Humphrey Coliseum · at Mississippi St
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | MSST | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 MSST 84–76 · win probability MSST 75%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 160.2
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: MSST has more of the edges
GT 1, MSST 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Three-pointers
GT hits 35.1% and allows 33.1%; MSST hits 32.4% and allows 33.9%. Threes are 33.1% and 40.1% of their shots
MSST offense vs GT defense
Offense 34th of 366 against a defense 123rd, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
GT has played the 78th-hardest schedule, MSST the 26th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Home court
MSST at home. This season: MSST 0-0 at home, GT 0-0 away
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: GT 18.6%, MSST 16.0%. Forced: GT 15.6%, MSST 12.8%
Even
GT offense vs MSST defense
Offense 71st of 366 against a defense 88th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: GT 16%, MSST 23%. Transfers in: GT 5, MSST 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: GT 33.3, MSST 30.6. Allowed: GT 34.2, MSST 32.3
Context
Tempo
About 72 possessions: GT plays 71.9 a game (38th fastest), MSST 72.3 (29th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: GT 29.9%, MSST 29.8%. Defensive: GT 69.3%, MSST 69.3%
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: GT 50.0 and allows 49.9; MSST 51.5 and allows 50.9
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 | — | MSST -7.8 | — |
| Total | — | 160.2 | — |
| Projected score | — | GT 76.2 · MSST 84 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | MSST -4.5 | — |
| 1H total | 74.8 | — |
| 1H projected score | GT 35.1 · MSST 39.7 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0-10 0% | 3-7 30% | 6-4 60% | |
| 2-8 20% | 2-8 20% | 5-5 50% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
GT 1–1 MSSTSeries tied · 2 games since 2021-22 · GT 1-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 3, 2025-26 | MSST 85 @ GT 73 | GT +1.5 | MSST W |
| Nov 28, 2023-24 | MSST 59 @ GT 67 | GT +8.5 | GT W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Georgia Tech
31 games played
Straight up
11-20
35% wins
Against the spread
13-18
42% covers · avg −2.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
18-13
58% overs · avg +1.5 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 56-52 | -28.5 | L −24.5 | 139.5 | U 108 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 74-45 | -15.5 | W +13.5 | 138.5 | U 119 |
| Nov 10 | vs | W 70-60 | -14.5 | L −4.5 | 133.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 87-92 | +15.5 | W +10.5 | 155.5 | O 179 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 68-66 | -10.5 | L −8.5 | 164.5 | U 134 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 82-66 | -18.5 | L −2.5 | 144.5 | O 148 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 61-75 | +1.5 | L −12.5 | 147.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 29 | vs | L 74-84 | -4.5 | L −14.5 | 137.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 73-85 | +1.5 | L −10.5 | 150.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 79-67 | -10.5 | W +1.5 | 144.5 | O 146 |
| Dec 16 | vs | W 87-76 | -6.5 | W +4.5 | 141.5 | O 163 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 95-81 | -16.5 | L −2.5 | 147.5 | O 176 |
| Dec 28 | vs | W 89-65 | -19.5 | W +4.5 | 146.5 | O 154 |
| Dec 31 | @ | L 79-85 | +27.5 | W +21.5 | 153.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 65-53 | -6.5 | W +5.5 | 145.5 | U 118 |
| Jan 6 | vs | L 72-82 | +2.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 81-91 | +15.5 | W +5.5 | 156.5 | O 172 |
| Jan 14 | vs | L 66-89 | +1.5 | L −21.5 | 145.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 78-74 | +17.5 | W +21.5 | 154.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 63-77 | +8.5 | L −5.5 | 142.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 27 | @ | L 65-71 | +9.5 | W +3.5 | 155.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 75-91 | +9.5 | L −6.5 | 160.5 | O 166 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 85-90 | +7.5 | W +2.5 | 152.5 | O 175 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 72-95 | +9.5 | L −13.5 | 151.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 67-83 | +3.5 | L −12.5 | 158.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 74-89 | +5.5 | L −9.5 | 150.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 68-94 | +13.5 | L −12.5 | 150.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 70-87 | +23.5 | W +6.5 | 167.5 | U 157 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 71-80 | +5.5 | L −3.5 | 158.5 | U 151 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 65-76 | +2.5 | L −8.5 | 154.5 | U 141 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 76-79 | +15.5 | W +12.5 | 145.5 | O 155 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
UMES
W 56-52
−24.5
7
vs
BRY
W 74-45
+13.5
10
vs
SELA
W 70-60
−4.5
14
@
UGA
L 87-92
+10.5
18
vs
GASO
W 68-66
−8.5
23
vs
WGA
W 82-66
−2.5
28
vs
DEP
L 61-75
−12.5
29
vs
DRKE
L 74-84
−14.5
3
vs
MSST
L 73-85
−10.5
6
vs
MONM
W 79-67
+1.5
16
vs
MRST
W 87-76
+4.5
20
vs
LAF
W 95-81
−2.5
28
vs
FAMU
W 89-65
+4.5
31
@
DUKE
L 79-85
+21.5
3
vs
BC
W 65-53
+5.5
6
vs
SYR
L 72-82
−7.5
10
@
MIA
L 81-91
+5.5
14
vs
PITT
L 66-89
−21.5
17
@
NCSU
W 78-74
+21.5
24
vs
CLEM
L 63-77
−5.5
27
@
VT
L 65-71
+3.5
31
vs
UNC
L 75-91
−6.5
4
@
CAL
L 85-90
+2.5
7
@
STAN
L 72-95
−13.5
11
vs
WAKE
L 67-83
−12.5
14
@
ND
L 74-89
−9.5
18
vs
UVA
L 68-94
−12.5
21
@
LOU
L 70-87
+6.5
28
vs
FSU
L 71-80
−3.5
4
vs
CAL
L 65-76
−8.5
7
@
CLEM
L 76-79
+12.5
covered 13didn’t cover 18avg −2.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
UMES
W 56-52
−31.5
7
vs
BRY
W 74-45
−19.5
10
vs
SELA
W 70-60
−3.5
14
@
UGA
L 87-92
+23.5
18
vs
GASO
W 68-66
−30.5
23
vs
WGA
W 82-66
+3.5
28
vs
DEP
L 61-75
−11.5
29
vs
DRKE
L 74-84
+20.5
3
vs
MSST
L 73-85
+7.5
6
vs
MONM
W 79-67
+1.5
16
vs
MRST
W 87-76
+21.5
20
vs
LAF
W 95-81
+28.5
28
vs
FAMU
W 89-65
+7.5
31
@
DUKE
L 79-85
+10.5
3
vs
BC
W 65-53
−27.5
6
vs
SYR
L 72-82
+7.5
10
@
MIA
L 81-91
+15.5
14
vs
PITT
L 66-89
+9.5
17
@
NCSU
W 78-74
−2.5
24
vs
CLEM
L 63-77
−2.5
27
@
VT
L 65-71
−19.5
31
vs
UNC
L 75-91
+5.5
4
@
CAL
L 85-90
+22.5
7
@
STAN
L 72-95
+15.5
11
vs
WAKE
L 67-83
−8.5
14
@
ND
L 74-89
+12.5
18
vs
UVA
L 68-94
+11.5
21
@
LOU
L 70-87
−10.5
28
vs
FSU
L 71-80
−7.5
4
vs
CAL
L 65-76
−13.5
7
@
CLEM
L 76-79
+9.5
over 18under 13avg +1.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Mississippi St
32 games played
Straight up
13-19
41% wins
Against the spread
10-22
31% covers · avg −4.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-16
50% overs · avg +3.1 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 86-62 | -24.5 | L −0.5 | 151.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 10 | vs | L 80-96 | +5.5 | L −10.5 | 150.5 | O 176 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 75-68 | -27.5 | L −20.5 | 150.5 | U 143 |
| Nov 20 | vs | L 77-98 | -2.5 | L −23.5 | 164.5 | O 175 |
| Nov 21 | vs | L 78-80 | -6.5 | L −8.5 | 151.5 | O 158 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 81-78 | -23.5 | L −20.5 | 160.5 | U 159 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 81-87 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 162.5 | O 168 |
| Dec 3 | @ | W 85-73 | -1.5 | W +10.5 | 150.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 7 | vs | L 62-65 | -4.5 | L −7.5 | 150.5 | U 127 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 82-74 | -1.5 | W +6.5 | 153.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 16 | vs | W 87-83 | -16.5 | L −12.5 | 152.5 | O 170 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 71-66 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 153.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 29 | vs | W 94-56 | -17.5 | W +20.5 | 154.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 101-98 | +9.5 | W +12.5 | 157.5 | O 199 |
| Jan 7 | vs | W 72-53 | -1.5 | W +17.5 | 158.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 68-92 | +10.5 | L −13.5 | 152.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 13 | vs | L 82-97 | +4.5 | L −10.5 | 171.5 | O 179 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 67-68 | -3.5 | L −4.5 | 147.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 68-88 | +8.5 | L −11.5 | 163.5 | U 156 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 56-88 | +7.5 | L −24.5 | 159.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 80-66 | +7.5 | W +21.5 | 154.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 79-84 | +6.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 68-88 | +5.5 | L −14.5 | 163.5 | U 156 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 64-73 | +8.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 90-78 | +3.5 | W +15.5 | 146.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 91-85 | +5.5 | W +11.5 | 155.5 | O 176 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 89-97 | -1.5 | L −9.5 | 151.5 | O 186 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 75-100 | +12.5 | L −12.5 | 176.5 | U 175 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 64-88 | +1.5 | L −22.5 | 154.5 | U 152 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 74-108 | +20.5 | L −13.5 | 161.5 | O 182 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 96-102 | +5.5 | L −0.5 | 167.5 | O 198 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 61-79 | +8.5 | L −9.5 | 160.5 | U 140 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
5
vs
UNA
W 86-62
−0.5
10
vs
ISU
L 80-96
−10.5
15
vs
SELA
W 75-68
−20.5
20
vs
KSU
L 77-98
−23.5
21
vs
UNM
L 78-80
−8.5
24
vs
NOLA
W 81-78
−20.5
28
vs
SMU
L 81-87
−7.5
3
@
GT
W 85-73
+10.5
7
vs
SF
L 62-65
−7.5
13
vs
UTAH
W 82-74
+6.5
16
vs
LIU
W 87-83
−12.5
20
vs
MEM
W 71-66
+1.5
29
vs
ALST
W 94-56
+20.5
3
@
TEX
W 101-98
+12.5
7
vs
OU
W 72-53
+17.5
10
@
UK
L 68-92
−13.5
13
vs
ALA
L 82-97
−10.5
17
vs
MISS
L 67-68
−4.5
21
@
TA&M
L 68-88
−11.5
24
vs
VAN
L 56-88
−24.5
28
@
LSU
W 80-66
+21.5
31
@
MIZ
L 79-84
+1.5
7
vs
ARK
L 68-88
−14.5
11
vs
TENN
L 64-73
−0.5
14
@
MISS
W 90-78
+15.5
18
vs
AUB
W 91-85
+11.5
21
@
SC
L 89-97
−9.5
25
@
ALA
L 75-100
−12.5
28
vs
MIZ
L 64-88
−22.5
3
@
FLA
L 74-108
−13.5
7
vs
UGA
L 96-102
−0.5
11
vs
AUB
L 61-79
−9.5
covered 10didn’t cover 22avg −4.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
5
vs
UNA
W 86-62
−3.5
10
vs
ISU
L 80-96
+25.5
15
vs
SELA
W 75-68
−7.5
20
vs
KSU
L 77-98
+10.5
21
vs
UNM
L 78-80
+6.5
24
vs
NOLA
W 81-78
−1.5
28
vs
SMU
L 81-87
+5.5
3
@
GT
W 85-73
+7.5
7
vs
SF
L 62-65
−23.5
13
vs
UTAH
W 82-74
+2.5
16
vs
LIU
W 87-83
+17.5
20
vs
MEM
W 71-66
−16.5
29
vs
ALST
W 94-56
−4.5
3
@
TEX
W 101-98
+41.5
7
vs
OU
W 72-53
−33.5
10
@
UK
L 68-92
+7.5
13
vs
ALA
L 82-97
+7.5
17
vs
MISS
L 67-68
−12.5
21
@
TA&M
L 68-88
−7.5
24
vs
VAN
L 56-88
−15.5
28
@
LSU
W 80-66
−8.5
31
@
MIZ
L 79-84
+16.5
7
vs
ARK
L 68-88
−7.5
11
vs
TENN
L 64-73
−10.5
14
@
MISS
W 90-78
+21.5
18
vs
AUB
W 91-85
+20.5
21
@
SC
L 89-97
+34.5
25
@
ALA
L 75-100
−1.5
28
vs
MIZ
L 64-88
−2.5
3
@
FLA
L 74-108
+20.5
7
vs
UGA
L 96-102
+30.5
11
vs
AUB
L 61-79
−20.5
over 16under 16avg +3.1 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: Georgia Tech 1, Mississippi St 1, even 3
Georgia TechBetterMississippi St
G N. Whitlock TR20.4 pts · 3.3 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 87
=Even
G J. Hubbard22.1 pts · 2.5 reb · 3.6 ast
Score 99
G C. Garland TR20.4 pts · 3.2 reb · 4.6 ast
Score 98
=Even
G R. Johnson TR14.8 pts · 3 reb · 3.9 ast
Score 86
G K. Craft7.3 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 43
→MSSTBig
G T. Simpkins TR9.7 pts · 2.8 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 83
F V. Valdes TR14.9 pts · 4 reb · 4.5 ast
Score 74
←GTBig
F K. Sanders TR5.2 pts · 3.1 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 31
F J. Fields TR4.3 pts · 3.4 reb · 1.1 ast
Not ranked
=No call
C N. Okafor TR11.2 pts · 5.6 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 71
Georgia TechBetterMississippi St
GT offense71st of 366 · +1.7
=Even
MSST defense88th of 366 · -0.1
GT defense123rd of 366 · -2.1
→MSSTSmall
MSST offense34th of 366 · +5.5
Backcourt+7.4 · 3 players
→MSSTSmall
Backcourt+9.6 · 3 players
Frontcourt+2.6 · 2 players
←GTSmall
Frontcourt+0.6 · 2 players
Bench-1.0 · 2 players
←GTSmall
Bench-2.0 · 3 players
Score, worst to bestGT betterMSST betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
N. Whitlock35 min · TRC. Garland35 min · TRK. Craft21 minC. Muldrew14 min · TRK. BaileyNewK. AllenNew
Forwards
V. Valdes30 min · TRJ. Fields14 min · TRT. JordanNewM. DiopNewI. KurucsNew
Centers
C. Kirouac12 minJ. McVeyNew
Guards
J. Hubbard33 minR. Johnson29 min · TRT. Simpkins25 min · TRK. Grace12 minA. Magee11 min · TRC. PaulNew
Forwards
K. Sanders20 min · TRT. Bassong19 min · TRT. ReedNew
Centers
N. Okafor23 min · TRG. CholNewT. BartlettNewT. ReedNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 73.8 #208 | Points per game | 77.6 #103 |
| 1.03 #292 | Points per possession | 1.07 #205 |
| 71.9 #38 | Pace (possessions) | 72.3 #29 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.0 #234 | Effective FG% | 51.5 #172 |
| 35.1 #109 | 3-point % | 32.4 #262 |
| 33.1 #313 | 3-point attempt rate | 40.1 #169 |
| 33.3 #229 | Free throw rate | 30.6 #288 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.6 #306 | Turnover rate | 16.0 #143 |
| 29.9 #203 | Offensive rebound rate | 29.8 #210 |
| 15.8 #55 | Assists per game | 12.8 #231 |
| Defense | ||
| 77.4 #247 | Points allowed | 81.8 #338 |
| 1.08 #148 | Points allowed per possession | 1.13 #299 |
| 49.9 #94 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.9 #154 |
| 33.1 #134 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.9 #179 |
| 15.6 #244 | Turnovers forced | 12.8 #358 |
| 69.3 #189 | Defensive rebound rate | 69.3 #190 |
| 6.1 #229 | Steals per game | 5.8 #260 |
| 3.9 #80 | Blocks per game | 4.4 #44 |
Georgia Tech
11-20 in 2025-26 overall · 2-16 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Clemson76–79
- Lvs California65–76
- Lvs Florida St71–80
- L@ Louisville70–87
- Lvs Virginia68–94
A week or more of rest.
Mississippi St
13-19 in 2025-26 overall · 5-14 in conference · Southeastern Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Auburn61–79
- Lvs Georgia96–102
- L@ Florida74–108
- Lvs Missouri64–88
- L@ Alabama75–100
A week or more of rest.