Vanderbilt Commodores at California Golden Bears: Model Line and Edge

Sun, Dec 6, 8:00 PM ETHaas Pavilion · at California

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Vanderbilt and California
VAN	This season	CAL
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 VAN 82–74 · win probability VAN 78%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 155.8

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: VAN has more of the edges

VAN 5, CAL 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

VANSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: VAN 13.5%, CAL 15.1%. Forced: VAN 17.7%, CAL 16.1%

VANSmall

VAN offense vs CAL defense

Offense 22nd of 366 against a defense 100th, on the model’s ratings

CALSmall

Three-pointers

VAN hits 35.6% and allows 32.6%; CAL hits 36.9% and allows 31.0%. Threes are 44.2% and 43.1% of their shots

VANSmall

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: VAN 31.2%, CAL 26.0%. Defensive: VAN 68.5%, CAL 69.5%

Context

Schedule so far

VAN has played the 21st-hardest schedule, CAL the 77th. A record against a soft schedule means less

VANSmall

Shooting

Effective FG%: VAN 55.3 and allows 49.0; CAL 52.6 and allows 49.8

VANSmall

CAL offense vs VAN defense

Offense 84th of 366 against a defense 29th, on the model’s ratings

CALSmall

Home court

CAL at home. This season: CAL 0-0 at home, VAN 0-0 away

Context

Tempo

About 70 possessions: VAN plays 70.9 a game (80th fastest), CAL 69.8 (126th). Faster games mean more points

Even

Free throws

Free throw rate: VAN 38.1, CAL 36.2. Allowed: VAN 39.5, CAL 36.3

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: VAN 26%, CAL 29%. Transfers in: VAN 5, CAL 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

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	—	VAN -8.8	—
Total	—	155.8	—
Projected score	—	VAN 82.3 · CAL 73.5

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	VAN -5.4	—
1H total	72.8	—
1H projected score	VAN 39.1 · CAL 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
VAN WWLLL	18-18	50%	6-6	—
CAL WLLWL	17-16	52%	9-12	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
VAN UOUUU	17-19	47%	27-9
CAL UUOOU	14-19	42%	21-12

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
VAN	6-4 60%	4-6 40%	5-5 50%
CAL	5-5 50%	5-5 50%	4-6 40%

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

Vanderbilt

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 12	vs WGA	No recent meeting

California

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 10	vs SELA	No recent meeting
Dec 12	vs UCR	No recent meeting

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

Recent meetings

Since 2021-22

VAN 1–0 CALVAN leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · VAN 1-0 ATS

Date	Result	Line	Covered
Nov 13, 2024-25	CAL 69 @ VAN 85	VAN -7.5	VAN W

ATS History · 2025-26

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

Vanderbilt

36 games played

Straight up

27-9

75% wins

Against the spread

18-18

50% covers · avg +0.6 pts vs the line

Over / Under

17-19

47% overs · avg +1.2 pts vs the total

Straight up

27-975%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

18-1850%

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

3 straight misses ATS1 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

17-1947%

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

3 straight unders1 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 3	vsLIP	W 105-61	-26.5	W +17.5	154.5	O 166
Nov 8	@UCF	W 105-93	-10.5	W +1.5	166.5	O 198
Nov 12	vsEKU	W 92-62	-28.5	W +1.5	168.5	U 154
Nov 15	vsUAPB	W 104-75	-41.5	L −12.5	172.5	O 179
Nov 20	vsTXSO	W 109-74	-36.5	L −1.5	164.5	O 183
Nov 26	vsWKU	W 83-78	-18.5	L −13.5	168.5	U 161
Nov 27	vsVCU	W 89-74	-6.5	W +8.5	161.5	O 163
Nov 28	vsSMC	W 96-71	-4.5	W +20.5	149.5	O 167
Dec 3	vsSMU	W 88-69	-10.5	W +8.5	165.5	U 157
Dec 13	vsCARK	W 83-72	-36.5	L −25.5	158.5	U 155
Dec 17	@MEM	W 77-70	-9.5	L −2.5	159.5	U 147
Dec 21	@WAKE	W 98-67	-5.5	W +25.5	164.5	O 165
Dec 29	vsNHVN	W 96-53	-39.5	W +3.5	145.5	O 149
Jan 3	@SC	W 83-71	-9.5	W +2.5	155.5	U 154
Jan 7	vsALA	W 96-90	-3.5	W +2.5	176.5	O 186
Jan 10	vsLSU	W 84-73	-13.5	L −2.5	159.5	U 157
Jan 14	@TEX	L 64-80	-3.5	L −19.5	163.5	U 144
Jan 17	vsFLA	L 94-98	+1.5	L −2.5	164.5	O 192
Jan 20	@ARK	L 68-93	+1.5	L −23.5	173.5	U 161
Jan 24	@MSST	W 88-56	-7.5	W +24.5	159.5	U 144
Jan 27	vsUK	W 80-55	-5.5	W +19.5	155.5	U 135
Jan 31	vsMISS	W 71-68	-10.5	L −7.5	149.5	U 139
Feb 7	vsOU	L 91-92	-11.5	L −12.5	159.5	O 183
Feb 10	@AUB	W 84-76	+3.5	W +11.5	161.5	U 160
Feb 14	vsTA&M	W 82-69	-7.5	W +5.5	165.5	U 151
Feb 18	@MIZ	L 80-81	-3.5	L −4.5	154.5	O 161
Feb 21	vsTENN	L 65-69	-2.5	L −6.5	150.5	U 134
Feb 25	vsUGA	W 88-80	-7.5	W +0.5	163.5	O 168
Feb 28	@UK	L 77-91	+1.5	L −12.5	157.5	O 168
Mar 3	@MISS	W 89-86	-7.5	L −4.5	155.5	O 175
Mar 7	@TENN	W 86-82	+2.5	W +6.5	146.5	O 168
Mar 13	vsTENN	W 75-68	+1.5	W +8.5	147.5	U 143
Mar 14	vsFLA	W 91-74	+7.5	W +24.5	161.5	O 165
Mar 15	vsARK	L 75-86	-2.5	L −13.5	165.5	U 161
Mar 19	vsMCN	W 78-68	-12.5	L −2.5	148.5	U 146
Mar 21	vsNEB	L 72-74	-1.5	L −3.5	146.5	U 146

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

LIP

W 105-61

+17.5

UCF

W 105-93

+1.5

EKU

W 92-62

+1.5

UAPB

W 104-75

−12.5

TXSO

W 109-74

−1.5

WKU

W 83-78

−13.5

VCU

W 89-74

+8.5

SMC

W 96-71

+20.5

SMU

W 88-69

+8.5

CARK

W 83-72

−25.5

MEM

W 77-70

−2.5

WAKE

W 98-67

+25.5

NHVN

W 96-53

+3.5

W 83-71

+2.5

ALA

W 96-90

+2.5

LSU

W 84-73

−2.5

TEX

L 64-80

−19.5

FLA

L 94-98

−2.5

ARK

L 68-93

−23.5

MSST

W 88-56

+24.5

W 80-55

+19.5

MISS

W 71-68

−7.5

L 91-92

−12.5

AUB

W 84-76

+11.5

TA&M

W 82-69

+5.5

MIZ

L 80-81

−4.5

TENN

L 65-69

−6.5

UGA

W 88-80

+0.5

L 77-91

−12.5

MISS

W 89-86

−4.5

TENN

W 86-82

+6.5

TENN

W 75-68

+8.5

FLA

W 91-74

+24.5

ARK

L 75-86

−13.5

MCN

W 78-68

−2.5

NEB

L 72-74

−3.5

covered 18didn’t cover 18avg +0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

LIP

W 105-61

+11.5

UCF

W 105-93

+31.5

EKU

W 92-62

−14.5

UAPB

W 104-75

+6.5

TXSO

W 109-74

+18.5

WKU

W 83-78

−7.5

VCU

W 89-74

+1.5

SMC

W 96-71

+17.5

SMU

W 88-69

−8.5

CARK

W 83-72

−3.5

MEM

W 77-70

−12.5

WAKE

W 98-67

+0.5

NHVN

W 96-53

+3.5

W 83-71

−1.5

ALA

W 96-90

+9.5

LSU

W 84-73

−2.5

TEX

L 64-80

−19.5

FLA

L 94-98

+27.5

ARK

L 68-93

−12.5

MSST

W 88-56

−15.5

W 80-55

−20.5

MISS

W 71-68

−10.5

L 91-92

+23.5

AUB

W 84-76

−1.5

TA&M

W 82-69

−14.5

MIZ

L 80-81

+6.5

TENN

L 65-69

−16.5

UGA

W 88-80

+4.5

L 77-91

+10.5

MISS

W 89-86

+19.5

TENN

W 86-82

+21.5

TENN

W 75-68

−4.5

FLA

W 91-74

+3.5

ARK

L 75-86

−4.5

MCN

W 78-68

−2.5

NEB

L 72-74

−0.5

over 17under 19avg +1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

California

33 games played

Straight up

21-12

64% wins

Against the spread

17-16

52% covers · avg +1.7 pts vs the line

Over / Under

14-19

42% overs · avg +1.1 pts vs the total

Straight up

21-1264%

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

1 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

17-1652%

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

1 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

14-1942%

U U U O U O O U U O U U O O U O U O U U O O U O O U U U 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 3	vsCSUB	W 87-60	-15.5	W +11.5	147.5	U 147
Nov 6	vsWRST	W 77-67	-14.5	L −4.5	148.5	U 144
Nov 10	vsCSUF	W 93-65	-22.5	W +5.5	162.5	U 158
Nov 13	@KSU	L 96-99	+6.5	W +3.5	164.5	O 195
Nov 18	vsPRES	W 67-57	-10.5	L −0.5	124.5	U 124
Nov 21	vsSAC	W 91-67	-21.5	W +2.5	154.5	O 158
Nov 25	vsUCLA	W 80-72	+7.5	W +15.5	143.5	O 152
Dec 2	vsUTAH	W 79-72	-7.5	L −0.5	152.5	U 151
Dec 6	vsPAC	W 67-61	-7.5	L −1.5	144.5	U 128
Dec 13	vsNWST	W 79-70	-19.5	L −10.5	145.5	O 149
Dec 19	vsMORG	W 97-50	-26.5	W +20.5	151.5	U 147
Dec 21	vsCOLU	W 74-56	-8.5	W +9.5	153.5	U 130
Dec 30	vsLOU	L 70-90	+7.5	L −12.5	159.5	O 160
Jan 2	vsND	W 72-71	-3.5	L −2.5	138.5	O 143
Jan 7	@UVA	L 60-84	+14.5	L −9.5	148.5	U 144
Jan 10	@VT	L 75-78	+5.5	W +2.5	148.5	O 153
Jan 14	vsDUKE	L 56-71	+14.5	L −0.5	149.5	U 127
Jan 17	vsUNC	W 84-78	+7.5	W +13.5	151.5	O 162
Jan 24	@STAN	W 78-66	+4.5	W +16.5	146.5	U 144
Jan 28	@FSU	L 61-63	+3.5	W +1.5	157.5	U 124
Jan 31	@MIA	W 86-85	+11.5	W +12.5	148.5	O 171
Feb 4	vsGT	W 90-85	-7.5	L −2.5	152.5	O 175
Feb 7	vsCLEM	L 55-77	+4.5	L −17.5	139.5	U 132
Feb 11	@SYR	L 100-107	+6.5	L −0.5	148.5	O 207
Feb 14	@BC	W 86-75	-3.5	W +7.5	144.5	O 161
Feb 21	vsSTAN	W 72-66	-1.5	W +4.5	149.5	U 138
Feb 25	vsSMU	W 73-69	+4.5	W +8.5	163.5	U 142
Feb 28	vsPITT	L 56-72	-6.5	L −22.5	143.5	U 128
Mar 4	@GT	W 76-65	-2.5	W +8.5	154.5	U 141
Mar 7	@WAKE	L 73-80	+5.5	L −1.5	154.5	U 153
Mar 11	vsFSU	L 89-95	+1.5	L −4.5	154.5	O 184
Mar 18	vsUIC	W 91-73	-6.5	W +11.5	150.5	O 164
Mar 22	vsJOES	L 75-76	-5.5	L −6.5	152.5	U 151

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

CSUB

W 87-60

+11.5

WRST

W 77-67

−4.5

CSUF

W 93-65

+5.5

KSU

L 96-99

+3.5

PRES

W 67-57

−0.5

SAC

W 91-67

+2.5

UCLA

W 80-72

+15.5

UTAH

W 79-72

−0.5

PAC

W 67-61

−1.5

NWST

W 79-70

−10.5

MORG

W 97-50

+20.5

COLU

W 74-56

+9.5

LOU

L 70-90

−12.5

W 72-71

−2.5

UVA

L 60-84

−9.5

L 75-78

+2.5

DUKE

L 56-71

−0.5

UNC

W 84-78

+13.5

STAN

W 78-66

+16.5

FSU

L 61-63

+1.5

MIA

W 86-85

+12.5

W 90-85

−2.5

CLEM

L 55-77

−17.5

SYR

L 100-107

−0.5

W 86-75

+7.5

STAN

W 72-66

+4.5

SMU

W 73-69

+8.5

PITT

L 56-72

−22.5

W 76-65

+8.5

WAKE

L 73-80

−1.5

FSU

L 89-95

−4.5

UIC

W 91-73

+11.5

JOES

L 75-76

−6.5

covered 17didn’t cover 16avg +1.7 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

CSUB

W 87-60

−0.5

WRST

W 77-67

−4.5

CSUF

W 93-65

−4.5

KSU

L 96-99

+30.5

PRES

W 67-57

−0.5

SAC

W 91-67

+3.5

UCLA

W 80-72

+8.5

UTAH

W 79-72

−1.5

PAC

W 67-61

−16.5

NWST

W 79-70

+3.5

MORG

W 97-50

−4.5

COLU

W 74-56

−23.5

LOU

L 70-90

+0.5

W 72-71

+4.5

UVA

L 60-84

−4.5

L 75-78

+4.5

DUKE

L 56-71

−22.5

UNC

W 84-78

+10.5

STAN

W 78-66

−2.5

FSU

L 61-63

−33.5

MIA

W 86-85

+22.5

W 90-85

+22.5

CLEM

L 55-77

−7.5

SYR

L 100-107

+58.5

W 86-75

+16.5

STAN

W 72-66

−11.5

SMU

W 73-69

−21.5

PITT

L 56-72

−15.5

W 76-65

−13.5

WAKE

L 73-80

−1.5

FSU

L 89-95

+29.5

UIC

W 91-73

+13.5

JOES

L 75-76

−1.5

over 14under 19avg +1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

Vanderbilt has the better starters

Position by position: Vanderbilt 2, California 1, even 2

VanderbiltBetterCalifornia

G T. Tanner19.5 pts · 3.6 reb · 5.1 ast Score 100

VANSmall

G M. Cooper TR13.8 pts · 2.7 reb · 2 ast Score 74

G A. Glass TR16.1 pts · 3 reb · 2.4 ast Score 86

Even

G N. Indrusaitis TR9.1 pts · 3.1 reb · 1.7 ast Score 76

F S. Williams-Adams TR7 pts · 3.5 reb · 1.5 ast Score 55

Even

G J. Ross TR6.7 pts · 2.5 reb · 2.3 ast Score 58

F B. Dak TR11.5 pts · 6.5 reb · 1.4 ast Score 90

VANBig

G S. Carr3.6 pts · 2.5 reb · 2.2 ast Score 46

C B. Buyuktuncel TR6.5 pts · 5.6 reb · 1.9 ast Score 61

CALSmall

F L. Dort8 pts · 7.8 reb · 0.9 ast Score 83

VanderbiltBetterCalifornia

VAN offense22nd of 366 · +7.6

VANSmall

CAL defense100th of 366 · -0.7

VAN defense29th of 366 · +3.7

VANSmall

CAL offense84th of 366 · +0.4

Backcourt+10.2 · 2 players

VANBig

Backcourt+1.0 · 4 players

Frontcourt+3.7 · 3 players

VANSmall

Frontcourt+1.7 · 1 player

Bench-0.4 · 3 players

Even

Bench+0.4 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestVAN betterCAL 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

Vanderbilt

Guards

T. Tanner34 minA. Glass29 min · TRA. BrownNewM. HawkinsNewB. AllenNewC. ByingtonNew

Forwards

S. Williams-Adams27 min · TRB. Dak26 min · TRT. Barrett23 min · TRC. Bing15 minE. MgbakoNewG. NesmithNew

Centers

B. Buyuktuncel24 min · TRJ. Leverett4 min

California

Guards

M. Cooper27 min · TRN. Indrusaitis24 min · TRJ. Ross21 min · TRS. Carr17 minB. Fisher1 minL. Butler1 min

Forwards

L. Dort23 minJ. Wilkins10 min · TRA. Ali7 min · TRS. Yeanay5 minD. Manyiel Dut4 min

Centers

M. Kocanas7 minN. MitrovicNewD. DaubarisNew

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

VAN85.7 #14

CAL77.7 #99

Points per possession

VAN1.21 #9

CAL1.11 #118

Pace (possessions)

VAN70.9 #80

CAL69.8 #126

Shooting

Effective FG%

VAN55.3 #31

CAL52.6 #119

3-point %

VAN35.6 #86

CAL36.9 #30

3-point attempt rate

VAN44.2 #85

CAL43.1 #111

Free throw rate

VAN38.1 #101

CAL36.2 #146

Possessions

Turnover rate

VAN13.5 #15

CAL15.1 #74

Offensive rebound rate

VAN31.2 #158

CAL26.0 #322

Assists per game

VAN16.3 #40

CAL14.1 #142

Defense

Points allowed

VAN75.0 #187

CAL73.4 #140

Points allowed per possession

VAN1.06 #99

CAL1.05 #92

Opponent effective FG%

VAN49.0 #67

CAL49.8 #91

Opponent 3-point %

VAN32.6 #96

CAL31.0 #34

Turnovers forced

VAN17.7 #112

CAL16.1 #216

Defensive rebound rate

VAN68.5 #231

CAL69.5 #180

Steals per game

VAN7.9 #40

CAL5.9 #244

Blocks per game

VAN4.5 #36

CAL3.0 #217

VAN		CAL
Scoring
85.7 #14	Points per game	77.7 #99
1.21 #9	Points per possession	1.11 #118
70.9 #80	Pace (possessions)	69.8 #126
Shooting
55.3 #31	Effective FG%	52.6 #119
35.6 #86	3-point %	36.9 #30
44.2 #85	3-point attempt rate	43.1 #111
38.1 #101	Free throw rate	36.2 #146
Possessions
13.5 #15	Turnover rate	15.1 #74
31.2 #158	Offensive rebound rate	26.0 #322
16.3 #40	Assists per game	14.1 #142
Defense
75.0 #187	Points allowed	73.4 #140
1.06 #99	Points allowed per possession	1.05 #92
49.0 #67	Opponent effective FG%	49.8 #91
32.6 #96	Opponent 3-point %	31.0 #34
17.7 #112	Turnovers forced	16.1 #216
68.5 #231	Defensive rebound rate	69.5 #180
7.9 #40	Steals per game	5.9 #244
4.5 #36	Blocks per game	3.0 #217

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.

Vanderbilt

27-9 in 2025-26 overall · 13-8 in conference · Southeastern Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Nebraska72–74
Wvs McNeese78–68
Lvs Arkansas75–86
Wvs Florida91–74
Wvs Tennessee75–68

A week or more of rest.

California

21-12 in 2025-26 overall · 9-10 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Saint Joseph's75–76
Wvs UIC91–73
Lvs Florida St89–95
L@ Wake Forest73–80
W@ Georgia Tech76–65

A week or more of rest.

Vanderbilt Commodores at California Golden Bears

What could decide it: VAN 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

Vanderbilt

California

Vanderbilt has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Vanderbilt

California