Amica Mutual Pavilion · at Providence
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | PROV | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 PROV 89–59 · win probability PROV 100%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 147.6
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: PROV has more of the edges
STO 0, PROV 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
STO has played the 352nd-hardest schedule, PROV the 31st. A record against a soft schedule means less
STO offense vs PROV defense
Offense 363rd of 366 against a defense 81st, on the model’s ratings
PROV offense vs STO defense
Offense 35th of 366 against a defense 225th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 71 possessions: STO plays 67.6 a game (244th fastest), PROV 74.2 (10th). Faster games mean more points
Shooting
Effective FG%: STO 46.9 and allows 47.8; PROV 55.0 and allows 51.4
Turnovers
Turnover rate: STO 19.4%, PROV 16.7%. Forced: STO 13.4%, PROV 13.1%
Free throws
Free throw rate: STO 27.3, PROV 36.7. Allowed: STO 30.3, PROV 32.7
Three-pointers
STO hits 31.7% and allows 33.4%; PROV hits 36.4% and allows 35.3%. Threes are 40.5% and 40.5% of their shots
Home court
PROV at home. This season: PROV 0-0 at home, STO 0-0 away
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: STO 28%, PROV 13%. Transfers in: STO 6, PROV 8. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: STO 27.5%, PROV 31.7%. Defensive: STO 72.9%, PROV 69.2%
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 | — | PROV -29.7 | — |
| Total | — | 147.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | STO 58.9 · PROV 88.6 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | PROV -17.5 | — |
| 1H total | 69.0 | — |
| 1H projected score | STO 25.7 · PROV 43.3 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% | |
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
STO 0–2 PROVPROV leads · 2 games since 2021-22 · PROV has won the last 2 meetings · STO 0-2 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 9, 2024-25 | STO 49 @ PROV 76 | PROV -24.5 | PROV W |
| Nov 15, 2022-23 | STO 76 @ PROV 100 | PROV -22.5 | PROV W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Stonehill
31 games played
Straight up
10-21
32% wins
Against the spread
16-15
52% covers · avg +0.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
11-20
35% overs · avg −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 7 | @ | L 64-72 | +22.5 | W +14.5 | 147.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 57-80 | +16.5 | L −6.5 | 151.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 71-73 | +6.5 | W +4.5 | 143.5 | O 144 |
| Nov 15 | vs | L 63-74 | +6.5 | L −4.5 | 138.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 17 | @ | L 57-96 | +40.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | O 153 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 74-70 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 141.5 | O 144 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 64-75 | -2.5 | L −13.5 | 148.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 30 | @ | L 62-76 | +15.5 | W +1.5 | 148.5 | U 138 |
| Dec 2 | @ | L 65-77 | +6.5 | L −5.5 | 134.5 | O 142 |
| Dec 17 | @ | L 58-59 | +3.5 | W +2.5 | 138.5 | U 117 |
| Dec 22 | @ | L 48-77 | +22.5 | L −6.5 | 140.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 2 | vs | L 55-70 | -1.5 | L −16.5 | 128.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 4 | @ | W 69-60 | +7.5 | W +16.5 | 139.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 69-76 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 134.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 85-82 | -4.5 | L −1.5 | 135.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 62-57 | +4.5 | W +9.5 | 128.5 | U 119 |
| Jan 19 | @ | L 61-63 | +1.5 | L −0.5 | 141.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 23 | vs | L 63-66 | +5.5 | W +2.5 | 137.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 26 | vs | W 61-59 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 135.5 | U 120 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 58-57 | -2.5 | L −1.5 | 131.5 | U 115 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 65-54 | +2.5 | W +13.5 | 140.5 | U 119 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 58-74 | +1.5 | L −14.5 | 130.5 | O 132 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 54-61 | +10.5 | W +3.5 | 132.5 | U 115 |
| Feb 12 | @ | L 55-68 | -2.5 | L −15.5 | 131.5 | U 123 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 57-68 | -3.5 | L −14.5 | 128.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 51-64 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 121.5 | U 115 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 77-68 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 137.5 | O 145 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 103-77 | -4.5 | W +21.5 | 140.5 | O 180 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 72-75 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 137.5 | O 147 |
| Mar 4 | @ | W 81-71 | +4.5 | W +14.5 | 140.5 | O 152 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 51-56 | +4.5 | L −0.5 | 134.5 | U 107 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
@
DEP
L 64-72
+14.5
11
@
URI
L 57-80
−6.5
14
@
FAIR
L 71-73
+4.5
15
vs
L-MD
L 63-74
−4.5
17
@
ISU
L 57-96
+1.5
21
vs
LAF
W 74-70
+5.5
26
vs
UML
L 64-75
−13.5
30
@
QUIN
L 62-76
+1.5
2
@
BRY
L 65-77
−5.5
17
@
UNH
L 58-59
+2.5
22
@
SYR
L 48-77
−6.5
2
vs
NHVN
L 55-70
−16.5
4
@
WAG
W 69-60
+16.5
8
@
CCSU
L 69-76
+0.5
10
vs
CHST
W 85-82
−1.5
17
@
MERC
W 62-57
+9.5
19
@
SFPA
L 61-63
−0.5
23
vs
LIU
L 63-66
+2.5
26
vs
CCSU
W 61-59
+3.5
29
vs
FDU
W 58-57
−1.5
31
@
LEM
W 65-54
+13.5
5
@
FDU
L 58-74
−14.5
7
@
LIU
L 54-61
+3.5
12
@
CHST
L 55-68
−15.5
14
vs
WAG
L 57-68
−14.5
19
@
NHVN
L 51-64
−10.5
21
vs
LEM
W 77-68
+10.5
26
vs
SFPA
W 103-77
+21.5
28
vs
MERC
L 72-75
−1.5
4
@
LEM
W 81-71
+14.5
7
@
MERC
L 51-56
−0.5
covered 16didn’t cover 15avg +0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
@
DEP
L 64-72
−11.5
11
@
URI
L 57-80
−14.5
14
@
FAIR
L 71-73
+0.5
15
vs
L-MD
L 63-74
−1.5
17
@
ISU
L 57-96
+6.5
21
vs
LAF
W 74-70
+2.5
26
vs
UML
L 64-75
−9.5
30
@
QUIN
L 62-76
−10.5
2
@
BRY
L 65-77
+7.5
17
@
UNH
L 58-59
−21.5
22
@
SYR
L 48-77
−15.5
2
vs
NHVN
L 55-70
−3.5
4
@
WAG
W 69-60
−10.5
8
@
CCSU
L 69-76
+10.5
10
vs
CHST
W 85-82
+31.5
17
@
MERC
W 62-57
−9.5
19
@
SFPA
L 61-63
−17.5
23
vs
LIU
L 63-66
−8.5
26
vs
CCSU
W 61-59
−15.5
29
vs
FDU
W 58-57
−16.5
31
@
LEM
W 65-54
−21.5
5
@
FDU
L 58-74
+1.5
7
@
LIU
L 54-61
−17.5
12
@
CHST
L 55-68
−8.5
14
vs
WAG
L 57-68
−3.5
19
@
NHVN
L 51-64
−6.5
21
vs
LEM
W 77-68
+7.5
26
vs
SFPA
W 103-77
+39.5
28
vs
MERC
L 72-75
+9.5
4
@
LEM
W 81-71
+11.5
7
@
MERC
L 51-56
−27.5
over 11under 20avg −4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Providence
33 games played
Straight up
15-18
45% wins
Against the spread
19-14
58% covers · avg −0.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
22-11
67% overs · avg +8.6 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 89-79 | -23.5 | L −13.5 | 152.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 8 | vs | L 101-107 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 157.5 | O 208 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 106-81 | -19.5 | W +5.5 | 172.5 | O 187 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 88-97 | +1.5 | L −7.5 | 163.5 | O 185 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 98-66 | -29.5 | W +2.5 | 161.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 77-65 | -3.5 | W +8.5 | 165.5 | U 142 |
| Nov 27 | vs | L 83-104 | +6.5 | L −14.5 | 166.5 | O 187 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 78-90 | +12.5 | W +0.5 | 169.5 | U 168 |
| Dec 2 | vs | W 94-64 | -26.5 | W +3.5 | 162.5 | U 158 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 90-71 | -7.5 | W +11.5 | 159.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 9 | vs | W 86-79 | -19.5 | L −12.5 | 145.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 110-113 | +3.5 | W +0.5 | 164.5 | O 223 |
| Dec 19 | vs | L 67-72 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 152.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 77-71 | +14.5 | W +20.5 | 166.5 | U 148 |
| Jan 7 | vs | L 98-103 | +9.5 | W +4.5 | 152.5 | O 201 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 84-97 | -1.5 | L −14.5 | 165.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 13 | vs | L 82-88 | +2.5 | L −3.5 | 156.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 16 | vs | W 93-88 | +2.5 | W +7.5 | 161.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 19 | @ | L 104-105 | +2.5 | W +1.5 | 167.5 | O 209 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 78-81 | -5.5 | L −8.5 | 159.5 | U 159 |
| Jan 27 | @ | L 81-87 | +15.5 | W +9.5 | 152.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 30 | @ | L 73-87 | +8.5 | L −5.5 | 157.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 97-87 | -2.5 | W +7.5 | 168.5 | O 184 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 90-72 | -4.5 | W +13.5 | 153.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 11 | @ | L 80-87 | +4.5 | L −2.5 | 150.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 69-79 | +6.5 | L −3.5 | 167.5 | U 148 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 71-68 | +2.5 | W +5.5 | 152.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 94-84 | -5.5 | W +4.5 | 170.5 | O 178 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 79-76 | +3.5 | W +6.5 | 166.5 | U 155 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 56-78 | -3.5 | L −25.5 | 161.5 | U 134 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 79-80 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 158.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 91-81 | -1.5 | W +8.5 | 162.5 | O 172 |
| Mar 12 | @ | L 72-85 | +11.5 | L −1.5 | 158.5 | U 157 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
HC
W 89-79
−13.5
8
vs
VT
L 101-107
−8.5
11
vs
PENN
W 106-81
+5.5
14
@
COLO
L 88-97
−7.5
18
vs
UNH
W 98-66
+2.5
22
vs
PSU
W 77-65
+8.5
27
vs
WIS
L 83-104
−14.5
28
vs
FLA
L 78-90
+0.5
2
vs
FDU
W 94-64
+3.5
6
vs
URI
W 90-71
+11.5
9
vs
BRWN
W 86-79
−12.5
13
@
BTLR
L 110-113
+0.5
19
vs
HALL
L 67-72
−6.5
3
@
SJU
W 77-71
+20.5
7
vs
CONN
L 98-103
+4.5
10
@
XAV
L 84-97
−14.5
13
vs
VILL
L 82-88
−3.5
16
vs
CREI
W 93-88
+7.5
19
@
MARQ
L 104-105
+1.5
24
vs
GTWN
L 78-81
−8.5
27
@
CONN
L 81-87
+9.5
30
@
VILL
L 73-87
−5.5
4
vs
BTLR
W 97-87
+7.5
7
vs
DEP
W 90-72
+13.5
11
@
HALL
L 80-87
−2.5
14
vs
SJU
L 69-79
−3.5
21
@
DEP
W 71-68
+5.5
25
vs
XAV
W 94-84
+4.5
28
@
CREI
W 79-76
+6.5
4
vs
MARQ
L 56-78
−25.5
7
@
GTWN
L 79-80
+0.5
11
vs
BTLR
W 91-81
+8.5
12
@
SJU
L 72-85
−1.5
covered 19didn’t cover 14avg −0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
HC
W 89-79
+15.5
8
vs
VT
L 101-107
+50.5
11
vs
PENN
W 106-81
+14.5
14
@
COLO
L 88-97
+21.5
18
vs
UNH
W 98-66
+2.5
22
vs
PSU
W 77-65
−23.5
27
vs
WIS
L 83-104
+20.5
28
vs
FLA
L 78-90
−1.5
2
vs
FDU
W 94-64
−4.5
6
vs
URI
W 90-71
+1.5
9
vs
BRWN
W 86-79
+19.5
13
@
BTLR
L 110-113
+58.5
19
vs
HALL
L 67-72
−13.5
3
@
SJU
W 77-71
−18.5
7
vs
CONN
L 98-103
+48.5
10
@
XAV
L 84-97
+15.5
13
vs
VILL
L 82-88
+13.5
16
vs
CREI
W 93-88
+19.5
19
@
MARQ
L 104-105
+41.5
24
vs
GTWN
L 78-81
−0.5
27
@
CONN
L 81-87
+15.5
30
@
VILL
L 73-87
+2.5
4
vs
BTLR
W 97-87
+15.5
7
vs
DEP
W 90-72
+8.5
11
@
HALL
L 80-87
+16.5
14
vs
SJU
L 69-79
−19.5
21
@
DEP
W 71-68
−13.5
25
vs
XAV
W 94-84
+7.5
28
@
CREI
W 79-76
−11.5
4
vs
MARQ
L 56-78
−27.5
7
@
GTWN
L 79-80
+0.5
11
vs
BTLR
W 91-81
+9.5
12
@
SJU
L 72-85
−1.5
over 22under 11avg +8.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Providence has the better starters
Position by position: Stonehill 0, Providence 4, even 1
StonehillBetterProvidence
G W. Batchelder8 pts · 2.5 reb · 1.5 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G R. Sabol TR18.9 pts · 3.3 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 66
G A. Boldin TR5.3 pts · 2.8 reb · 1 ast
Score 29
→PROVBig
G M. Mack TR13.6 pts · 3 reb · 4.1 ast
Score 80
G D. Arlington TR2.7 pts · 1.9 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 5
→PROVBig
G D. Vanterpool TR15.2 pts · 6 reb · 2.5 ast
Score 89
G E. Greenberg TR2.3 pts · 1.2 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 0
→PROVBig
G M. Byrd TR10.6 pts · 4.7 reb · 2.7 ast
Score 90
G A. Allen TR3.6 pts · 1.6 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 15
→PROVBig
G R. Mela9.9 pts · 5.3 reb · 2 ast
Score 81
StonehillBetterProvidence
STO offense363rd of 366 · -14.8
→PROVBig
PROV defense81st of 366 · +0.3
STO defense225th of 366 · -5.9
→PROVBig
PROV offense35th of 366 · +5.2
Backcourt-10.2 · 5 players
→PROVBig
Backcourt+8.2 · 5 players
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
=No call
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
Bench-3.6 · 5 players
→PROVBig
Bench+4.2 · 4 players
Score, worst to bestSTO betterPROV betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
W. Batchelder32 minA. Boldin18 min · TRD. Arlington14 min · TRE. Greenberg14 min · TRA. Allen14 min · TRT. Ruth11 min
Forwards
P. McGuinn9 minE. Steele4 min · TRJ. MedalieNewB. LeonsNew
Centers
D. ChengNew
Guards
R. Sabol37 min · TRM. Mack32 min · TRD. Vanterpool32 min · TRM. Byrd28 min · TRR. Mela26 minG. Hightower10 min · TR
Forwards
A. Page23 min · TRJ. Bannarbie16 min · TRJ. BardwellNewC. WaltersNewL. MarangonNew
Centers
S. Aletan26 min · TR
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 64.2 #353 | Points per game | 85.3 #15 |
| 0.95 #357 | Points per possession | 1.15 #58 |
| 67.6 #244 | Pace (possessions) | 74.2 #10 |
| Shooting | ||
| 46.9 #339 | Effective FG% | 55.0 #37 |
| 31.7 #294 | 3-point % | 36.4 #45 |
| 40.5 #158 | 3-point attempt rate | 40.5 #157 |
| 27.3 #350 | Free throw rate | 36.7 #138 |
| Possessions | ||
| 19.4 #333 | Turnover rate | 16.7 #174 |
| 27.5 #282 | Offensive rebound rate | 31.7 #135 |
| 11.8 #298 | Assists per game | 14.0 #146 |
| Defense | ||
| 69.5 #56 | Points allowed | 84.0 #356 |
| 1.03 #57 | Points allowed per possession | 1.13 #292 |
| 47.8 #36 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.4 #179 |
| 33.4 #150 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.3 #265 |
| 13.4 #347 | Turnovers forced | 13.1 #352 |
| 72.9 #40 | Defensive rebound rate | 69.2 #195 |
| 4.7 #347 | Steals per game | 5.4 #313 |
| 4.0 #75 | Blocks per game | 3.9 #86 |
Stonehill
10-21 in 2025-26 overall · 9-11 in conference · Northeast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Mercyhurst51–56
- W@ Le Moyne81–71
- Lvs Mercyhurst72–75
- Wvs Saint Francis Red Wolves103–77
- Wvs Le Moyne77–68
A week or more of rest.
Providence
15-18 in 2025-26 overall · 8-14 in conference · Big East Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ St John's72–85
- Wvs Butler91–81
- L@ Georgetown79–80
- Lvs Marquette56–78
- W@ Creighton79–76
A week or more of rest.