J. Lawrence Walkup Skydome · at N Arizona · Conference game
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | NAU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 MONT 73–73 · win probability MONT 52%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 145.4
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: MONT has more of the edges
MONT 4, NAU 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Shooting
Effective FG%: MONT 55.8 and allows 50.5; NAU 51.7 and allows 56.9
Turnovers
Turnover rate: MONT 19.5%, NAU 16.0%. Forced: MONT 14.3%, NAU 16.6%
Three-pointers
MONT hits 36.6% and allows 32.3%; NAU hits 35.6% and allows 38.7%. Threes are 41.8% and 36.6% of their shots
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: MONT plays 71.1 a game (72nd fastest), NAU 65.5 (330th). Faster games mean more points
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: MONT 20.7%, NAU 23.3%. Defensive: MONT 70.4%, NAU 66.6%
Free throws
Free throw rate: MONT 36.8, NAU 31.8. Allowed: MONT 32.6, NAU 32.7
Home court
NAU at home. This season: NAU 0-0 at home, MONT 0-0 away
Even
MONT offense vs NAU defense
Offense 256th of 366 against a defense 292nd, on the model’s ratings
Even
NAU offense vs MONT defense
Offense 330th of 366 against a defense 294th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
MONT has played the 250th-hardest schedule, NAU the 275th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: MONT 39%, NAU 40%. Transfers in: MONT 0, NAU 3. 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 | — | MONT -0.5 | — |
| Total | — | 145.4 | — |
| Projected score | — | MONT 73 · NAU 72.5 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | MONT -0.4 | — |
| 1H total | 68.0 | — |
| 1H projected score | MONT 34.2 · NAU 33.8 | — |
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% | 5-5 50% | |
| 2-8 20% | 3-7 30% | 3-7 30% |
Recent meetings
Last 5 of 12 since 2021-22
MONT 9–3 NAUMONT leads · 12 games since 2021-22 · MONT has won the last 7 meetings · MONT 7-5 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 19, 2025-26 | MONT 98 @ NAU 72 | NAU +3.5 | MONT W |
| Jan 1, 2025-26 | NAU 64 @ MONT 78 | MONT -5.5 | MONT W |
| Mar 9, 2024-25 | NAU 65 vs MONT 74 | MONT -5.5 | MONT W |
| Feb 8, 2024-25 | MONT 83 @ NAU 80 | NAU +1.5 | MONT W |
| Jan 9, 2024-25 | NAU 76 @ MONT 81 | MONT -7.5 | NAU W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Montana
30 games played
Straight up
15-15
50% wins
Against the spread
16-14
53% covers · avg −0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-16
47% overs · avg −0.4 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 8 | @ | L 68-91 | +12.5 | L −10.5 | 150.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 11 | @ | W 102-93 | +10.5 | W +19.5 | 157.5 | O 195 |
| Nov 14 | vs | W 90-82 | -7.5 | W +0.5 | 168.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 81-86 | +17.5 | W +12.5 | 164.5 | O 167 |
| Nov 23 | vs | L 63-68 | -4.5 | L −9.5 | 148.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 87-95 | -4.5 | L −12.5 | 162.5 | O 182 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 72-81 | -3.5 | L −12.5 | 153.5 | U 153 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 79-75 | -5.5 | L −1.5 | 154.5 | U 154 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 54-94 | +30.5 | L −9.5 | 166.5 | U 148 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 78-64 | -5.5 | W +8.5 | 149.5 | U 142 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 88-79 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 161.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 8 | @ | W 79-73 | +4.5 | W +10.5 | 154.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 65-66 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 161.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 67-76 | +5.5 | L −3.5 | 150.5 | U 143 |
| Jan 19 | @ | W 98-72 | -3.5 | W +22.5 | 146.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 81-65 | -4.5 | W +11.5 | 157.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 69-60 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 148.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 29 | @ | W 64-60 | +4.5 | W +8.5 | 143.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 79-86 | -3.5 | L −10.5 | 155.5 | O 165 |
| Feb 5 | vs | L 74-82 | -5.5 | L −13.5 | 151.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 73-68 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 152.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 71-82 | -2.5 | L −13.5 | 145.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 69-73 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 149.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 72-92 | +2.5 | L −17.5 | 152.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 81-73 | -7.5 | W +0.5 | 161.5 | U 154 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 74-68 | -1.5 | W +4.5 | 141.5 | O 142 |
| Mar 2 | @ | L 57-85 | +5.5 | L −22.5 | 154.5 | U 142 |
| Mar 9 | vs | W 95-89 | +4.5 | W +10.5 | 152.5 | O 184 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 75-72 | +3.5 | W +6.5 | 145.5 | O 147 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 66-77 | +3.5 | L −7.5 | 147.5 | U 143 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
@
STAN
L 68-91
−10.5
11
@
UNLV
W 102-93
+19.5
14
vs
CP
W 90-82
+0.5
18
@
TA&M
L 81-86
+12.5
23
vs
LAM
L 63-68
−9.5
25
vs
OAK
L 87-95
−12.5
3
vs
NDSU
L 72-81
−12.5
6
@
UND
W 79-75
−1.5
20
@
LOU
L 54-94
−9.5
1
vs
NAU
W 78-64
+8.5
3
vs
UNCO
W 88-79
+10.5
8
@
IDHO
W 79-73
+10.5
10
@
EWU
L 65-66
+0.5
17
@
MTST
L 67-76
−3.5
19
@
NAU
W 98-72
+22.5
22
vs
WEB
W 81-65
+11.5
24
vs
IDST
W 69-60
+4.5
29
@
PRST
W 64-60
+8.5
31
@
SAC
L 79-86
−10.5
5
vs
EWU
L 74-82
−13.5
7
vs
IDHO
W 73-68
+3.5
14
vs
MTST
L 71-82
−13.5
19
@
IDST
L 69-73
−5.5
21
@
WEB
L 72-92
−17.5
26
vs
SAC
W 81-73
+0.5
28
vs
PRST
W 74-68
+4.5
2
@
UNCO
L 57-85
−22.5
9
vs
UNCO
W 95-89
+10.5
10
vs
PRST
W 75-72
+6.5
11
vs
IDHO
L 66-77
−7.5
covered 16didn’t cover 14avg −0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
@
STAN
L 68-91
+8.5
11
@
UNLV
W 102-93
+37.5
14
vs
CP
W 90-82
+3.5
18
@
TA&M
L 81-86
+2.5
23
vs
LAM
L 63-68
−17.5
25
vs
OAK
L 87-95
+19.5
3
vs
NDSU
L 72-81
−0.5
6
@
UND
W 79-75
−0.5
20
@
LOU
L 54-94
−18.5
1
vs
NAU
W 78-64
−7.5
3
vs
UNCO
W 88-79
+5.5
8
@
IDHO
W 79-73
−2.5
10
@
EWU
L 65-66
−30.5
17
@
MTST
L 67-76
−7.5
19
@
NAU
W 98-72
+23.5
22
vs
WEB
W 81-65
−11.5
24
vs
IDST
W 69-60
−19.5
29
@
PRST
W 64-60
−19.5
31
@
SAC
L 79-86
+9.5
5
vs
EWU
L 74-82
+4.5
7
vs
IDHO
W 73-68
−11.5
14
vs
MTST
L 71-82
+7.5
19
@
IDST
L 69-73
−7.5
21
@
WEB
L 72-92
+11.5
26
vs
SAC
W 81-73
−7.5
28
vs
PRST
W 74-68
+0.5
2
@
UNCO
L 57-85
−12.5
9
vs
UNCO
W 95-89
+31.5
10
vs
PRST
W 75-72
+1.5
11
vs
IDHO
L 66-77
−4.5
over 14under 16avg −0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
N Arizona
29 games played
Straight up
7-22
24% wins
Against the spread
14-15
48% covers · avg −2.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
11-18
38% overs · avg −2.3 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 | L 71-77 | +8.5 | W +2.5 | 144.5 | O 148 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 49-84 | +35.5 | W +0.5 | 163.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 93-87 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 164.5 | O 180 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 79-72 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 153.5 | U 151 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 62-75 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 148.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 68-69 | +12.5 | W +11.5 | 147.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 9 | @ | L 48-73 | +16.5 | L −8.5 | 154.5 | U 121 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 69-78 | +4.5 | L −4.5 | 149.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 18 | vs | W 65-57 | -5.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 122 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 66-90 | +6.5 | L −17.5 | 140.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 64-78 | +5.5 | L −8.5 | 149.5 | U 142 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 68-77 | +10.5 | W +1.5 | 143.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 8 | vs | L 65-78 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 149.5 | U 143 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 79-81 | +4.5 | W +2.5 | 139.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 15 | @ | L 69-83 | +1.5 | L −12.5 | 153.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 52-63 | +11.5 | W +0.5 | 140.5 | U 115 |
| Jan 19 | vs | L 72-98 | +3.5 | L −22.5 | 146.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 81-77 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 150.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 92-86 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 145.5 | O 178 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 62-79 | +5.5 | L −11.5 | 146.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 5 | @ | W 79-73 | +8.5 | W +14.5 | 141.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 53-72 | +7.5 | L −11.5 | 150.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 68-77 | +6.5 | L −2.5 | 136.5 | O 145 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 79-74 | -2.5 | W +2.5 | 154.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 77-78 | +13.5 | W +12.5 | 151.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 58-78 | +10.5 | L −9.5 | 145.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 57-88 | +9.5 | L −21.5 | 146.5 | U 145 |
| Mar 2 | vs | L 65-76 | +5.5 | L −5.5 | 142.5 | U 141 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 65-73 | +4.5 | L −3.5 | 142.5 | U 138 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
DRKE
L 71-77
+2.5
11
@
ARIZ
L 49-84
+0.5
24
vs
CP
W 93-87
+7.5
26
vs
SEMO
W 79-72
+4.5
3
vs
SDST
L 62-75
−10.5
6
@
NDSU
L 68-69
+11.5
9
@
ASU
L 48-73
−8.5
13
@
USD
L 69-78
−4.5
18
vs
SUU
W 65-57
+2.5
21
@
UIW
L 66-90
−17.5
1
@
MONT
L 64-78
−8.5
3
@
MTST
L 68-77
+1.5
8
vs
WEB
L 65-78
−10.5
10
vs
IDST
L 79-81
+2.5
15
@
SAC
L 69-83
−12.5
17
@
PRST
L 52-63
+0.5
19
vs
MONT
L 72-98
−22.5
24
vs
UNCO
W 81-77
+10.5
29
vs
EWU
W 92-86
+8.5
31
vs
IDHO
L 62-79
−11.5
5
@
IDST
W 79-73
+14.5
7
@
WEB
L 53-72
−11.5
12
vs
PRST
L 68-77
−2.5
14
vs
SAC
W 79-74
+2.5
21
@
UNCO
L 77-78
+12.5
26
@
IDHO
L 58-78
−9.5
28
@
EWU
L 57-88
−21.5
2
vs
MTST
L 65-76
−5.5
7
vs
IDST
L 65-73
−3.5
covered 14didn’t cover 15avg −2.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
DRKE
L 71-77
+3.5
11
@
ARIZ
L 49-84
−30.5
24
vs
CP
W 93-87
+15.5
26
vs
SEMO
W 79-72
−2.5
3
vs
SDST
L 62-75
−11.5
6
@
NDSU
L 68-69
−10.5
9
@
ASU
L 48-73
−33.5
13
@
USD
L 69-78
−2.5
18
vs
SUU
W 65-57
−28.5
21
@
UIW
L 66-90
+15.5
1
@
MONT
L 64-78
−7.5
3
@
MTST
L 68-77
+1.5
8
vs
WEB
L 65-78
−6.5
10
vs
IDST
L 79-81
+20.5
15
@
SAC
L 69-83
−1.5
17
@
PRST
L 52-63
−25.5
19
vs
MONT
L 72-98
+23.5
24
vs
UNCO
W 81-77
+7.5
29
vs
EWU
W 92-86
+32.5
31
vs
IDHO
L 62-79
−5.5
5
@
IDST
W 79-73
+10.5
7
@
WEB
L 53-72
−25.5
12
vs
PRST
L 68-77
+8.5
14
vs
SAC
W 79-74
−1.5
21
@
UNCO
L 77-78
+3.5
26
@
IDHO
L 58-78
−9.5
28
@
EWU
L 57-88
−1.5
2
vs
MTST
L 65-76
−1.5
7
vs
IDST
L 65-73
−4.5
over 11under 18avg −2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
N Arizona has the better starters
Position by position: Montana 0, N Arizona 1, even 4
MontanaBetterN Arizona
G T. Thompson8.4 pts · 3.9 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 24
→NAUSmall
G R. Abelman10.9 pts · 4.9 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 42
G C. Anderson5.6 pts · 1 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G C. Komin8 pts · 2.2 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 50
G C. Dick1.6 pts · 1.2 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G B. Peterson4.4 pts · 0.7 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 7
F K. Aguino8.6 pts · 4.1 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 48
=No call
G M. Majerle TR0.7 pts · 0.9 reb · 0.4 ast
Not ranked
F A. Jedkins0.9 pts · 0.9 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F D. Anderson TR1.5 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 6
MontanaBetterN Arizona
MONT offense256th of 366 · -7.8
=Even
NAU defense292nd of 366 · -7.4
MONT defense294th of 366 · -7.4
=Even
NAU offense330th of 366 · -10.7
Backcourt-3.2 · 3 players
←MONTSmall
Backcourt-5.2 · 4 players
Frontcourt-0.9 · 2 players
=Even
Frontcourt-0.8 · 1 player
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
Bench+0.1 · 2 players
Score, worst to bestMONT betterNAU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
T. Thompson30 minC. Anderson10 minC. Dick9 minG. DutroNewJ. BrownNewJ. ClarkNew
Forwards
K. Aguino24 minA. Jedkins5 minJ. SandersNewC. MpianaNew
Guards
R. Abelman33 minC. Komin27 minB. Peterson20 minM. Majerle5 min · TRC. Bennett3 min · TRJ. Amundsen1 min
Forwards
D. Anderson7 min · TRL. WieskampNewT. GreenNewL. ToukamNewZ. TannerNew
Centers
N. KeutchaNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 75.7 #148 | Points per game | 68.1 #311 |
| 1.06 #216 | Points per possession | 1.04 #271 |
| 71.1 #72 | Pace (possessions) | 65.5 #330 |
| Shooting | ||
| 55.8 #23 | Effective FG% | 51.7 #161 |
| 36.6 #38 | 3-point % | 35.6 #79 |
| 41.8 #138 | 3-point attempt rate | 36.6 #236 |
| 36.8 #135 | Free throw rate | 31.8 #260 |
| Possessions | ||
| 19.5 #339 | Turnover rate | 16.0 #140 |
| 20.7 #363 | Offensive rebound rate | 23.3 #348 |
| 14.3 #125 | Assists per game | 12.5 #251 |
| Defense | ||
| 77.6 #254 | Points allowed | 77.6 #257 |
| 1.09 #204 | Points allowed per possession | 1.18 #351 |
| 50.5 #129 | Opponent effective FG% | 56.9 #355 |
| 32.3 #74 | Opponent 3-point % | 38.7 #362 |
| 14.3 #326 | Turnovers forced | 16.6 #181 |
| 70.4 #143 | Defensive rebound rate | 66.6 #305 |
| 5.4 #306 | Steals per game | 6.3 #194 |
| 2.4 #313 | Blocks per game | 2.7 #287 |
Montana
15-15 in 2025-26 overall · 12-9 in conference · Big Sky Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Idaho66–77
- Wvs Portland St75–72
- Wvs N Colorado95–89
- L@ N Colorado57–85
- Wvs Portland St74–68
A week or more of rest.
N Arizona
7-22 in 2025-26 overall · 4-15 in conference · Big Sky Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Idaho St65–73
- Lvs Montana St65–76
- L@ E Washington57–88
- L@ Idaho58–78
- L@ N Colorado77–78
A week or more of rest.