Capital One Arena · at Georgetown
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | GTWN | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 GTWN 82–62 · win probability GTWN 96%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 143.6
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: NAVY has more of the edges
NAVY 4, GTWN 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
NAVY has played the 311th-hardest schedule, GTWN the 47th. A record against a soft schedule means less
NAVY offense vs GTWN defense
Offense 270th of 366 against a defense 46th, on the model’s ratings
Three-pointers
NAVY hits 35.9% and allows 30.0%; GTWN hits 31.8% and allows 33.3%. Threes are 33.1% and 35.2% of their shots
Shooting
Effective FG%: NAVY 53.1 and allows 48.3; GTWN 49.6 and allows 50.0
Free throws
Free throw rate: NAVY 38.8, GTWN 37.3. Allowed: NAVY 26.0, GTWN 33.9
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: NAVY 31.9%, GTWN 32.5%. Defensive: NAVY 72.6%, GTWN 68.5%
GTWN offense vs NAVY defense
Offense 75th of 366 against a defense 145th, on the model’s ratings
Home court
GTWN at home. This season: GTWN 0-0 at home, NAVY 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 67 possessions: NAVY plays 66.0 a game (316th fastest), GTWN 67.8 (238th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: NAVY 16.8%, GTWN 15.8%. Forced: NAVY 18.3%, GTWN 16.2%
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: NAVY 46%, GTWN 38%. Transfers in: NAVY 0, GTWN 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
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 | — | GTWN -19.6 | — |
| Total | — | 143.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | NAVY 62 · GTWN 81.6 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | GTWN -11.5 | — |
| 1H total | 67.2 | — |
| 1H projected score | NAVY 27.8 · GTWN 39.4 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8-2 80% | 7-3 70% | 8-2 80% | |
| 3-7 30% | 5-5 50% | 5-5 50% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Navy
32 games played
Straight up
24-8
75% wins
Against the spread
21-11
66% covers · avg +3.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-17
47% overs · avg −1.3 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 | @ | W 76-55 | -3.5 | W +17.5 | 141.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 7 | vs | L 68-97 | +5.5 | L −23.5 | 147.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 71-80 | +11.5 | W +2.5 | 155.5 | U 151 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 61-73 | +26.5 | W +14.5 | 160.5 | U 134 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 86-70 | -17.5 | L −1.5 | 140.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 84-51 | -10.5 | W +22.5 | 153.5 | U 135 |
| Nov 28 | @ | L 57-87 | +8.5 | L −21.5 | 138.5 | O 144 |
| Nov 29 | vs | L 65-69 | -3.5 | L −7.5 | 136.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 3 | @ | W 66-59 | -15.5 | L −8.5 | 132.5 | U 125 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 61-56 | -9.5 | L −4.5 | 133.5 | U 117 |
| Dec 19 | vs | W 88-55 | -20.5 | W +12.5 | 145.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 31 | vs | W 82-77 | -4.5 | W +0.5 | 137.5 | O 159 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 65-58 | -5.5 | W +1.5 | 137.5 | U 123 |
| Jan 7 | vs | W 76-55 | -8.5 | W +12.5 | 137.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 76-50 | -8.5 | W +17.5 | 141.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 12 | @ | L 51-65 | -2.5 | L −16.5 | 139.5 | U 116 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 82-79 | -3.5 | L −0.5 | 137.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 85-68 | -11.5 | W +5.5 | 134.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 84-56 | -10.5 | W +17.5 | 143.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 58-50 | -1.5 | W +6.5 | 138.5 | U 108 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 87-71 | -9.5 | W +6.5 | 143.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 65-50 | -3.5 | W +11.5 | 139.5 | U 115 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 82-73 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 134.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 9 | @ | W 76-60 | -6.5 | W +9.5 | 135.5 | O 136 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 84-80 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 139.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 72-49 | -9.5 | W +13.5 | 139.5 | U 121 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 81-63 | -8.5 | W +9.5 | 139.5 | O 144 |
| Feb 25 | @ | W 78-51 | -6.5 | W +20.5 | 147.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 85-69 | -6.5 | W +9.5 | 141.5 | O 154 |
| Mar 5 | vs | W 74-69 | -15.5 | L −10.5 | 133.5 | O 143 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 72-73 | -6.5 | L −7.5 | 136.5 | O 145 |
| Mar 18 | @ | L 72-82 | +9.5 | L −0.5 | 148.5 | O 154 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
PRES
W 76-55
+17.5
7
vs
YALE
L 68-97
−23.5
11
@
PSU
L 71-80
+2.5
18
@
UNC
L 61-73
+14.5
22
vs
NJIT
W 86-70
−1.5
26
vs
GWEB
W 84-51
+22.5
28
@
UNCW
L 57-87
−21.5
29
vs
SELA
L 65-69
−7.5
3
@
DSU
W 66-59
−8.5
7
vs
AF
W 61-56
−4.5
19
vs
COPP
W 88-55
+12.5
31
vs
BU
W 82-77
+0.5
3
@
HC
W 65-58
+1.5
7
vs
BUCK
W 76-55
+12.5
10
vs
LAF
W 76-50
+17.5
12
@
AMER
L 51-65
−16.5
17
@
LEH
W 82-79
−0.5
21
vs
HC
W 85-68
+5.5
24
vs
ARMY
W 84-56
+17.5
28
@
BU
W 58-50
+6.5
31
vs
L-MD
W 87-71
+6.5
4
@
LAF
W 65-50
+11.5
7
vs
AMER
W 82-73
+4.5
9
@
BUCK
W 76-60
+9.5
14
@
COLG
W 84-80
+5.5
18
vs
LEH
W 72-49
+13.5
21
@
ARMY
W 81-63
+9.5
25
@
L-MD
W 78-51
+20.5
28
vs
COLG
W 85-69
+9.5
5
vs
BUCK
W 74-69
−10.5
8
vs
BU
L 72-73
−7.5
18
@
WAKE
L 72-82
−0.5
covered 21didn’t cover 11avg +3.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
PRES
W 76-55
−10.5
7
vs
YALE
L 68-97
+17.5
11
@
PSU
L 71-80
−4.5
18
@
UNC
L 61-73
−26.5
22
vs
NJIT
W 86-70
+15.5
26
vs
GWEB
W 84-51
−18.5
28
@
UNCW
L 57-87
+5.5
29
vs
SELA
L 65-69
−2.5
3
@
DSU
W 66-59
−7.5
7
vs
AF
W 61-56
−16.5
19
vs
COPP
W 88-55
−2.5
31
vs
BU
W 82-77
+21.5
3
@
HC
W 65-58
−14.5
7
vs
BUCK
W 76-55
−6.5
10
vs
LAF
W 76-50
−15.5
12
@
AMER
L 51-65
−23.5
17
@
LEH
W 82-79
+23.5
21
vs
HC
W 85-68
+18.5
24
vs
ARMY
W 84-56
−3.5
28
@
BU
W 58-50
−30.5
31
vs
L-MD
W 87-71
+14.5
4
@
LAF
W 65-50
−24.5
7
vs
AMER
W 82-73
+20.5
9
@
BUCK
W 76-60
+0.5
14
@
COLG
W 84-80
+24.5
18
vs
LEH
W 72-49
−18.5
21
@
ARMY
W 81-63
+4.5
25
@
L-MD
W 78-51
−18.5
28
vs
COLG
W 85-69
+12.5
5
vs
BUCK
W 74-69
+9.5
8
vs
BU
L 72-73
+8.5
18
@
WAKE
L 72-82
+5.5
over 15under 17avg −1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Georgetown
34 games played
Straight up
16-18
47% wins
Against the spread
14-20
41% covers · avg −0.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
18-16
53% overs · avg +0.6 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 87-70 | -27.5 | L −10.5 | 154.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 7 | @ | W 70-60 | +4.5 | W +14.5 | 144.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 83-70 | -27.5 | L −14.5 | 141.5 | O 153 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 79-74 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 142.5 | O 153 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 92-75 | -25.5 | L −8.5 | 140.5 | O 167 |
| Nov 27 | vs | L 79-84 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 145.5 | O 163 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 65-78 | +5.5 | L −7.5 | 151.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 90-81 | -19.5 | L −10.5 | 149.5 | O 171 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 61-81 | +10.5 | L −9.5 | 149.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 76-68 | -20.5 | L −12.5 | 140.5 | O 144 |
| Dec 17 | @ | W 78-69 | +6.5 | W +15.5 | 149.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 20 | vs | L 77-80 | -4.5 | L −7.5 | 149.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 97-67 | -33.5 | L −3.5 | 150.5 | O 164 |
| Dec 31 | vs | L 83-95 | +8.5 | L −3.5 | 152.5 | O 178 |
| Jan 6 | @ | L 50-56 | +2.5 | L −3.5 | 144.5 | U 106 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 67-76 | +1.5 | L −7.5 | 137.5 | O 143 |
| Jan 13 | @ | L 83-86 | +8.5 | W +5.5 | 147.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 62-64 | +11.5 | W +9.5 | 141.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 51-66 | +8.5 | L −6.5 | 142.5 | U 117 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 81-78 | +5.5 | W +8.5 | 159.5 | U 159 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 70-61 | -3.5 | W +5.5 | 139.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 77-64 | +5.5 | W +18.5 | 149.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 76-68 | -1.5 | W +6.5 | 146.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 73-80 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 140.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 75-79 | +16.5 | W +12.5 | 138.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 89-93 | -6.5 | L −10.5 | 147.5 | O 182 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 47-51 | +6.5 | W +2.5 | 136.5 | U 98 |
| Feb 24 | vs | L 60-76 | -2.5 | L −18.5 | 150.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 84-91 | +4.5 | L −2.5 | 155.5 | O 175 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 69-72 | +15.5 | W +12.5 | 148.5 | U 141 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 80-79 | -1.5 | L −0.5 | 158.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 63-56 | -1.5 | W +5.5 | 136.5 | U 119 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 78-64 | +7.5 | W +21.5 | 140.5 | O 142 |
| Mar 13 | vs | L 51-67 | +14.5 | L −1.5 | 138.5 | U 118 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
MORG
W 87-70
−10.5
7
@
MD
W 70-60
+14.5
12
vs
BING
W 83-70
−14.5
15
vs
CLEM
W 79-74
+6.5
22
vs
WAG
W 92-75
−8.5
27
vs
DAY
L 79-84
−3.5
28
vs
MIA
L 65-78
−7.5
3
vs
UMBC
W 90-81
−10.5
7
@
UNC
L 61-81
−9.5
13
vs
SPU
W 76-68
−12.5
17
@
MARQ
W 78-69
+15.5
20
vs
XAV
L 77-80
−7.5
22
vs
COPP
W 97-67
−3.5
31
vs
SJU
L 83-95
−3.5
6
@
DEP
L 50-56
−3.5
10
vs
HALL
L 67-76
−7.5
13
@
CREI
L 83-86
+5.5
17
vs
CONN
L 62-64
+9.5
21
@
VILL
L 51-66
−6.5
24
@
PROV
W 81-78
+8.5
28
vs
DEP
W 70-61
+5.5
31
@
BTLR
W 77-64
+18.5
4
vs
CREI
W 76-68
+6.5
7
vs
VILL
L 73-80
−4.5
14
@
CONN
L 75-79
+12.5
18
vs
BTLR
L 89-93
−10.5
21
@
HALL
L 47-51
+2.5
24
vs
MARQ
L 60-76
−18.5
28
@
XAV
L 84-91
−2.5
3
@
SJU
L 69-72
+12.5
7
vs
PROV
W 80-79
−0.5
11
vs
DEP
W 63-56
+5.5
12
vs
VILL
W 78-64
+21.5
13
vs
CONN
L 51-67
−1.5
covered 14didn’t cover 20avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
MORG
W 87-70
+2.5
7
@
MD
W 70-60
−14.5
12
vs
BING
W 83-70
+11.5
15
vs
CLEM
W 79-74
+10.5
22
vs
WAG
W 92-75
+26.5
27
vs
DAY
L 79-84
+17.5
28
vs
MIA
L 65-78
−8.5
3
vs
UMBC
W 90-81
+21.5
7
@
UNC
L 61-81
−7.5
13
vs
SPU
W 76-68
+3.5
17
@
MARQ
W 78-69
−2.5
20
vs
XAV
L 77-80
+7.5
22
vs
COPP
W 97-67
+13.5
31
vs
SJU
L 83-95
+25.5
6
@
DEP
L 50-56
−38.5
10
vs
HALL
L 67-76
+5.5
13
@
CREI
L 83-86
+21.5
17
vs
CONN
L 62-64
−15.5
21
@
VILL
L 51-66
−25.5
24
@
PROV
W 81-78
−0.5
28
vs
DEP
W 70-61
−8.5
31
@
BTLR
W 77-64
−8.5
4
vs
CREI
W 76-68
−2.5
7
vs
VILL
L 73-80
+12.5
14
@
CONN
L 75-79
+15.5
18
vs
BTLR
L 89-93
+34.5
21
@
HALL
L 47-51
−38.5
24
vs
MARQ
L 60-76
−14.5
28
@
XAV
L 84-91
+19.5
3
@
SJU
L 69-72
−7.5
7
vs
PROV
W 80-79
+0.5
11
vs
DEP
W 63-56
−17.5
12
vs
VILL
W 78-64
+1.5
13
vs
CONN
L 51-67
−20.5
over 18under 16avg +0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Georgetown has the better starters
Position by position: Navy 0, Georgetown 3, even 2
NavyBetterGeorgetown
G J. Kim10 pts · 3.1 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 35
→GTWNBig
G V. Miller TR10.8 pts · 2.7 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 74
G J. Pennick7.5 pts · 2.1 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 12
→GTWNBig
F C. Williams8.8 pts · 5.1 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 57
G C. Cole6 pts · 1.9 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 41
→GTWNBig
F J. Parker TR9.8 pts · 6.1 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 79
G D. Burnett1.4 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
C V. Iwuchukwu11.6 pts · 6.1 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 89
G N. Howard1.6 pts · 0.7 reb · 0.6 ast
Not ranked
=No call
C C. Machot TR8.8 pts · 5.4 reb · 0.2 ast
Score 78
NavyBetterGeorgetown
NAVY offense270th of 366 · -8.2
→GTWNBig
GTWN defense46th of 366 · +2.3
NAVY defense145th of 366 · -3.1
→GTWNSmall
GTWN offense75th of 366 · +1.3
Backcourt-5.8 · 5 players
→GTWNBig
Backcourt+0.7 · 1 player
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
=No call
Frontcourt+6.5 · 4 players
Bench-0.2 · 5 players
→GTWNSmall
Bench+1.4 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestNAVY betterGTWN betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Kim31 minJ. Pennick25 minC. Cole19 minD. Burnett6 minN. Howard3 minJ. Gabbidon1 min
Forwards
C. Jackson2 minJ. Ashley2 minO. Gray2 minT. RajiNewC. PollockNewS. GriffinNew
Centers
C. CraneNew
Guards
V. Miller26 min · TRJ. Lowe19 min · TRE. Jackson18 min · TRK. Mulready17 minM. Moses1 minM. Van Raaphorst1 min
Forwards
C. Williams30 minJ. Parker22 min · TRJ. CaldwellNewP. PastreNew
Centers
V. Iwuchukwu23 minC. Machot20 min · TRS. Diouf4 min
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 74.1 #194 | Points per game | 73.6 #215 |
| 1.12 #97 | Points per possession | 1.09 #165 |
| 66.0 #316 | Pace (possessions) | 67.8 #238 |
| Shooting | ||
| 53.1 #100 | Effective FG% | 49.6 #257 |
| 35.9 #64 | 3-point % | 31.8 #285 |
| 33.1 #314 | 3-point attempt rate | 35.2 #271 |
| 38.8 #82 | Free throw rate | 37.3 #121 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.8 #190 | Turnover rate | 15.8 #120 |
| 31.9 #126 | Offensive rebound rate | 32.5 #107 |
| 15.8 #52 | Assists per game | 14.8 #101 |
| Defense | ||
| 65.6 #10 | Points allowed | 72.9 #130 |
| 1.00 #23 | Points allowed per possession | 1.08 #147 |
| 48.3 #42 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.0 #96 |
| 30.0 #7 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.3 #139 |
| 18.3 #84 | Turnovers forced | 16.2 #211 |
| 72.6 #49 | Defensive rebound rate | 68.5 #228 |
| 7.5 #84 | Steals per game | 6.5 #182 |
| 3.3 #185 | Blocks per game | 3.6 #130 |
Navy
24-8 in 2025-26 overall · 18-2 in conference · Patriot League
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Wake Forest72–82
- Lvs Boston U72–73
- Wvs Bucknell74–69
- Wvs Colgate85–69
- W@ Loyola MD78–51
A week or more of rest.
Georgetown
16-18 in 2025-26 overall · 8-15 in conference · Big East Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs UConn51–67
- Wvs Villanova78–64
- Wvs DePaul63–56
- Wvs Providence80–79
- L@ St John's69–72
A week or more of rest.