Arkansas-Pine Bluff Golden Lions vs UCLA Bruins basketball prediction & odds
Wed, Nov 11 · 9:00 PM ET · Pauley Pavilion, Los Angeles, CA
Non-conferencePeacockPauley Pavilion, Los Angeles, CA
AR-Pine Bluff
0-2 · 0-0 conf
Efficiency #357
@
9UCLA
2-0 · 0-0 conf
Efficiency #25
Wed, Nov 11 · 9:00 PM ET
60.596.0
Projected score
UAPB win 0%UCLA win 100%
No line posted yet.
Our play
How our line is built
each step, from an even game to our lineSpread
Even game
0.0
UCLArated 14.6 above average
+14.6
AR-Pine Bluffrated 16.6 below average
+16.6
Home court
+4.2
Our line
UCLA −35.4
◂ AR-Pine Bluff sideUCLA side ▸
The spread is seen from the home side: a plus moves it toward UCLA. Our total joins once both teams have played 3 games.
Pace & total
possessions per 40 minutesTempo, possessions per 40 minutes
Projected possessions: 74.6, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw season pace, AR-Pine Bluff is the faster team (80.0, #16 of 365) and UCLA the slower (76.9, #40). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (weights 0.80 vs 0.66).
Projected possessions
74.6
per team, 40 min
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
74.5#23
AR-Pine Bluff
70.7#172
UCLA
How this game plays
points this game from the four factors, vs an average D-I matchupOur line
UCLA −35.4
Four factors +41.7 · not in these stats −6.3
From the four factors
UCLA has the ball+19.9
AR-Pine Bluff has the ball−21.9
UCLA has the ball
✓Takes care of the ballTO% 9.7% #4 · UAPB forces 12.5% #322 · ~7 turnovers+7.8
✓Shoots it welleFG% 54.6% #118 · UAPB allows 55.5% #268+5.5
✓Wins second chancesOR% 34.5% #116 · UAPB allows 48.7% #353+4.7
✓Gets to the lineFTR 41.8% #118 · UAPB allows 61.8% #342 · FT 74.6% #111+1.9
AR-Pine Bluff has the ball
✗Tough shooting lookeFG% 42.4% #300 · UCLA allows 41.1% #35−9.9
✗Coughs it upTO% 36.3% #359 · UCLA forces 18.2% #168 · ~21 turnovers−9.4
✗Few second chancesOR% 28.6% #233 · UCLA allows 24.7% #59−2.4
✗Few trips to the lineFTR 36.2% #188 · UCLA allows 40.7% #221 · FT 65.8% #246−0.1
Shot diet
Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shootAR-Pine Bluffoffense vs#9UCLAdefense
Share of shots by zone
AR-Pine Bluff shoots
22.2
28.6
9.5
39.7
UCLA allows
34.0
8.7
9.7
47.6
D-I average
37.8
8.0
12.4
41.8
FG% by zone
| Zone | D-I avg | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Rim | 71.4%#38 | 45.7%#43 | 58.0% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 22.2%#266 | 33.3%#125 | 38.2% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 16.7%#298 | 10.0%#26 | 34.7% |
| Three | 26.8%#258 | 26.6%#76 | 32.5% |
#9UCLAoffense vsAR-Pine Bluffdefense
Share of shots by zone
UCLA shoots
36.5
5.2
20.9
37.4
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 | 54.8%#226 | 89.3%#358 | 58.0% |
| Short 2 (≤9 ft) | 66.7%#29 | 33.3%#125 | 38.2% |
| Mid 2 (10 ft+) | 37.5%#142 | 23.1%#76 | 34.7% |
| Three | 41.4%#47 | 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 lineAR-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
#9UCLA
+9.9extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#54 of 365
Off reb %
34.5%
#116
Def reb %
75.3%
#59
Turnover %
9.7%
#4
Forced TO %
18.2%
#168
FT rate
41.8%
#118
FT allowed
40.7%
#221
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.0
Defensive rebounding+2.3
Ball security+6.0
Forcing turnovers+0.1
Foul shots drawn+1.2
Foul shots allowed−0.7
UCLA has more extra scoring chances per game: +9.9 (#54 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 notAR-Pine Bluff2026-27 numbers · last game: Baylor, Nov 6
| # | Player | 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 gamesAR-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 | Baylor | A | L 53–109 | +37.5 | L−18.5 | 163.5 | U162 | 64.6 | 132.9 | 82.0 |
| Nov 3 | #12Arkansas | A | L 61–106 | +42.0 | L−3.0 | 166.5 | O167 | 78.2 | 135.9 | 78.0 |
| Mar 12 | Southern | N | L 81–84 | +5.0 | W+2.0 | 150.5 | O165 | 123.9 | 128.4 | 65.4 |
| Mar 5 | Alcorn St | A | W 83–48 | −1.0 | W+34.0 | 144.0 | U131 | 111.6 | 64.5 | 74.4 |
| Mar 3 | Jackson St | A | L 78–81 | −1.0 | L−4.0 | 153.0 | O159 | 112.5 | 116.8 | 69.3 |
| Feb 28 | Miss Valley St | H | L 69–70 | −14.0 | L−15.0 | 147.5 | U139 | 99.0 | 100.4 | 69.7 |
| Feb 21 | Prairie View | H | W 84–82 | −3.5 | L−1.5 | 158.0 | O166 | 123.7 | 120.8 | 67.9 |
| Feb 19 | Texas Southern | H | L 64–83 | −1.0 | L−20.0 | 152.5 | U147 | 93.7 | 121.5 | 68.3 |
| Feb 16 | Alabama A&M | A | L 70–82 | +3.5 | L−8.5 | 144.0 | O152 | 110.4 | 129.3 | 63.4 |
| Feb 14 | Alabama St | A | L 61–79 | +3.5 | L−14.5 | 150.0 | U140 | 84.2 | 109.1 | 72.4 |
#9UCLA
Against the spread
Season
2-0
Home
1-0
Road
0-0
Last 10
2-0
avg cover +16.5
Covered 2 straight
Over / under
Season
2-0
Home
1-0
Road
0-0
Last 10
2-0
avg vs total +14.8
Over 2 straight
Last 10 games, newest first
| Date | Opponent | Site | Result | Total | PPP for | PPP vs | Pace | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 6 | North Florida | H | W 114–63 | −32.0 | W+19.0 | 157.0 | O177 | 141.9 | 78.4 | 80.3 |
| Nov 2 | #5Arizona | N | W 84–75 | +5.0 | W+14.0 | 149.5 | O159 | 114.2 | 102.0 | 73.6 |
| Mar 22 | #2UConn | N | L 57–73 | +5.5 | L−10.5 | 136.0 | U130 | 90.5 | 115.9 | 63.0 |
| Mar 20 | #10UCF | N | W 75–71 | −6.0 | L−2.0 | 152.0 | U146 | 106.3 | 100.6 | 70.6 |
| Mar 14 | #18Purdue | N | L 66–73 | +7.0 | P0.0 | 145.0 | U139 | 110.7 | 122.4 | 59.6 |
| Mar 13 | #8Michigan St | N | W 88–84 | +5.0 | W+9.0 | 141.5 | O172 | 131.9 | 125.9 | 66.7 |
| Mar 12 | Rutgers | N | W 72–59 | −10.5 | W+2.5 | 142.5 | U131 | 104.6 | 85.7 | 68.8 |
| Mar 7 | USC | A | W 89–68 | −5.0 | W+16.0 | 151.0 | O157 | 142.2 | 108.7 | 62.6 |
| Mar 3 | #9Nebraska | H | W 72–52 | +1.0 | W+21.0 | 144.5 | U124 | 118.7 | 85.7 | 60.6 |
| Feb 28 | Minnesota | A | L 73–78 | −1.5 | L−6.5 | 135.5 | O151 | 131.4 | 140.4 | 55.6 |
Records vs the closing line describe the past; ten games is a small sample.
Team comparison
national rank toned left for away, right for homeAR-Pine Bluff#9UCLA
Efficiency
96.2
117.1
114.0
99.0
74.5
70.7
14.2
3.2
Shooting
42.4%
54.6%
43.8%
49.4%
26.8%
41.4%
65.8%
74.6%
36.2%
41.8%
Ball control & glass
36.3%
9.7%
12.5%
18.2%
28.6%
34.5%
48.7%
24.7%
23.1%
3.9%
21.9%
9.6%
Style
39.0%
41.1%
43.9%
34.3%
9.6%
19.2%
43.6%
61.5%
47.3%
32.4%
Roster
2.82
2.48
6'5.9"
6'5.9"
2.7%
43.3%
Offseason
roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model inputAR-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).
#9UCLA
Returning minutes: 47.6%Returning production: 44.3%
Lost
- Donovan Dent 33.5 mpg, 12.9 ppg · transferred to LSU
- Tyler Bilodeau 26.0 mpg, 15.2 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Skyy Clark 20.7 mpg, 8.3 ppg · transferred to LSU
- Jamar Brown 15.6 mpg, 3.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Steven Jamerson II 9.4 mpg, 1.8 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
- Anthony Peoples Jr. 0.3 mpg, 0.1 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
- Jaylen Petty from Texas Tech · 29.5 mpg, 9.6 ppg last season
- Filip Jovic from Auburn · 17.8 mpg, 6.1 ppg last season
- Sergej Macura from Mississippi St · 16.2 mpg, 4.4 ppg last season
- Azavier Robinson from Butler · 12.6 mpg, 4.2 ppg last season
- Joe Philon III no D1 minutes last season
- Gunars Grinvalds no D1 minutes last season
Returns 48% of last season's minutes; lost 3 of its top 5 (2 transferred).
Head-to-head
this season and lastNo meetings the last two seasons.
More games on Wed, Nov 11
- FDU at East Texas A&M · 11:30 AM ET
- Kansas City vs Florida A&M · 12:00 PM ET
- Dartmouth at UAlbany · 1:00 PM ET
- Incarnate Word at UC Davis · 2:00 PM ET
- Loyola Chicago at Air Force · 3:00 PM ET
- Saint Joseph's vs South Florida · 3:00 PM ET
- NC A&T at East Carolina · 4:00 PM ET
- Bethune at San Diego St · 5:00 PM ET
- Penn at Navy · 5:30 PM ET
- NC Central at VMI · 6:00 PM ET
- S Indiana at IU Indy · 6:30 PM ET
- Charleston at Temple · 6:30 PM ET
- Marquette at Michigan · 7:00 PM ET
- UMass Lowell at UMass · 7:00 PM ET
- Cornell at St Bonaventure · 7:00 PM ET
- American at Drexel · 7:00 PM ET
- UNC Asheville at West Georgia · 7:00 PM ET
- William & Mary at FAU · 7:00 PM ET
- NJIT at VCU · 7:00 PM ET
- Colgate at St John's · 7:00 PM ET
- Campbell at ETSU · 7:00 PM ET
- James Madison at Delaware · 7:00 PM ET
- Furman at Holy Cross · 7:00 PM ET
- Saint Peter's at South Carolina · 7:00 PM ET
- Stony Brook at Princeton · 7:00 PM ET
- SC State at Notre Dame · 7:00 PM ET
- Old Dominion at Norfolk St · 7:00 PM ET
- Kent State at UNC Wilmington · 7:00 PM ET
- Milwaukee at Indiana St · 7:00 PM ET
- Pepperdine at Sam Houston · 7:30 PM ET
- Santa Clara at North Texas · 8:00 PM ET
- Jackson St at Southern Miss · 8:00 PM ET
- Jax State at Houston · 8:00 PM ET
- Oral Roberts at Tulsa · 8:00 PM ET
- Robert Morris at Arkansas · 8:00 PM ET
- Valparaiso at S Dakota St · 8:00 PM ET
- Cal Poly at Grand Canyon · 9:00 PM ET
- Nevada at Santa Barbara · 9:00 PM ET
- SF Austin at Abilene Chrstn · 9:00 PM ET
- Portland St at Colorado St · 9:00 PM ET
- Lindenwood at Nebraska · 9:00 PM ET
- Oakland at Boise St · 9:00 PM ET
- UTSA at Seattle U · 10:00 PM ET
- Pacific at Long Beach St · 10:00 PM ET
- Chicago St at CA Baptist · 10:00 PM ET
- Miss Valley St at Oregon · 10:00 PM ET
- USC at California · 11:00 PM ET
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.