Le Moyne Dolphins at Clemson Tigers: Model Line and Edge

Sun, Dec 6, 1:00 PM ETLittlejohn Coliseum · at Clemson

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Le Moyne and Clemson
LEM	This season	CLEM
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 CLEM 88–57 · win probability CLEM 100%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 144.9

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: CLEM has more of the edges

LEM 1, CLEM 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

CLEMBig

LEM offense vs CLEM defense

Offense 333rd of 366 against a defense 25th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Schedule so far

LEM has played the 344th-hardest schedule, CLEM the 66th. A record against a soft schedule means less

CLEMBig

CLEM offense vs LEM defense

Offense 51st of 366 against a defense 308th, on the model’s ratings

CLEMBig

Turnovers

Turnover rate: LEM 19.1%, CLEM 14.0%. Forced: LEM 15.0%, CLEM 17.4%

CLEMSmall

Three-pointers

LEM hits 34.3% and allows 36.0%; CLEM hits 34.1% and allows 32.4%. Threes are 40.8% and 43.1% of their shots

CLEMSmall

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: LEM 25.2%, CLEM 28.1%. Defensive: LEM 71.0%, CLEM 73.7%

Context

Tempo

About 67 possessions: LEM plays 69.2 a game (168th fastest), CLEM 65.6 (326th). Faster games mean more points

CLEMSmall

Home court

CLEM at home. This season: CLEM 0-0 at home, LEM 0-0 away

LEMSmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: LEM 39.5, CLEM 36.7. Allowed: LEM 32.7, CLEM 33.9

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: LEM 24%, CLEM 37%. Transfers in: LEM 7, CLEM 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Even

Shooting

Effective FG%: LEM 52.6 and allows 49.3; CLEM 52.5 and allows 48.8

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	—	CLEM -31.2	—
Total	—	144.9	—
Projected score	—	LEM 56.8 · CLEM 88

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	CLEM -18.4	—
1H total	67.8	—
1H projected score	LEM 24.7 · CLEM 43.1	—

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
LEM WLWLL	16-15	52%	10-7	—
CLEM LWLLL	17-18	49%	8-8	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
LEM UOUUO	12-19	39%	14-17
CLEM OUOUU	14-21	40%	24-11

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
LEM	4-6 40%	3-7 30%	4-6 40%
CLEM	4-6 40%	2-8 20%	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

Le Moyne

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 13	@ FAIR	L83–97LO

Clemson

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 12	@ TCU	W74–66WU
Dec 15	@ SC	W68–61LU

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

Le Moyne

31 games played

Straight up

14-17

45% wins

Against the spread

16-15

52% covers · avg +1.2 pts vs the line

Over / Under

12-19

39% overs · avg +0.4 pts vs the total

Straight up

14-1745%

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

2 straight losses1 of last 4 won

Against the spread

16-1552%

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

2 straight misses ATS1 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

12-1939%

U U O O O U O O U U O U U U U U U O U O U U O O U U 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 6	@XAV	L 69-74	+24.5	W +19.5	156.5	U 143
Nov 9	@BGSU	L 60-83	+11.5	L −11.5	154.5	U 143
Nov 13	@MASS	L 80-94	+16.5	W +2.5	153.5	O 174
Nov 17	vsNIA	W 74-68	-2.5	W +3.5	138.5	O 142
Nov 22	vsFAIR	L 83-97	+1.5	L −12.5	145.5	O 180
Nov 28	@LAF	W 76-63	+4.5	W +17.5	151.5	U 139
Nov 29	vsMONM	W 83-79	+6.5	W +10.5	145.5	O 162
Nov 30	vsBALL	L 85-96	-1.5	L −12.5	140.5	O 181
Dec 6	@BING	W 78-63	-2.5	W +12.5	144.5	U 141
Dec 16	@TEX	L 53-95	+29.5	L −12.5	152.5	U 148
Dec 20	@SBU	L 81-92	+21.5	W +10.5	151.5	O 173
Dec 28	@BC	L 64-72	+12.5	W +4.5	146.5	U 136
Jan 2	@SFPA	W 84-58	-5.5	W +20.5	151.5	U 142
Jan 4	@MERC	L 60-74	+2.5	L −11.5	141.5	U 134
Jan 8	vsNHVN	W 73-47	-5.5	W +20.5	137.5	U 120
Jan 10	vsCCSU	L 59-69	-1.5	L −11.5	146.5	U 128
Jan 17	@CHST	W 72-57	-6.5	W +8.5	146.5	U 129
Jan 19	vsLIU	W 83-77	+1.5	W +7.5	150.5	O 160
Jan 23	vsWAG	W 69-67	-7.5	L −5.5	143.5	U 136
Jan 26	@FDU	W 87-74	+1.5	W +14.5	139.5	O 161
Jan 29	@LIU	L 61-83	+8.5	L −13.5	147.5	U 144
Jan 31	vsSTO	L 54-65	-2.5	L −13.5	140.5	U 119
Feb 5	@WAG	L 78-79	-1.5	L −2.5	138.5	O 157
Feb 7	vsSFPA	W 86-84	-7.5	L −5.5	153.5	O 170
Feb 12	vsMERC	W 58-57	-2.5	L −1.5	138.5	U 115
Feb 14	vsCHST	W 81-63	-6.5	W +11.5	144.5	U 144
Feb 19	@CCSU	L 77-78	+8.5	W +7.5	165.5	U 155
Feb 21	@STO	L 68-77	-1.5	L −10.5	137.5	O 145
Feb 26	vsFDU	W 76-59	-4.5	W +12.5	139.5	U 135
Feb 28	@NHVN	L 59-66	-1.5	L −8.5	137.5	U 125
Mar 4	vsSTO	L 71-81	-4.5	L −14.5	140.5	O 152

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

XAV

L 69-74

+19.5

BGSU

L 60-83

−11.5

MASS

L 80-94

+2.5

NIA

W 74-68

+3.5

FAIR

L 83-97

−12.5

LAF

W 76-63

+17.5

MONM

W 83-79

+10.5

BALL

L 85-96

−12.5

BING

W 78-63

+12.5

TEX

L 53-95

−12.5

SBU

L 81-92

+10.5

L 64-72

+4.5

SFPA

W 84-58

+20.5

MERC

L 60-74

−11.5

NHVN

W 73-47

+20.5

CCSU

L 59-69

−11.5

CHST

W 72-57

+8.5

LIU

W 83-77

+7.5

WAG

W 69-67

−5.5

FDU

W 87-74

+14.5

LIU

L 61-83

−13.5

STO

L 54-65

−13.5

WAG

L 78-79

−2.5

SFPA

W 86-84

−5.5

MERC

W 58-57

−1.5

CHST

W 81-63

+11.5

CCSU

L 77-78

+7.5

STO

L 68-77

−10.5

FDU

W 76-59

+12.5

NHVN

L 59-66

−8.5

STO

L 71-81

−14.5

covered 16didn’t cover 15avg +1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

XAV

L 69-74

−13.5

BGSU

L 60-83

−11.5

MASS

L 80-94

+20.5

NIA

W 74-68

+3.5

FAIR

L 83-97

+34.5

LAF

W 76-63

−12.5

MONM

W 83-79

+16.5

BALL

L 85-96

+40.5

BING

W 78-63

−3.5

TEX

L 53-95

−4.5

SBU

L 81-92

+21.5

L 64-72

−10.5

SFPA

W 84-58

−9.5

MERC

L 60-74

−7.5

NHVN

W 73-47

−17.5

CCSU

L 59-69

−18.5

CHST

W 72-57

−17.5

LIU

W 83-77

+9.5

WAG

W 69-67

−7.5

FDU

W 87-74

+21.5

LIU

L 61-83

−3.5

STO

L 54-65

−21.5

WAG

L 78-79

+18.5

SFPA

W 86-84

+16.5

MERC

W 58-57

−23.5

CHST

W 81-63

−0.5

CCSU

L 77-78

−10.5

STO

L 68-77

+7.5

FDU

W 76-59

−4.5

NHVN

L 59-66

−12.5

STO

L 71-81

+11.5

over 12under 19avg +0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin

Clemson

35 games played

Straight up

24-11

69% wins

Against the spread

17-18

49% covers · avg −0.2 pts vs the line

Over / Under

14-21

40% overs · avg −2 pts vs the total

Straight up

24-1169%

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

2 straight losses2 of last 4 won

Against the spread

17-1849%

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

3 straight misses ATS1 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

14-2140%

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

2 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	vsUNH	W 88-38	-29.5	W +20.5	146.5	U 126
Nov 7	vsGWEB	W 97-59	-29.5	W +8.5	145.5	O 156
Nov 11	vsMORE	W 83-56	-29.5	L −2.5	151.5	U 139
Nov 15	@GTWN	L 74-79	-1.5	L −6.5	142.5	O 153
Nov 17	vsUNA	W 81-61	-25.5	L −5.5	144.5	U 142
Nov 21	vsWVU	W 70-67	-4.5	L −1.5	132.5	O 137
Nov 23	vsUGA	W 97-94	-1.5	W +1.5	152.5	O 191
Nov 28	vsAAMU	W 92-56	-27.5	W +8.5	141.5	O 148
Dec 3	@ALA	L 84-90	+8.5	W +2.5	165.5	O 174
Dec 9	vsBYU	L 64-67	+4.5	W +1.5	152.5	U 131
Dec 13	vsMER	W 70-63	-22.5	L −15.5	152.5	U 133
Dec 16	vsSC	W 68-61	-12.5	L −5.5	142.5	U 129
Dec 21	vsCIN	W 68-65	-3.5	L −0.5	140.5	U 133
Dec 31	@SYR	W 64-61	-1.5	W +1.5	140.5	U 125
Jan 3	@PITT	W 73-68	-3.5	W +1.5	135.5	O 141
Jan 7	vsSMU	W 74-70	-3.5	W +0.5	149.5	U 144
Jan 10	@ND	W 76-61	-3.5	W +11.5	133.5	O 137
Jan 13	vsBC	W 74-50	-15.5	W +8.5	136.5	U 124
Jan 17	vsMIA	W 69-59	-4.5	W +5.5	143.5	U 128
Jan 20	vsNCSU	L 76-80	-2.5	L −6.5	142.5	O 156
Jan 24	@GT	W 77-63	-8.5	W +5.5	142.5	U 140
Jan 31	vsPITT	W 63-52	-10.5	W +0.5	135.5	U 115
Feb 4	@STAN	W 66-64	-3.5	L −1.5	138.5	U 130
Feb 7	@CAL	W 77-55	-4.5	W +17.5	139.5	U 132
Feb 11	vsVT	L 66-76	-8.5	L −18.5	138.5	O 142
Feb 14	@DUKE	L 54-67	+12.5	L −0.5	134.5	U 121
Feb 18	@WAKE	L 77-85	-4.5	L −12.5	140.5	O 162
Feb 21	vsFSU	L 65-70	-8.5	L −13.5	145.5	U 135
Feb 28	vsLOU	W 80-75	+2.5	W +7.5	146.5	O 155
Mar 3	@UNC	L 63-67	+2.5	L −1.5	141.5	U 130
Mar 7	vsGT	W 79-76	-15.5	L −12.5	145.5	O 155
Mar 11	vsWAKE	W 71-62	-5.5	W +3.5	143.5	U 133
Mar 12	vsUNC	W 80-79	-2.5	L −1.5	140.5	O 159
Mar 13	vsDUKE	L 61-73	+10.5	L −1.5	134.5	U 134
Mar 20	vsIOWA	L 61-67	+1.5	L −4.5	130.5	U 128

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

UNH

W 88-38

+20.5

GWEB

W 97-59

+8.5

W 83-56

−2.5

GTWN

L 74-79

−6.5

UNA

W 81-61

−5.5

WVU

W 70-67

−1.5

UGA

W 97-94

+1.5

AAMU

W 92-56

+8.5

ALA

L 84-90

+2.5

BYU

L 64-67

+1.5

MER

W 70-63

−15.5

W 68-61

−5.5

CIN

W 68-65

−0.5

SYR

W 64-61

+1.5

PITT

W 73-68

+1.5

SMU

W 74-70

+0.5

W 76-61

+11.5

W 74-50

+8.5

MIA

W 69-59

+5.5

NCSU

L 76-80

−6.5

W 77-63

+5.5

PITT

W 63-52

+0.5

STAN

W 66-64

−1.5

CAL

W 77-55

+17.5

L 66-76

−18.5

DUKE

L 54-67

−0.5

WAKE

L 77-85

−12.5

FSU

L 65-70

−13.5

LOU

W 80-75

+7.5

UNC

L 63-67

−1.5

W 79-76

−12.5

WAKE

W 71-62

+3.5

UNC

W 80-79

−1.5

DUKE

L 61-73

−1.5

IOWA

L 61-67

−4.5

covered 17didn’t cover 18avg −0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

UNH

W 88-38

−20.5

GWEB

W 97-59

+10.5

W 83-56

−12.5

GTWN

L 74-79

+10.5

UNA

W 81-61

−2.5

WVU

W 70-67

+4.5

UGA

W 97-94

+38.5

AAMU

W 92-56

+6.5

ALA

L 84-90

+8.5

BYU

L 64-67

−21.5

MER

W 70-63

−19.5

W 68-61

−13.5

CIN

W 68-65

−7.5

SYR

W 64-61

−15.5

PITT

W 73-68

+5.5

SMU

W 74-70

−5.5

W 76-61

+3.5

W 74-50

−12.5

MIA

W 69-59

−15.5

NCSU

L 76-80

+13.5

W 77-63

−2.5

PITT

W 63-52

−20.5

STAN

W 66-64

−8.5

CAL

W 77-55

−7.5

L 66-76

+3.5

DUKE

L 54-67

−13.5

WAKE

L 77-85

+21.5

FSU

L 65-70

−10.5

LOU

W 80-75

+8.5

UNC

L 63-67

−11.5

W 79-76

+9.5

WAKE

W 71-62

−10.5

UNC

W 80-79

+18.5

DUKE

L 61-73

−0.5

IOWA

L 61-67

−2.5

over 14under 21avg −2 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

Clemson has the better starters

Position by position: Le Moyne 0, Clemson 4, even 1

Le MoyneBetterClemson

G A. Moss10 pts · 7 reb · 5 ast Not ranked

No call

G C. Certa TR12.8 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.8 ast Score 83

G J. Clayville TR6.6 pts · 1.5 reb · 1.3 ast Score 11

CLEMBig

F D. Faulkner TR17.3 pts · 8.6 reb · 1.8 ast Score 99

G D. King TR4.6 pts · 2.5 reb · 1.1 ast Score 59

CLEMBig

F D. Fuchs TR13 pts · 7.8 reb · 1.5 ast Score 95

F K. Stuckey TR4.4 pts · 4.7 reb · 0.5 ast Score 5

CLEMBig

F L. Lelevicius TR8 pts · 3.4 reb · 0.7 ast Score 72

F T. Francis TR4.5 pts · 2.6 reb · 0.4 ast Score 27

CLEMBig

F C. Welling10.2 pts · 5.4 reb · 1.1 ast Score 97

Le MoyneBetterClemson

LEM offense333rd of 366 · -10.8

CLEMBig

CLEM defense25th of 366 · +4.8

LEM defense308th of 366 · -8.0

CLEMBig

CLEM offense51st of 366 · +3.6

Backcourt-4.4 · 3 players

CLEMBig

Backcourt+1.5 · 1 player

Frontcourt-3.3 · 2 players

CLEMBig

Frontcourt+14.4 · 4 players

Bench-6.1 · 5 players

CLEMBig

Bench+2.5 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestLEM betterCLEM 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

Le Moyne

Guards

A. Moss37 minJ. Clayville20 min · TRD. King14 min · TRJ. Teat14 min · TRK. Williams12 min · TRJ. Lee4 min

Forwards

K. Stuckey19 min · TRT. Francis15 min · TRT. Roe7 minI. BrownNewC. SchreinerNewC. JohnsonNew

Centers

P. Hartman9 min · TR

Clemson

Guards

C. Certa27 min · TRA. Buckner20 minZ. Foster19 minH. ReynoldsNewA. JamesNew

Forwards

D. Faulkner27 min · TRD. Fuchs24 min · TRL. Lelevicius24 min · TRC. Welling21 minC. Thompson9 minD. Thomas4 min

Centers

W. StevensNew

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

LEM72.3 #234

CLEM73.8 #209

Points per possession

LEM1.04 #265

CLEM1.12 #95

Pace (possessions)

LEM69.2 #168

CLEM65.6 #326

Shooting

Effective FG%

LEM52.6 #118

CLEM52.5 #126

3-point %

LEM34.3 #152

CLEM34.1 #165

3-point attempt rate

LEM40.8 #151

CLEM43.1 #115

Free throw rate

LEM39.5 #68

CLEM36.7 #136

Possessions

Turnover rate

LEM19.1 #323

CLEM14.0 #24

Offensive rebound rate

LEM25.2 #337

CLEM28.1 #264

Assists per game

LEM14.0 #149

CLEM12.7 #233

Defense

Points allowed

LEM73.9 #154

CLEM66.7 #21

Points allowed per possession

LEM1.07 #132

CLEM1.02 #41

Opponent effective FG%

LEM49.3 #75

CLEM48.8 #59

Opponent 3-point %

LEM36.0 #303

CLEM32.4 #88

Turnovers forced

LEM15.0 #289

CLEM17.4 #124

Defensive rebound rate

LEM71.0 #107

CLEM73.7 #21

Steals per game

LEM5.5 #300

CLEM6.3 #209

Blocks per game

LEM3.3 #177

CLEM2.8 #260

LEM		CLEM
Scoring
72.3 #234	Points per game	73.8 #209
1.04 #265	Points per possession	1.12 #95
69.2 #168	Pace (possessions)	65.6 #326
Shooting
52.6 #118	Effective FG%	52.5 #126
34.3 #152	3-point %	34.1 #165
40.8 #151	3-point attempt rate	43.1 #115
39.5 #68	Free throw rate	36.7 #136
Possessions
19.1 #323	Turnover rate	14.0 #24
25.2 #337	Offensive rebound rate	28.1 #264
14.0 #149	Assists per game	12.7 #233
Defense
73.9 #154	Points allowed	66.7 #21
1.07 #132	Points allowed per possession	1.02 #41
49.3 #75	Opponent effective FG%	48.8 #59
36.0 #303	Opponent 3-point %	32.4 #88
15.0 #289	Turnovers forced	17.4 #124
71.0 #107	Defensive rebound rate	73.7 #21
5.5 #300	Steals per game	6.3 #209
3.3 #177	Blocks per game	2.8 #260

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.

Le Moyne

14-17 in 2025-26 overall · 10-9 in conference · Northeast Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Stonehill71–81
L@ New Haven59–66
Wvs FDU76–59
L@ Stonehill68–77
L@ C Connecticut77–78

A week or more of rest.

Clemson

24-11 in 2025-26 overall · 14-7 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Iowa61–67
Lvs Duke61–73
Wvs North Carolina80–79
Wvs Wake Forest71–62
Wvs Georgia Tech79–76

A week or more of rest.

Le Moyne Dolphins at Clemson Tigers

What could decide it: CLEM has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Le Moyne

Clemson

Clemson has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Le Moyne

Clemson