MVP Arena · at Siena
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SIE | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SBU 73–70 · win probability SBU 62%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 142.6
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: SIE has more of the edges
SBU 2, SIE 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
SBU has played the 109th-hardest schedule, SIE the 320th. A record against a soft schedule means less
SIE offense vs SBU defense
Offense 309th of 366 against a defense 131st, on the model’s ratings
Free throws
Free throw rate: SBU 30.0, SIE 33.4. Allowed: SBU 33.9, SIE 27.5
Shooting
Effective FG%: SBU 52.4 and allows 53.3; SIE 50.4 and allows 48.5
Context
Tempo
About 66 possessions: SBU plays 68.0 a game (228th fastest), SIE 64.4 (354th). Faster games mean more points
Home court
SIE at home. This season: SIE 0-0 at home, SBU 0-0 away
Three-pointers
SBU hits 37.4% and allows 36.0%; SIE hits 30.6% and allows 32.4%. Threes are 31.3% and 32.2% of their shots
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: SBU 34.5%, SIE 31.8%. Defensive: SBU 70.2%, SIE 70.5%
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: SBU 16.8%, SIE 15.8%. Forced: SBU 17.1%, SIE 17.0%
Even
SBU offense vs SIE defense
Offense 169th of 366 against a defense 194th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: SBU 18%, SIE 28%. Transfers in: SBU 3, SIE 1. 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 | — | SBU -3.4 | — |
| Total | — | 142.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | SBU 73 · SIE 69.6 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SBU -2.1 | — |
| 1H total | 66.7 | — |
| 1H projected score | SBU 34.4 · SIE 32.3 | — |
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% | 4-6 40% | |
| 6-4 60% | 7-3 70% | 1-9 10% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
SBU 4–1 SIESBU leads · 5 games since 2021-22 · SBU has won the last 3 meetings · SBU 3-2 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 12, 2025-26 | SIE 66 @ SBU 75 | SBU -9.5 | SIE W |
| Dec 17, 2024-25 | SBU 65 @ SIE 48 | SIE +6.5 | SBU W |
| Dec 9, 2023-24 | SIE 56 @ SBU 89 | SBU -20.5 | SBU W |
| Dec 19, 2022-23 | SBU 70 @ SIE 76 | SIE +1.5 | SIE W |
| Nov 9, 2021-22 | SIE 47 @ SBU 75 | SBU -19 | SBU W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
St Bonaventure
33 games played
Straight up
16-17
48% wins
Against the spread
13-20
39% covers · avg −2.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
19-14
58% overs · avg +4.9 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 69-63 | -1.5 | W +4.5 | 139.5 | U 132 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 89-70 | -21.5 | L −2.5 | 136.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 75-66 | -9.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 84-80 | -9.5 | L −5.5 | 146.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 75-61 | -11.5 | W +2.5 | 146.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 70-85 | +10.5 | L −4.5 | 152.5 | O 155 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 67-58 | -10.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | U 125 |
| Nov 30 | @ | W 70-65 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 146.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 77-69 | -5.5 | W +2.5 | 144.5 | O 146 |
| Dec 10 | vs | W 85-77 | -9.5 | L −1.5 | 142.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 83-88 | -6.5 | L −11.5 | 150.5 | O 171 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 92-81 | -21.5 | L −10.5 | 151.5 | O 173 |
| Dec 31 | @ | L 82-89 | +9.5 | W +2.5 | 157.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 7 | vs | L 80-89 | -6.5 | L −15.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 77-81 | -8.5 | L −12.5 | 142.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 64-68 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 147.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 74-78 | -5.5 | L −9.5 | 141.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 20 | vs | W 84-70 | -10.5 | W +3.5 | 147.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 23 | vs | L 62-97 | +8.5 | L −26.5 | 159.5 | U 159 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 87-79 | +3.5 | W +11.5 | 150.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 73-77 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 142.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 3 | @ | L 70-72 | +7.5 | W +5.5 | 144.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 70-67 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 141.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 73-78 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 152.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 65-71 | -5.5 | L −11.5 | 147.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 94-99 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 147.5 | O 193 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 94-76 | -2.5 | W +15.5 | 144.5 | O 170 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 58-71 | +3.5 | L −9.5 | 146.5 | U 129 |
| Mar 4 | @ | L 82-91 | +7.5 | L −1.5 | 157.5 | O 173 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 63-68 | -4.5 | L −9.5 | 141.5 | U 131 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 99-80 | -7.5 | W +11.5 | 146.5 | O 179 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 63-57 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 143.5 | U 120 |
| Mar 13 | vs | L 63-68 | +5.5 | W +0.5 | 141.5 | U 131 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
BRAD
W 69-63
+4.5
8
vs
CAN
W 89-70
−2.5
12
vs
SIE
W 75-66
−0.5
15
vs
YSU
W 84-80
−5.5
20
vs
RMU
W 75-61
+2.5
25
vs
UNC
L 70-85
−4.5
27
vs
ECU
W 67-58
−1.5
30
@
FAU
W 70-65
+6.5
6
@
BUF
W 77-69
+2.5
10
vs
COLG
W 85-77
−1.5
13
vs
OHIO
L 83-88
−11.5
20
vs
LEM
W 92-81
−10.5
31
@
VCU
L 82-89
+2.5
7
vs
RICH
L 80-89
−15.5
10
vs
FOR
L 77-81
−12.5
14
@
JOES
L 64-68
−5.5
17
@
LAS
L 74-78
−9.5
20
vs
LUC
W 84-70
+3.5
23
vs
SLU
L 62-97
−26.5
28
@
DUQ
W 87-79
+11.5
31
vs
GMU
L 73-77
−2.5
3
@
DAY
L 70-72
+5.5
7
@
FOR
W 70-67
+1.5
14
vs
DUQ
L 73-78
−6.5
18
vs
JOES
L 65-71
−11.5
21
@
RICH
L 94-99
−3.5
26
vs
URI
W 94-76
+15.5
28
@
GMU
L 58-71
−9.5
4
@
GW
L 82-91
−1.5
7
vs
DAV
L 63-68
−9.5
11
vs
LAS
W 99-80
+11.5
12
vs
GMU
W 63-57
+8.5
13
vs
DAY
L 63-68
+0.5
covered 13didn’t cover 20avg −2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
BRAD
W 69-63
−7.5
8
vs
CAN
W 89-70
+22.5
12
vs
SIE
W 75-66
+0.5
15
vs
YSU
W 84-80
+17.5
20
vs
RMU
W 75-61
−10.5
25
vs
UNC
L 70-85
+2.5
27
vs
ECU
W 67-58
−19.5
30
@
FAU
W 70-65
−11.5
6
@
BUF
W 77-69
+1.5
10
vs
COLG
W 85-77
+19.5
13
vs
OHIO
L 83-88
+20.5
20
vs
LEM
W 92-81
+21.5
31
@
VCU
L 82-89
+13.5
7
vs
RICH
L 80-89
+15.5
10
vs
FOR
L 77-81
+15.5
14
@
JOES
L 64-68
−15.5
17
@
LAS
L 74-78
+10.5
20
vs
LUC
W 84-70
+6.5
23
vs
SLU
L 62-97
−0.5
28
@
DUQ
W 87-79
+15.5
31
vs
GMU
L 73-77
+7.5
3
@
DAY
L 70-72
−2.5
7
@
FOR
W 70-67
−4.5
14
vs
DUQ
L 73-78
−1.5
18
vs
JOES
L 65-71
−11.5
21
@
RICH
L 94-99
+45.5
26
vs
URI
W 94-76
+25.5
28
@
GMU
L 58-71
−17.5
4
@
GW
L 82-91
+15.5
7
vs
DAV
L 63-68
−10.5
11
vs
LAS
W 99-80
+32.5
12
vs
GMU
W 63-57
−23.5
13
vs
DAY
L 63-68
−10.5
over 19under 14avg +4.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Siena
35 games played
Straight up
23-12
66% wins
Against the spread
21-14
60% covers · avg +1.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
11-24
31% overs · avg −1.8 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 82-66 | -13.5 | W +2.5 | 148.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 7 | @ | W 62-46 | -3.5 | W +12.5 | 142.5 | U 108 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 66-75 | +9.5 | W +0.5 | 140.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 17 | vs | L 69-72 | -6.5 | L −9.5 | 146.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 73-63 | -10.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 24 | @ | W 73-69 | -9.5 | L −5.5 | 137.5 | O 142 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 70-63 | -5.5 | W +1.5 | 145.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 29 | @ | W 59-55 | -2.5 | W +1.5 | 137.5 | U 114 |
| Nov 30 | vs | W 64-60 | -9.5 | L −5.5 | 127.5 | U 124 |
| Dec 5 | vs | W 83-54 | -12.5 | W +16.5 | 129.5 | O 137 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 74-52 | -17.5 | W +4.5 | 131.5 | U 126 |
| Dec 17 | @ | L 69-83 | +2.5 | L −11.5 | 134.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 22 | @ | L 60-81 | +21.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 2 | @ | L 72-75 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 149.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 4 | @ | W 74-65 | -8.5 | W +0.5 | 135.5 | O 139 |
| Jan 9 | vs | L 59-63 | -5.5 | L −9.5 | 132.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 11 | @ | W 67-50 | -2.5 | W +14.5 | 139.5 | U 117 |
| Jan 14 | vs | L 80-86 | -8.5 | L −14.5 | 139.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 74-59 | -6.5 | W +8.5 | 144.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 19 | vs | W 85-77 | -6.5 | W +1.5 | 142.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 69-50 | -1.5 | W +17.5 | 133.5 | U 119 |
| Jan 30 | @ | W 82-79 | -9.5 | L −6.5 | 128.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 1 | @ | W 78-63 | -8.5 | W +6.5 | 135.5 | O 141 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 79-72 | -8.5 | L −1.5 | 140.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 65-70 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 135.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 13 | vs | L 62-74 | -3.5 | L −15.5 | 144.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 15 | @ | W 67-63 | +2.5 | W +6.5 | 133.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 20 | @ | L 72-79 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 133.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 22 | vs | W 72-63 | -5.5 | W +3.5 | 135.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 27 | @ | L 58-72 | -1.5 | L −15.5 | 142.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 1 | vs | W 76-61 | -14.5 | W +0.5 | 137.5 | U 137 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 63-58 | -2.5 | W +2.5 | 135.5 | U 121 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 76-61 | -1.5 | W +13.5 | 138.5 | U 137 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 64-54 | +2.5 | W +12.5 | 128.5 | U 118 |
| Mar 19 | vs | L 65-71 | +28.5 | W +22.5 | 137.5 | U 136 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
BRY
W 82-66
+2.5
7
@
BRWN
W 62-46
+12.5
12
@
SBU
L 66-75
+0.5
17
vs
COLG
L 69-72
−9.5
21
vs
UALB
W 73-63
−0.5
24
@
HC
W 73-69
−5.5
28
vs
LONG
W 70-63
+1.5
29
@
AMER
W 59-55
+1.5
30
vs
ME
W 64-60
−5.5
5
vs
NIA
W 83-54
+16.5
7
vs
CAN
W 74-52
+4.5
17
@
UVM
L 69-83
−11.5
22
@
IU
L 60-81
+0.5
2
@
IONA
L 72-75
−4.5
4
@
RID
W 74-65
+0.5
9
vs
MRMK
L 59-63
−9.5
11
@
MSM
W 67-50
+14.5
14
vs
SHU
L 80-86
−14.5
17
@
MAN
W 74-59
+8.5
19
vs
FAIR
W 85-77
+1.5
22
vs
MRST
W 69-50
+17.5
30
@
NIA
W 82-79
−6.5
1
@
CAN
W 78-63
+6.5
5
vs
IONA
W 79-72
−1.5
7
@
SPU
L 65-70
−6.5
13
vs
QUIN
L 62-74
−15.5
15
@
MRST
W 67-63
+6.5
20
@
MRMK
L 72-79
−4.5
22
vs
SPU
W 72-63
+3.5
27
@
FAIR
L 58-72
−15.5
1
vs
RID
W 76-61
+0.5
7
vs
MSM
W 63-58
+2.5
8
vs
FAIR
W 76-61
+13.5
10
vs
MRMK
W 64-54
+12.5
19
vs
DUKE
L 65-71
+22.5
covered 21didn’t cover 14avg +1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
BRY
W 82-66
−0.5
7
@
BRWN
W 62-46
−34.5
12
@
SBU
L 66-75
+0.5
17
vs
COLG
L 69-72
−5.5
21
vs
UALB
W 73-63
−4.5
24
@
HC
W 73-69
+4.5
28
vs
LONG
W 70-63
−12.5
29
@
AMER
W 59-55
−23.5
30
vs
ME
W 64-60
−3.5
5
vs
NIA
W 83-54
+7.5
7
vs
CAN
W 74-52
−5.5
17
@
UVM
L 69-83
+17.5
22
@
IU
L 60-81
−4.5
2
@
IONA
L 72-75
−2.5
4
@
RID
W 74-65
+3.5
9
vs
MRMK
L 59-63
−10.5
11
@
MSM
W 67-50
−22.5
14
vs
SHU
L 80-86
+26.5
17
@
MAN
W 74-59
−11.5
19
vs
FAIR
W 85-77
+19.5
22
vs
MRST
W 69-50
−14.5
30
@
NIA
W 82-79
+32.5
1
@
CAN
W 78-63
+5.5
5
vs
IONA
W 79-72
+10.5
7
@
SPU
L 65-70
−0.5
13
vs
QUIN
L 62-74
−8.5
15
@
MRST
W 67-63
−3.5
20
@
MRMK
L 72-79
+17.5
22
vs
SPU
W 72-63
−0.5
27
@
FAIR
L 58-72
−12.5
1
vs
RID
W 76-61
−0.5
7
vs
MSM
W 63-58
−14.5
8
vs
FAIR
W 76-61
−1.5
10
vs
MRMK
W 64-54
−10.5
19
vs
DUKE
L 65-71
−1.5
over 11under 24avg −1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
St Bonaventure has the better starters
Position by position: St Bonaventure 2, Siena 0, even 3
St BonaventureBetterSiena
G A. Fulton TR10.7 pts · 6.3 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 62
←SBUSmall
G T. Yildizoglu TR10.4 pts · 3.6 reb · 4.4 ast
Score 30
G I. Ermakov2.6 pts · 1.1 reb · 0.9 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G B. Coyle8.7 pts · 4.6 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 17
F R. Kalambay TR4.4 pts · 5.6 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 40
←SBUSmall
G I. Henderson3.8 pts · 0.8 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 12
F J. Grahovac4.2 pts · 2.8 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 33
=No call
G O. Schlager2.8 pts · 1.2 reb · 0.6 ast
Not ranked
F M. Blackwood TR2.6 pts · 1.8 reb · 0.2 ast
Score 22
=No call
G C. Torres0.5 pts · 0 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
St BonaventureBetterSiena
SBU offense169th of 366 · -5.2
=Even
SIE defense194th of 366 · -4.7
SBU defense131st of 366 · -2.4
←SBUBig
SIE offense309th of 366 · -9.6
Backcourt-0.4 · 2 players
←SBUBig
Backcourt-7.7 · 5 players
Frontcourt-2.4 · 3 players
=No call
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
Bench-0.6 · 2 players
=No call
BenchNo numbers yet
Score, worst to bestSBU betterSIE betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
A. Fulton29 min · TRI. Ermakov10 minA. Lonati8 minJ. DeRose1 minR. HeathNewZ. PhilipkoskiNew
Forwards
R. Kalambay21 min · TRJ. Grahovac18 minM. Blackwood12 min · TRJ. IkpotokinNewC. BlankenbergNew
Centers
B. BillNewC. DialloNew
Guards
T. Yildizoglu32 min · TRB. Coyle31 minI. Henderson14 minO. Schlager10 minC. Torres3 minR. DucharmeNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 76.2 #138 | Points per game | 70.4 #276 |
| 1.12 #104 | Points per possession | 1.09 #154 |
| 68.0 #228 | Pace (possessions) | 64.4 #354 |
| Shooting | ||
| 52.4 #129 | Effective FG% | 50.4 #222 |
| 37.4 #22 | 3-point % | 30.6 #330 |
| 31.3 #335 | 3-point attempt rate | 32.2 #327 |
| 30.0 #310 | Free throw rate | 33.4 #226 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.8 #189 | Turnover rate | 15.8 #126 |
| 34.5 #60 | Offensive rebound rate | 31.8 #133 |
| 15.4 #73 | Assists per game | 13.5 #182 |
| Defense | ||
| 75.4 #201 | Points allowed | 65.8 #12 |
| 1.11 #245 | Points allowed per possession | 1.02 #44 |
| 53.3 #278 | Opponent effective FG% | 48.5 #48 |
| 36.0 #299 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.4 #82 |
| 17.1 #144 | Turnovers forced | 17.0 #154 |
| 70.2 #150 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.5 #133 |
| 7.5 #80 | Steals per game | 5.8 #262 |
| 4.4 #41 | Blocks per game | 3.1 #205 |
St Bonaventure
16-17 in 2025-26 overall · 6-15 in conference · Atlantic 10 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Dayton63–68
- Wvs George Mason63–57
- Wvs La Salle99–80
- Lvs Davidson63–68
- L@ G Washington82–91
A week or more of rest.
Siena
23-12 in 2025-26 overall · 16-7 in conference · Metro Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Duke65–71
- Wvs Merrimack64–54
- Wvs Fairfield76–61
- Wvs Mount St Marys63–58
- Wvs Rider76–61
A week or more of rest.