Christl Arena · at Army
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | ARMY | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 MRST 72–70 · win probability MRST 55%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 141.8
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: MRST has more of the edges
MRST 4, ARMY 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Shooting
Effective FG%: MRST 49.3 and allows 45.6; ARMY 49.3 and allows 55.1
Three-pointers
MRST hits 32.2% and allows 28.6%; ARMY hits 32.0% and allows 35.5%. Threes are 34.6% and 53.3% of their shots
ARMY offense vs MRST defense
Offense 271st of 366 against a defense 135th, on the model’s ratings
Turnovers
Turnover rate: MRST 17.0%, ARMY 17.2%. Forced: MRST 19.4%, ARMY 15.4%
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: MRST 31%, ARMY 65%. Transfers in: MRST 1, ARMY 0. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Home court
ARMY at home. This season: ARMY 0-0 at home, MRST 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: MRST plays 66.8 a game (286th fastest), ARMY 68.6 (200th). Faster games mean more points
Context
Schedule so far
MRST has played the 339th-hardest schedule, ARMY the 302nd. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: MRST 25.7, ARMY 26.8. Allowed: MRST 37.6, ARMY 39.6
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: MRST 29.1%, ARMY 29.6%. Defensive: MRST 71.7%, ARMY 72.3%
Even
MRST offense vs ARMY defense
Offense 322nd of 366 against a defense 304th, on the model’s ratings
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 | — | MRST -1.4 | — |
| Total | — | 141.8 | — |
| Projected score | — | MRST 71.6 · ARMY 70.2 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | MRST -0.9 | — |
| 1H total | 66.4 | — |
| 1H projected score | MRST 33.6 · ARMY 32.7 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5-5 50% | 5-5 50% | 3-7 30% | |
| 2-8 20% | 1-9 10% | 5-5 50% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
MRST 3–1 ARMYMRST leads · 4 games since 2021-22 · MRST has won the last 3 meetings · MRST 1-3 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 21, 2025-26 | ARMY 65 @ MRST 76 | MRST -12.5 | ARMY W |
| Nov 15, 2024-25 | ARMY 88 @ MRST 91 | MRST -7.5 | ARMY W |
| Nov 6, 2023-24 | MRST 71 @ ARMY 55 | ARMY -0.5 | MRST W |
| Nov 27, 2021-22 | MRST 61 @ ARMY 65 | ARMY -3.5 | ARMY W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Marist
30 games played
Straight up
18-12
60% wins
Against the spread
15-15
50% covers · avg +1.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
11-19
37% overs · avg −3.5 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 62-66 | +12.5 | W +8.5 | 139.5 | U 128 |
| Nov 9 | @ | W 75-56 | +1.5 | W +20.5 | 138.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 16 | vs | L 54-56 | -6.5 | L −8.5 | 130.5 | U 110 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 76-65 | -12.5 | L −1.5 | 132.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 78-55 | -7.5 | W +15.5 | 132.5 | O 133 |
| Dec 5 | vs | W 64-56 | -8.5 | L −0.5 | 136.5 | U 120 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 80-68 | -7.5 | W +4.5 | 140.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 13 | @ | W 82-74 | -1.5 | W +6.5 | 131.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 76-87 | +6.5 | L −4.5 | 141.5 | O 163 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 70-51 | -6.5 | W +12.5 | 137.5 | U 121 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 58-64 | +2.5 | L −3.5 | 145.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 2 | @ | L 59-69 | -2.5 | L −12.5 | 133.5 | U 128 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 83-38 | -4.5 | W +40.5 | 148.5 | U 121 |
| Jan 9 | @ | W 76-72 | -5.5 | L −1.5 | 143.5 | O 148 |
| Jan 11 | @ | W 71-49 | -10.5 | W +11.5 | 131.5 | U 120 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 82-67 | -8.5 | W +6.5 | 141.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 19 | vs | L 55-68 | -6.5 | L −19.5 | 133.5 | U 123 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 50-69 | +1.5 | L −17.5 | 133.5 | U 119 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 71-64 | -3.5 | W +3.5 | 139.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 30 | @ | W 88-86 | -9.5 | L −7.5 | 129.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 1 | @ | W 58-46 | -9.5 | W +2.5 | 128.5 | U 104 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 81-52 | -14.5 | W +14.5 | 135.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 60-63 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 138.5 | U 123 |
| Feb 12 | @ | L 56-81 | +2.5 | L −22.5 | 128.5 | O 137 |
| Feb 15 | vs | L 63-67 | -2.5 | L −6.5 | 133.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 20 | @ | W 84-70 | -5.5 | W +8.5 | 142.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 22 | vs | W 65-63 | -7.5 | L −5.5 | 146.5 | U 128 |
| Mar 1 | vs | L 56-63 | -4.5 | L −11.5 | 132.5 | U 119 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 77-75 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 135.5 | O 152 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 57-58 | +2.5 | W +1.5 | 128.5 | U 115 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
XAV
L 62-66
+8.5
9
@
DART
W 75-56
+20.5
16
vs
HARV
L 54-56
−8.5
21
vs
ARMY
W 76-65
−1.5
25
vs
LEH
W 78-55
+15.5
5
vs
MSM
W 64-56
−0.5
7
vs
MAN
W 80-68
+4.5
13
@
BRY
W 82-74
+6.5
16
@
GT
L 76-87
−4.5
21
vs
STBK
W 70-51
+12.5
29
@
QUIN
L 58-64
−3.5
2
@
SPU
L 59-69
−12.5
4
vs
IONA
W 83-38
+40.5
9
@
SHU
W 76-72
−1.5
11
@
RID
W 71-49
+11.5
17
vs
FAIR
W 82-67
+6.5
19
vs
MRMK
L 55-68
−19.5
22
@
SIE
L 50-69
−17.5
24
vs
QUIN
W 71-64
+3.5
30
@
CAN
W 88-86
−7.5
1
@
NIA
W 58-46
+2.5
5
vs
RID
W 81-52
+14.5
7
@
FAIR
L 60-63
−4.5
12
@
MRMK
L 56-81
−22.5
15
vs
SIE
L 63-67
−6.5
20
@
MAN
W 84-70
+8.5
22
vs
SHU
W 65-63
−5.5
1
vs
SPU
L 56-63
−11.5
7
vs
QUIN
W 77-75
+3.5
8
vs
MRMK
L 57-58
+1.5
covered 15didn’t cover 15avg +1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
XAV
L 62-66
−11.5
9
@
DART
W 75-56
−7.5
16
vs
HARV
L 54-56
−20.5
21
vs
ARMY
W 76-65
+8.5
25
vs
LEH
W 78-55
+0.5
5
vs
MSM
W 64-56
−16.5
7
vs
MAN
W 80-68
+7.5
13
@
BRY
W 82-74
+24.5
16
@
GT
L 76-87
+21.5
21
vs
STBK
W 70-51
−16.5
29
@
QUIN
L 58-64
−23.5
2
@
SPU
L 59-69
−5.5
4
vs
IONA
W 83-38
−27.5
9
@
SHU
W 76-72
+4.5
11
@
RID
W 71-49
−11.5
17
vs
FAIR
W 82-67
+7.5
19
vs
MRMK
L 55-68
−10.5
22
@
SIE
L 50-69
−14.5
24
vs
QUIN
W 71-64
−4.5
30
@
CAN
W 88-86
+44.5
1
@
NIA
W 58-46
−24.5
5
vs
RID
W 81-52
−2.5
7
@
FAIR
L 60-63
−15.5
12
@
MRMK
L 56-81
+8.5
15
vs
SIE
L 63-67
−3.5
20
@
MAN
W 84-70
+11.5
22
vs
SHU
W 65-63
−18.5
1
vs
SPU
L 56-63
−13.5
7
vs
QUIN
W 77-75
+16.5
8
vs
MRMK
L 57-58
−13.5
over 11under 19avg −3.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Army
30 games played
Straight up
9-21
30% wins
Against the spread
12-18
40% covers · avg −1.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-13
57% overs · avg +3.5 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 8 | @ | L 76-83 | +18.5 | W +11.5 | 151.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 11 | vs | L 59-114 | +33.5 | L −21.5 | 152.5 | O 173 |
| Nov 15 | vs | L 52-75 | +6.5 | L −16.5 | 146.5 | U 127 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 73-86 | +17.5 | W +4.5 | 164.5 | U 159 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 65-76 | +12.5 | W +1.5 | 132.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 67-84 | +2.5 | L −14.5 | 143.5 | O 151 |
| Nov 26 | @ | W 81-73 | +4.5 | W +12.5 | 152.5 | O 154 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 81-78 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 152.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 2 | vs | L 70-84 | +19.5 | W +5.5 | 156.5 | U 154 |
| Dec 12 | @ | W 63-60 | +7.5 | W +10.5 | 146.5 | U 123 |
| Dec 23 | vs | W 95-85 | -12.5 | L −2.5 | 140.5 | O 180 |
| Dec 31 | @ | W 85-78 | +5.5 | W +12.5 | 146.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 69-76 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 7 | vs | L 76-84 | -4.5 | L −12.5 | 146.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 91-100 | +7.5 | L −1.5 | 140.5 | O 191 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 75-82 | +4.5 | L −2.5 | 142.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 18 | vs | L 67-78 | +4.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 21 | @ | W 87-84 | +4.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 56-84 | +10.5 | L −17.5 | 143.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 67-64 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 147.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 69-68 | -2.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 55-69 | +10.5 | L −3.5 | 150.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 60-63 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 142.5 | U 123 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 68-85 | +2.5 | L −14.5 | 140.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 63-75 | +9.5 | L −2.5 | 144.5 | U 138 |
| Feb 18 | @ | W 87-77 | +4.5 | W +14.5 | 149.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 63-81 | +8.5 | L −9.5 | 139.5 | O 144 |
| Feb 25 | vs | L 73-75 | -2.5 | L −4.5 | 142.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 77-83 | +3.5 | L −2.5 | 144.5 | O 160 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 55-65 | +1.5 | L −8.5 | 144.5 | U 120 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
@
STMN
L 76-83
+11.5
11
vs
DUKE
L 59-114
−21.5
15
vs
HARV
L 52-75
−16.5
18
@
COR
L 73-86
+4.5
21
@
MRST
L 65-76
+1.5
25
vs
ETAM
L 67-84
−14.5
26
@
FDU
W 81-73
+12.5
29
vs
MAN
W 81-78
+4.5
2
vs
GW
L 70-84
+5.5
12
@
UMBC
W 63-60
+10.5
23
vs
BING
W 95-85
−2.5
31
@
LEH
W 85-78
+12.5
3
vs
COLG
L 69-76
+0.5
7
vs
L-MD
L 76-84
−12.5
10
@
BU
L 91-100
−1.5
14
@
HC
L 75-82
−2.5
18
vs
AMER
L 67-78
−6.5
21
@
BUCK
W 87-84
+7.5
24
@
NAVY
L 56-84
−17.5
28
vs
LEH
W 67-64
+4.5
31
vs
HC
W 69-68
−1.5
4
@
COLG
L 55-69
−3.5
7
vs
LAF
L 60-63
−1.5
11
vs
BU
L 68-85
−14.5
14
@
AMER
L 63-75
−2.5
18
@
L-MD
W 87-77
+14.5
21
vs
NAVY
L 63-81
−9.5
25
vs
BUCK
L 73-75
−4.5
28
@
LAF
L 77-83
−2.5
3
@
BUCK
L 55-65
−8.5
covered 12didn’t cover 18avg −1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
@
STMN
L 76-83
+7.5
11
vs
DUKE
L 59-114
+20.5
15
vs
HARV
L 52-75
−19.5
18
@
COR
L 73-86
−5.5
21
@
MRST
L 65-76
+8.5
25
vs
ETAM
L 67-84
+7.5
26
@
FDU
W 81-73
+1.5
29
vs
MAN
W 81-78
+6.5
2
vs
GW
L 70-84
−2.5
12
@
UMBC
W 63-60
−23.5
23
vs
BING
W 95-85
+39.5
31
@
LEH
W 85-78
+16.5
3
vs
COLG
L 69-76
−2.5
7
vs
L-MD
L 76-84
+13.5
10
@
BU
L 91-100
+50.5
14
@
HC
L 75-82
+14.5
18
vs
AMER
L 67-78
−2.5
21
@
BUCK
W 87-84
+26.5
24
@
NAVY
L 56-84
−3.5
28
vs
LEH
W 67-64
−16.5
31
vs
HC
W 69-68
−7.5
4
@
COLG
L 55-69
−26.5
7
vs
LAF
L 60-63
−19.5
11
vs
BU
L 68-85
+12.5
14
@
AMER
L 63-75
−6.5
18
@
L-MD
W 87-77
+14.5
21
vs
NAVY
L 63-81
+4.5
25
vs
BUCK
L 73-75
+5.5
28
@
LAF
L 77-83
+15.5
3
@
BUCK
L 55-65
−24.5
over 17under 13avg +3.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Marist has the better starters
Position by position: Marist 2, Army 1, even 2
MaristBetterArmy
G J. Collins-Roberts7.3 pts · 4.6 reb · 3.2 ast
Score 27
→ARMYSmall
G R. Curry13.4 pts · 4.1 reb · 4.4 ast
Score 57
G J. Graham TR11.1 pts · 2.9 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 43
←MRSTSmall
G K. McCarthy7.2 pts · 2.6 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 13
F M. Parker5 pts · 2.3 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 59
←MRSTSmall
F J. Holloway10.7 pts · 3.6 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 37
C T. Watson6.1 pts · 2.3 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F T. Laczkowski5.3 pts · 5.2 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 38
C J. Gabriel2 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F D. Benner1.4 pts · 0.6 reb · 0.4 ast
Not ranked
MaristBetterArmy
MRST offense322nd of 366 · -10.5
=Even
ARMY defense304th of 366 · -7.8
MRST defense135th of 366 · -2.6
←MRSTBig
ARMY offense271st of 366 · -8.2
Backcourt-3.3 · 2 players
=Even
Backcourt-3.1 · 2 players
Frontcourt-0.0 · 3 players
←MRSTSmall
Frontcourt-2.6 · 3 players
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
Bench-1.0 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestMRST betterARMY betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Collins-Roberts31 minJ. Graham28 min · TRJ. WilliamsNewC. SweeneyNewB. ArnoldNewD. ChessNew
Forwards
M. Parker15 minE. OnyiaNewL. RodriguezNew
Centers
T. Watson11 minJ. Gabriel7 minL. FranzNew
Guards
R. Curry34 minK. McCarthy24 minD. Watt5 minJ. Green3 minB. O'Keefe2 minJ. EllisNew
Forwards
J. Holloway29 minT. Laczkowski22 minD. Benner6 minN. Ikechi3 minD. Murans3 minH. RasmussenNew
Centers
P. HendersonNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 68.9 #301 | Points per game | 70.8 #268 |
| 1.04 #276 | Points per possession | 1.03 #281 |
| 66.8 #286 | Pace (possessions) | 68.6 #200 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.3 #276 | Effective FG% | 49.3 #279 |
| 32.2 #272 | 3-point % | 32.0 #278 |
| 34.6 #285 | 3-point attempt rate | 53.3 #3 |
| 25.7 #360 | Free throw rate | 26.8 #352 |
| Possessions | ||
| 17.0 #202 | Turnover rate | 17.2 #221 |
| 29.1 #233 | Offensive rebound rate | 29.6 #219 |
| 15.0 #89 | Assists per game | 14.5 #118 |
| Defense | ||
| 63.9 #4 | Points allowed | 79.0 #298 |
| 0.95 #3 | Points allowed per possession | 1.15 #321 |
| 45.6 #5 | Opponent effective FG% | 55.1 #334 |
| 28.6 #2 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.5 #285 |
| 19.4 #35 | Turnovers forced | 15.4 #257 |
| 71.7 #77 | Defensive rebound rate | 72.3 #54 |
| 7.1 #116 | Steals per game | 5.4 #307 |
| 3.1 #200 | Blocks per game | 1.6 #359 |
Marist
18-12 in 2025-26 overall · 13-9 in conference · Metro Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Merrimack57–58
- Wvs Quinnipiac77–75
- Lvs Saint Peter's56–63
- Wvs Sacred Heart65–63
- W@ Manhattan84–70
A week or more of rest.
Army
9-21 in 2025-26 overall · 5-14 in conference · Patriot League
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Bucknell55–65
- L@ Lafayette77–83
- Lvs Bucknell73–75
- Lvs Navy63–81
- W@ Loyola MD87–77
A week or more of rest.