 27.8 mpg, 7.2 ppg last season
Brandon McCreesh from Bucknell · 6.7 mpg, 1.8 ppg last season
D'Arrae Goodwin from San Diego · 6.2 mpg, 2.0 ppg last season
Godswill Erheriene from Seton Hall · 1.4 mpg, 0.2 ppg last season

Returns 0% 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).

UTEP

Returning minutes: 0.0%Returning production: 0.0%

Lost

Kaseem Watson 31.4 mpg, 12.5 ppg · transferred to East Carolina
Jamal West Jr. 31.1 mpg, 14.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
KJ Thomas 28.5 mpg, 5.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Elijah Jones 28.1 mpg, 13.1 ppg · transferred to George Mason
Caleb Blackwell 27.5 mpg, 9.5 ppg · transferred to Tarleton St
Cassius Brooks 13.3 mpg, 2.7 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet

Added

Leif Moeller from Evansville · 32.5 mpg, 10.8 ppg last season
Reese Miller from William & Mary · 22.9 mpg, 11.3 ppg last season
Jace Whiting from Weber St · 19.2 mpg, 7.0 ppg last season
Ryan Jackson Jr. from William & Mary · 18.1 mpg, 6.8 ppg last season
Reid Cason from East Carolina · 15.2 mpg, 3.9 ppg last season
Augusto Cassia from Ole Miss · 9.2 mpg, 1.9 ppg last season

Returns 0% 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).

Line history

Market line, home spread or game total

Lines by book

Book	Spread (home) open → now	Total open → now	ML home	ML away
DraftKings	-12.5→-13.5-108	143.5→142.5o-110 u-110	-950	+625
FanDuel	-11.5→-12.5-120	143.5→141.5o-115 u-105	-1100	+680
BetMGM	-12.5→-13.5-105	143.5→142.5o-105 u-115	-1000	+625
BetRivers	-10.5→-13.5-112	143.5→141.5o-117 u-107	-1115	+650
Caesars	-12.5→-13.5-110	143.5→142.5o-110 u-110	-900	+600
Fanatics	-11→-13.5-105	144→142.5o-110 u-110	-900	+600
BetOnline	-12.5→-13-110	144.5→142.5o-110 u-110	—	—
Bovada	-12.5→-13.5-110	141.5→142.5o-110 u-110	-900	+575
theScore Bet	-12.5→-13.5-110	141.5→143.5o-105 u-115	-1200	+700
Hard Rock	-10.5→-13.5-110	143.5→141.5o-115 u-105	-1100	+650
Kalshi	-10.5→-13.5+108	144.5→141.5o-113 u+108	-733	+733
Polymarket	-10.5→-12.5-117	143.5→142.5o-104 u+100	-733	+669
Novig	-12.5→—	143.5→—	-770	+700

open = first-sighted line for this event · now = latest capture

Head-to-head

this season and last

No meetings the last two seasons.

More games on Sun, Nov 8

Iona at St John's · 12:00 PM ET
Arkansas vs Virginia · 1:00 PM ET
Fairfield at Bryant · 1:00 PM ET
Manhattan at Maine · 1:00 PM ET
Sacred Heart at New Hampshire · 1:00 PM ET
Marist at UMass Lowell · 1:00 PM ET
SE Missouri at South Carolina · 1:00 PM ET
Princeton at Siena · 1:00 PM ET
Butler at Boise St · 2:00 PM ET
Brown at Lehigh · 2:00 PM ET
C Connecticut at Dartmouth · 2:00 PM ET
Quinnipiac at Vermont · 2:00 PM ET
Campbell at W Michigan · 2:00 PM ET
Green Bay at St Thomas · 2:00 PM ET
Merrimack at UAlbany · 2:00 PM ET
Idaho St at Air Force · 3:00 PM ET
Western KY at Tennessee Tech · 3:00 PM ET
Southern at Drake · 3:00 PM ET
Rider at Binghamton · 4:00 PM ET
Saint Peter's at NJIT · 4:00 PM ET
Saint Mary's vs Nevada · 4:30 PM ET
Richmond vs Temple · 5:00 PM ET
N Dakota St at Bakersfield · 6:00 PM ET
Norfolk St at William & Mary · 6:00 PM ET
Pitt vs Penn State · 8:00 PM ET
California vs Houston · 8:30 PM ET
UT Arlington at Hawai'i · 10:00 PM ET
Wichita St vs USC · 11:00 PM ET

← Sat, Nov 7 · Mon, Nov 9 → · 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.

Line	Our line	Close
Spread	UTEP −14.9	UTEP −13.5open UTEP −10.5
Total	—	142.5open 143.5