Redhawk Center · at Seattle U
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SEA | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SEA 80–61 · win probability SEA 95%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 140.7
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: SEA has more of the edges
NORF 1, SEA 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
NORF offense vs SEA defense
Offense 314th of 366 against a defense 76th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
NORF has played the 343rd-hardest schedule, SEA the 114th. A record against a soft schedule means less
SEA offense vs NORF defense
Offense 183rd of 366 against a defense 301st, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: NORF 32.5%, SEA 23.7%. Defensive: NORF 67.7%, SEA 68.2%
Turnovers
Turnover rate: NORF 18.7%, SEA 16.7%. Forced: NORF 18.8%, SEA 21.2%
Shooting
Effective FG%: NORF 49.3 and allows 51.7; SEA 49.8 and allows 48.4
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: NORF 8%, SEA 50%. Transfers in: NORF 4, SEA 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Home court
SEA at home. This season: SEA 0-0 at home, NORF 0-0 away
Even
Three-pointers
NORF hits 34.2% and allows 32.0%; SEA hits 33.7% and allows 32.1%. Threes are 30.6% and 39.4% of their shots
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: NORF 43.5, SEA 34.2. Allowed: NORF 45.3, SEA 33.0
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: NORF plays 69.1 a game (172nd fastest), SEA 69.1 (175th). Faster games mean more points
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 | — | SEA -18.8 | — |
| Total | — | 140.7 | — |
| Projected score | — | NORF 60.9 · SEA 79.7 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SEA -11.1 | — |
| 1H total | 65.8 | — |
| 1H projected score | NORF 27.4 · SEA 38.4 | — |
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% | 7-3 70% | |
| 6-4 60% | 7-3 70% | 5-5 50% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Norfolk St
28 games played
Straight up
11-17
39% wins
Against the spread
13-15
46% covers · avg −0.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
18-10
64% overs · avg +4.5 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 | vs | L 78-81 | +2.5 | L −0.5 | 158.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 57-60 | +8.5 | W +5.5 | 149.5 | U 117 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 41-51 | +13.5 | W +3.5 | 138.5 | U 92 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 62-60 | -2.5 | L −0.5 | 133.5 | U 122 |
| Nov 23 | @ | L 67-75 | +15.5 | W +7.5 | 141.5 | O 142 |
| Nov 29 | @ | L 61-98 | +35.5 | L −1.5 | 146.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 67-68 | +10.5 | W +9.5 | 138.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 10 | @ | L 67-97 | +26.5 | L −3.5 | 148.5 | O 164 |
| Dec 18 | vs | L 68-80 | -1.5 | L −13.5 | 135.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 19 | vs | W 82-72 | -5.5 | W +4.5 | 140.5 | O 154 |
| Dec 21 | @ | W 72-71 | +10.5 | W +11.5 | 136.5 | O 143 |
| Dec 22 | vs | L 70-89 | +11.5 | L −7.5 | 136.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 28 | @ | L 54-63 | +3.5 | L −5.5 | 126.5 | U 117 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 67-69 | -1.5 | L −3.5 | 141.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 66-64 | -4.5 | L −2.5 | 132.5 | U 130 |
| Jan 12 | vs | L 70-74 | -5.5 | L −9.5 | 132.5 | O 144 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 89-82 | -5.5 | W +1.5 | 139.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 103-76 | -13.5 | W +13.5 | 143.5 | O 179 |
| Jan 26 | vs | L 78-79 | -7.5 | L −8.5 | 152.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 60-88 | +7.5 | L −20.5 | 146.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 75-68 | -4.5 | W +2.5 | 148.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 75-58 | -9.5 | W +7.5 | 134.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 16 | @ | W 70-66 | -1.5 | W +2.5 | 136.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 90-71 | -10.5 | W +8.5 | 140.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 75-69 | -5.5 | W +0.5 | 140.5 | O 144 |
| Mar 2 | @ | L 84-90 | -3.5 | L −9.5 | 156.5 | O 174 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 76-84 | +6.5 | L −1.5 | 149.5 | O 160 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 82-88 | -7.5 | L −13.5 | 144.5 | O 170 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
vs
W&M
L 78-81
−0.5
11
@
ODU
L 57-60
+5.5
14
@
TOW
L 41-51
+3.5
21
vs
HAMP
W 62-60
−0.5
23
@
WYO
L 67-75
+7.5
29
@
ARIZ
L 61-98
−1.5
6
@
JMU
L 67-68
+9.5
10
@
BAY
L 67-97
−3.5
18
vs
GRAM
L 68-80
−13.5
19
vs
JKST
W 82-72
+4.5
21
@
UTEP
W 72-71
+11.5
22
vs
UCI
L 70-89
−7.5
28
@
UL
L 54-63
−5.5
3
@
NCCU
L 67-69
−3.5
10
@
DSU
W 66-64
−2.5
12
vs
UMES
L 70-74
−9.5
17
@
SCST
W 89-82
+1.5
24
vs
COPP
W 103-76
+13.5
26
vs
MORG
L 78-79
−8.5
31
@
HOW
L 60-88
−20.5
7
vs
NCCU
W 75-68
+2.5
14
vs
DSU
W 75-58
+7.5
16
@
UMES
W 70-66
+2.5
21
vs
SCST
W 90-71
+8.5
28
@
COPP
W 75-69
+0.5
2
@
MORG
L 84-90
−9.5
5
vs
HOW
L 76-84
−1.5
12
vs
SCST
L 82-88
−13.5
covered 13didn’t cover 15avg −0.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
vs
W&M
L 78-81
+0.5
11
@
ODU
L 57-60
−32.5
14
@
TOW
L 41-51
−46.5
21
vs
HAMP
W 62-60
−11.5
23
@
WYO
L 67-75
+0.5
29
@
ARIZ
L 61-98
+12.5
6
@
JMU
L 67-68
−3.5
10
@
BAY
L 67-97
+15.5
18
vs
GRAM
L 68-80
+12.5
19
vs
JKST
W 82-72
+13.5
21
@
UTEP
W 72-71
+6.5
22
vs
UCI
L 70-89
+22.5
28
@
UL
L 54-63
−9.5
3
@
NCCU
L 67-69
−5.5
10
@
DSU
W 66-64
−2.5
12
vs
UMES
L 70-74
+11.5
17
@
SCST
W 89-82
+31.5
24
vs
COPP
W 103-76
+35.5
26
vs
MORG
L 78-79
+4.5
31
@
HOW
L 60-88
+1.5
7
vs
NCCU
W 75-68
−5.5
14
vs
DSU
W 75-58
−1.5
16
@
UMES
W 70-66
−0.5
21
vs
SCST
W 90-71
+20.5
28
@
COPP
W 75-69
+3.5
2
@
MORG
L 84-90
+17.5
5
vs
HOW
L 76-84
+10.5
12
vs
SCST
L 82-88
+25.5
over 18under 10avg +4.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Seattle U
33 games played
Straight up
19-14
58% wins
Against the spread
15-18
45% covers · avg +0.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
13-20
39% overs · avg −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 | vs | W 84-73 | -13.5 | L −2.5 | 136.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 8 | vs | L 71-73 | -10.5 | L −12.5 | 164.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 94-67 | -8.5 | W +18.5 | 148.5 | O 161 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 83-74 | -11.5 | L −2.5 | 138.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 21 | @ | W 77-69 | +10.5 | W +18.5 | 152.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 66-52 | -7.5 | W +6.5 | 136.5 | U 118 |
| Nov 29 | vs | L 71-74 | -2.5 | L −5.5 | 142.5 | O 145 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 75-68 | -12.5 | L −5.5 | 136.5 | O 143 |
| Dec 17 | @ | W 79-78 | -2.5 | L −1.5 | 143.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 19 | vs | W 70-66 | +7.5 | W +11.5 | 151.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 22 | @ | W 71-68 | -10.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 28 | vs | L 59-67 | -2.5 | L −10.5 | 146.5 | U 126 |
| Dec 30 | vs | W 69-55 | -6.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 2 | @ | L 72-80 | +24.5 | W +16.5 | 155.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 76-93 | +11.5 | L −5.5 | 139.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 55-68 | -4.5 | L −17.5 | 139.5 | U 123 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 75-64 | -9.5 | W +1.5 | 147.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 50-71 | +9.5 | L −11.5 | 150.5 | U 121 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 69-59 | -4.5 | W +5.5 | 141.5 | U 128 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 54-56 | +1.5 | L −0.5 | 137.5 | U 110 |
| Jan 28 | @ | L 58-70 | +1.5 | L −10.5 | 142.5 | U 128 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 83-81 | -12.5 | L −10.5 | 139.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 53-54 | -3.5 | L −4.5 | 143.5 | U 107 |
| Feb 11 | @ | L 72-84 | +12.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 15 | vs | W 60-50 | -6.5 | W +3.5 | 136.5 | U 110 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 70-72 | +9.5 | W +7.5 | 133.5 | O 142 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 71-59 | -7.5 | W +4.5 | 140.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 25 | @ | W 87-80 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 71-66 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 136.5 | O 137 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 58-56 | -8.5 | L −6.5 | 139.5 | U 114 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 58-61 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 129.5 | U 119 |
| Mar 17 | vs | W 67-52 | -2.5 | W +12.5 | 145.5 | U 119 |
| Mar 22 | @ | L 85-91 | +14.5 | W +8.5 | 145.5 | O 176 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
DEN
W 84-73
−2.5
8
vs
CP
L 71-73
−12.5
12
vs
EWU
W 94-67
+18.5
15
vs
IDST
W 83-74
−2.5
21
@
STAN
W 77-69
+18.5
28
vs
TXST
W 66-52
+6.5
29
vs
UCSB
L 71-74
−5.5
7
vs
UTEP
W 75-68
−5.5
17
@
UCD
W 79-78
−1.5
19
vs
WASH
W 70-66
+11.5
22
@
UTSA
W 71-68
−7.5
28
vs
SF
L 59-67
−10.5
30
vs
WSU
W 69-55
+7.5
2
@
GONZ
L 72-80
+16.5
4
@
SMC
L 76-93
−5.5
8
@
ORST
L 55-68
−17.5
15
vs
USD
W 75-64
+1.5
17
vs
GONZ
L 50-71
−11.5
21
vs
LMU
W 69-59
+5.5
24
@
PAC
L 54-56
−0.5
28
@
WSU
L 58-70
−10.5
4
vs
PEPP
W 83-81
−10.5
7
@
PORT
L 53-54
−4.5
11
@
SCU
L 72-84
+0.5
15
vs
ORST
W 60-50
+3.5
18
vs
SMC
L 70-72
+7.5
21
vs
PORT
W 71-59
+4.5
25
@
PEPP
W 87-80
−0.5
28
@
LMU
W 71-66
+6.5
6
vs
USD
W 58-56
−6.5
7
vs
PAC
L 58-61
−1.5
17
vs
STMN
W 67-52
+12.5
22
@
AUB
L 85-91
+8.5
covered 15didn’t cover 18avg +0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
DEN
W 84-73
+20.5
8
vs
CP
L 71-73
−20.5
12
vs
EWU
W 94-67
+12.5
15
vs
IDST
W 83-74
+18.5
21
@
STAN
W 77-69
−6.5
28
vs
TXST
W 66-52
−18.5
29
vs
UCSB
L 71-74
+2.5
7
vs
UTEP
W 75-68
+6.5
17
@
UCD
W 79-78
+13.5
19
vs
WASH
W 70-66
−15.5
22
@
UTSA
W 71-68
−9.5
28
vs
SF
L 59-67
−20.5
30
vs
WSU
W 69-55
−20.5
2
@
GONZ
L 72-80
−3.5
4
@
SMC
L 76-93
+29.5
8
@
ORST
L 55-68
−16.5
15
vs
USD
W 75-64
−8.5
17
vs
GONZ
L 50-71
−29.5
21
vs
LMU
W 69-59
−13.5
24
@
PAC
L 54-56
−27.5
28
@
WSU
L 58-70
−14.5
4
vs
PEPP
W 83-81
+24.5
7
@
PORT
L 53-54
−36.5
11
@
SCU
L 72-84
+8.5
15
vs
ORST
W 60-50
−26.5
18
vs
SMC
L 70-72
+8.5
21
vs
PORT
W 71-59
−10.5
25
@
PEPP
W 87-80
+21.5
28
@
LMU
W 71-66
+0.5
6
vs
USD
W 58-56
−25.5
7
vs
PAC
L 58-61
−10.5
17
vs
STMN
W 67-52
−26.5
22
@
AUB
L 85-91
+30.5
over 13under 20avg −5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Seattle U has the better starters
Position by position: Norfolk St 0, Seattle U 4, even 1
Norfolk StBetterSeattle U
G B. Laster TR6.9 pts · 2.7 reb · 1 ast
Score 51
→SEASmall
G T. Boston TR14.5 pts · 3.6 reb · 3.7 ast
Score 76
G A. Newton3.6 pts · 1.4 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 12
→SEASmall
G M. Arington4.9 pts · 3.2 reb · 4 ast
Score 41
F J. Gupton TR7.7 pts · 4.9 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 22
→SEASmall
F J. Yeo12.3 pts · 4.1 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 45
F B. Gardner TR3.5 pts · 2.6 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 3
→SEABig
F W. Heimbrodt12.7 pts · 5.4 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 72
F J. Riley TR3.4 pts · 2.3 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 56
=Even
F T. Thrastarson TR9.1 pts · 4.2 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 54
Norfolk StBetterSeattle U
NORF offense314th of 366 · -10.1
→SEABig
SEA defense76th of 366 · +0.6
NORF defense301st of 366 · -7.7
→SEASmall
SEA offense183rd of 366 · -5.7
Backcourt-2.2 · 2 players
→SEASmall
Backcourt-0.2 · 2 players
Frontcourt-4.2 · 3 players
→SEABig
Frontcourt+0.6 · 3 players
Bench-0.0 · 1 player
=Even
Bench+0.1 · 3 players
Score, worst to bestNORF betterSEA betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
B. Laster19 min · TRA. Newton16 minA. Torrence1 minC. WalkerNewD. CamaraNewJ. SkyersNew
Forwards
J. Gupton25 min · TRB. Gardner16 min · TRJ. Riley11 min · TRM. MitchellNew
Centers
J. JordanNew
Guards
T. Boston33 min · TRM. Arington31 minK. HansenNewM. WilliamsNewJ. WhiteNewJ. HarshmanNew
Forwards
J. Yeo32 minW. Heimbrodt32 minT. Thrastarson23 min · TRY. Kawashima3 minR. Adams2 min
Centers
H. Dzellat8 min · TRL. CoulibalyNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 71.6 #257 | Points per game | 70.1 #283 |
| 1.04 #274 | Points per possession | 1.01 #312 |
| 69.1 #172 | Pace (possessions) | 69.1 #175 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.3 #277 | Effective FG% | 49.8 #249 |
| 34.2 #157 | 3-point % | 33.7 #186 |
| 30.6 #347 | 3-point attempt rate | 39.4 #185 |
| 43.5 #13 | Free throw rate | 34.2 #201 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.7 #311 | Turnover rate | 16.7 #178 |
| 32.5 #108 | Offensive rebound rate | 23.7 #347 |
| 11.3 #326 | Assists per game | 13.2 #201 |
| Defense | ||
| 74.7 #181 | Points allowed | 68.2 #34 |
| 1.08 #160 | Points allowed per possession | 0.99 #20 |
| 51.7 #196 | Opponent effective FG% | 48.4 #46 |
| 32.0 #61 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.1 #69 |
| 18.8 #58 | Turnovers forced | 21.2 #9 |
| 67.7 #270 | Defensive rebound rate | 68.2 #249 |
| 6.5 #180 | Steals per game | 7.8 #52 |
| 2.8 #264 | Blocks per game | 4.9 #20 |
Norfolk St
11-17 in 2025-26 overall · 8-7 in conference · Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs SC State82–88
- Lvs Howard76–84
- L@ Morgan St84–90
- W@ Coppin St75–69
- Wvs SC State90–71
A week or more of rest.
Seattle U
19-14 in 2025-26 overall · 9-11 in conference · West Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Auburn85–91
- Wvs St Thomas67–52
- Lvs Pacific58–61
- Wvs San Diego58–56
- W@ LMU71–66
A week or more of rest.