Stetson Hatters at Louisville Cardinals: Model Line and Edge

Thu, Nov 19, 8:00 PM ETKFC Yum! Center · at Louisville

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Stetson and Louisville
STET	This season	LOU
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 LOU 95–59 · win probability LOU 100%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 153.6

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: LOU has more of the edges

STET 1, LOU 7 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

LOUBig

LOU offense vs STET defense

Offense 15th of 366 against a defense 328th, on the model’s ratings

LOUBig

STET offense vs LOU defense

Offense 273rd of 366 against a defense 16th, on the model’s ratings

LOUBig

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: STET 26.6%, LOU 32.8%. Defensive: STET 68.2%, LOU 72.5%

LOUBig

Shooting

Effective FG%: STET 53.1 and allows 55.2; LOU 56.5 and allows 48.7

Context

Schedule so far

STET has played the 220th-hardest schedule, LOU the 44th. A record against a soft schedule means less

LOUSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: STET 18.2%, LOU 16.8%. Forced: STET 15.1%, LOU 16.7%

LOUSmall

Three-pointers

STET hits 36.0% and allows 34.5%; LOU hits 36.0% and allows 32.3%. Threes are 44.8% and 52.9% of their shots

Context

Tempo

About 70 possessions: STET plays 68.2 a game (221st fastest), LOU 71.0 (77th). Faster games mean more points

STETSmall

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: STET 51%, LOU 12%. Transfers in: STET 3, LOU 8. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

LOUSmall

Home court

LOU at home. This season: LOU 0-0 at home, STET 0-0 away

Even

Free throws

Free throw rate: STET 32.5, LOU 33.1. Allowed: STET 30.4, LOU 33.0

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	—	LOU -36.3	—
Total	—	153.6	—
Projected score	—	STET 58.6 · LOU 94.9

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	LOU -21.5	—
1H total	71.8	—
1H projected score	STET 25.2 · LOU 46.6	—

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
STET WWWWW	18-13	58%	8-8	—
LOU WLLWL	16-19	46%	9-8	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
STET UOUOU	14-17	45%	10-21
LOU OUUOU	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
STET	4-6 40%	7-3 70%	6-4 60%
LOU	5-5 50%	3-7 30%	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

Stetson

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 24	@ USF	L72–74WU
Dec 5	@ MIA	L61–102LO
Dec 14	@ CIN	L75–83WO

Louisville

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 24	vs TTU	L38–70LU
Dec 1	vs TEX	L80–81WO
Dec 5	vs MICH	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

Stetson

31 games played

Straight up

10-21

32% wins

Against the spread

18-13

58% covers · avg +2.3 pts vs the line

Over / Under

14-17

45% overs · avg +1.7 pts vs the total

Straight up

10-2132%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

18-1358%

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

5 straight covers4 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

14-1745%

O O U U O U U U U U O U O O U O O U U U U O O U O O U O U 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	@URI	L 62-93	+18.5	L −12.5	152.5	O 155
Nov 10	@MIA	L 61-102	+34.5	L −6.5	161.5	O 163
Nov 16	@WCU	L 65-76	+12.5	W +1.5	155.5	U 141
Nov 19	vsHOW	W 64-60	+1.5	W +5.5	149.5	U 124
Nov 22	vsVMI	W 99-80	+2.5	W +21.5	148.5	O 179
Nov 25	vsWRST	L 62-79	+9.5	L −7.5	147.5	U 141
Nov 29	vsSUU	L 68-70	+1.5	L −0.5	148.5	U 138
Nov 30	@RMU	L 62-80	+11.5	L −6.5	142.5	U 142
Dec 2	@GCU	L 45-67	+24.5	W +2.5	141.5	U 112
Dec 6	@SC	L 51-82	+22.5	L −8.5	142.5	U 133
Dec 22	@OU	L 54-107	+31.5	L −21.5	148.5	O 161
Jan 1	@UNA	W 70-67	+9.5	W +12.5	142.5	U 137
Jan 3	@CARK	L 73-93	+11.5	L −8.5	147.5	O 166
Jan 8	vsLIP	W 91-83	+11.5	W +19.5	150.5	O 174
Jan 10	vsAPSU	L 69-81	+9.5	L −2.5	150.5	U 150
Jan 15	vsWGA	W 95-86	+1.5	W +10.5	151.5	O 181
Jan 17	vsQUC	L 81-87	+10.5	W +4.5	162.5	O 168
Jan 22	@LIP	L 74-79	+15.5	W +10.5	157.5	U 153
Jan 23	@APSU	L 65-73	+16.5	W +8.5	148.5	U 138
Jan 29	@UNF	W 84-77	-1.5	W +5.5	165.5	U 161
Jan 31	vsUNA	L 66-68	-1.5	L −3.5	144.5	U 134
Feb 5	@BELL	L 71-92	+4.5	L −16.5	148.5	O 163
Feb 7	@EKU	L 88-100	+9.5	L −2.5	151.5	O 188
Feb 11	vsJAX	W 67-62	+2.5	W +7.5	138.5	U 129
Feb 14	@FGCU	L 76-78	+11.5	W +9.5	148.5	O 154
Feb 19	vsCARK	L 76-88	+9.5	L −2.5	149.5	O 164
Feb 21	vsUNF	W 76-71	-1.5	W +3.5	161.5	U 147
Feb 26	@JAX	L 85-89	+7.5	W +3.5	138.5	O 174
Feb 28	vsFGCU	W 78-63	+5.5	W +20.5	150.5	U 141
Mar 4	vsEKU	W 92-76	+5.5	W +21.5	155.5	O 168
Mar 6	vsAPSU	L 60-69	+11.5	W +2.5	153.5	U 129

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

URI

L 62-93

−12.5

MIA

L 61-102

−6.5

WCU

L 65-76

+1.5

HOW

W 64-60

+5.5

VMI

W 99-80

+21.5

WRST

L 62-79

−7.5

SUU

L 68-70

−0.5

RMU

L 62-80

−6.5

GCU

L 45-67

+2.5

L 51-82

−8.5

L 54-107

−21.5

UNA

W 70-67

+12.5

CARK

L 73-93

−8.5

LIP

W 91-83

+19.5

APSU

L 69-81

−2.5

WGA

W 95-86

+10.5

QUC

L 81-87

+4.5

LIP

L 74-79

+10.5

APSU

L 65-73

+8.5

UNF

W 84-77

+5.5

UNA

L 66-68

−3.5

BELL

L 71-92

−16.5

EKU

L 88-100

−2.5

JAX

W 67-62

+7.5

FGCU

L 76-78

+9.5

CARK

L 76-88

−2.5

UNF

W 76-71

+3.5

JAX

L 85-89

+3.5

FGCU

W 78-63

+20.5

EKU

W 92-76

+21.5

APSU

L 60-69

+2.5

covered 18didn’t cover 13avg +2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

URI

L 62-93

+2.5

MIA

L 61-102

+1.5

WCU

L 65-76

−14.5

HOW

W 64-60

−25.5

VMI

W 99-80

+30.5

WRST

L 62-79

−6.5

SUU

L 68-70

−10.5

RMU

L 62-80

−0.5

GCU

L 45-67

−29.5

L 51-82

−9.5

L 54-107

+12.5

UNA

W 70-67

−5.5

CARK

L 73-93

+18.5

LIP

W 91-83

+23.5

APSU

L 69-81

−0.5

WGA

W 95-86

+29.5

QUC

L 81-87

+5.5

LIP

L 74-79

−4.5

APSU

L 65-73

−10.5

UNF

W 84-77

−4.5

UNA

L 66-68

−10.5

BELL

L 71-92

+14.5

EKU

L 88-100

+36.5

JAX

W 67-62

−9.5

FGCU

L 76-78

+5.5

CARK

L 76-88

+14.5

UNF

W 76-71

−14.5

JAX

L 85-89

+35.5

FGCU

W 78-63

−9.5

EKU

W 92-76

+12.5

APSU

L 60-69

−24.5

over 14under 17avg +1.7 ptslonger = bigger margin

Louisville

35 games played

Straight up

24-11

69% wins

Against the spread

16-19

46% covers · avg +0.2 pts vs the line

Over / Under

14-21

40% overs · avg −3.8 pts vs the total

Straight up

24-1169%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

16-1946%

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

1 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

14-2140%

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

1 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	vsSCST	W 104-45	-35.5	W +23.5	159.5	U 149
Nov 6	vsJKST	W 106-70	-38.5	L −2.5	165.5	O 176
Nov 11	vsUK	W 96-88	-5.5	W +2.5	173.5	O 184
Nov 15	vsOHIO	W 106-81	-31.5	L −6.5	174.5	O 187
Nov 21	vsCIN	W 74-64	-8.5	W +1.5	163.5	U 138
Nov 24	vsEMU	W 87-46	-33.5	W +7.5	162.5	U 133
Nov 26	vsNJIT	W 104-47	-44.5	W +12.5	158.5	U 151
Dec 3	@ARK	L 80-89	-1.5	L −10.5	166.5	O 169
Dec 6	vsIU	W 87-78	-3.5	W +5.5	162.5	O 165
Dec 13	vsMEM	W 99-73	-16.5	W +9.5	162.5	O 172
Dec 16	@TENN	L 62-83	+4.5	L −16.5	156.5	U 145
Dec 20	vsMONT	W 94-54	-30.5	W +9.5	166.5	U 148
Dec 30	@CAL	W 90-70	-7.5	W +12.5	159.5	O 160
Jan 2	@STAN	L 76-80	-7.5	L −11.5	157.5	U 156
Jan 6	vsDUKE	L 73-84	+1.5	L −9.5	161.5	U 157
Jan 10	vsBC	W 75-62	-21.5	L −8.5	150.5	U 137
Jan 13	vsUVA	L 70-79	-4.5	L −13.5	154.5	U 149
Jan 17	@PITT	W 100-59	-7.5	W +33.5	152.5	O 159
Jan 24	vsVT	W 85-71	-14.5	L −0.5	160.5	U 156
Jan 26	@DUKE	L 52-83	+8.5	L −22.5	157.5	U 135
Jan 31	vsSMU	W 88-74	-9.5	W +4.5	163.5	U 162
Feb 4	vsND	W 76-65	-19.5	L −8.5	155.5	U 141
Feb 7	@WAKE	W 88-80	-9.5	L −1.5	162.5	O 168
Feb 9	vsNCSU	W 118-77	-6.5	W +34.5	161.5	O 195
Feb 14	vsBAY	W 82-71	-7.5	W +3.5	162.5	U 153
Feb 17	@SMU	L 85-95	-4.5	L −14.5	168.5	O 180
Feb 21	vsGT	W 87-70	-23.5	L −6.5	167.5	U 157
Feb 23	@UNC	L 74-77	-3.5	L −6.5	162.5	U 151
Feb 28	@CLEM	L 75-80	-2.5	L −7.5	146.5	O 155
Mar 3	vsSYR	W 77-62	-14.5	W +0.5	159.5	U 139
Mar 7	@MIA	W 92-89	+1.5	W +4.5	155.5	O 181
Mar 11	vsSMU	W 62-58	-7.5	L −3.5	164.5	U 120
Mar 12	vsMIA	L 73-78	-1.5	L −6.5	153.5	U 151
Mar 19	vsUSF	W 83-79	-3.5	W +0.5	160.5	O 162
Mar 21	vsMSU	L 69-77	+5.5	L −2.5	151.5	U 146

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

SCST

W 104-45

+23.5

JKST

W 106-70

−2.5

W 96-88

+2.5

OHIO

W 106-81

−6.5

CIN

W 74-64

+1.5

EMU

W 87-46

+7.5

NJIT

W 104-47

+12.5

ARK

L 80-89

−10.5

W 87-78

+5.5

MEM

W 99-73

+9.5

TENN

L 62-83

−16.5

MONT

W 94-54

+9.5

CAL

W 90-70

+12.5

STAN

L 76-80

−11.5

DUKE

L 73-84

−9.5

W 75-62

−8.5

UVA

L 70-79

−13.5

PITT

W 100-59

+33.5

W 85-71

−0.5

DUKE

L 52-83

−22.5

SMU

W 88-74

+4.5

W 76-65

−8.5

WAKE

W 88-80

−1.5

NCSU

W 118-77

+34.5

BAY

W 82-71

+3.5

SMU

L 85-95

−14.5

W 87-70

−6.5

UNC

L 74-77

−6.5

CLEM

L 75-80

−7.5

SYR

W 77-62

+0.5

MIA

W 92-89

+4.5

SMU

W 62-58

−3.5

MIA

L 73-78

−6.5

USF

W 83-79

+0.5

MSU

L 69-77

−2.5

covered 16didn’t cover 19avg +0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

SCST

W 104-45

−10.5

JKST

W 106-70

+10.5

W 96-88

+10.5

OHIO

W 106-81

+12.5

CIN

W 74-64

−25.5

EMU

W 87-46

−29.5

NJIT

W 104-47

−7.5

ARK

L 80-89

+2.5

W 87-78

+2.5

MEM

W 99-73

+9.5

TENN

L 62-83

−11.5

MONT

W 94-54

−18.5

CAL

W 90-70

+0.5

STAN

L 76-80

−1.5

DUKE

L 73-84

−4.5

W 75-62

−13.5

UVA

L 70-79

−5.5

PITT

W 100-59

+6.5

W 85-71

−4.5

DUKE

L 52-83

−22.5

SMU

W 88-74

−1.5

W 76-65

−14.5

WAKE

W 88-80

+5.5

NCSU

W 118-77

+33.5

BAY

W 82-71

−9.5

SMU

L 85-95

+11.5

W 87-70

−10.5

UNC

L 74-77

−11.5

CLEM

L 75-80

+8.5

SYR

W 77-62

−20.5

MIA

W 92-89

+25.5

SMU

W 62-58

−44.5

MIA

L 73-78

−2.5

USF

W 83-79

+1.5

MSU

L 69-77

−5.5

over 14under 21avg −3.8 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

Louisville has the better starters

Position by position: Stetson 0, Louisville 4, even 1

StetsonBetterLouisville

G D. Macgregor4.8 pts · 2 reb · 3.8 ast Score 26

LOUBig

G J. Shelstad TR15.6 pts · 2.9 reb · 4.9 ast Score 92

F C. Kuhl13.2 pts · 6 reb · 0.6 ast Score 87

Even

G S. Trimble TR14 pts · 3.8 reb · 3 ast Score 90

F F. Sheridan7.5 pts · 4.2 reb · 1.4 ast Score 21

LOUBig

G D. Montgomery TR13.4 pts · 4 reb · 2.1 ast Score 92

F M. Myles TR7.7 pts · 3.5 reb · 0.5 ast Score 66

LOUSmall

F F. Bidunga TR13.3 pts · 9 reb · 1.5 ast Score 99

F A. Doyle5.1 pts · 2.2 reb · 0.9 ast Score 9

LOUBig

F L. Wells TR15.1 pts · 7.1 reb · 2.2 ast Score 85

StetsonBetterLouisville

STET offense273rd of 366 · -8.3

LOUBig

LOU defense16th of 366 · +6.2

STET defense328th of 366 · -8.5

LOUBig

LOU offense15th of 366 · +9.3

Backcourt-1.4 · 1 player

LOUBig

Backcourt+9.1 · 3 players

Frontcourt-0.9 · 4 players

LOUBig

Frontcourt+9.2 · 2 players

Bench-5.1 · 5 players

LOUBig

Bench+4.1 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestSTET betterLOU 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

Stetson

Guards

D. Macgregor19 minS. Morgan14 minT. Sucatzky13 min · TRM. McGowan2 minI. Jones2 minB. Gladieux2 min

Forwards

C. Kuhl24 minF. Sheridan23 minM. Myles21 min · TRA. Doyle17 minM. Entenmann12 min · TRJ. Boyomo KeediNew

Louisville

Guards

J. Shelstad35 min · TRS. Trimble33 min · TRD. Montgomery31 min · TRA. Wooley23 minK. Knox22 min · TRW. Hanke1 min

Forwards

F. Bidunga32 min · TRL. Wells31 min · TRA. Folgueiras21 min · TRB. ZhangNew

Centers

G. Dynes12 min · TRO. EkezieNew

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

STET71.9 #246

LOU84.2 #18

Points per possession

STET1.06 #231

LOU1.18 #29

Pace (possessions)

STET68.2 #221

LOU71.0 #77

Shooting

Effective FG%

STET53.1 #96

LOU56.5 #14

3-point %

STET36.0 #59

LOU36.0 #58

3-point attempt rate

STET44.8 #75

LOU52.9 #4

Free throw rate

STET32.5 #250

LOU33.1 #236

Possessions

Turnover rate

STET18.2 #284

LOU16.8 #184

Offensive rebound rate

STET26.6 #308

LOU32.8 #93

Assists per game

STET14.7 #105

LOU17.1 #23

Defense

Points allowed

STET79.9 #315

LOU72.5 #119

Points allowed per possession

STET1.17 #339

LOU1.02 #49

Opponent effective FG%

STET55.2 #338

LOU48.7 #54

Opponent 3-point %

STET34.5 #223

LOU32.3 #76

Turnovers forced

STET15.1 #278

LOU16.7 #172

Defensive rebound rate

STET68.2 #250

LOU72.5 #50

Steals per game

STET6.2 #213

LOU6.8 #148

Blocks per game

STET2.0 #344

LOU3.3 #179

STET		LOU
Scoring
71.9 #246	Points per game	84.2 #18
1.06 #231	Points per possession	1.18 #29
68.2 #221	Pace (possessions)	71.0 #77
Shooting
53.1 #96	Effective FG%	56.5 #14
36.0 #59	3-point %	36.0 #58
44.8 #75	3-point attempt rate	52.9 #4
32.5 #250	Free throw rate	33.1 #236
Possessions
18.2 #284	Turnover rate	16.8 #184
26.6 #308	Offensive rebound rate	32.8 #93
14.7 #105	Assists per game	17.1 #23
Defense
79.9 #315	Points allowed	72.5 #119
1.17 #339	Points allowed per possession	1.02 #49
55.2 #338	Opponent effective FG%	48.7 #54
34.5 #223	Opponent 3-point %	32.3 #76
15.1 #278	Turnovers forced	16.7 #172
68.2 #250	Defensive rebound rate	72.5 #50
6.2 #213	Steals per game	6.8 #148
2.0 #344	Blocks per game	3.3 #179

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.

Stetson

10-21 in 2025-26 overall · 8-12 in conference · Atlantic Sun Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Austin Peay60–69
Wvs E Kentucky92–76
Wvs FGCU78–63
L@ Jacksonville85–89
Wvs North Florida76–71

A week or more of rest.

Louisville

24-11 in 2025-26 overall · 12-8 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Michigan St69–77
Wvs South Florida83–79
Lvs Miami73–78
Wvs SMU62–58
W@ Miami92–89

A week or more of rest.

Stetson Hatters at Louisville Cardinals

What could decide it: LOU has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Stetson

Louisville

Louisville has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Stetson

Louisville