University Credit Union Center · at UC Davis
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | UCD | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 UCD 74–70 · win probability UCD 63%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 143.8
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: UCD has more of the edges
CBU 2, UCD 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: CBU 37.5%, UCD 25.2%. Defensive: CBU 72.8%, UCD 69.5%
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: CBU plays 68.3 a game (217th fastest), UCD 71.8 (39th). Faster games mean more points
CBU offense vs UCD defense
Offense 246th of 366 against a defense 171st, on the model’s ratings
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: CBU 18%, UCD 57%. Transfers in: CBU 2, UCD 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Turnovers
Turnover rate: CBU 18.0%, UCD 17.9%. Forced: CBU 16.9%, UCD 19.8%
Three-pointers
CBU hits 33.4% and allows 29.5%; UCD hits 34.4% and allows 33.8%. Threes are 32.0% and 43.5% of their shots
Home court
UCD at home. This season: UCD 0-0 at home, CBU 0-0 away
Even
UCD offense vs CBU defense
Offense 208th of 366 against a defense 178th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: CBU 35.9, UCD 40.5. Allowed: CBU 36.6, UCD 39.1
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: CBU 48.3 and allows 46.3; UCD 51.8 and allows 51.7
Context
Schedule so far
CBU has played the 202nd-hardest schedule, UCD the 189th. A record against a soft schedule means less
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 | — | UCD -3.9 | — |
| Total | — | 143.8 | — |
| Projected score | — | CBU 70 · UCD 73.9 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | UCD -2.2 | — |
| 1H total | 67.3 | — |
| 1H projected score | CBU 32.6 · UCD 34.7 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7-3 70% | 8-2 80% | 4-6 40% | |
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% |
Next 3 games
With how the last meeting with each opponent went
No more games listed yet.
No more games listed yet.
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
CA Baptist
34 games played
Straight up
25-9
74% wins
Against the spread
20-14
59% covers · avg +1.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
12-22
35% overs · avg −4.3 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 | vs | W 87-75 | -14.5 | L −2.5 | 152.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 7 | @ | W 69-61 | +8.5 | W +16.5 | 147.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 14 | vs | W 69-59 | -15.5 | L −5.5 | 140.5 | U 128 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 80-57 | -12.5 | W +10.5 | 142.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 72-59 | -14.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 76-61 | -7.5 | W +7.5 | 146.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 29 | @ | W 75-69 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 137.5 | O 144 |
| Dec 1 | @ | L 70-78 | +13.5 | W +5.5 | 150.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 60-91 | +18.5 | L −12.5 | 153.5 | U 151 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 85-91 | +5.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 176 |
| Dec 12 | @ | W 88-83 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 153.5 | O 171 |
| Dec 16 | vs | W 75-67 | -12.5 | L −4.5 | 155.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 74-67 | -14.5 | L −7.5 | 158.5 | U 141 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 66-73 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 148.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 51-63 | -2.5 | L −14.5 | 134.5 | U 114 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 76-81 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 147.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 84-72 | -7.5 | W +4.5 | 144.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 58-55 | -14.5 | L −11.5 | 150.5 | U 113 |
| Jan 15 | @ | W 74-58 | +1.5 | W +17.5 | 140.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 73-64 | -8.5 | W +0.5 | 143.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 78-71 | -1.5 | W +5.5 | 147.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 87-77 | -1.5 | W +8.5 | 134.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 56-55 | -10.5 | L −9.5 | 138.5 | U 111 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 65-63 | -8.5 | L −6.5 | 135.5 | U 128 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 83-66 | -5.5 | W +11.5 | 147.5 | O 149 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 65-70 | -2.5 | L −7.5 | 143.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 46-65 | +8.5 | L −10.5 | 142.5 | U 111 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 68-56 | -6.5 | W +5.5 | 134.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 82-67 | -8.5 | W +6.5 | 139.5 | O 149 |
| Mar 5 | vs | W 87-48 | -9.5 | W +29.5 | 136.5 | U 135 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 82-75 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 148.5 | O 157 |
| Mar 13 | vs | W 86-72 | -8.5 | W +5.5 | 144.5 | O 158 |
| Mar 14 | vs | W 63-61 | +2.5 | W +4.5 | 139.5 | U 124 |
| Mar 20 | vs | L 60-68 | +14.5 | W +6.5 | 142.5 | U 128 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
UPST
W 87-75
−2.5
7
@
UCI
W 69-61
+16.5
14
vs
WIU
W 69-59
−5.5
18
vs
UCR
W 80-57
+10.5
21
vs
GRAM
W 72-59
−1.5
25
vs
USD
W 76-61
+7.5
29
@
ORST
W 75-69
+7.5
1
@
COLO
L 70-78
+5.5
3
@
BYU
L 60-91
−12.5
6
@
UTAH
L 85-91
−0.5
12
@
EWU
W 88-83
+1.5
16
vs
SOU
W 75-67
−4.5
20
vs
SAC
W 74-67
−7.5
29
@
UVU
L 66-73
+0.5
1
@
UTA
L 51-63
−14.5
3
@
TAR
L 76-81
−3.5
8
vs
UTU
W 84-72
+4.5
10
vs
SUU
W 58-55
−11.5
15
@
ACU
W 74-58
+17.5
21
vs
UTU
W 73-64
+0.5
24
vs
UVU
W 78-71
+5.5
31
@
UTA
W 87-77
+8.5
5
vs
TAR
W 56-55
−9.5
7
vs
ACU
W 65-63
−6.5
12
@
SUU
W 83-66
+11.5
14
@
UTU
L 65-70
−7.5
19
@
UVU
L 46-65
−10.5
26
vs
UTA
W 68-56
+5.5
28
vs
TAR
W 82-67
+6.5
5
vs
ACU
W 87-48
+29.5
7
@
SUU
W 82-75
+0.5
13
vs
UTU
W 86-72
+5.5
14
vs
UVU
W 63-61
+4.5
20
vs
KU
L 60-68
+6.5
covered 20didn’t cover 14avg +1.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
UPST
W 87-75
+9.5
7
@
UCI
W 69-61
−17.5
14
vs
WIU
W 69-59
−12.5
18
vs
UCR
W 80-57
−5.5
21
vs
GRAM
W 72-59
−13.5
25
vs
USD
W 76-61
−9.5
29
@
ORST
W 75-69
+6.5
1
@
COLO
L 70-78
−2.5
3
@
BYU
L 60-91
−2.5
6
@
UTAH
L 85-91
+30.5
12
@
EWU
W 88-83
+17.5
16
vs
SOU
W 75-67
−13.5
20
vs
SAC
W 74-67
−17.5
29
@
UVU
L 66-73
−9.5
1
@
UTA
L 51-63
−20.5
3
@
TAR
L 76-81
+9.5
8
vs
UTU
W 84-72
+11.5
10
vs
SUU
W 58-55
−37.5
15
@
ACU
W 74-58
−8.5
21
vs
UTU
W 73-64
−6.5
24
vs
UVU
W 78-71
+1.5
31
@
UTA
W 87-77
+29.5
5
vs
TAR
W 56-55
−27.5
7
vs
ACU
W 65-63
−7.5
12
@
SUU
W 83-66
+1.5
14
@
UTU
L 65-70
−8.5
19
@
UVU
L 46-65
−31.5
26
vs
UTA
W 68-56
−10.5
28
vs
TAR
W 82-67
+9.5
5
vs
ACU
W 87-48
−1.5
7
@
SUU
W 82-75
+8.5
13
vs
UTU
W 86-72
+13.5
14
vs
UVU
W 63-61
−15.5
20
vs
KU
L 60-68
−14.5
over 12under 22avg −4.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
UC Davis
31 games played
Straight up
17-14
55% wins
Against the spread
17-13
57% covers · avg +1.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-13
57% 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 5 | vs | W 80-68 | -1.5 | W +10.5 | 142.5 | O 148 |
| Nov 9 | @ | L 63-67 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 151.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 14 | vs | W 77-73 | -4.5 | L −0.5 | 151.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 18 | @ | W 75-71 | +12.5 | W +16.5 | 143.5 | O 146 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 79-95 | +14.5 | L −1.5 | 152.5 | O 174 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 77-56 | -9.5 | W +11.5 | 136.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 4 | @ | L 69-75 | — | — | — | — |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 62-104 | +13.5 | L −28.5 | 146.5 | O 166 |
| Dec 17 | vs | L 78-79 | +2.5 | W +1.5 | 143.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 21 | @ | W 93-83 | +5.5 | W +15.5 | 143.5 | O 176 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 89-80 | -3.5 | W +5.5 | 162.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 79-81 | -9.5 | L −11.5 | 151.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 8 | @ | W 93-86 | +4.5 | W +11.5 | 147.5 | O 179 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 78-84 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 168.5 | U 162 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 74-69 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 166.5 | U 143 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 75-72 | +3.5 | W +6.5 | 148.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 22 | vs | L 74-80 | +1.5 | L −4.5 | 152.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 74-66 | -9.5 | L −1.5 | 149.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 78-94 | +3.5 | L −12.5 | 163.5 | O 172 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 80-72 | -5.5 | W +2.5 | 152.5 | U 152 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 85-75 | +3.5 | W +13.5 | 147.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 67-58 | -5.5 | W +3.5 | 169.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 12 | @ | L 51-68 | +5.5 | L −11.5 | 150.5 | U 119 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 71-54 | -4.5 | W +12.5 | 149.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 92-93 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 156.5 | O 185 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 78-73 | -2.5 | W +2.5 | 149.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 26 | vs | L 73-77 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 146.5 | O 150 |
| Mar 5 | @ | W 76-70 | -1.5 | W +4.5 | 149.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 69-79 | +7.5 | L −2.5 | 144.5 | O 148 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 79-73 | +4.5 | W +10.5 | 139.5 | O 152 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 70-82 | +1.5 | L −10.5 | 155.5 | U 152 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
5
vs
NDSU
W 80-68
+10.5
9
@
PORT
L 63-67
−2.5
14
vs
SAC
W 77-73
−0.5
18
@
NEV
W 75-71
+16.5
21
@
COLO
L 79-95
−1.5
24
vs
UL
W 77-56
+11.5
13
@
ORE
L 62-104
−28.5
17
vs
SEA
L 78-79
+1.5
21
@
IDST
W 93-83
+15.5
1
vs
CSUN
W 89-80
+5.5
3
vs
CSUB
L 79-81
−11.5
8
@
UCSB
W 93-86
+11.5
10
@
CP
L 78-84
−7.5
15
vs
CSUF
W 74-69
+1.5
17
vs
UCI
W 75-72
+6.5
22
vs
UCSD
L 74-80
−4.5
24
vs
UCR
W 74-66
−1.5
29
@
CSUN
L 78-94
−12.5
31
@
CSUB
W 80-72
+2.5
5
vs
UCSB
W 85-75
+13.5
7
vs
CP
W 67-58
+3.5
12
@
UCSD
L 51-68
−11.5
14
vs
LBSU
W 71-54
+12.5
19
@
CSUF
L 92-93
+0.5
21
@
UCR
W 78-73
+2.5
26
vs
HAW
L 73-77
−2.5
5
@
LBSU
W 76-70
+4.5
7
@
UCI
L 69-79
−2.5
11
vs
UCSB
W 79-73
+10.5
12
vs
CSUF
L 70-82
−10.5
covered 17didn’t cover 13avg +1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
5
vs
NDSU
W 80-68
+5.5
9
@
PORT
L 63-67
−21.5
14
vs
SAC
W 77-73
−1.5
18
@
NEV
W 75-71
+2.5
21
@
COLO
L 79-95
+21.5
24
vs
UL
W 77-56
−3.5
13
@
ORE
L 62-104
+19.5
17
vs
SEA
L 78-79
+13.5
21
@
IDST
W 93-83
+32.5
1
vs
CSUN
W 89-80
+6.5
3
vs
CSUB
L 79-81
+8.5
8
@
UCSB
W 93-86
+31.5
10
@
CP
L 78-84
−6.5
15
vs
CSUF
W 74-69
−23.5
17
vs
UCI
W 75-72
−1.5
22
vs
UCSD
L 74-80
+1.5
24
vs
UCR
W 74-66
−9.5
29
@
CSUN
L 78-94
+8.5
31
@
CSUB
W 80-72
−0.5
5
vs
UCSB
W 85-75
+12.5
7
vs
CP
W 67-58
−44.5
12
@
UCSD
L 51-68
−31.5
14
vs
LBSU
W 71-54
−24.5
19
@
CSUF
L 92-93
+28.5
21
@
UCR
W 78-73
+1.5
26
vs
HAW
L 73-77
+3.5
5
@
LBSU
W 76-70
−3.5
7
@
UCI
L 69-79
+3.5
11
vs
UCSB
W 79-73
+12.5
12
vs
CSUF
L 70-82
−3.5
over 17under 13avg +1.3 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: CA Baptist 1, UC Davis 1, even 3
CA BaptistBetterUC Davis
G E. Duncan TR10.8 pts · 1.9 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 67
←CBUSmall
G C. Sevilla13.2 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 45
G J. Muller4.4 pts · 1 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 7
→UCDBig
G B. Fagbemi6.8 pts · 3.3 reb · 4.3 ast
Score 53
G J. Dollar1.9 pts · 0.3 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F I. Chappell8.4 pts · 4.6 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 26
F R. D'Amelio2.6 pts · 3 reb · 0.2 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F V. Abosi TR4.8 pts · 4 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 43
F N. Richart TR0.3 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F O. Suljanovic5.3 pts · 2.6 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 12
CA BaptistBetterUC Davis
CBU offense246th of 366 · -7.5
→UCDSmall
UCD defense171st of 366 · -3.9
CBU defense178th of 366 · -4.0
=Even
UCD offense208th of 366 · -6.3
Backcourt-2.2 · 3 players
=Even
Backcourt-1.5 · 2 players
Frontcourt-0.8 · 2 players
←CBUSmall
Frontcourt-3.5 · 3 players
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
Bench-2.2 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestCBU betterUCD betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
E. Duncan21 min · TRJ. Muller21 minJ. Dollar5 minT. ConerNewJ. StonkusNewO. BlanksonNew
Forwards
R. D'Amelio11 minN. Richart7 min · TRA. MilenkovicNewJ. ZilinskasNewA. SafinNew
Centers
M. KovacNew
Guards
C. Sevilla32 minB. Fagbemi26 minJ. Stokes14 minC. Rawlins4 minC. Massamba4 min · TRY. Esso-EssisNew
Forwards
I. Chappell24 minV. Abosi17 min · TRO. Suljanovic14 minJ. Margrave10 min · TRN. NobleNewJ. DabrowskiNew
Centers
A. Szymczyk7 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 72.7 #230 | Points per game | 76.1 #139 |
| 1.07 #209 | Points per possession | 1.06 #234 |
| 68.3 #217 | Pace (possessions) | 71.8 #39 |
| Shooting | ||
| 48.3 #308 | Effective FG% | 51.8 #157 |
| 33.4 #200 | 3-point % | 34.4 #149 |
| 32.0 #330 | 3-point attempt rate | 43.5 #102 |
| 35.9 #154 | Free throw rate | 40.5 #53 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.0 #270 | Turnover rate | 17.9 #267 |
| 37.5 #13 | Offensive rebound rate | 25.2 #334 |
| 10.2 #355 | Assists per game | 15.1 #83 |
| Defense | ||
| 67.6 #28 | Points allowed | 76.0 #217 |
| 0.99 #18 | Points allowed per possession | 1.06 #104 |
| 46.3 #16 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.7 #197 |
| 29.5 #5 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.8 #172 |
| 16.9 #159 | Turnovers forced | 19.8 #29 |
| 72.8 #41 | Defensive rebound rate | 69.5 #182 |
| 5.5 #296 | Steals per game | 7.5 #81 |
| 2.9 #253 | Blocks per game | 2.7 #276 |
CA Baptist
25-9 in 2025-26 overall · 15-5 in conference · Big West Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Kansas60–68
- Wvs Utah Valley63–61
- Wvs Utah Tech86–72
- W@ Southern Utah82–75
- Wvs Abilene Chrstn87–48
A week or more of rest.
UC Davis
17-14 in 2025-26 overall · 12-10 in conference · Mountain West Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Fullerton70–82
- Wvs Santa Barbara79–73
- L@ UC Irvine69–79
- W@ Long Beach St76–70
- Lvs Hawai'i73–77
A week or more of rest.