Hinkle Fieldhouse · at Butler
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | BTLR | |
|---|---|---|
| 0-0 | Record | 0-0 |
| 0-0 | ATS | 0-0 |
| 0-0 | O/U | 0-0 |
ATS = covered-didn’t-push · O/U = overs-unders
Model: projects BTLR 78–75 · win probability BTLR 61%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 153.1
Model edge
—
No market line yet
Public
—
No split yet for this game
The model has not beaten the closing line: with an edge of 3 or more it went 409-367 in 2025-26. Model record
What could decide it: BTLR has more of the edges
PITT 0, BTLR 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Free throws
Free throw rate: PITT 30.4, BTLR 42.1. Allowed: PITT 30.9, BTLR 24.9
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: PITT plays 65.0 a game (345th fastest), BTLR 71.1 (69th). Faster games mean more points
Home court
BTLR at home. This season: BTLR 0-0 at home, PITT 0-0 away
Even
Three-pointers
PITT hits 33.4% and allows 35.2%; BTLR hits 32.7% and allows 33.3%. Threes are 42.6% and 35.0% of their shots
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: PITT 33.9%, BTLR 34.5%. Defensive: PITT 71.9%, BTLR 70.0%
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: PITT 3%, BTLR 22%. Transfers in: PITT 10, BTLR 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: PITT 51.0 and allows 53.4; BTLR 50.9 and allows 51.9
Even
PITT offense vs BTLR defense
Offense 87th of 366 against a defense 107th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: PITT 17.2%, BTLR 15.9%. Forced: PITT 16.3%, BTLR 15.1%
Context
Schedule so far
PITT has played the 65th-hardest schedule, BTLR the 56th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
BTLR offense vs PITT defense
Offense 56th of 366 against a defense 59th, on the model’s ratings
Market
Open → current
Spread
Open—
no open
Now—
Opening line not available
Total
Open—
no open
Now—
Moneyline
—
Pre-game lines only (ESPN, DraftKings first). After tip-off the line shown is the closing line.
Model vs market
| Market | Model | Model edge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Spread | — | BTLR -3.2 | — |
| Total | — | 153.1 | — |
| Projected score | — | PITT 74.9 · BTLR 78.1 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | BTLR -1.8 | — |
| 1H total | 71.6 | — |
| 1H projected score | PITT 34.9 · BTLR 36.7 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 7-3 70% | 6-4 60% | |
| 3-7 30% | 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Pitt
33 games played
Straight up
13-20
39% wins
Against the spread
16-17
48% covers · avg −0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
19-14
58% overs · avg −0.1 pts vs the total
Game by game: lines, results and totals
Lines, results and totalsCover margin by game · points beyond the lineTotal margin by game · points over or under the total
| Date | Opp | Result | Line | ATS | Total | O/U |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 3 | vs | W 74-59 | -14.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 78-60 | -14.5 | W +3.5 | 145.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 10 | vs | W 78-66 | -15.5 | L −3.5 | 141.5 | O 144 |
| Nov 13 | @ | L 49-71 | +5.5 | L −16.5 | 134.5 | U 120 |
| Nov 17 | vs | W 84-50 | -16.5 | W +17.5 | 141.5 | U 134 |
| Nov 20 | vs | L 67-77 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 149.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 23 | vs | L 75-83 | -12.5 | L −20.5 | 140.5 | O 158 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 67-66 | +5.5 | W +6.5 | 148.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 2 | vs | L 73-81 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 152.5 | O 154 |
| Dec 7 | vs | L 73-80 | -8.5 | L −15.5 | 134.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 61-79 | +10.5 | L −7.5 | 138.5 | O 140 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 103-63 | -24.5 | W +15.5 | 134.5 | O 166 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 80-46 | +1.5 | W +35.5 | 146.5 | U 126 |
| Dec 30 | @ | L 69-76 | +9.5 | W +2.5 | 144.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 68-73 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 135.5 | O 141 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 72-83 | -1.5 | L −12.5 | 142.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 14 | @ | W 89-66 | -1.5 | W +21.5 | 145.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 59-100 | +7.5 | L −33.5 | 152.5 | O 159 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 62-65 | -2.5 | L −5.5 | 137.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 72-81 | +6.5 | L −2.5 | 144.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 27 | vs | W 80-76 | -1.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 52-63 | +10.5 | L −0.5 | 135.5 | U 115 |
| Feb 3 | @ | L 47-67 | +12.5 | L −7.5 | 142.5 | U 114 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 67-86 | +4.5 | L −14.5 | 147.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 10 | vs | L 54-70 | +17.5 | W +1.5 | 136.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 65-79 | +11.5 | L −2.5 | 142.5 | O 144 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 73-68 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 140.5 | O 141 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 67-75 | +8.5 | W +0.5 | 138.5 | O 142 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 72-56 | +6.5 | W +22.5 | 143.5 | U 128 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 74-75 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 144.5 | O 149 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 71-69 | +5.5 | W +7.5 | 141.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 64-63 | +4.5 | W +5.5 | 136.5 | U 127 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 88-98 | +8.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | O 186 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
YSU
W 74-59
+0.5
7
vs
LONG
W 78-60
+3.5
10
vs
EMU
W 78-66
−3.5
13
@
WVU
L 49-71
−16.5
17
vs
BUCK
W 84-50
+17.5
20
vs
UCF
L 67-77
−11.5
23
vs
QUIN
L 75-83
−20.5
28
vs
OSU
W 67-66
+6.5
2
vs
TA&M
L 73-81
−4.5
7
vs
HOF
L 73-80
−15.5
13
@
VILL
L 61-79
−7.5
17
vs
BING
W 103-63
+15.5
21
vs
PSU
W 80-46
+35.5
30
@
MIA
L 69-76
+2.5
3
vs
CLEM
L 68-73
−1.5
10
vs
SYR
L 72-83
−12.5
14
@
GT
W 89-66
+21.5
17
vs
LOU
L 59-100
−33.5
21
@
BC
L 62-65
−5.5
24
vs
NCSU
L 72-81
−2.5
27
vs
WAKE
W 80-76
+2.5
31
@
CLEM
L 52-63
−0.5
3
@
UVA
L 47-67
−7.5
7
vs
SMU
L 67-86
−14.5
10
vs
DUKE
L 54-70
+1.5
14
@
UNC
L 65-79
−2.5
21
vs
ND
W 73-68
+1.5
25
@
STAN
L 67-75
+0.5
28
@
CAL
W 72-56
+22.5
4
vs
FSU
L 74-75
+0.5
7
@
SYR
W 71-69
+7.5
10
vs
STAN
W 64-63
+5.5
11
vs
NCSU
L 88-98
−1.5
covered 16didn’t cover 17avg −0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
YSU
W 74-59
−12.5
7
vs
LONG
W 78-60
−7.5
10
vs
EMU
W 78-66
+2.5
13
@
WVU
L 49-71
−14.5
17
vs
BUCK
W 84-50
−7.5
20
vs
UCF
L 67-77
−5.5
23
vs
QUIN
L 75-83
+17.5
28
vs
OSU
W 67-66
−15.5
2
vs
TA&M
L 73-81
+1.5
7
vs
HOF
L 73-80
+18.5
13
@
VILL
L 61-79
+1.5
17
vs
BING
W 103-63
+31.5
21
vs
PSU
W 80-46
−20.5
30
@
MIA
L 69-76
+0.5
3
vs
CLEM
L 68-73
+5.5
10
vs
SYR
L 72-83
+12.5
14
@
GT
W 89-66
+9.5
17
vs
LOU
L 59-100
+6.5
21
@
BC
L 62-65
−10.5
24
vs
NCSU
L 72-81
+8.5
27
vs
WAKE
W 80-76
+5.5
31
@
CLEM
L 52-63
−20.5
3
@
UVA
L 47-67
−28.5
7
vs
SMU
L 67-86
+5.5
10
vs
DUKE
L 54-70
−12.5
14
@
UNC
L 65-79
+1.5
21
vs
ND
W 73-68
+0.5
25
@
STAN
L 67-75
+3.5
28
@
CAL
W 72-56
−15.5
4
vs
FSU
L 74-75
+4.5
7
@
SYR
W 71-69
−1.5
10
vs
STAN
W 64-63
−9.5
11
vs
NCSU
L 88-98
+41.5
over 19under 14avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Butler
32 games played
Straight up
16-16
50% wins
Against the spread
16-16
50% covers · avg −0.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
18-14
56% overs · avg +2.1 pts vs the total
Game by game: lines, results and totals
Lines, results and totalsCover margin by game · points beyond the lineTotal margin by game · points over or under the total
| Date | Opp | Result | Line | ATS | Total | O/U |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 5 | vs | W 88-58 | -22.5 | W +7.5 | 156.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 112-80 | -20.5 | W +11.5 | 192.5 | U 192 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 98-66 | -26.5 | W +5.5 | 158.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 85-87 | +7.5 | W +5.5 | 163.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 79-72 | -3.5 | W +3.5 | 150.5 | O 151 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 80-73 | +6.5 | W +13.5 | 155.5 | U 153 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 94-69 | -14.5 | W +10.5 | 150.5 | O 163 |
| Dec 2 | vs | W 84-68 | -17.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | U 152 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 68-77 | -2.5 | L −11.5 | 148.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 113-110 | -3.5 | L −0.5 | 164.5 | O 223 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 60-79 | +15.5 | L −3.5 | 144.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 61-58 | -3.5 | L −0.5 | 154.5 | U 119 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 101-52 | -32.5 | W +16.5 | 149.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 30 | @ | L 85-89 | +5.5 | W +1.5 | 156.5 | O 174 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 67-85 | -2.5 | L −20.5 | 149.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 6 | vs | L 70-84 | +4.5 | L −9.5 | 162.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 75-89 | -1.5 | L −15.5 | 161.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 77-66 | +6.5 | W +17.5 | 144.5 | U 143 |
| Jan 20 | vs | W 87-80 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 23 | vs | W 87-76 | -5.5 | W +5.5 | 161.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 28 | @ | L 70-92 | +12.5 | L −9.5 | 158.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 64-77 | -5.5 | L −18.5 | 149.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 87-97 | +2.5 | L −7.5 | 168.5 | O 184 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 55-70 | +3.5 | L −11.5 | 155.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 70-80 | +11.5 | W +1.5 | 143.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 15 | vs | L 56-63 | +5.5 | L −1.5 | 138.5 | U 119 |
| Feb 18 | @ | W 93-89 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 147.5 | O 182 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 80-75 | -4.5 | W +0.5 | 159.5 | U 155 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 73-82 | +10.5 | W +1.5 | 147.5 | O 155 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 59-76 | -2.5 | L −19.5 | 155.5 | U 135 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 81-71 | +4.5 | W +14.5 | 142.5 | O 152 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 81-91 | +1.5 | L −8.5 | 162.5 | O 172 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
5
vs
USI
W 88-58
+7.5
8
vs
IUIN
W 112-80
+11.5
11
vs
CHST
W 98-66
+5.5
15
@
SMU
L 85-87
+5.5
21
vs
SC
W 79-72
+3.5
23
vs
UVA
W 80-73
+13.5
28
vs
WRST
W 94-69
+10.5
2
vs
EMU
W 84-68
−1.5
6
vs
BOIS
L 68-77
−11.5
13
vs
PROV
W 113-110
−0.5
16
@
CONN
L 60-79
−3.5
20
vs
NU
W 61-58
−0.5
22
vs
NJIT
W 101-52
+16.5
30
@
CREI
L 85-89
+1.5
3
vs
VILL
L 67-85
−20.5
6
vs
SJU
L 70-84
−9.5
14
@
XAV
L 75-89
−15.5
17
@
HALL
W 77-66
+17.5
20
vs
DEP
W 87-80
−0.5
23
vs
MARQ
W 87-76
+5.5
28
@
SJU
L 70-92
−9.5
31
vs
GTWN
L 64-77
−18.5
4
@
PROV
L 87-97
−7.5
7
@
MARQ
L 55-70
−11.5
11
vs
CONN
L 70-80
+1.5
15
vs
HALL
L 56-63
−1.5
18
@
GTWN
W 93-89
+10.5
21
vs
XAV
W 80-75
+0.5
25
@
VILL
L 73-82
+1.5
4
vs
CREI
L 59-76
−19.5
7
@
DEP
W 81-71
+14.5
11
vs
PROV
L 81-91
−8.5
covered 16didn’t cover 16avg −0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
5
vs
USI
W 88-58
−10.5
8
vs
IUIN
W 112-80
−0.5
11
vs
CHST
W 98-66
+5.5
15
@
SMU
L 85-87
+8.5
21
vs
SC
W 79-72
+0.5
23
vs
UVA
W 80-73
−2.5
28
vs
WRST
W 94-69
+12.5
2
vs
EMU
W 84-68
−1.5
6
vs
BOIS
L 68-77
−3.5
13
vs
PROV
W 113-110
+58.5
16
@
CONN
L 60-79
−5.5
20
vs
NU
W 61-58
−35.5
22
vs
NJIT
W 101-52
+3.5
30
@
CREI
L 85-89
+17.5
3
vs
VILL
L 67-85
+2.5
6
vs
SJU
L 70-84
−8.5
14
@
XAV
L 75-89
+2.5
17
@
HALL
W 77-66
−1.5
20
vs
DEP
W 87-80
+19.5
23
vs
MARQ
W 87-76
+1.5
28
@
SJU
L 70-92
+3.5
31
vs
GTWN
L 64-77
−8.5
4
@
PROV
L 87-97
+15.5
7
@
MARQ
L 55-70
−30.5
11
vs
CONN
L 70-80
+6.5
15
vs
HALL
L 56-63
−19.5
18
@
GTWN
W 93-89
+34.5
21
vs
XAV
W 80-75
−4.5
25
@
VILL
L 73-82
+7.5
4
vs
CREI
L 59-76
−20.5
7
@
DEP
W 81-71
+9.5
11
vs
PROV
L 81-91
+9.5
over 18under 14avg +2.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
The starting fives are even
Position by position: Pitt 0, Butler 0, even 5
PittBetterButler
G N. George TR10.9 pts · 3 reb · 5.4 ast
Score 75
=Even
G J. Ellerbee TR13.6 pts · 3.4 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 66
G A. Sumler TR19.3 pts · 4.6 reb · 3.9 ast
Score 93
=No call
G J. Jackson9.5 pts · 3.5 reb · 3.8 ast
Not ranked
F T. Rudovskii TR13.1 pts · 4.8 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 59
=Even
F C. Moore TR11.6 pts · 3.2 reb · 1 ast
Score 46
F B. Ndongo TR11.8 pts · 8.1 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 90
=Even
F T. Anderson TR10.8 pts · 5.5 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 92
C A. Mighty TR13.3 pts · 10.9 reb · 1 ast
Score 71
=Even
C D. Jones6.3 pts · 4.6 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 76
PittBetterButler
PITT offense87th of 366 · +0.2
=Even
BTLR defense107th of 366 · -1.1
PITT defense59th of 366 · +1.3
=Even
BTLR offense56th of 366 · +3.1
Backcourt+4.1 · 2 players
←PITTSmall
Backcourt+1.3 · 2 players
Frontcourt+5.4 · 3 players
←PITTSmall
Frontcourt+3.5 · 3 players
Bench-4.0 · 5 players
→BTLRBig
Bench+0.9 · 3 players
Score, worst to bestPITT betterBTLR betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
N. George32 min · TRA. Sumler31 min · TRC. Hawkins27 min · TRJ. Powell16 min · TRJ. Bethea8 min · TRM. Moore6 min
Forwards
T. Rudovskii32 min · TRB. Ndongo27 min · TRA. Souare8 min · TRD. Diomande8 min · TRB. MayhewNewJ. NelsonNew
Centers
A. Mighty32 min · TR
Guards
J. Ellerbee28 min · TRJ. Jackson23 minE. Klafke15 min · TRE. McComb1 minB. WalkerNewS. AdlerNew
Forwards
C. Moore26 min · TRT. Anderson19 min · TRS. Calderon4 min · TRH. BrutusNewB. CardinalNewM. MaricNew
Centers
D. Jones20 minK. NdzieNew
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Matchup stats
2025-26 · rank among 365 teams
Scoring
Points per game
Points per possession
Pace (possessions)
Shooting
Effective FG%
3-point %
3-point attempt rate
Free throw rate
Possessions
Turnover rate
Offensive rebound rate
Assists per game
Defense
Points allowed
Points allowed per possession
Opponent effective FG%
Opponent 3-point %
Turnovers forced
Defensive rebound rate
Steals per game
Blocks per game
| Scoring | ||
|---|---|---|
| 70.5 #274 | Points per game | 79.4 #75 |
| 1.08 #181 | Points per possession | 1.12 #106 |
| 65.0 #345 | Pace (possessions) | 71.1 #69 |
| Shooting | ||
| 51.0 #193 | Effective FG% | 50.9 #199 |
| 33.4 #206 | 3-point % | 32.7 #242 |
| 42.6 #124 | 3-point attempt rate | 35.0 #276 |
| 30.4 #300 | Free throw rate | 42.1 #29 |
| Possessions | ||
| 17.2 #223 | Turnover rate | 15.9 #131 |
| 33.9 #72 | Offensive rebound rate | 34.5 #58 |
| 13.2 #197 | Assists per game | 15.5 #64 |
| Defense | ||
| 71.8 #101 | Points allowed | 77.5 #252 |
| 1.11 #237 | Points allowed per possession | 1.09 #195 |
| 53.4 #279 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.9 #208 |
| 35.2 #263 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.3 #142 |
| 16.3 #202 | Turnovers forced | 15.1 #272 |
| 71.9 #68 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.0 #163 |
| 6.5 #172 | Steals per game | 6.5 #178 |
| 3.1 #203 | Blocks per game | 3.2 #191 |
Pitt
13-20 in 2025-26 overall · 6-14 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs NC State88–98
- Wvs Stanford64–63
- W@ Syracuse71–69
- Lvs Florida St74–75
- W@ California72–56
A week or more of rest.
Butler
16-16 in 2025-26 overall · 7-14 in conference · Big East Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Providence81–91
- W@ DePaul81–71
- Lvs Creighton59–76
- L@ Villanova73–82
- Wvs Xavier80–75
A week or more of rest.