CHI Health Center Omaha · at Creighton
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | CREI | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 CREI 90–61 · win probability CREI 99%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 150.6
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: CREI has more of the edges
LEM 1, CREI 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
LEM has played the 344th-hardest schedule, CREI the 40th. A record against a soft schedule means less
LEM offense vs CREI defense
Offense 333rd of 366 against a defense 43rd, on the model’s ratings
CREI offense vs LEM defense
Offense 33rd of 366 against a defense 308th, on the model’s ratings
Free throws
Free throw rate: LEM 39.5, CREI 28.3. Allowed: LEM 32.7, CREI 24.8
Turnovers
Turnover rate: LEM 19.1%, CREI 16.4%. Forced: LEM 15.0%, CREI 13.7%
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: LEM 24%, CREI 53%. Transfers in: LEM 7, CREI 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Home court
CREI at home. This season: CREI 0-0 at home, LEM 0-0 away
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: LEM 52.6 and allows 49.3; CREI 53.0 and allows 51.1
Even
Three-pointers
LEM hits 34.3% and allows 36.0%; CREI hits 34.1% and allows 35.1%. Threes are 40.8% and 48.2% of their shots
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: LEM plays 69.2 a game (168th fastest), CREI 68.9 (187th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: LEM 25.2%, CREI 26.9%. Defensive: LEM 71.0%, CREI 70.5%
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 | — | CREI -28.9 | — |
| Total | — | 150.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | LEM 60.9 · CREI 89.7 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | CREI -17.1 | — |
| 1H total | 70.4 | — |
| 1H projected score | LEM 26.7 · CREI 43.7 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% | |
| 3-7 30% | 3-7 30% | 5-5 50% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Le Moyne
31 games played
Straight up
14-17
45% wins
Against the spread
16-15
52% covers · avg +1.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
12-19
39% overs · avg +0.4 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 6 | @ | L 69-74 | +24.5 | W +19.5 | 156.5 | U 143 |
| Nov 9 | @ | L 60-83 | +11.5 | L −11.5 | 154.5 | U 143 |
| Nov 13 | @ | L 80-94 | +16.5 | W +2.5 | 153.5 | O 174 |
| Nov 17 | vs | W 74-68 | -2.5 | W +3.5 | 138.5 | O 142 |
| Nov 22 | vs | L 83-97 | +1.5 | L −12.5 | 145.5 | O 180 |
| Nov 28 | @ | W 76-63 | +4.5 | W +17.5 | 151.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 83-79 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 145.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 30 | vs | L 85-96 | -1.5 | L −12.5 | 140.5 | O 181 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 78-63 | -2.5 | W +12.5 | 144.5 | U 141 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 53-95 | +29.5 | L −12.5 | 152.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 81-92 | +21.5 | W +10.5 | 151.5 | O 173 |
| Dec 28 | @ | L 64-72 | +12.5 | W +4.5 | 146.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 2 | @ | W 84-58 | -5.5 | W +20.5 | 151.5 | U 142 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 60-74 | +2.5 | L −11.5 | 141.5 | U 134 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 73-47 | -5.5 | W +20.5 | 137.5 | U 120 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 59-69 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 146.5 | U 128 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 72-57 | -6.5 | W +8.5 | 146.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 19 | vs | W 83-77 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 150.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 23 | vs | W 69-67 | -7.5 | L −5.5 | 143.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 26 | @ | W 87-74 | +1.5 | W +14.5 | 139.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 61-83 | +8.5 | L −13.5 | 147.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 54-65 | -2.5 | L −13.5 | 140.5 | U 119 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 78-79 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 138.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 86-84 | -7.5 | L −5.5 | 153.5 | O 170 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 58-57 | -2.5 | L −1.5 | 138.5 | U 115 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 81-63 | -6.5 | W +11.5 | 144.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 77-78 | +8.5 | W +7.5 | 165.5 | U 155 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 68-77 | -1.5 | L −10.5 | 137.5 | O 145 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 76-59 | -4.5 | W +12.5 | 139.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 59-66 | -1.5 | L −8.5 | 137.5 | U 125 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 71-81 | -4.5 | L −14.5 | 140.5 | O 152 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
6
@
XAV
L 69-74
+19.5
9
@
BGSU
L 60-83
−11.5
13
@
MASS
L 80-94
+2.5
17
vs
NIA
W 74-68
+3.5
22
vs
FAIR
L 83-97
−12.5
28
@
LAF
W 76-63
+17.5
29
vs
MONM
W 83-79
+10.5
30
vs
BALL
L 85-96
−12.5
6
@
BING
W 78-63
+12.5
16
@
TEX
L 53-95
−12.5
20
@
SBU
L 81-92
+10.5
28
@
BC
L 64-72
+4.5
2
@
SFPA
W 84-58
+20.5
4
@
MERC
L 60-74
−11.5
8
vs
NHVN
W 73-47
+20.5
10
vs
CCSU
L 59-69
−11.5
17
@
CHST
W 72-57
+8.5
19
vs
LIU
W 83-77
+7.5
23
vs
WAG
W 69-67
−5.5
26
@
FDU
W 87-74
+14.5
29
@
LIU
L 61-83
−13.5
31
vs
STO
L 54-65
−13.5
5
@
WAG
L 78-79
−2.5
7
vs
SFPA
W 86-84
−5.5
12
vs
MERC
W 58-57
−1.5
14
vs
CHST
W 81-63
+11.5
19
@
CCSU
L 77-78
+7.5
21
@
STO
L 68-77
−10.5
26
vs
FDU
W 76-59
+12.5
28
@
NHVN
L 59-66
−8.5
4
vs
STO
L 71-81
−14.5
covered 16didn’t cover 15avg +1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
6
@
XAV
L 69-74
−13.5
9
@
BGSU
L 60-83
−11.5
13
@
MASS
L 80-94
+20.5
17
vs
NIA
W 74-68
+3.5
22
vs
FAIR
L 83-97
+34.5
28
@
LAF
W 76-63
−12.5
29
vs
MONM
W 83-79
+16.5
30
vs
BALL
L 85-96
+40.5
6
@
BING
W 78-63
−3.5
16
@
TEX
L 53-95
−4.5
20
@
SBU
L 81-92
+21.5
28
@
BC
L 64-72
−10.5
2
@
SFPA
W 84-58
−9.5
4
@
MERC
L 60-74
−7.5
8
vs
NHVN
W 73-47
−17.5
10
vs
CCSU
L 59-69
−18.5
17
@
CHST
W 72-57
−17.5
19
vs
LIU
W 83-77
+9.5
23
vs
WAG
W 69-67
−7.5
26
@
FDU
W 87-74
+21.5
29
@
LIU
L 61-83
−3.5
31
vs
STO
L 54-65
−21.5
5
@
WAG
L 78-79
+18.5
7
vs
SFPA
W 86-84
+16.5
12
vs
MERC
W 58-57
−23.5
14
vs
CHST
W 81-63
−0.5
19
@
CCSU
L 77-78
−10.5
21
@
STO
L 68-77
+7.5
26
vs
FDU
W 76-59
−4.5
28
@
NHVN
L 59-66
−12.5
4
vs
STO
L 71-81
+11.5
over 12under 19avg +0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Creighton
34 games played
Straight up
16-18
47% wins
Against the spread
11-23
32% covers · avg −2.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-18
47% overs · avg +0 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 92-76 | -29.5 | L −13.5 | 169.5 | U 168 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 63-90 | +12.5 | L −14.5 | 164.5 | U 153 |
| Nov 14 | vs | W 84-45 | -33.5 | W +5.5 | 135.5 | U 129 |
| Nov 19 | vs | W 75-60 | -29.5 | L −14.5 | 155.5 | U 135 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 74-81 | +3.5 | L −3.5 | 154.5 | O 155 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 60-78 | +9.5 | L −8.5 | 152.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 76-66 | -2.5 | W +7.5 | 150.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 2 | vs | W 96-76 | -18.5 | W +1.5 | 143.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 50-71 | +5.5 | L −15.5 | 155.5 | U 121 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 76-83 | -4.5 | L −11.5 | 159.5 | U 159 |
| Dec 17 | @ | W 98-57 | +2.5 | W +43.5 | 151.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 84-63 | -6.5 | W +14.5 | 151.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 92-69 | -19.5 | W +3.5 | 147.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 30 | vs | W 89-85 | -5.5 | L −1.5 | 156.5 | O 174 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 54-56 | +3.5 | W +1.5 | 143.5 | U 110 |
| Jan 7 | @ | W 76-72 | +4.5 | W +8.5 | 142.5 | O 148 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 73-90 | +2.5 | L −14.5 | 152.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 13 | vs | W 86-83 | -8.5 | L −5.5 | 147.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 16 | @ | L 88-93 | -2.5 | L −7.5 | 161.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 94-93 | -8.5 | L −7.5 | 155.5 | O 187 |
| Jan 27 | @ | L 62-86 | -1.5 | L −25.5 | 154.5 | U 148 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 58-85 | +6.5 | L −20.5 | 142.5 | O 143 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 68-76 | +1.5 | L −6.5 | 146.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 69-68 | -1.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 11 | @ | L 71-72 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 141.5 | O 143 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 69-80 | +1.5 | L −9.5 | 145.5 | O 149 |
| Feb 18 | @ | W 91-84 | +15.5 | W +22.5 | 143.5 | O 175 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 52-81 | +12.5 | L −16.5 | 156.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 25 | vs | L 71-72 | -3.5 | L −4.5 | 142.5 | O 143 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 76-79 | -3.5 | L −6.5 | 166.5 | U 155 |
| Mar 4 | @ | W 76-59 | +2.5 | W +19.5 | 155.5 | U 135 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 61-72 | +2.5 | L −8.5 | 136.5 | U 133 |
| Apr 2 | vs | W 82-69 | -4.5 | W +8.5 | 151.5 | U 151 |
| Apr 4 | vs | L 70-87 | +1.5 | L −15.5 | 137.5 | O 157 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
5
vs
SDAK
W 92-76
−13.5
11
@
GONZ
L 63-90
−14.5
14
vs
UMES
W 84-45
+5.5
19
vs
UND
W 75-60
−14.5
24
vs
BAY
L 74-81
−3.5
25
vs
ISU
L 60-78
−8.5
27
vs
ORE
W 76-66
+7.5
2
vs
NICH
W 96-76
+1.5
7
@
NEB
L 50-71
−15.5
13
vs
KSU
L 76-83
−11.5
17
@
XAV
W 98-57
+43.5
20
vs
MARQ
W 84-63
+14.5
22
vs
UTU
W 92-69
+3.5
30
vs
BTLR
W 89-85
−1.5
4
@
HALL
L 54-56
+1.5
7
@
VILL
W 76-72
+8.5
10
vs
SJU
L 73-90
−14.5
13
vs
GTWN
W 86-83
−5.5
16
@
PROV
L 88-93
−7.5
21
vs
XAV
W 94-93
−7.5
27
@
MARQ
L 62-86
−25.5
31
vs
CONN
L 58-85
−20.5
4
@
GTWN
L 68-76
−6.5
7
vs
HALL
W 69-68
−0.5
11
@
DEP
L 71-72
−2.5
14
vs
VILL
L 69-80
−9.5
18
@
CONN
W 91-84
+22.5
21
@
SJU
L 52-81
−16.5
25
vs
DEP
L 71-72
−4.5
28
vs
PROV
L 76-79
−6.5
4
@
BTLR
W 76-59
+19.5
12
vs
HALL
L 61-72
−8.5
2
vs
RUTG
W 82-69
+8.5
4
vs
WVU
L 70-87
−15.5
covered 11didn’t cover 23avg −2.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
5
vs
SDAK
W 92-76
−1.5
11
@
GONZ
L 63-90
−11.5
14
vs
UMES
W 84-45
−6.5
19
vs
UND
W 75-60
−20.5
24
vs
BAY
L 74-81
+0.5
25
vs
ISU
L 60-78
−14.5
27
vs
ORE
W 76-66
−8.5
2
vs
NICH
W 96-76
+28.5
7
@
NEB
L 50-71
−34.5
13
vs
KSU
L 76-83
−0.5
17
@
XAV
W 98-57
+3.5
20
vs
MARQ
W 84-63
−4.5
22
vs
UTU
W 92-69
+13.5
30
vs
BTLR
W 89-85
+17.5
4
@
HALL
L 54-56
−33.5
7
@
VILL
W 76-72
+5.5
10
vs
SJU
L 73-90
+10.5
13
vs
GTWN
W 86-83
+21.5
16
@
PROV
L 88-93
+19.5
21
vs
XAV
W 94-93
+31.5
27
@
MARQ
L 62-86
−6.5
31
vs
CONN
L 58-85
+0.5
4
@
GTWN
L 68-76
−2.5
7
vs
HALL
W 69-68
−3.5
11
@
DEP
L 71-72
+1.5
14
vs
VILL
L 69-80
+3.5
18
@
CONN
W 91-84
+31.5
21
@
SJU
L 52-81
−23.5
25
vs
DEP
L 71-72
+0.5
28
vs
PROV
L 76-79
−11.5
4
@
BTLR
W 76-59
−20.5
12
vs
HALL
L 61-72
−3.5
2
vs
RUTG
W 82-69
−0.5
4
vs
WVU
L 70-87
+19.5
over 16under 18avg +0 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Creighton has the better starters
Position by position: Le Moyne 0, Creighton 4, even 1
Le MoyneBetterCreighton
G A. Moss10 pts · 7 reb · 5 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G B. Robinson TR17.6 pts · 2.8 reb · 6.7 ast
Score 86
G J. Clayville TR6.6 pts · 1.5 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 11
→CREIBig
G W. Enis TR16.4 pts · 3.6 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 72
G D. King TR4.6 pts · 2.5 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 59
→CREISmall
F J. Green10.5 pts · 6.3 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 92
F K. Stuckey TR4.4 pts · 4.7 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 5
→CREIBig
F O. Erhunmwunse TR6.9 pts · 8.3 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 74
F T. Francis TR4.5 pts · 2.6 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 27
→CREIBig
C F. King TR13.1 pts · 8.4 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 92
Le MoyneBetterCreighton
LEM offense333rd of 366 · -10.8
→CREIBig
CREI defense43rd of 366 · +2.7
LEM defense308th of 366 · -8.0
→CREIBig
CREI offense33rd of 366 · +5.5
Backcourt-4.4 · 3 players
→CREIBig
Backcourt+3.2 · 2 players
Frontcourt-3.3 · 2 players
→CREIBig
Frontcourt+8.6 · 3 players
Bench-6.1 · 5 players
→CREIBig
Bench+5.7 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestLEM betterCREI betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
A. Moss37 minJ. Clayville20 min · TRD. King14 min · TRJ. Teat14 min · TRK. Williams12 min · TRJ. Lee4 min
Forwards
K. Stuckey19 min · TRT. Francis15 min · TRT. Roe7 minI. BrownNewC. SchreinerNewC. JohnsonNew
Centers
P. Hartman9 min · TR
Guards
B. Robinson36 min · TRW. Enis34 min · TRB. Davis23 min · TRA. Swartz22 minH. Greer14 minK. Edwards7 min · TR
Forwards
J. Green28 minO. Erhunmwunse25 min · TRJ. McAndrew21 minI. Traudt19 minT. Carter-GivensNew
Centers
F. King25 min · TRW. RosaNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 72.3 #234 | Points per game | 75.2 #159 |
| 1.04 #265 | Points per possession | 1.09 #156 |
| 69.2 #168 | Pace (possessions) | 68.9 #187 |
| Shooting | ||
| 52.6 #118 | Effective FG% | 53.0 #103 |
| 34.3 #152 | 3-point % | 34.1 #167 |
| 40.8 #151 | 3-point attempt rate | 48.2 #23 |
| 39.5 #68 | Free throw rate | 28.3 #340 |
| Possessions | ||
| 19.1 #323 | Turnover rate | 16.4 #161 |
| 25.2 #337 | Offensive rebound rate | 26.9 #301 |
| 14.0 #149 | Assists per game | 15.4 #72 |
| Defense | ||
| 73.9 #154 | Points allowed | 75.2 #196 |
| 1.07 #132 | Points allowed per possession | 1.09 #197 |
| 49.3 #75 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.1 #165 |
| 36.0 #303 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.1 #256 |
| 15.0 #289 | Turnovers forced | 13.7 #341 |
| 71.0 #107 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.5 #132 |
| 5.5 #300 | Steals per game | 5.7 #278 |
| 3.3 #177 | Blocks per game | 2.8 #255 |
Le Moyne
14-17 in 2025-26 overall · 10-9 in conference · Northeast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Stonehill71–81
- L@ New Haven59–66
- Wvs FDU76–59
- L@ Stonehill68–77
- L@ C Connecticut77–78
A week or more of rest.
Creighton
16-18 in 2025-26 overall · 9-12 in conference · Big East Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs West Virginia70–87
- Wvs Rutgers82–69
- Lvs Seton Hall61–72
- W@ Butler76–59
- Lvs Providence76–79
A week or more of rest.