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 77–67 · win probability SEA 81%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 143.6
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
APSU 2, SEA 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
APSU has played the 318th-hardest schedule, SEA the 114th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: APSU 29.7%, SEA 23.7%. Defensive: APSU 71.1%, SEA 68.2%
APSU offense vs SEA defense
Offense 174th of 366 against a defense 76th, on the model’s ratings
SEA offense vs APSU defense
Offense 183rd of 366 against a defense 240th, on the model’s ratings
Home court
SEA at home. This season: SEA 0-0 at home, APSU 0-0 away
Free throws
Free throw rate: APSU 37.6, SEA 34.2. Allowed: APSU 32.8, SEA 33.0
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: APSU 30%, SEA 50%. Transfers in: APSU 2, SEA 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: APSU plays 70.1 a game (114th fastest), SEA 69.1 (175th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: APSU 53.0 and allows 52.2; SEA 49.8 and allows 48.4
Even
Three-pointers
APSU hits 35.3% and allows 33.2%; SEA hits 33.7% and allows 32.1%. Threes are 38.0% and 39.4% of their shots
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: APSU 15.4%, SEA 16.7%. Forced: APSU 17.9%, SEA 21.2%
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 -9.8 | — |
| Total | — | 143.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | APSU 66.9 · SEA 76.7 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SEA -5.7 | — |
| 1H total | 67.2 | — |
| 1H projected score | APSU 30.7 · SEA 36.5 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7-3 70% | 4-6 40% | 7-3 70% | |
| 6-4 60% | 7-3 70% | 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
Austin Peay
29 games played
Straight up
20-9
69% wins
Against the spread
14-15
48% covers · avg +1.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-15
48% overs · avg +2.1 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 | @ | W 74-54 | -1.5 | W +18.5 | 136.5 | U 128 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 65-79 | +5.5 | L −8.5 | 153.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 15 | @ | W 69-63 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 145.5 | U 132 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 65-72 | +20.5 | W +13.5 | 145.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 75-84 | +8.5 | L −0.5 | 148.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 77-59 | -6.5 | W +11.5 | 147.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 84-96 | +8.5 | L −3.5 | 153.5 | O 180 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 50-63 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 151.5 | U 113 |
| Dec 12 | vs | W 76-75 | +3.5 | W +4.5 | 143.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 102-83 | -15.5 | W +3.5 | 162.5 | O 185 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 71-68 | -10.5 | L −7.5 | 140.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 8 | @ | W 82-71 | +3.5 | W +14.5 | 153.5 | U 153 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 81-69 | -9.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 74-72 | -7.5 | L −5.5 | 153.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 78-82 | +2.5 | L −1.5 | 155.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 83-62 | -6.5 | W +14.5 | 155.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 23 | vs | W 73-65 | -16.5 | L −8.5 | 148.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 90-82 | -2.5 | W +5.5 | 151.5 | O 172 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 81-78 | -7.5 | L −4.5 | 150.5 | O 159 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 87-76 | -4.5 | W +6.5 | 156.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 91-62 | -12.5 | W +16.5 | 145.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 11 | @ | W 95-87 | +2.5 | W +10.5 | 161.5 | O 182 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 90-70 | -9.5 | W +10.5 | 153.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 19 | @ | W 77-76 | -11.5 | L −10.5 | 166.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 65-61 | -6.5 | L −2.5 | 142.5 | U 126 |
| Feb 25 | vs | L 88-93 | -4.5 | L −9.5 | 152.5 | O 181 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 97-111 | -5.5 | L −19.5 | 153.5 | O 208 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 69-60 | -11.5 | L −2.5 | 153.5 | U 129 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 83-90 | -2.5 | L −9.5 | 161.5 | O 173 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
@
AF
W 74-54
+18.5
11
@
WYO
L 65-79
−8.5
15
@
UNCG
W 69-63
+7.5
18
@
MISS
L 65-72
+13.5
21
@
TLSA
L 75-84
−0.5
25
vs
NIU
W 77-59
+11.5
3
@
KENT
L 84-96
−3.5
7
@
RGV
L 50-63
−10.5
12
vs
ETSU
W 76-75
+4.5
1
vs
UNF
W 102-83
+3.5
3
vs
JAX
W 71-68
−7.5
8
@
FGCU
W 82-71
+14.5
10
@
STET
W 81-69
+2.5
15
vs
EKU
W 74-72
−5.5
17
@
LIP
L 78-82
−1.5
22
vs
FGCU
W 83-62
+14.5
23
vs
STET
W 73-65
−8.5
28
@
EKU
W 90-82
+5.5
31
@
WGA
W 81-78
−4.5
4
vs
LIP
W 87-76
+6.5
7
vs
UNA
W 91-62
+16.5
11
@
QUC
W 95-87
+10.5
14
vs
BELL
W 90-70
+10.5
19
@
UNF
W 77-76
−10.5
21
@
JAX
W 65-61
−2.5
25
vs
CARK
L 88-93
−9.5
28
@
BELL
L 97-111
−19.5
6
vs
STET
W 69-60
−2.5
7
vs
QUC
L 83-90
−9.5
covered 14didn’t cover 15avg +1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
@
AF
W 74-54
−8.5
11
@
WYO
L 65-79
−9.5
15
@
UNCG
W 69-63
−13.5
18
@
MISS
L 65-72
−8.5
21
@
TLSA
L 75-84
+10.5
25
vs
NIU
W 77-59
−11.5
3
@
KENT
L 84-96
+26.5
7
@
RGV
L 50-63
−38.5
12
vs
ETSU
W 76-75
+7.5
1
vs
UNF
W 102-83
+22.5
3
vs
JAX
W 71-68
−1.5
8
@
FGCU
W 82-71
−0.5
10
@
STET
W 81-69
−0.5
15
vs
EKU
W 74-72
−7.5
17
@
LIP
L 78-82
+4.5
22
vs
FGCU
W 83-62
−10.5
23
vs
STET
W 73-65
−10.5
28
@
EKU
W 90-82
+20.5
31
@
WGA
W 81-78
+8.5
4
vs
LIP
W 87-76
+6.5
7
vs
UNA
W 91-62
+7.5
11
@
QUC
W 95-87
+20.5
14
vs
BELL
W 90-70
+6.5
19
@
UNF
W 77-76
−13.5
21
@
JAX
W 65-61
−16.5
25
vs
CARK
L 88-93
+28.5
28
@
BELL
L 97-111
+54.5
6
vs
STET
W 69-60
−24.5
7
vs
QUC
L 83-90
+11.5
over 14under 15avg +2.1 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.
The starting fives are even
Position by position: Austin Peay 1, Seattle U 1, even 3
Austin PeayBetterSeattle U
G Z. Collins13.7 pts · 3.2 reb · 4.2 ast
Score 60
→SEASmall
G T. Boston TR14.5 pts · 3.6 reb · 3.7 ast
Score 76
G C. Love TR7.2 pts · 2.6 reb · 1 ast
Score 44
=Even
G M. Arington4.9 pts · 3.2 reb · 4 ast
Score 41
G S. Hugie TR4.4 pts · 2.4 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 32
=Even
F J. Yeo12.3 pts · 4.1 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 45
G C. Ryans NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
=No call
F W. Heimbrodt12.7 pts · 5.4 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 72
F R. Marshall16.3 pts · 7 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 92
←APSUBig
F T. Thrastarson TR9.1 pts · 4.2 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 54
Austin PeayBetterSeattle U
APSU offense174th of 366 · -5.4
→SEASmall
SEA defense76th of 366 · +0.6
APSU defense240th of 366 · -6.3
→SEASmall
SEA offense183rd of 366 · -5.7
Backcourt-1.7 · 4 players
→SEASmall
Backcourt-0.2 · 2 players
Frontcourt+3.8 · 1 player
←APSUBig
Frontcourt+0.6 · 3 players
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
Bench+0.1 · 3 players
Score, worst to bestAPSU betterSEA betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
Z. Collins30 minC. Love25 min · TRS. Hugie12 min · TRC. RyansNewP. SingletonNewT. ToddNew
Forwards
R. Marshall30 minD. BoldenNewA. DavisNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 79.0 #79 | Points per game | 70.1 #283 |
| 1.13 #91 | Points per possession | 1.01 #312 |
| 70.1 #114 | Pace (possessions) | 69.1 #175 |
| Shooting | ||
| 53.0 #105 | Effective FG% | 49.8 #249 |
| 35.3 #99 | 3-point % | 33.7 #186 |
| 38.0 #215 | 3-point attempt rate | 39.4 #185 |
| 37.6 #110 | Free throw rate | 34.2 #201 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.4 #94 | Turnover rate | 16.7 #178 |
| 29.7 #214 | Offensive rebound rate | 23.7 #347 |
| 15.3 #76 | Assists per game | 13.2 #201 |
| Defense | ||
| 74.6 #179 | Points allowed | 68.2 #34 |
| 1.06 #119 | Points allowed per possession | 0.99 #20 |
| 52.2 #227 | Opponent effective FG% | 48.4 #46 |
| 33.2 #137 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.1 #69 |
| 17.9 #103 | Turnovers forced | 21.2 #9 |
| 71.1 #100 | Defensive rebound rate | 68.2 #249 |
| 8.4 #22 | Steals per game | 7.8 #52 |
| 2.2 #329 | Blocks per game | 4.9 #20 |
Austin Peay
20-9 in 2025-26 overall · 16-4 in conference · United Athletic Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Queens University Royals83–90
- Wvs Stetson69–60
- L@ Bellarmine97–111
- Lvs C Arkansas88–93
- W@ Jacksonville65–61
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.