Pepperdine Waves at Abilene Christian Wildcats: Model Line and Edge

Tue, Dec 1, 8:00 PM ETMoody Coliseum (Abilene) · at Abilene Chrstn

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Pepperdine and Abilene Chrstn
PEPP	This season	ACU
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 PEPP 74–72 · win probability PEPP 57%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 146.9

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: PEPP has more of the edges

PEPP 4, ACU 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

ACUBig

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: PEPP 29.1%, ACU 31.0%. Defensive: PEPP 66.0%, ACU 70.9%

PEPPSmall

ACU offense vs PEPP defense

Offense 298th of 366 against a defense 216th, on the model’s ratings

PEPPSmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: PEPP 33.9, ACU 41.7. Allowed: PEPP 28.5, ACU 53.5

PEPPSmall

PEPP offense vs ACU defense

Offense 139th of 366 against a defense 200th, on the model’s ratings

ACUSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: PEPP 18.3%, ACU 20.8%. Forced: PEPP 16.5%, ACU 23.4%

Context

Schedule so far

PEPP has played the 128th-hardest schedule, ACU the 183rd. A record against a soft schedule means less

ACUSmall

Home court

ACU at home. This season: ACU 0-0 at home, PEPP 0-0 away

PEPPSmall

Three-pointers

PEPP hits 31.4% and allows 35.5%; ACU hits 31.0% and allows 40.9%. Threes are 39.2% and 32.8% of their shots

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: PEPP 5%, ACU 25%. Transfers in: PEPP 7, ACU 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Context

Tempo

About 70 possessions: PEPP plays 70.0 a game (117th fastest), ACU 69.2 (167th). Faster games mean more points

Even

Shooting

Effective FG%: PEPP 47.6 and allows 54.2; ACU 47.5 and allows 56.5

Sorted by how lopsided each matchup is, from national ranks. Reasons to look, not picks: the market already knows most of this.

Model vs market

	Market	Model	Model edge
Spread	—	PEPP -2.0	—
Total	—	146.9	—
Projected score	—	PEPP 74.4 · ACU 72.4

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	PEPP -1.3	—
1H total	68.7	—
1H projected score	PEPP 35 · ACU 33.7	—

The 1st-half model is fitted from the full-game model and past halves. ESPN has no 1st-half lines for college games, so there is no market to compare it with.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

ATS

2025-26 season

	Season	Cover	Venue	Role
PEPP WLWWL	14-16	47%	8-5	—
ACU WLLWL	14-16	47%	4-7	—

Venue/role: PEPP away; ACU home. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
PEPP OOOOU	15-15	50%	7-23
ACU OUUOO	16-14	53%	11-19

Squares: last 5 games (O over, U under), oldest first. Tap for the score and line.

Last 10 games

2025-26

	Straight up	Spread	Over / under
PEPP	3-7 30%	5-5 50%	9-1 90%
ACU	4-6 40%	4-6 40%	5-5 50%

Wins-losses (pushes last). Spread and over / under skip games without a line.

Next 3 games

With how the last meeting with each opponent went

Pepperdine

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 5	vs FGCU	No recent meeting
Dec 9	vs PV	No recent meeting
Dec 13	@ SAC	No recent meeting

Abilene Chrstn

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 5	vs SDST	No recent meeting
Dec 13	@ UTAH	L56–70LU

Last meeting: result, against the spread, over / under. Hover a result for its date.

Recent meetings

Since 2021-22

PEPP 0–1 ACUACU leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · PEPP 0-1 ATS

Date	Result	Line	Covered
Dec 2, 2025-26	ACU 71 @ PEPP 63	PEPP +1.5	ACU W

ATS History · 2025-26

WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total

Pepperdine

30 games played

Straight up

7-23

23% wins

Against the spread

14-16

47% covers · avg −0.5 pts vs the line

Over / Under

15-15

50% overs · avg +2.2 pts vs the total

Straight up

7-2323%

L L W L L L L L W L W L L L L L L W L L L L L L W W L L W L

1 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

14-1647%

W L W L L L L L W W W L L W W L L W W L L W L L W W L W W L

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

15-1550%

U O O U U U U U U O O U U U O U U U U O O O O O O O O O O U

3 of last 4 overno streak

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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	@UCLA	L 63-74	+29.5	W +18.5	152.5	U 137
Nov 15	vsUNCO	L 81-88	+1.5	L −5.5	153.5	O 169
Nov 18	vsNOLA	W 90-79	-5.5	W +5.5	157.5	O 169
Nov 21	vsSFA	L 60-63	+1.5	L −1.5	148.5	U 123
Nov 26	vsFRES	L 53-76	+2.5	L −20.5	150.5	U 129
Nov 29	@CSUF	L 69-83	+1.5	L −12.5	161.5	U 152
Dec 2	vsACU	L 63-71	+1.5	L −6.5	137.5	U 134
Dec 6	vsUVM	L 56-65	+1.5	L −7.5	142.5	U 121
Dec 13	@CSUB	W 70-62	+1.5	W +9.5	147.5	U 132
Dec 18	@LBSU	L 78-81	+4.5	W +1.5	141.5	O 159
Dec 20	vsRICE	W 84-62	+1.5	W +23.5	140.5	O 146
Dec 28	vsGONZ	L 56-96	+29.5	L −10.5	152.5	U 152
Dec 30	vsSMC	L 45-72	+19.5	L −7.5	141.5	U 117
Jan 2	@SCU	L 63-82	+20.5	W +1.5	150.5	U 145
Jan 4	@PAC	L 69-74	+11.5	W +6.5	138.5	O 143
Jan 8	@USD	L 63-83	+4.5	L −15.5	149.5	U 146
Jan 10	vsSF	L 60-80	+7.5	L −12.5	140.5	U 140
Jan 14	vsPORT	W 67-63	+1.5	W +5.5	147.5	U 130
Jan 21	@GONZ	L 60-84	+28.5	W +4.5	150.5	U 144
Jan 24	@WSU	L 79-95	+11.5	L −4.5	146.5	O 174
Jan 28	vsUSD	L 88-92	+2.5	L −1.5	151.5	O 180
Feb 4	@SEA	L 81-83	+12.5	W +10.5	139.5	O 164
Feb 7	vsPAC	L 59-92	+7.5	L −25.5	142.5	O 151
Feb 11	@SMC	L 60-88	+24.5	L −3.5	144.5	O 148
Feb 14	vsLMU	W 90-89	+5.5	W +6.5	147.5	O 179
Feb 18	@PORT	W 95-87	+7.5	W +15.5	150.5	O 182
Feb 21	@ORST	L 73-83	+9.5	L −0.5	148.5	O 156
Feb 25	vsSEA	L 80-87	+7.5	W +0.5	145.5	O 167
Feb 28	vsWSU	W 88-79	+7.5	W +16.5	158.5	O 167
Mar 5	vsPORT	L 68-77	+3.5	L −5.5	154.5	U 145

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

UCLA

L 63-74

+18.5

UNCO

L 81-88

−5.5

NOLA

W 90-79

+5.5

SFA

L 60-63

−1.5

FRES

L 53-76

−20.5

CSUF

L 69-83

−12.5

ACU

L 63-71

−6.5

UVM

L 56-65

−7.5

CSUB

W 70-62

+9.5

LBSU

L 78-81

+1.5

RICE

W 84-62

+23.5

GONZ

L 56-96

−10.5

SMC

L 45-72

−7.5

SCU

L 63-82

+1.5

PAC

L 69-74

+6.5

USD

L 63-83

−15.5

L 60-80

−12.5

PORT

W 67-63

+5.5

GONZ

L 60-84

+4.5

WSU

L 79-95

−4.5

USD

L 88-92

−1.5

SEA

L 81-83

+10.5

PAC

L 59-92

−25.5

SMC

L 60-88

−3.5

LMU

W 90-89

+6.5

PORT

W 95-87

+15.5

ORST

L 73-83

−0.5

SEA

L 80-87

+0.5

WSU

W 88-79

+16.5

PORT

L 68-77

−5.5

covered 14didn’t cover 16avg −0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

UCLA

L 63-74

−15.5

UNCO

L 81-88

+15.5

NOLA

W 90-79

+11.5

SFA

L 60-63

−25.5

FRES

L 53-76

−21.5

CSUF

L 69-83

−9.5

ACU

L 63-71

−3.5

UVM

L 56-65

−21.5

CSUB

W 70-62

−15.5

LBSU

L 78-81

+17.5

RICE

W 84-62

+5.5

GONZ

L 56-96

−0.5

SMC

L 45-72

−24.5

SCU

L 63-82

−5.5

PAC

L 69-74

+4.5

USD

L 63-83

−3.5

L 60-80

−0.5

PORT

W 67-63

−17.5

GONZ

L 60-84

−6.5

WSU

L 79-95

+27.5

USD

L 88-92

+28.5

SEA

L 81-83

+24.5

PAC

L 59-92

+8.5

SMC

L 60-88

+3.5

LMU

W 90-89

+31.5

PORT

W 95-87

+31.5

ORST

L 73-83

+7.5

SEA

L 80-87

+21.5

WSU

W 88-79

+8.5

PORT

L 68-77

−9.5

over 15under 15avg +2.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Abilene Chrstn

30 games played

Straight up

11-19

37% wins

Against the spread

14-16

47% covers · avg −2.9 pts vs the line

Over / Under

16-14

53% overs · avg +1.3 pts vs the total

Straight up

11-1937%

W L L W L W W L L W L W W L L L L L L L W W L W L L L L W L

1 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

14-1647%

L L L W L W W W W W L W W L L L L L W W W W L L L W L L W L

1 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

16-1453%

U U U U O U O O O O O O O O U U O O U U U U U O O O U U O O

2 straight overs2 of last 4 over

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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 6	vsOMA	W 73-71	-4.5	L −2.5	150.5	U 144
Nov 14	@SFA	L 66-76	+6.5	L −3.5	142.5	U 142
Nov 18	@TXST	L 49-63	+1.5	L −12.5	138.5	U 112
Nov 24	vsUTSA	W 61-50	-2.5	W +8.5	144.5	U 111
Nov 25	vsW&M	L 58-92	-1.5	L −35.5	147.5	O 150
Dec 2	@PEPP	W 71-63	-1.5	W +6.5	137.5	U 134
Dec 6	vsNMSU	W 77-69	+1.5	W +9.5	131.5	O 146
Dec 16	@ARIZ	L 62-96	+34.5	W +0.5	145.5	O 158
Dec 19	@BYU	L 67-85	+33.5	W +15.5	146.5	O 152
Dec 22	@TXSO	W 75-68	-4.5	W +2.5	138.5	O 143
Jan 1	vsUTU	L 64-79	-5.5	L −20.5	139.5	O 143
Jan 3	vsUVU	W 85-68	+7.5	W +24.5	139.5	O 153
Jan 8	@TAR	W 84-80	+4.5	W +8.5	140.5	O 164
Jan 10	@UTA	L 72-82	+3.5	L −6.5	134.5	O 154
Jan 15	vsCBU	L 58-74	-1.5	L −17.5	140.5	U 132
Jan 17	@SUU	L 52-74	-3.5	L −25.5	149.5	U 126
Jan 29	vsUTU	L 70-76	-3.5	L −9.5	145.5	O 146
Jan 31	vsSUU	L 76-79	-6.5	L −9.5	150.5	O 155
Feb 5	@UVU	L 55-68	+14.5	W +1.5	145.5	U 123
Feb 7	@CBU	L 63-65	+8.5	W +6.5	135.5	U 128
Feb 12	vsUTA	W 67-63	-1.5	W +2.5	134.5	U 130
Feb 14	vsTAR	W 73-59	-3.5	W +10.5	134.5	U 132
Feb 16	@TAR	L 62-65	-1.5	L −4.5	134.5	U 127
Feb 21	vsSUU	W 87-83	-8.5	L −4.5	143.5	O 170
Feb 26	@UTU	L 81-85	+2.5	L −1.5	139.5	O 166
Feb 28	@UVU	L 67-74	+14.5	W +7.5	140.5	O 141
Mar 5	@CBU	L 48-87	+9.5	L −29.5	136.5	U 135
Mar 7	vsUTA	L 57-64	-1.5	L −8.5	131.5	U 121
Mar 11	vsTAR	W 84-78	-1.5	W +4.5	134.5	O 162
Mar 12	vsUTU	L 74-80	+1.5	L −4.5	142.5	O 154

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

OMA

W 73-71

−2.5

SFA

L 66-76

−3.5

TXST

L 49-63

−12.5

UTSA

W 61-50

+8.5

W&M

L 58-92

−35.5

PEPP

W 71-63

+6.5

NMSU

W 77-69

+9.5

ARIZ

L 62-96

+0.5

BYU

L 67-85

+15.5

TXSO

W 75-68

+2.5

UTU

L 64-79

−20.5

UVU

W 85-68

+24.5

TAR

W 84-80

+8.5

UTA

L 72-82

−6.5

CBU

L 58-74

−17.5

SUU

L 52-74

−25.5

UTU

L 70-76

−9.5

SUU

L 76-79

−9.5

UVU

L 55-68

+1.5

CBU

L 63-65

+6.5

UTA

W 67-63

+2.5

TAR

W 73-59

+10.5

TAR

L 62-65

−4.5

SUU

W 87-83

−4.5

UTU

L 81-85

−1.5

UVU

L 67-74

+7.5

CBU

L 48-87

−29.5

UTA

L 57-64

−8.5

TAR

W 84-78

+4.5

UTU

L 74-80

−4.5

covered 14didn’t cover 16avg −2.9 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

OMA

W 73-71

−6.5

SFA

L 66-76

−0.5

TXST

L 49-63

−26.5

UTSA

W 61-50

−33.5

W&M

L 58-92

+2.5

PEPP

W 71-63

−3.5

NMSU

W 77-69

+14.5

ARIZ

L 62-96

+12.5

BYU

L 67-85

+5.5

TXSO

W 75-68

+4.5

UTU

L 64-79

+3.5

UVU

W 85-68

+13.5

TAR

W 84-80

+23.5

UTA

L 72-82

+19.5

CBU

L 58-74

−8.5

SUU

L 52-74

−23.5

UTU

L 70-76

+0.5

SUU

L 76-79

+4.5

UVU

L 55-68

−22.5

CBU

L 63-65

−7.5

UTA

W 67-63

−4.5

TAR

W 73-59

−2.5

TAR

L 62-65

−7.5

SUU

W 87-83

+26.5

UTU

L 81-85

+26.5

UVU

L 67-74

+0.5

CBU

L 48-87

−1.5

UTA

L 57-64

−10.5

TAR

W 84-78

+27.5

UTU

L 74-80

+11.5

over 16under 14avg +1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin

Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.

Pepperdine has the better starters

Position by position: Pepperdine 1, Abilene Chrstn 0, even 4

PepperdineBetterAbilene Chrstn

G J. Williamson TR10.4 pts · 2 reb · 0.8 ast Score 58

PEPPSmall

G N. Bolanga TR11.6 pts · 5.9 reb · 2.3 ast Score 38

G W. McClendon TR13.7 pts · 3 reb · 1.3 ast Not ranked

No call

G Y. Rivera7.4 pts · 1.5 reb · 2.3 ast Score 41

F P. Majstorovic TR14.4 pts · 6.3 reb · 1.8 ast Score 78

No call

G I. Dye1.7 pts · 0.8 reb · 0.1 ast Not ranked

F Y. Fritz TR9.8 pts · 5.4 reb · 1.5 ast Score 58

No call

G E. Boisdur TR1.3 pts · 0.4 reb · 0.3 ast Not ranked

F E. Meuser TR6.1 pts · 5.2 reb · 1.3 ast Score 39

Even

F C. Hornecker5.2 pts · 3.5 reb · 1.1 ast Score 48

PepperdineBetterAbilene Chrstn

PEPP offense139th of 366 · -4.2

PEPPSmall

ACU defense200th of 366 · -5.0

PEPP defense216th of 366 · -5.6

PEPPSmall

ACU offense298th of 366 · -9.2

Backcourt+1.6 · 2 players

PEPPBig

Backcourt-3.6 · 4 players

Frontcourt+1.2 · 3 players

PEPPSmall

Frontcourt-0.2 · 1 player

Bench-1.6 · 3 players

ACUSmall

Bench-0.0 · 2 players

Score, worst to bestPEPP betterACU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers

Projected starters: college teams publish no depth chart, so these come from minutes played, and a freshman or a new starter can change them. The score is the share of ranked players at the position that player is ahead of. Numbers are this season's once a player has 30 minutes, 2025-26's before that. Bench is the next five by minutes. Tap a player for the full numbers.

Depth chart

Projected rotation by position, starters outlined

Pepperdine

Guards

J. Williamson26 min · TRW. McClendon25 min · TRE. Haywood19 min · TRD. Mager10 minA. BalianNewC. ChouNew

Forwards

P. Majstorovic32 min · TRY. Fritz26 min · TRE. Meuser21 min · TRA. Robinson10 min · TRA. ConstanzaNewF. BiberovicNew

Abilene Chrstn

Guards

N. Bolanga34 min · TRY. Rivera25 minI. Dye6 minE. Boisdur6 min · TRT. Pons5 min · TRI. Neyhart3 min

Forwards

C. Hornecker16 minV. Yimga MoukouriNewS. RowleyNewW. Marie-AnaisNew

In order of minutes, from rosters as of today. ESPN lists players only as guards, forwards or centers, and no injury report exists for college basketball, so a player who is out may still show here.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

Matchup stats

2025-26 · rank among 365 teams

ChartTable

Scoring

Points per game

PEPP70.4 #277

ACU67.9 #313

Points per possession

PEPP1.00 #320

ACU0.98 #340

Pace (possessions)

PEPP70.0 #117

ACU69.2 #167

Shooting

Effective FG%

PEPP47.6 #323

ACU47.5 #326

3-point %

PEPP31.4 #310

ACU31.0 #319

3-point attempt rate

PEPP39.2 #187

ACU32.8 #318

Free throw rate

PEPP33.9 #216

ACU41.7 #34

Possessions

Turnover rate

PEPP18.3 #288

ACU20.8 #356

Offensive rebound rate

PEPP29.1 #234

ACU31.0 #164

Assists per game

PEPP13.6 #176

ACU12.5 #249

Defense

Points allowed

PEPP79.7 #311

ACU73.9 #151

Points allowed per possession

PEPP1.14 #303

ACU1.07 #123

Opponent effective FG%

PEPP54.2 #306

ACU56.5 #352

Opponent 3-point %

PEPP35.5 #276

ACU40.9 #365

Turnovers forced

PEPP16.5 #184

ACU23.4 #3

Defensive rebound rate

PEPP66.0 #318

ACU70.9 #113

Steals per game

PEPP5.9 #246

ACU9.6 #4

Blocks per game

PEPP2.8 #269

ACU2.6 #298

PEPP		ACU
Scoring
70.4 #277	Points per game	67.9 #313
1.00 #320	Points per possession	0.98 #340
70.0 #117	Pace (possessions)	69.2 #167
Shooting
47.6 #323	Effective FG%	47.5 #326
31.4 #310	3-point %	31.0 #319
39.2 #187	3-point attempt rate	32.8 #318
33.9 #216	Free throw rate	41.7 #34
Possessions
18.3 #288	Turnover rate	20.8 #356
29.1 #234	Offensive rebound rate	31.0 #164
13.6 #176	Assists per game	12.5 #249
Defense
79.7 #311	Points allowed	73.9 #151
1.14 #303	Points allowed per possession	1.07 #123
54.2 #306	Opponent effective FG%	56.5 #352
35.5 #276	Opponent 3-point %	40.9 #365
16.5 #184	Turnovers forced	23.4 #3
66.0 #318	Defensive rebound rate	70.9 #113
5.9 #246	Steals per game	9.6 #4
2.8 #269	Blocks per game	2.6 #298

From the box scores. A longer bar is a better national rank, on every row; the better team's bar is solid. A green rank is near the top of Division I, a red one near the bottom. Pace and 3-point rate are styles, so they have no better side.

Pepperdine

7-23 in 2025-26 overall · 4-15 in conference · West Coast Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Portland68–77
Wvs Washington St88–79
Lvs Seattle U80–87
L@ Oregon St73–83
W@ Portland95–87

A week or more of rest.

Abilene Chrstn

11-19 in 2025-26 overall · 6-14 in conference · United Athletic Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Utah Tech74–80
Wvs Tarleton St84–78
Lvs UT Arlington57–64
L@ CA Baptist48–87
L@ Utah Valley67–74

A week or more of rest.

Pepperdine Waves at Abilene Christian Wildcats

What could decide it: PEPP has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

Recent meetings

ATS History · 2025-26

Pepperdine

Abilene Chrstn

Pepperdine has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Pepperdine

Abilene Chrstn