Lee's Family Forum · Neutral site
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | MUR | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SCU 82–77 · win probability SCU 65%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 159.3
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: SCU has more of the edges
SCU 3, MUR 1 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Free throws
Free throw rate: SCU 25.5, MUR 38.6. Allowed: SCU 38.2, MUR 32.2
Turnovers
Turnover rate: SCU 15.3%, MUR 16.4%. Forced: SCU 20.1%, MUR 15.7%
SCU offense vs MUR defense
Offense 93rd of 366 against a defense 197th, on the model’s ratings
Three-pointers
SCU hits 34.9% and allows 33.1%; MUR hits 35.0% and allows 36.2%. Threes are 45.0% and 44.8% of their shots
Context
Schedule so far
SCU has played the 86th-hardest schedule, MUR the 165th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Context
Tempo
About 71 possessions: SCU plays 69.7 a game (135th fastest), MUR 72.3 (30th). Faster games mean more points
Even
MUR offense vs SCU defense
Offense 110th of 366 against a defense 137th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: SCU 42%, MUR 28%. Transfers in: SCU 3, MUR 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: SCU 54.5 and allows 52.0; MUR 53.8 and allows 52.4
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: SCU 36.4%, MUR 32.6%. Defensive: SCU 67.9%, MUR 68.7%
Context
Neutral floor
No home court: the model takes it out of the line
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 | — | SCU -4.5 | — |
| Total | — | 159.3 | — |
| Projected score | — | SCU 81.9 · MUR 77.4 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SCU -2.8 | — |
| 1H total | 74.4 | — |
| 1H projected score | SCU 38.6 · MUR 35.8 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 60% | 3-7 30% | 6-4 60% | |
| 4-6 40% | 2-8 20% | 6-4 60% |
Next 3 games
With how the last meeting with each opponent went
| Date | Game | Last meeting |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 14 | vs MCN | W79–67WU |
No more games listed yet.
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Santa Clara
34 games played
Straight up
25-9
74% wins
Against the spread
18-16
53% covers · avg +2.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
19-15
56% overs · avg +4 pts vs the total
Against the spread
18-1653%
2 straight misses ATS1 of last 4 covered
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 7 | vs | W 79-67 | -6.5 | W +5.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 10 | @ | W 87-68 | +3.5 | W +22.5 | 155.5 | U 155 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 98-83 | -6.5 | W +8.5 | 144.5 | O 181 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 64-55 | -14.5 | L −5.5 | 141.5 | U 119 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 80-43 | -19.5 | W +17.5 | 140.5 | U 123 |
| Nov 27 | vs | L 70-71 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 158.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 86-75 | -5.5 | W +5.5 | 138.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 90-80 | -20.5 | L −10.5 | 144.5 | O 170 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 71-98 | +1.5 | L −25.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 79-82 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 154.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 63-60 | -12.5 | L −9.5 | 139.5 | U 123 |
| Dec 20 | vs | L 78-80 | -15.5 | L −17.5 | 151.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 28 | @ | W 102-64 | -7.5 | W +30.5 | 150.5 | O 166 |
| Dec 30 | @ | W 92-85 | -13.5 | L −6.5 | 157.5 | O 177 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 82-63 | -20.5 | L −1.5 | 150.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 98-70 | -17.5 | W +10.5 | 161.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 77-89 | +17.5 | W +5.5 | 163.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 103-72 | -11.5 | W +19.5 | 153.5 | O 175 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 85-69 | -12.5 | W +3.5 | 154.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 62-54 | -1.5 | W +6.5 | 152.5 | U 116 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 85-73 | -13.5 | L −1.5 | 162.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 88-73 | -9.5 | W +5.5 | 150.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 104-73 | -8.5 | W +22.5 | 153.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 71-56 | -6.5 | W +8.5 | 151.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 96-92 | -8.5 | L −4.5 | 160.5 | O 188 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 84-72 | -12.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 86-94 | +4.5 | L −3.5 | 158.5 | O 180 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 94-73 | -6.5 | W +14.5 | 158.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 67-86 | +5.5 | L −13.5 | 153.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 93-72 | -15.5 | W +5.5 | 153.5 | O 165 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 76-68 | -9.5 | L −1.5 | 148.5 | U 144 |
| Mar 9 | vs | W 76-71 | +4.5 | W +9.5 | 150.5 | U 147 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 68-79 | +8.5 | L −2.5 | 157.5 | U 147 |
| Mar 20 | vs | L 84-89 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 157.5 | O 173 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
vs
MCN
W 79-67
+5.5
10
@
XAV
W 87-68
+22.5
15
vs
NEV
W 98-83
+8.5
18
vs
IDST
W 64-55
−5.5
21
vs
UL
W 80-43
+17.5
27
vs
SLU
L 70-71
+0.5
28
vs
MINN
W 86-75
+5.5
3
vs
UTU
W 90-80
−10.5
6
@
UNM
L 71-98
−25.5
13
vs
ASU
L 79-82
−4.5
17
vs
UNT
W 63-60
−9.5
20
vs
LUC
L 78-80
−17.5
28
@
ORST
W 102-64
+30.5
30
@
PORT
W 92-85
−6.5
2
vs
PEPP
W 82-63
−1.5
4
vs
USD
W 98-70
+10.5
8
@
GONZ
L 77-89
+5.5
10
vs
LMU
W 103-72
+19.5
14
vs
PAC
W 85-69
+3.5
17
vs
SMC
W 62-54
+6.5
24
@
USD
W 85-73
−1.5
28
vs
SF
W 88-73
+5.5
31
@
LMU
W 104-73
+22.5
4
@
PAC
W 71-56
+8.5
7
@
WSU
W 96-92
−4.5
11
vs
SEA
W 84-72
−0.5
14
vs
GONZ
L 86-94
−3.5
21
@
SF
W 94-73
+14.5
25
@
SMC
L 67-86
−13.5
28
vs
ORST
W 93-72
+5.5
8
vs
PAC
W 76-68
−1.5
9
vs
SMC
W 76-71
+9.5
10
vs
GONZ
L 68-79
−2.5
20
vs
UK
L 84-89
−1.5
covered 18didn’t cover 16avg +2.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
vs
MCN
W 79-67
−5.5
10
@
XAV
W 87-68
−0.5
15
vs
NEV
W 98-83
+36.5
18
vs
IDST
W 64-55
−22.5
21
vs
UL
W 80-43
−17.5
27
vs
SLU
L 70-71
−17.5
28
vs
MINN
W 86-75
+22.5
3
vs
UTU
W 90-80
+25.5
6
@
UNM
L 71-98
+15.5
13
vs
ASU
L 79-82
+6.5
17
vs
UNT
W 63-60
−16.5
20
vs
LUC
L 78-80
+6.5
28
@
ORST
W 102-64
+15.5
30
@
PORT
W 92-85
+19.5
2
vs
PEPP
W 82-63
−5.5
4
vs
USD
W 98-70
+6.5
8
@
GONZ
L 77-89
+2.5
10
vs
LMU
W 103-72
+21.5
14
vs
PAC
W 85-69
−0.5
17
vs
SMC
W 62-54
−36.5
24
@
USD
W 85-73
−4.5
28
vs
SF
W 88-73
+10.5
31
@
LMU
W 104-73
+23.5
4
@
PAC
W 71-56
−24.5
7
@
WSU
W 96-92
+27.5
11
vs
SEA
W 84-72
+8.5
14
vs
GONZ
L 86-94
+21.5
21
@
SF
W 94-73
+8.5
25
@
SMC
L 67-86
−0.5
28
vs
ORST
W 93-72
+11.5
8
vs
PAC
W 76-68
−4.5
9
vs
SMC
W 76-71
−3.5
10
vs
GONZ
L 68-79
−10.5
20
vs
UK
L 84-89
+15.5
over 19under 15avg +4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Murray St
33 games played
Straight up
20-13
61% wins
Against the spread
14-19
42% covers · avg −2.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
19-14
58% overs · avg +4.9 pts vs the total
Against the spread
14-1942%
8 straight misses ATS0 of last 4 covered
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 85-77 | -5.5 | W +2.5 | 153.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 108-60 | -38.5 | W +9.5 | 159.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 91-102 | +10.5 | L −0.5 | 164.5 | O 193 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 99-79 | -14.5 | W +5.5 | 157.5 | O 178 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 89-68 | -13.5 | W +7.5 | 153.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 23 | vs | L 87-90 | -6.5 | L −9.5 | 161.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 60-73 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 158.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 96-95 | +7.5 | W +8.5 | 167.5 | O 191 |
| Dec 2 | vs | W 84-52 | -16.5 | W +15.5 | 158.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 81-68 | -16.5 | L −3.5 | 157.5 | U 149 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 115-100 | +4.5 | W +19.5 | 168.5 | O 215 |
| Dec 18 | vs | W 81-72 | -7.5 | W +1.5 | 156.5 | U 153 |
| Dec 21 | @ | W 85-79 | -5.5 | W +0.5 | 155.5 | O 164 |
| Dec 29 | vs | W 84-81 | -6.5 | L −3.5 | 165.5 | U 165 |
| Jan 1 | @ | W 81-77 | -5.5 | L −1.5 | 159.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 86-66 | -5.5 | W +14.5 | 162.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 7 | @ | W 79-69 | -8.5 | W +1.5 | 153.5 | U 148 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 92-79 | -12.5 | W +0.5 | 152.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 85-81 | -11.5 | L −7.5 | 167.5 | U 166 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 90-101 | -4.5 | L −15.5 | 156.5 | O 191 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 76-81 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 145.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 28 | vs | L 65-70 | -3.5 | L −8.5 | 159.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 86-103 | +3.5 | L −13.5 | 163.5 | O 189 |
| Feb 3 | vs | W 81-74 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 157.5 | U 155 |
| Feb 6 | @ | W 91-81 | -1.5 | W +8.5 | 157.5 | O 172 |
| Feb 9 | vs | L 60-89 | -4.5 | L −33.5 | 145.5 | O 149 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 74-72 | -3.5 | L −1.5 | 163.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 15 | vs | L 70-87 | +1.5 | L −15.5 | 166.5 | U 157 |
| Feb 18 | @ | L 61-78 | +2.5 | L −14.5 | 158.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 88-75 | -15.5 | L −2.5 | 153.5 | O 163 |
| Mar 1 | @ | L 78-87 | +3.5 | L −5.5 | 157.5 | O 165 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 79-92 | +1.5 | L −11.5 | 150.5 | O 171 |
| Mar 18 | @ | L 75-89 | +8.5 | L −5.5 | 159.5 | O 164 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
OMA
W 85-77
+2.5
7
vs
MVSU
W 108-60
+9.5
11
@
SMU
L 91-102
−0.5
15
vs
NICH
W 99-79
+5.5
18
vs
LR
W 89-68
+7.5
23
vs
MTSU
L 87-90
−9.5
24
vs
MCN
L 60-73
−10.5
25
vs
GW
W 96-95
+8.5
2
vs
MORE
W 84-52
+15.5
6
vs
BELL
W 81-68
−3.5
13
vs
AKR
W 115-100
+19.5
18
vs
DRKE
W 81-72
+1.5
21
@
VAL
W 85-79
+0.5
29
vs
SIU
W 84-81
−3.5
1
@
UIC
W 81-77
−1.5
4
vs
BRAD
W 86-66
+14.5
7
@
EVAN
W 79-69
+1.5
10
vs
VAL
W 92-79
+0.5
17
vs
INST
W 85-81
−7.5
21
@
DRKE
L 90-101
−15.5
24
@
UNI
L 76-81
−6.5
28
vs
ILST
L 65-70
−8.5
31
@
BEL
L 86-103
−13.5
3
vs
UIC
W 81-74
+0.5
6
@
SIU
W 91-81
+8.5
9
vs
UNI
L 60-89
−33.5
12
@
INST
W 74-72
−1.5
15
vs
BEL
L 70-87
−15.5
18
@
ILST
L 61-78
−14.5
21
vs
EVAN
W 88-75
−2.5
1
@
BRAD
L 78-87
−5.5
6
vs
UIC
L 79-92
−11.5
18
@
NEV
L 75-89
−5.5
covered 14didn’t cover 19avg −2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
OMA
W 85-77
+8.5
7
vs
MVSU
W 108-60
+8.5
11
@
SMU
L 91-102
+28.5
15
vs
NICH
W 99-79
+20.5
18
vs
LR
W 89-68
+3.5
23
vs
MTSU
L 87-90
+15.5
24
vs
MCN
L 60-73
−25.5
25
vs
GW
W 96-95
+23.5
2
vs
MORE
W 84-52
−22.5
6
vs
BELL
W 81-68
−8.5
13
vs
AKR
W 115-100
+46.5
18
vs
DRKE
W 81-72
−3.5
21
@
VAL
W 85-79
+8.5
29
vs
SIU
W 84-81
−0.5
1
@
UIC
W 81-77
−1.5
4
vs
BRAD
W 86-66
−10.5
7
@
EVAN
W 79-69
−5.5
10
vs
VAL
W 92-79
+18.5
17
vs
INST
W 85-81
−1.5
21
@
DRKE
L 90-101
+34.5
24
@
UNI
L 76-81
+11.5
28
vs
ILST
L 65-70
−24.5
31
@
BEL
L 86-103
+25.5
3
vs
UIC
W 81-74
−2.5
6
@
SIU
W 91-81
+14.5
9
vs
UNI
L 60-89
+3.5
12
@
INST
W 74-72
−17.5
15
vs
BEL
L 70-87
−9.5
18
@
ILST
L 61-78
−19.5
21
vs
EVAN
W 88-75
+9.5
1
@
BRAD
L 78-87
+7.5
6
vs
UIC
L 79-92
+20.5
18
@
NEV
L 75-89
+4.5
over 19under 14avg +4.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Murray St has the better starters
Position by position: Santa Clara 1, Murray St 2, even 2
Santa ClaraBetterMurray St
G J. Ensminger6.4 pts · 5.5 reb · 2.8 ast
Score 53
=Even
G C. Jones TR10 pts · 3 reb · 3.1 ast
Score 61
G D. Castillo TR10.3 pts · 1.9 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 41
→MURBig
G R. Domon14.2 pts · 5.2 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 95
G S. Gavalyugov9 pts · 1.9 reb · 2.7 ast
Score 61
←SCUSmall
G M. Courbon4.6 pts · 2 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 31
G T. Darlan5.9 pts · 3.3 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 35
→MURSmall
F S. Tupuola TR6.3 pts · 5.8 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 55
G F. Zugic TR5.2 pts · 2 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 56
=Even
F B. Rogers TR6.7 pts · 3.6 reb · 1.7 ast
Score 67
Santa ClaraBetterMurray St
SCU offense93rd of 366 · -0.4
←SCUSmall
MUR defense197th of 366 · -4.8
SCU defense137th of 366 · -2.8
=Even
MUR offense110th of 366 · -1.8
Backcourt-2.9 · 5 players
→MURBig
Backcourt+2.2 · 3 players
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
=No call
Frontcourt+0.4 · 2 players
Bench-0.2 · 3 players
=Even
Bench-1.0 · 2 players
Score, worst to bestSCU betterMUR betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Ensminger29 minD. Castillo28 min · TRS. Gavalyugov20 minT. Darlan18 minF. Zugic16 min · TRK. Cochran12 min
Forwards
C. TadjoNewN. BadibangaNew
Centers
F. Chukwudebelu6 minS. Gueye4 min · TRA. EnsorNew
Guards
C. Jones26 min · TRR. Domon25 minM. Courbon16 minB. Shorter15 minK. Magwood11 min · TRB. ShtolzbergNew
Forwards
S. Tupuola25 min · TRB. Rogers18 min · TRP. NikolicNewJ. BoulefaaNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 82.9 #30 | Points per game | 83.1 #26 |
| 1.18 #37 | Points per possession | 1.15 #56 |
| 69.7 #135 | Pace (possessions) | 72.3 #30 |
| Shooting | ||
| 54.5 #53 | Effective FG% | 53.8 #70 |
| 34.9 #125 | 3-point % | 35.0 #120 |
| 45.0 #67 | 3-point attempt rate | 44.8 #72 |
| 25.5 #363 | Free throw rate | 38.6 #86 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.3 #86 | Turnover rate | 16.4 #160 |
| 36.4 #20 | Offensive rebound rate | 32.6 #100 |
| 16.6 #33 | Assists per game | 13.7 #165 |
| Defense | ||
| 73.5 #141 | Points allowed | 80.2 #323 |
| 1.06 #117 | Points allowed per possession | 1.11 #233 |
| 52.0 #213 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.4 #236 |
| 33.1 #127 | Opponent 3-point % | 36.2 #310 |
| 20.1 #20 | Turnovers forced | 15.7 #234 |
| 67.9 #262 | Defensive rebound rate | 68.7 #214 |
| 8.7 #14 | Steals per game | 5.9 #248 |
| 3.6 #125 | Blocks per game | 4.1 #69 |
Santa Clara
25-9 in 2025-26 overall · 17-4 in conference · West Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Kentucky84–89
- Lvs Gonzaga68–79
- Wvs Saint Mary's76–71
- Wvs Pacific76–68
- Wvs Oregon St93–72
A week or more of rest.
Murray St
20-13 in 2025-26 overall · 12-9 in conference · Missouri Valley Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Nevada75–89
- Lvs UIC79–92
- L@ Bradley78–87
- Wvs Evansville88–75
- L@ Illinois St61–78
A week or more of rest.