UL Monroe Warhawks at Arizona State Sun Devils: Model Line and Edge

Fri, Nov 13, 9:00 PM ETDesert Financial Arena · at Arizona St

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: UL Monroe and Arizona St
ULM	This season	ASU
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 ASU 93–61 · win probability ASU 100%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 154.0

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: ASU has more of the edges

ULM 1, ASU 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

ASUBig

ASU offense vs ULM defense

Offense 55th of 366 against a defense 361st, on the model’s ratings

ASUBig

ULM offense vs ASU defense

Offense 332nd of 366 against a defense 60th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Schedule so far

ULM has played the 216th-hardest schedule, ASU the 13th. A record against a soft schedule means less

ASUBig

Shooting

Effective FG%: ULM 47.8 and allows 57.1; ASU 51.1 and allows 52.4

ASUSmall

Three-pointers

ULM hits 32.2% and allows 36.9%; ASU hits 33.4% and allows 35.0%. Threes are 41.9% and 38.4% of their shots

ASUSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: ULM 16.9%, ASU 17.1%. Forced: ULM 15.7%, ASU 18.4%

ASUSmall

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: ULM 25.1%, ASU 29.9%. Defensive: ULM 64.6%, ASU 65.1%

ULMSmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: ULM 38.8, ASU 39.5. Allowed: ULM 27.7, ASU 34.3

ASUSmall

Home court

ASU at home. This season: ASU 0-0 at home, ULM 0-0 away

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: ULM 1%, ASU 11%. Transfers in: ULM 6, ASU 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Context

Tempo

About 71 possessions: ULM plays 71.3 a game (58th fastest), ASU 70.6 (93rd). Faster games mean more points

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	—	ASU -31.1	—
Total	—	154.0	—
Projected score	—	ULM 61.4 · ASU 92.6

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	ASU -18.4	—
1H total	72.0	—
1H projected score	ULM 26.8 · ASU 45.2	—

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
ULM WWLWW	17-12	59%	9-7	—
ASU WWLWL	20-13	61%	10-5	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
ULM UOUUO	20-9	69%	2-28
ASU UUOOU	16-17	48%	17-16

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
ULM	1-9 10%	7-3 70%	6-4 60%
ASU	5-5 50%	6-4 60%	3-7 30%

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

UL Monroe

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 14	@ GCU	No recent meeting
Nov 18	@ LSU	L60–95LO
Nov 24	vs HCU	L61–72LU

Arizona St

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 18	vs OAK	No recent meeting
Nov 25	vs LSU	No recent meeting
Nov 26	vs SC	No recent meeting

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

ATS History · 2025-26

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

UL Monroe

30 games played

Straight up

2-28

7% wins

Against the spread

17-12

59% covers · avg −0.1 pts vs the line

Over / Under

20-9

69% overs · avg +6.4 pts vs the total

Straight up

2-287%

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

8 straight losses0 of last 4 won

Against the spread

17-1259%

L W L L W L W L W W L W L W W W L L W–W W L L W W W L W W

2 straight covers3 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

20-969%

O O U O O O U O O O O O O O O U U O U–O O U O O U O U U O

2 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 3	@NIU	L 82-102	+7.5	L −12.5	147.5	O 184
Nov 7	@MISS	L 65-86	+37.5	W +16.5	149.5	O 151
Nov 13	@HCU	L 61-72	+8.5	L −2.5	143.5	U 133
Nov 17	vsLAM	L 66-79	+11.5	L −1.5	140.5	O 145
Nov 22	vsMORE	L 80-83	+6.5	W +3.5	145.5	O 163
Nov 23	@ETSU	L 55-97	+19.5	L −22.5	146.5	O 152
Dec 3	vsMVSU	W 66-52	-9.5	W +4.5	149.5	U 118
Dec 7	@SFA	L 76-96	+19.5	L −0.5	142.5	O 172
Dec 13	@MIA	L 79-104	+35.5	W +10.5	153.5	O 183
Dec 17	vsUSA	L 92-96	+9.5	W +5.5	148.5	O 188
Dec 20	vsUL	L 62-76	+1.5	L −12.5	136.5	O 138
Dec 28	@KSU	L 85-94	+32.5	W +23.5	169.5	O 179
Jan 1	vsUSM	L 73-87	+9.5	L −4.5	152.5	O 160
Jan 3	vsTXST	L 79-84	+10.5	W +5.5	150.5	O 163
Jan 8	@UL	L 79-85	+7.5	W +1.5	139.5	O 164
Jan 10	@USM	L 60-70	+14.5	W +4.5	155.5	U 130
Jan 17	vsGAST	L 57-77	+6.5	L −13.5	155.5	U 134
Jan 22	@MRSH	L 60-115	+18.5	L −36.5	160.5	O 175
Jan 23	@APP	L 43-59	+16.5	W +0.5	144.5	U 102
Jan 30	vsGASO	L 76-79	—	—	—	—
Feb 1	vsCCU	L 79-83	+10.5	W +6.5	146.5	O 162
Feb 4	@ODU	W 85-79	+14.5	W +20.5	154.5	O 164
Feb 7	vsBALL	L 68-73	+4.5	L −0.5	143.5	U 141
Feb 11	@ARST	L 70-103	+20.5	L −12.5	162.5	O 173
Feb 14	@TXST	L 84-95	+14.5	W +3.5	149.5	O 179
Feb 18	vsTROY	L 76-77	+17.5	W +16.5	153.5	U 153
Feb 21	vsARST	L 94-102	+15.5	W +7.5	165.5	O 196
Feb 25	@USA	L 54-89	+14.5	L −20.5	153.5	U 143
Feb 27	@TROY	L 65-80	+18.5	W +3.5	153.5	U 145
Mar 3	vsODU	L 80-87	+9.5	W +2.5	157.5	O 167

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

NIU

L 82-102

−12.5

MISS

L 65-86

+16.5

HCU

L 61-72

−2.5

LAM

L 66-79

−1.5

L 80-83

+3.5

ETSU

L 55-97

−22.5

MVSU

W 66-52

+4.5

SFA

L 76-96

−0.5

MIA

L 79-104

+10.5

USA

L 92-96

+5.5

L 62-76

−12.5

KSU

L 85-94

+23.5

USM

L 73-87

−4.5

TXST

L 79-84

+5.5

L 79-85

+1.5

USM

L 60-70

+4.5

GAST

L 57-77

−13.5

MRSH

L 60-115

−36.5

APP

L 43-59

+0.5

CCU

L 79-83

+6.5

ODU

W 85-79

+20.5

BALL

L 68-73

−0.5

ARST

L 70-103

−12.5

TXST

L 84-95

+3.5

TROY

L 76-77

+16.5

ARST

L 94-102

+7.5

USA

L 54-89

−20.5

TROY

L 65-80

+3.5

ODU

L 80-87

+2.5

covered 17didn’t cover 12avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

NIU

L 82-102

+36.5

MISS

L 65-86

+1.5

HCU

L 61-72

−10.5

LAM

L 66-79

+4.5

L 80-83

+17.5

ETSU

L 55-97

+5.5

MVSU

W 66-52

−31.5

SFA

L 76-96

+29.5

MIA

L 79-104

+29.5

USA

L 92-96

+39.5

L 62-76

+1.5

KSU

L 85-94

+9.5

USM

L 73-87

+7.5

TXST

L 79-84

+12.5

L 79-85

+24.5

USM

L 60-70

−25.5

GAST

L 57-77

−21.5

MRSH

L 60-115

+14.5

APP

L 43-59

−42.5

CCU

L 79-83

+15.5

ODU

W 85-79

+9.5

BALL

L 68-73

−2.5

ARST

L 70-103

+10.5

TXST

L 84-95

+29.5

TROY

L 76-77

−0.5

ARST

L 94-102

+30.5

USA

L 54-89

−10.5

TROY

L 65-80

−8.5

ODU

L 80-87

+9.5

over 20under 9avg +6.4 ptslonger = bigger margin

Arizona St

33 games played

Straight up

17-16

52% wins

Against the spread

20-13

61% covers · avg +0.9 pts vs the line

Over / Under

16-17

48% overs · avg +0.1 pts vs the total

Straight up

17-1652%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

20-1361%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

16-1748%

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

2 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 4	vsSUU	W 81-64	-17.5	L −0.5	151.5	U 145
Nov 9	vsUTU	W 81-66	-12.5	W +2.5	152.5	U 147
Nov 14	vsGONZ	L 65-77	+13.5	W +1.5	158.5	U 142
Nov 17	vsGAST	W 75-62	-18.5	L −5.5	145.5	U 137
Nov 20	@HAW	W 83-76	+1.5	W +8.5	143.5	O 159
Nov 24	vsTEX	W 87-86	+6.5	W +7.5	153.5	O 173
Nov 25	vsWSU	W 100-94	-4.5	W +1.5	157.5	O 194
Nov 26	vsUSC	L 75-88	+4.5	L −8.5	161.5	O 163
Dec 6	vsOU	W 86-70	+5.5	W +21.5	157.5	U 156
Dec 9	vsNAU	W 73-48	-16.5	W +8.5	154.5	U 121
Dec 13	vsSCU	W 82-79	+1.5	W +4.5	154.5	O 161
Dec 17	@UCLA	L 77-90	+9.5	L −3.5	142.5	O 167
Dec 21	vsORST	L 75-78	-12.5	L −15.5	147.5	O 153
Jan 3	vsCOLO	L 89-95	-1.5	L −7.5	156.5	O 184
Jan 7	@BYU	L 76-104	+17.5	L −10.5	168.5	O 180
Jan 10	vsKSU	W 87-84	-1.5	W +1.5	169.5	O 171
Jan 14	@ARIZ	L 82-89	+21.5	W +14.5	167.5	O 171
Jan 18	@HOU	L 73-103	+18.5	L −11.5	142.5	O 176
Jan 21	vsWVU	L 63-75	-1.5	L −13.5	145.5	U 138
Jan 24	vsCIN	W 82-68	+3.5	W +17.5	146.5	O 150
Jan 27	@UCF	L 76-79	+6.5	W +3.5	161.5	U 155
Jan 31	vsARIZ	L 74-87	+14.5	W +1.5	163.5	U 161
Feb 4	@UTAH	W 71-63	+1.5	W +9.5	161.5	U 134
Feb 7	@COLO	L 70-78	+3.5	L −4.5	158.5	U 148
Feb 10	vsOKST	W 85-76	-3.5	W +5.5	163.5	U 161
Feb 17	vsTTU	W 72-67	+7.5	W +12.5	156.5	U 139
Feb 21	@BAY	L 68-73	+8.5	W +3.5	157.5	U 141
Feb 24	@TCU	L 78-90	+6.5	L −5.5	149.5	O 168
Feb 28	vsUTAH	W 73-60	-6.5	W +6.5	150.5	U 133
Mar 3	vsKU	W 70-60	+5.5	W +15.5	151.5	U 130
Mar 7	@ISU	L 65-86	+16.5	L −4.5	148.5	O 151
Mar 10	vsBAY	W 83-79	+5.5	W +9.5	152.5	O 162
Mar 11	vsISU	L 42-91	+13.5	L −35.5	148.5	U 133

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

SUU

W 81-64

−0.5

UTU

W 81-66

+2.5

GONZ

L 65-77

+1.5

GAST

W 75-62

−5.5

HAW

W 83-76

+8.5

TEX

W 87-86

+7.5

WSU

W 100-94

+1.5

USC

L 75-88

−8.5

W 86-70

+21.5

NAU

W 73-48

+8.5

SCU

W 82-79

+4.5

UCLA

L 77-90

−3.5

ORST

L 75-78

−15.5

COLO

L 89-95

−7.5

BYU

L 76-104

−10.5

KSU

W 87-84

+1.5

ARIZ

L 82-89

+14.5

HOU

L 73-103

−11.5

WVU

L 63-75

−13.5

CIN

W 82-68

+17.5

UCF

L 76-79

+3.5

ARIZ

L 74-87

+1.5

UTAH

W 71-63

+9.5

COLO

L 70-78

−4.5

OKST

W 85-76

+5.5

TTU

W 72-67

+12.5

BAY

L 68-73

+3.5

TCU

L 78-90

−5.5

UTAH

W 73-60

+6.5

W 70-60

+15.5

ISU

L 65-86

−4.5

BAY

W 83-79

+9.5

ISU

L 42-91

−35.5

covered 20didn’t cover 13avg +0.9 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

SUU

W 81-64

−6.5

UTU

W 81-66

−5.5

GONZ

L 65-77

−16.5

GAST

W 75-62

−8.5

HAW

W 83-76

+15.5

TEX

W 87-86

+19.5

WSU

W 100-94

+36.5

USC

L 75-88

+1.5

W 86-70

−1.5

NAU

W 73-48

−33.5

SCU

W 82-79

+6.5

UCLA

L 77-90

+24.5

ORST

L 75-78

+5.5

COLO

L 89-95

+27.5

BYU

L 76-104

+11.5

KSU

W 87-84

+1.5

ARIZ

L 82-89

+3.5

HOU

L 73-103

+33.5

WVU

L 63-75

−7.5

CIN

W 82-68

+3.5

UCF

L 76-79

−6.5

ARIZ

L 74-87

−2.5

UTAH

W 71-63

−27.5

COLO

L 70-78

−10.5

OKST

W 85-76

−2.5

TTU

W 72-67

−17.5

BAY

L 68-73

−16.5

TCU

L 78-90

+18.5

UTAH

W 73-60

−17.5

W 70-60

−21.5

ISU

L 65-86

+2.5

BAY

W 83-79

+9.5

ISU

L 42-91

−15.5

over 16under 17avg +0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

Arizona St has the better starters

Position by position: UL Monroe 0, Arizona St 2, even 3

UL MonroeBetterArizona St

G D. Anderson TR5.1 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.6 ast Score 23

ASUBig

G J. Foxwell TR15.8 pts · 4.3 reb · 6.4 ast Score 79

G K. London TR5.6 pts · 1.4 reb · 1 ast Score 5

ASUBig

G D. Shaw TR7.5 pts · 5.3 reb · 1.5 ast Score 55

G Q. McPherson TR4.4 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.5 ast Score 60

Even

G E. Innocenti TR6 pts · 3.8 reb · 1.7 ast Score 58

G R. Cowherd TR0.9 pts · 0 reb · 0.1 ast Not ranked

No call

F P. Murauskas TR18.4 pts · 7.8 reb · 2.2 ast Score 97

C J. Lafleur TR1 pts · 2.5 reb · 0 ast Not ranked

No call

C B. Defty TR15.1 pts · 6.8 reb · 1.9 ast Score 84

UL MonroeBetterArizona St

ULM offense332nd of 366 · -10.8

ASUBig

ASU defense60th of 366 · +1.2

ULM defense361st of 366 · -11.5

ASUBig

ASU offense55th of 366 · +3.2

Backcourt-4.2 · 4 players

ASUBig

Backcourt+1.0 · 3 players

Frontcourt-0.3 · 1 player

ASUBig

Frontcourt+9.4 · 2 players

Bench-0.1 · 2 players

Even

Bench-0.9 · 2 players

Score, worst to bestULM betterASU 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

UL Monroe

Guards

D. Anderson16 min · TRK. London14 min · TRQ. McPherson11 min · TRR. Cowherd5 min · TRC. Campbell1 minP. TillmanNew

Forwards

L. Carr2 min · TRG. ChamberlainNewJ. RegisteNewG. SchoentgenNew

Centers

J. Lafleur6 min · TRM. AdonryNewZ. NdanckyNew

Arizona St

Guards

J. Foxwell36 min · TRD. Shaw28 min · TRE. Innocenti24 min · TRB. Ford22 minV. WallaceNewJ. CroyNew

Forwards

P. Murauskas33 min · TRA. NyuonNewM. VaughnsNew

Centers

B. Defty29 min · TRN. Garcia7 min · TRF. MalesevicNew

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

ULM71.7 #255

ASU76.3 #133

Points per possession

ULM1.00 #321

ASU1.08 #178

Pace (possessions)

ULM71.3 #58

ASU70.6 #93

Shooting

Effective FG%

ULM47.8 #316

ASU51.1 #190

3-point %

ULM32.2 #270

ASU33.4 #202

3-point attempt rate

ULM41.9 #135

ASU38.4 #201

Free throw rate

ULM38.8 #85

ASU39.5 #66

Possessions

Turnover rate

ULM16.9 #196

ASU17.1 #211

Offensive rebound rate

ULM25.1 #338

ASU29.9 #206

Assists per game

ULM11.9 #288

ASU13.7 #166

Defense

Points allowed

ULM85.4 #361

ASU78.3 #273

Points allowed per possession

ULM1.20 #358

ASU1.11 #239

Opponent effective FG%

ULM57.1 #358

ASU52.4 #235

Opponent 3-point %

ULM36.9 #343

ASU35.0 #249

Turnovers forced

ULM15.7 #235

ASU18.4 #77

Defensive rebound rate

ULM64.6 #345

ASU65.1 #337

Steals per game

ULM6.0 #237

ASU7.0 #122

Blocks per game

ULM3.2 #189

ASU4.6 #32

ULM		ASU
Scoring
71.7 #255	Points per game	76.3 #133
1.00 #321	Points per possession	1.08 #178
71.3 #58	Pace (possessions)	70.6 #93
Shooting
47.8 #316	Effective FG%	51.1 #190
32.2 #270	3-point %	33.4 #202
41.9 #135	3-point attempt rate	38.4 #201
38.8 #85	Free throw rate	39.5 #66
Possessions
16.9 #196	Turnover rate	17.1 #211
25.1 #338	Offensive rebound rate	29.9 #206
11.9 #288	Assists per game	13.7 #166
Defense
85.4 #361	Points allowed	78.3 #273
1.20 #358	Points allowed per possession	1.11 #239
57.1 #358	Opponent effective FG%	52.4 #235
36.9 #343	Opponent 3-point %	35.0 #249
15.7 #235	Turnovers forced	18.4 #77
64.6 #345	Defensive rebound rate	65.1 #337
6.0 #237	Steals per game	7.0 #122
3.2 #189	Blocks per game	4.6 #32

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.

UL Monroe

2-28 in 2025-26 overall · 1-18 in conference · Sun Belt Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Old Dominion80–87
L@ Troy65–80
L@ South Alabama54–89
Lvs Arkansas St94–102
Lvs Troy76–77

A week or more of rest.

Arizona St

17-16 in 2025-26 overall · 8-12 in conference · Big 12 Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Iowa State42–91
Wvs Baylor83–79
L@ Iowa State65–86
Wvs Kansas70–60
Wvs Utah73–60

A week or more of rest.

UL Monroe Warhawks at Arizona State Sun Devils

What could decide it: ASU has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

UL Monroe

Arizona St

Arizona St has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

UL Monroe

Arizona St