Provident Credit Union Event Center · at San José St
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SJSU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SJSU 80–69 · win probability SJSU 84%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 148.6
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: SJSU has more of the edges
LBSU 2, SJSU 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
SJSU offense vs LBSU defense
Offense 141st of 366 against a defense 300th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: LBSU plays 71.7 a game (46th fastest), SJSU 66.0 (315th). Faster games mean more points
LBSU offense vs SJSU defense
Offense 285th of 366 against a defense 151st, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: LBSU 26.2%, SJSU 29.3%. Defensive: LBSU 72.2%, SJSU 63.5%
Free throws
Free throw rate: LBSU 30.7, SJSU 33.4. Allowed: LBSU 42.3, SJSU 35.4
Turnovers
Turnover rate: LBSU 18.0%, SJSU 15.1%. Forced: LBSU 17.5%, SJSU 17.4%
Context
Schedule so far
LBSU has played the 152nd-hardest schedule, SJSU the 85th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Shooting
Effective FG%: LBSU 50.6 and allows 53.7; SJSU 49.7 and allows 57.1
Home court
SJSU at home. This season: SJSU 0-0 at home, LBSU 0-0 away
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: LBSU 8%, SJSU 24%. Transfers in: LBSU 5, SJSU 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Three-pointers
LBSU hits 32.7% and allows 34.4%; SJSU hits 35.3% and allows 36.0%. Threes are 34.8% and 38.3% of their shots
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 | — | SJSU -11.4 | — |
| Total | — | 148.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | LBSU 68.6 · SJSU 80 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SJSU -6.6 | — |
| 1H total | 69.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | LBSU 31.4 · SJSU 38.1 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2-8 20% | 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% | |
| 3-7 30% | 5-5 50% | 9-1 90% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
LBSU 0–2 SJSUSJSU leads · 2 games since 2021-22 · SJSU has won the last 2 meetings · LBSU 1-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 9, 2025-26 | LBSU 83 @ SJSU 89 | SJSU -7.5 | LBSU W |
| Nov 27, 2024-25 | SJSU 82 vs LBSU 66 | LBSU +7.5 | SJSU W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Long Beach St
30 games played
Straight up
8-22
27% wins
Against the spread
16-14
53% covers · avg +0.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
20-10
67% overs · avg +4.6 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 4 | @ | L 45-77 | +25.5 | L −6.5 | 135.5 | U 122 |
| Nov 8 | @ | L 62-82 | +6.5 | L −13.5 | 142.5 | O 144 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 66-69 | +12.5 | W +9.5 | 141.5 | U 135 |
| Nov 16 | vs | L 80-82 | +8.5 | W +6.5 | 141.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 21 | vs | L 72-78 | +3.5 | L −2.5 | 140.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 26 | @ | L 73-93 | +5.5 | L −14.5 | 148.5 | O 166 |
| Nov 30 | vs | W 76-72 | +2.5 | W +6.5 | 147.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 4 | @ | L 77-84 | +13.5 | W +6.5 | 141.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 74-80 | +8.5 | W +2.5 | 145.5 | O 154 |
| Dec 9 | @ | L 83-89 | +7.5 | W +1.5 | 141.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 18 | vs | W 81-78 | -4.5 | L −1.5 | 141.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 60-91 | +37.5 | W +6.5 | 149.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 74-66 | -2.5 | W +5.5 | 162.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 64-74 | +10.5 | W +0.5 | 142.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 81-75 | -6.5 | L −0.5 | 142.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 88-73 | -5.5 | W +9.5 | 141.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 87-80 | +7.5 | W +14.5 | 158.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 61-71 | +3.5 | L −6.5 | 160.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 71-74 | +4.5 | W +1.5 | 144.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 61-71 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 144.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 82-89 | +8.5 | W +1.5 | 144.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 74-77 | +10.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 82-86 | -2.5 | L −6.5 | 156.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 54-71 | +4.5 | L −12.5 | 149.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 19 | vs | L 58-69 | +5.5 | L −5.5 | 144.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 76-78 | +2.5 | W +0.5 | 157.5 | U 154 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 92-102 | +5.5 | L −4.5 | 162.5 | O 194 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 88-87 | -3.5 | L −2.5 | 152.5 | O 175 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 70-76 | +1.5 | L −4.5 | 149.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 84-75 | +14.5 | W +23.5 | 150.5 | O 159 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
@
SDSU
L 45-77
−6.5
8
@
FRES
L 62-82
−13.5
12
@
PAC
L 66-69
+9.5
16
vs
ILST
L 80-82
+6.5
21
vs
MTST
L 72-78
−2.5
26
@
PORT
L 73-93
−14.5
30
vs
USD
W 76-72
+6.5
4
@
UCSB
L 77-84
+6.5
6
vs
UCSD
L 74-80
+2.5
9
@
SJSU
L 83-89
+1.5
18
vs
PEPP
W 81-78
−1.5
21
@
ISU
L 60-91
+6.5
3
vs
CP
W 74-66
+5.5
8
@
UCI
L 64-74
+0.5
10
vs
CSUB
W 81-75
−0.5
15
vs
UCR
W 88-73
+9.5
17
@
CSUN
W 87-80
+14.5
22
@
CSUF
L 61-71
−6.5
24
vs
UCSB
L 71-74
+1.5
29
@
UCR
L 61-71
−11.5
31
vs
HAW
L 82-89
+1.5
5
@
UCSD
L 74-77
+7.5
12
vs
CSUF
L 82-86
−6.5
14
@
UCD
L 54-71
−12.5
19
vs
UCI
L 58-69
−5.5
21
vs
CSUN
L 76-78
+0.5
26
@
CP
L 92-102
−4.5
28
@
CSUB
W 88-87
−2.5
5
vs
UCD
L 70-76
−4.5
7
@
HAW
W 84-75
+23.5
covered 16didn’t cover 14avg +0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
@
SDSU
L 45-77
−13.5
8
@
FRES
L 62-82
+1.5
12
@
PAC
L 66-69
−6.5
16
vs
ILST
L 80-82
+20.5
21
vs
MTST
L 72-78
+9.5
26
@
PORT
L 73-93
+17.5
30
vs
USD
W 76-72
+0.5
4
@
UCSB
L 77-84
+19.5
6
vs
UCSD
L 74-80
+8.5
9
@
SJSU
L 83-89
+30.5
18
vs
PEPP
W 81-78
+17.5
21
@
ISU
L 60-91
+1.5
3
vs
CP
W 74-66
−22.5
8
@
UCI
L 64-74
−4.5
10
vs
CSUB
W 81-75
+13.5
15
vs
UCR
W 88-73
+19.5
17
@
CSUN
W 87-80
+8.5
22
@
CSUF
L 61-71
−28.5
24
vs
UCSB
L 71-74
+0.5
29
@
UCR
L 61-71
−12.5
31
vs
HAW
L 82-89
+26.5
5
@
UCSD
L 74-77
+6.5
12
vs
CSUF
L 82-86
+11.5
14
@
UCD
L 54-71
−24.5
19
vs
UCI
L 58-69
−17.5
21
vs
CSUN
L 76-78
−3.5
26
@
CP
L 92-102
+31.5
28
@
CSUB
W 88-87
+22.5
5
vs
UCD
L 70-76
−3.5
7
@
HAW
W 84-75
+8.5
over 20under 10avg +4.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
San José St
32 games played
Straight up
8-24
25% wins
Against the spread
16-16
50% covers · avg +0.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
21-11
66% overs · avg +5.1 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 3 | @ | L 75-84 | +11.5 | W +2.5 | 146.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 8 | @ | L 74-85 | +9.5 | L −1.5 | 146.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 13 | @ | L 60-79 | +24.5 | W +5.5 | 143.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 80-66 | -5.5 | W +8.5 | 150.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 51-81 | +5.5 | L −24.5 | 149.5 | U 132 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 63-51 | -1.5 | W +10.5 | 136.5 | U 114 |
| Nov 30 | vs | L 63-72 | +3.5 | L −5.5 | 139.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 5 | vs | W 86-69 | -6.5 | W +10.5 | 144.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 9 | vs | W 89-83 | -7.5 | L −1.5 | 141.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 82-86 | +8.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | O 168 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 65-88 | +16.5 | L −6.5 | 152.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 30 | vs | L 68-81 | +11.5 | L −1.5 | 141.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 78-96 | +22.5 | W +4.5 | 151.5 | O 174 |
| Jan 6 | vs | L 55-70 | +1.5 | L −13.5 | 149.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 58-76 | +16.5 | L −1.5 | 141.5 | U 134 |
| Jan 13 | vs | W 70-62 | -5.5 | W +2.5 | 128.5 | O 132 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 62-76 | +7.5 | L −6.5 | 146.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 20 | @ | L 54-87 | +16.5 | L −16.5 | 137.5 | O 141 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 62-66 | +13.5 | W +9.5 | 141.5 | U 128 |
| Jan 27 | vs | L 58-89 | +12.5 | L −18.5 | 141.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 80-90 | +15.5 | W +5.5 | 148.5 | O 170 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 57-65 | +15.5 | W +7.5 | 138.5 | U 122 |
| Feb 10 | @ | L 75-82 | +12.5 | W +5.5 | 149.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 79-94 | +11.5 | L −3.5 | 139.5 | O 173 |
| Feb 17 | vs | W 87-71 | +10.5 | W +26.5 | 141.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 69-84 | +18.5 | W +3.5 | 146.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 24 | @ | W 86-80 | -6.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 166 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 73-85 | +4.5 | L −7.5 | 151.5 | O 158 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 68-82 | +7.5 | L −6.5 | 151.5 | U 150 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 78-88 | +6.5 | L −3.5 | 148.5 | O 166 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 84-74 | +14.5 | W +24.5 | 146.5 | O 158 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 77-93 | +16.5 | W +0.5 | 154.5 | O 170 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
UTAH
L 75-84
+2.5
8
@
UCSB
L 74-85
−1.5
13
@
MSU
L 60-79
+5.5
21
vs
SOU
W 80-66
+8.5
25
vs
TLSA
L 51-81
−24.5
26
vs
LUC
W 63-51
+10.5
30
vs
UCI
L 63-72
−5.5
5
vs
USD
W 86-69
+10.5
9
vs
LBSU
W 89-83
−1.5
13
vs
STAN
L 82-86
+4.5
20
@
UNM
L 65-88
−6.5
30
vs
SDSU
L 68-81
−1.5
3
@
USU
L 78-96
+4.5
6
vs
FRES
L 55-70
−13.5
10
@
GCU
L 58-76
−1.5
13
vs
AF
W 70-62
+2.5
17
vs
UNLV
L 62-76
−6.5
20
@
NEV
L 54-87
−16.5
24
@
WYO
L 62-66
+9.5
27
vs
BOIS
L 58-89
−18.5
31
vs
UNM
L 80-90
+5.5
7
@
CSU
L 57-65
+7.5
10
@
UNLV
L 75-82
+5.5
14
vs
GCU
L 79-94
−3.5
17
vs
NEV
W 87-71
+26.5
21
@
BOIS
L 69-84
+3.5
24
@
AF
W 86-80
−0.5
28
vs
CSU
L 73-85
−7.5
3
@
FRES
L 68-82
−6.5
7
vs
WYO
L 78-88
−3.5
11
vs
BOIS
W 84-74
+24.5
12
vs
UNM
L 77-93
+0.5
covered 16didn’t cover 16avg +0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
UTAH
L 75-84
+12.5
8
@
UCSB
L 74-85
+12.5
13
@
MSU
L 60-79
−4.5
21
vs
SOU
W 80-66
−4.5
25
vs
TLSA
L 51-81
−17.5
26
vs
LUC
W 63-51
−22.5
30
vs
UCI
L 63-72
−4.5
5
vs
USD
W 86-69
+10.5
9
vs
LBSU
W 89-83
+30.5
13
vs
STAN
L 82-86
+22.5
20
@
UNM
L 65-88
+0.5
30
vs
SDSU
L 68-81
+7.5
3
@
USU
L 78-96
+22.5
6
vs
FRES
L 55-70
−24.5
10
@
GCU
L 58-76
−7.5
13
vs
AF
W 70-62
+3.5
17
vs
UNLV
L 62-76
−8.5
20
@
NEV
L 54-87
+3.5
24
@
WYO
L 62-66
−13.5
27
vs
BOIS
L 58-89
+5.5
31
vs
UNM
L 80-90
+21.5
7
@
CSU
L 57-65
−16.5
10
@
UNLV
L 75-82
+7.5
14
vs
GCU
L 79-94
+33.5
17
vs
NEV
W 87-71
+16.5
21
@
BOIS
L 69-84
+6.5
24
@
AF
W 86-80
+20.5
28
vs
CSU
L 73-85
+6.5
3
@
FRES
L 68-82
−1.5
7
vs
WYO
L 78-88
+17.5
11
vs
BOIS
W 84-74
+11.5
12
vs
UNM
L 77-93
+15.5
over 21under 11avg +5.1 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: Long Beach St 0, San José St 0, even 5
Long Beach StBetterSan José St
G J. Payne TR6.9 pts · 3.7 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 40
=Even
G P. Goodarzi8.2 pts · 1.9 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 35
G Y. Sissoko TR2.7 pts · 1.8 reb · 1 ast
Score 32
=No call
G J. Hannah7.5 pts · 1 reb · 0.5 ast
Not ranked
G C. Jones3.1 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.4 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F Z. Eddine Bedri TR12.8 pts · 7.4 reb · 2.2 ast
Not ranked
F G. Brcic TR4.3 pts · 4.8 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 39
=No call
F R. Vaihola TR5 pts · 7.6 reb · 1.4 ast
Not ranked
C N. Amenhauser TR5.1 pts · 2.2 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 57
=Even
F M. Cook TR7.5 pts · 4 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 61
Long Beach StBetterSan José St
LBSU offense285th of 366 · -8.8
→SJSUBig
SJSU defense151st of 366 · -3.3
LBSU defense300th of 366 · -7.7
→SJSUBig
SJSU offense141st of 366 · -4.3
Backcourt-2.0 · 3 players
=Even
Backcourt-1.8 · 2 players
Frontcourt-0.3 · 2 players
→SJSUSmall
Frontcourt+2.3 · 3 players
Bench-1.9 · 2 players
→SJSUBig
Bench+1.4 · 3 players
Score, worst to bestLBSU betterSJSU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Payne22 min · TRY. Sissoko11 min · TRC. Jones10 minJ. TenganNewJ. GrayNewM. AdamsNew
Forwards
G. Brcic17 min · TRK. Smith8 min · TRJ. Chaikovsky6 minB. WrightNewH. LauNewM. VanlaninghamNew
Centers
N. Amenhauser12 min · TR
Guards
P. Goodarzi26 minJ. Hannah22 minM. Mason20 min · TRJ. Chammaa17 min · TRR. GreenNewC. KruegerNew
Forwards
Z. Eddine Bedri24 min · TRR. Vaihola21 min · TRM. Cook21 min · TRK. Martin8 min · TRL. HowardNew
Centers
M. Dau NyangolNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 73.2 #219 | Points per game | 70.8 #269 |
| 1.02 #303 | Points per possession | 1.07 #203 |
| 71.7 #46 | Pace (possessions) | 66.0 #315 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.6 #207 | Effective FG% | 49.7 #255 |
| 32.7 #245 | 3-point % | 35.3 #97 |
| 34.8 #280 | 3-point attempt rate | 38.3 #204 |
| 30.7 #287 | Free throw rate | 33.4 #225 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.0 #271 | Turnover rate | 15.1 #77 |
| 26.2 #315 | Offensive rebound rate | 29.3 #225 |
| 12.3 #264 | Assists per game | 10.3 #353 |
| Defense | ||
| 79.0 #297 | Points allowed | 79.2 #305 |
| 1.10 #220 | Points allowed per possession | 1.20 #359 |
| 53.7 #290 | Opponent effective FG% | 57.1 #359 |
| 34.4 #212 | Opponent 3-point % | 36.0 #305 |
| 17.5 #119 | Turnovers forced | 17.4 #123 |
| 72.2 #60 | Defensive rebound rate | 63.5 #354 |
| 6.5 #173 | Steals per game | 5.8 #259 |
| 2.9 #250 | Blocks per game | 2.2 #333 |
Long Beach St
8-22 in 2025-26 overall · 6-14 in conference · Big West Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- W@ Hawai'i84–75
- Lvs UC Davis70–76
- W@ Bakersfield88–87
- L@ Cal Poly92–102
- Lvs CSU Northridge76–78
A week or more of rest.
San José St
8-24 in 2025-26 overall · 4-18 in conference · Mountain West Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs New Mexico77–93
- Wvs Boise St84–74
- Lvs Wyoming78–88
- L@ Fresno St68–82
- Lvs Colorado St73–85
A week or more of rest.