Charles Koch Arena · at Wichita St
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | WICH | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 WICH 84–68 · win probability WICH 92%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 151.1
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: WICH has more of the edges
APSU 1, WICH 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
APSU has played the 318th-hardest schedule, WICH the 106th. A record against a soft schedule means less
WICH offense vs APSU defense
Offense 78th of 366 against a defense 240th, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: APSU 29.7%, WICH 38.0%. Defensive: APSU 71.1%, WICH 71.2%
APSU offense vs WICH defense
Offense 174th of 366 against a defense 82nd, on the model’s ratings
Turnovers
Turnover rate: APSU 15.4%, WICH 15.0%. Forced: APSU 17.9%, WICH 15.7%
Home court
WICH at home. This season: WICH 0-0 at home, APSU 0-0 away
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: APSU 30%, WICH 55%. Transfers in: APSU 2, WICH 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: APSU 37.6, WICH 36.0. Allowed: APSU 32.8, WICH 34.3
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: APSU plays 70.1 a game (114th fastest), WICH 69.3 (164th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: APSU 53.0 and allows 52.2; WICH 49.4 and allows 47.2
Even
Three-pointers
APSU hits 35.3% and allows 33.2%; WICH hits 33.5% and allows 31.5%. Threes are 38.0% and 33.9% of their shots
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 | — | WICH -15.9 | — |
| Total | — | 151.1 | — |
| Projected score | — | APSU 67.6 · WICH 83.5 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | WICH -9.3 | — |
| 1H total | 70.7 | — |
| 1H projected score | APSU 30.7 · WICH 40 | — |
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% | |
| 8-2 80% | 7-3 70% | 5-5 50% |
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
Wichita St
35 games played
Straight up
23-12
66% wins
Against the spread
23-12
66% covers · avg +3.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-20
43% overs · avg −1.3 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 4 | vs | W 75-58 | -6.5 | W +10.5 | 157.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 105-62 | -20.5 | W +22.5 | 156.5 | O 167 |
| Nov 13 | vs | W 95-74 | -5.5 | W +15.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 59-62 | +9.5 | W +6.5 | 150.5 | U 121 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 75-58 | -10.5 | W +6.5 | 158.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 65-70 | +9.5 | W +4.5 | 139.5 | U 135 |
| Nov 27 | vs | L 70-76 | +1.5 | L −4.5 | 142.5 | O 146 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 70-75 | -4.5 | L −9.5 | 155.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 74-69 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 135.5 | O 143 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 58-61 | -7.5 | L −10.5 | 145.5 | U 119 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 84-73 | -12.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 88-57 | -14.5 | W +16.5 | 148.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 31 | @ | W 75-70 | +3.5 | W +8.5 | 149.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 100-104 | -5.5 | L −9.5 | 140.5 | O 204 |
| Jan 7 | vs | L 64-66 | -13.5 | L −15.5 | 145.5 | U 130 |
| Jan 11 | vs | W 78-67 | -8.5 | W +2.5 | 135.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 15 | @ | L 67-85 | +3.5 | L −14.5 | 155.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 18 | @ | W 86-85 | +7.5 | W +8.5 | 158.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 77-60 | -12.5 | W +4.5 | 144.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 74-59 | -3.5 | W +11.5 | 145.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 1 | @ | L 83-93 | +5.5 | L −4.5 | 154.5 | O 176 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 74-64 | -9.5 | W +0.5 | 143.5 | U 138 |
| Feb 8 | @ | W 75-61 | -5.5 | W +8.5 | 148.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 58-66 | +2.5 | L −5.5 | 160.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 81-77 | -1.5 | W +2.5 | 152.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 18 | @ | W 92-89 | -7.5 | L −4.5 | 149.5 | O 181 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 69-57 | -8.5 | W +3.5 | 144.5 | U 126 |
| Feb 26 | @ | W 88-82 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 149.5 | O 170 |
| Mar 1 | @ | W 84-67 | -15.5 | W +1.5 | 151.5 | U 151 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 88-70 | -8.5 | W +9.5 | 150.5 | O 158 |
| Mar 14 | vs | W 81-68 | +1.5 | W +14.5 | 152.5 | U 149 |
| Mar 15 | vs | L 55-70 | +6.5 | L −8.5 | 151.5 | U 125 |
| Mar 17 | vs | W 74-70 | -5.5 | L −1.5 | 148.5 | U 144 |
| Mar 22 | @ | W 96-70 | +2.5 | W +28.5 | 164.5 | O 166 |
| Mar 24 | @ | L 79-83 | +4.5 | W +0.5 | 154.5 | O 162 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
vs
UNCA
W 75-58
+10.5
8
vs
PV
W 105-62
+22.5
13
vs
LUC
W 95-74
+15.5
18
@
BOIS
L 59-62
+6.5
22
vs
MILW
W 75-58
+6.5
26
vs
SMC
L 65-70
+4.5
27
vs
CSU
L 70-76
−4.5
28
vs
WKU
L 70-75
−9.5
6
@
UNI
W 74-69
+6.5
13
vs
DEP
L 58-61
−10.5
17
vs
WOF
W 84-73
−1.5
21
vs
EKU
W 88-57
+16.5
31
@
UAB
W 75-70
+8.5
3
@
CLT
L 100-104
−9.5
7
vs
RICE
L 64-66
−15.5
11
vs
UNT
W 78-67
+2.5
15
@
FAU
L 67-85
−14.5
18
@
USF
W 86-85
+8.5
21
vs
ECU
W 77-60
+4.5
24
vs
MEM
W 74-59
+11.5
1
@
TLSA
L 83-93
−4.5
4
vs
CLT
W 74-64
+0.5
8
@
TULN
W 75-61
+8.5
11
vs
USF
L 58-66
−5.5
14
vs
TLSA
W 81-77
+2.5
18
@
ECU
W 92-89
−4.5
21
vs
TEM
W 69-57
+3.5
26
@
MEM
W 88-82
+7.5
1
@
UTSA
W 84-67
+1.5
7
vs
FAU
W 88-70
+9.5
14
vs
TLSA
W 81-68
+14.5
15
vs
USF
L 55-70
−8.5
17
vs
WYO
W 74-70
−1.5
22
@
OKST
W 96-70
+28.5
24
@
TLSA
L 79-83
+0.5
covered 23didn’t cover 12avg +3.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
vs
UNCA
W 75-58
−24.5
8
vs
PV
W 105-62
+10.5
13
vs
LUC
W 95-74
+15.5
18
@
BOIS
L 59-62
−29.5
22
vs
MILW
W 75-58
−25.5
26
vs
SMC
L 65-70
−4.5
27
vs
CSU
L 70-76
+3.5
28
vs
WKU
L 70-75
−10.5
6
@
UNI
W 74-69
+7.5
13
vs
DEP
L 58-61
−26.5
17
vs
WOF
W 84-73
+12.5
21
vs
EKU
W 88-57
−3.5
31
@
UAB
W 75-70
−4.5
3
@
CLT
L 100-104
+63.5
7
vs
RICE
L 64-66
−15.5
11
vs
UNT
W 78-67
+9.5
15
@
FAU
L 67-85
−3.5
18
@
USF
W 86-85
+12.5
21
vs
ECU
W 77-60
−7.5
24
vs
MEM
W 74-59
−12.5
1
@
TLSA
L 83-93
+21.5
4
vs
CLT
W 74-64
−5.5
8
@
TULN
W 75-61
−12.5
11
vs
USF
L 58-66
−36.5
14
vs
TLSA
W 81-77
+5.5
18
@
ECU
W 92-89
+31.5
21
vs
TEM
W 69-57
−18.5
26
@
MEM
W 88-82
+20.5
1
@
UTSA
W 84-67
−0.5
7
vs
FAU
W 88-70
+7.5
14
vs
TLSA
W 81-68
−3.5
15
vs
USF
L 55-70
−26.5
17
vs
WYO
W 74-70
−4.5
22
@
OKST
W 96-70
+1.5
24
@
TLSA
L 79-83
+7.5
over 15under 20avg −1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Wichita St has the better starters
Position by position: Austin Peay 0, Wichita St 1, even 4
Austin PeayBetterWichita St
G Z. Collins13.7 pts · 3.2 reb · 4.2 ast
Score 60
=Even
G J. Long TR11.8 pts · 3.3 reb · 4 ast
Score 72
G C. Love TR7.2 pts · 2.6 reb · 1 ast
Score 44
→WICHBig
G J. Frison TR16.5 pts · 3.4 reb · 4.1 ast
Score 93
G S. Hugie TR4.4 pts · 2.4 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 32
=Even
G M. Gray7.9 pts · 3.3 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 37
G C. Ryans NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
=No call
G T. Williams8.8 pts · 5.1 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 80
F R. Marshall16.3 pts · 7 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 92
=Even
C W. Berg8.8 pts · 8 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 85
Austin PeayBetterWichita St
APSU offense174th of 366 · -5.4
→WICHSmall
WICH defense82nd of 366 · +0.2
APSU defense240th of 366 · -6.3
→WICHBig
WICH offense78th of 366 · +0.8
Backcourt-1.7 · 4 players
→WICHBig
Backcourt+3.8 · 4 players
Frontcourt+3.8 · 1 player
=Even
Frontcourt+2.8 · 1 player
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
Bench+0.8 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestAPSU betterWICH 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
J. Long34 min · TRJ. Frison31 min · TRM. Gray27 minT. Williams22 minB. Heard18 min · TRJ. IghovodjaNew
Forwards
D. Battie18 minJ. Valencia13 minN. Hill5 minH. Thengvall2 min
Centers
W. Berg22 minC. Malonga11 min · TR
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 | 77.6 #105 |
| 1.13 #91 | Points per possession | 1.12 #98 |
| 70.1 #114 | Pace (possessions) | 69.3 #164 |
| Shooting | ||
| 53.0 #105 | Effective FG% | 49.4 #274 |
| 35.3 #99 | 3-point % | 33.5 #195 |
| 38.0 #215 | 3-point attempt rate | 33.9 #300 |
| 37.6 #110 | Free throw rate | 36.0 #149 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.4 #94 | Turnover rate | 15.0 #62 |
| 29.7 #214 | Offensive rebound rate | 38.0 #8 |
| 15.3 #76 | Assists per game | 11.3 #325 |
| Defense | ||
| 74.6 #179 | Points allowed | 70.8 #71 |
| 1.06 #119 | Points allowed per possession | 1.02 #42 |
| 52.2 #227 | Opponent effective FG% | 47.2 #24 |
| 33.2 #137 | Opponent 3-point % | 31.5 #44 |
| 17.9 #103 | Turnovers forced | 15.7 #238 |
| 71.1 #100 | Defensive rebound rate | 71.2 #93 |
| 8.4 #22 | Steals per game | 6.0 #235 |
| 2.2 #329 | Blocks per game | 3.8 #100 |
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.
Wichita St
23-12 in 2025-26 overall · 14-6 in conference · American Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Tulsa79–83
- W@ Oklahoma St96–70
- Wvs Wyoming74–70
- Lvs South Florida55–70
- Wvs Tulsa81–68
A week or more of rest.