Gallagher-Iba Arena · at Oklahoma St
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | OKST | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 OKST 92–70 · win probability OKST 97%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 162.2
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: OKST has more of the edges
TNST 2, OKST 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
TNST has played the 345th-hardest schedule, OKST the 60th. A record against a soft schedule means less
OKST offense vs TNST defense
Offense 23rd of 366 against a defense 290th, on the model’s ratings
Free throws
Free throw rate: TNST 33.4, OKST 39.4. Allowed: TNST 41.4, OKST 31.4
TNST offense vs OKST defense
Offense 207th of 366 against a defense 99th, on the model’s ratings
Turnovers
Turnover rate: TNST 16.7%, OKST 15.7%. Forced: TNST 19.8%, OKST 15.7%
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: TNST 10%, OKST 41%. Transfers in: TNST 7, OKST 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: TNST 34.8%, OKST 30.8%. Defensive: TNST 69.4%, OKST 69.7%
Home court
OKST at home. This season: OKST 0-0 at home, TNST 0-0 away
Even
Three-pointers
TNST hits 33.3% and allows 34.0%; OKST hits 33.9% and allows 36.0%. Threes are 30.7% and 35.5% of their shots
Context
Tempo
About 73 possessions: TNST plays 71.1 a game (66th fastest), OKST 74.8 (6th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: TNST 50.0 and allows 51.6; OKST 52.0 and allows 53.1
Market
Open → current
Spread
Open—
no open
Now—
Opening line not available
Total
Open—
no open
Now—
Moneyline
—
Pre-game lines only (ESPN, DraftKings first). After tip-off the line shown is the closing line.
Model vs market
| Market | Model | Model edge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Spread | — | OKST -22.2 | — |
| Total | — | 162.2 | — |
| Projected score | — | TNST 70 · OKST 92.2 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | OKST -13.1 | — |
| 1H total | 75.8 | — |
| 1H projected score | TNST 31.4 · OKST 44.4 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8-2 80% | 7-3 70% | 4-6 40% | |
| 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% | 8-2 80% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Tennessee St
30 games played
Straight up
20-10
67% wins
Against the spread
18-12
60% covers · avg +3.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-16
47% overs · avg +2.3 pts vs the total
Game by game: lines, results and totals
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 8 | @ | L 79-87 | +13.5 | W +5.5 | 158.5 | O 166 |
| Nov 16 | @ | L 82-95 | +12.5 | L −0.5 | 167.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 60-89 | +31.5 | W +2.5 | 157.5 | U 149 |
| Nov 25 | @ | W 75-73 | +5.5 | W +7.5 | 164.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 30 | @ | W 70-64 | +8.5 | W +14.5 | 155.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 53-80 | -4.5 | L −31.5 | 147.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 13 | @ | W 63-60 | +12.5 | W +15.5 | 161.5 | U 123 |
| Dec 18 | vs | W 78-71 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 141.5 | O 149 |
| Dec 20 | vs | L 82-91 | +1.5 | L −7.5 | 151.5 | O 173 |
| Dec 30 | @ | W 88-76 | -1.5 | W +10.5 | 155.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 84-79 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 144.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 8 | @ | W 90-68 | -6.5 | W +15.5 | 145.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 70-74 | -3.5 | L −7.5 | 144.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 105-100 | -7.5 | L −2.5 | 148.5 | O 205 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 73-67 | -8.5 | L −2.5 | 150.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 66-74 | +1.5 | L −6.5 | 142.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 96-86 | +4.5 | W +14.5 | 160.5 | O 182 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 70-63 | -4.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 2 | vs | L 85-90 | -7.5 | L −12.5 | 153.5 | O 175 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 77-68 | -9.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | U 145 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 83-56 | -15.5 | W +11.5 | 151.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 73-71 | -6.5 | L −4.5 | 147.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 86-94 | -1.5 | L −9.5 | 148.5 | O 180 |
| Feb 19 | vs | W 89-80 | -3.5 | W +5.5 | 159.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 80-53 | -2.5 | W +24.5 | 143.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 26 | @ | W 79-71 | +2.5 | W +10.5 | 151.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 67-42 | +2.5 | W +27.5 | 143.5 | U 109 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 68-55 | -1.5 | W +11.5 | 137.5 | U 123 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 93-67 | -5.5 | W +20.5 | 143.5 | O 160 |
| Mar 20 | vs | L 74-108 | +24.5 | L −9.5 | 147.5 | O 182 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
@
BEL
L 79-87
+5.5
16
@
WKU
L 82-95
−0.5
20
@
TENN
L 60-89
+2.5
25
@
UNCA
W 75-73
+7.5
30
@
UTC
W 70-64
+14.5
3
@
AAMU
L 53-80
−31.5
13
@
UNLV
W 63-60
+15.5
18
vs
UTM
W 78-71
+4.5
20
vs
SEMO
L 82-91
−7.5
30
@
TNTC
W 88-76
+10.5
3
@
LR
W 84-79
+3.5
8
@
WIU
W 90-68
+15.5
10
@
EIU
L 70-74
−7.5
15
vs
MORE
W 105-100
−2.5
17
vs
USI
W 73-67
−2.5
22
@
SIUE
L 66-74
−6.5
24
@
LIN
W 96-86
+14.5
29
vs
LR
W 70-63
+2.5
2
vs
TNTC
L 85-90
−12.5
5
vs
EIU
W 77-68
−0.5
7
vs
WIU
W 83-56
+11.5
12
@
USI
W 73-71
−4.5
14
@
MORE
L 86-94
−9.5
19
vs
LIN
W 89-80
+5.5
21
vs
SIUE
W 80-53
+24.5
26
@
SEMO
W 79-71
+10.5
28
@
UTM
W 67-42
+27.5
6
vs
UTM
W 68-55
+11.5
7
vs
MORE
W 93-67
+20.5
20
vs
ISU
L 74-108
−9.5
covered 18didn’t cover 12avg +3.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
@
BEL
L 79-87
+7.5
16
@
WKU
L 82-95
+9.5
20
@
TENN
L 60-89
−8.5
25
@
UNCA
W 75-73
−16.5
30
@
UTC
W 70-64
−21.5
3
@
AAMU
L 53-80
−14.5
13
@
UNLV
W 63-60
−38.5
18
vs
UTM
W 78-71
+7.5
20
vs
SEMO
L 82-91
+21.5
30
@
TNTC
W 88-76
+8.5
3
@
LR
W 84-79
+18.5
8
@
WIU
W 90-68
+12.5
10
@
EIU
L 70-74
−0.5
15
vs
MORE
W 105-100
+56.5
17
vs
USI
W 73-67
−10.5
22
@
SIUE
L 66-74
−2.5
24
@
LIN
W 96-86
+21.5
29
vs
LR
W 70-63
−17.5
2
vs
TNTC
L 85-90
+21.5
5
vs
EIU
W 77-68
−0.5
7
vs
WIU
W 83-56
−12.5
12
@
USI
W 73-71
−3.5
14
@
MORE
L 86-94
+31.5
19
vs
LIN
W 89-80
+9.5
21
vs
SIUE
W 80-53
−10.5
26
@
SEMO
W 79-71
−1.5
28
@
UTM
W 67-42
−34.5
6
vs
UTM
W 68-55
−14.5
7
vs
MORE
W 93-67
+16.5
20
vs
ISU
L 74-108
+34.5
over 14under 16avg +2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Oklahoma St
35 games played
Straight up
20-15
57% wins
Against the spread
16-19
46% covers · avg −0.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
21-14
60% overs · avg +3.4 pts vs the total
Against the spread
16-1946%
2 straight misses ATS2 of last 4 covered
Game by game: lines, results and totals
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 | vs | W 95-71 | -20.5 | W +3.5 | 165.5 | O 166 |
| Nov 9 | vs | W 87-63 | +2.5 | W +26.5 | 174.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 94-67 | -30.5 | L −3.5 | 168.5 | U 161 |
| Nov 16 | vs | W 85-69 | -20.5 | L −4.5 | 154.5 | U 154 |
| Nov 19 | vs | W 103-95 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 177.5 | O 198 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 95-81 | -23.5 | L −9.5 | 155.5 | O 176 |
| Nov 27 | @ | W 86-81 | +2.5 | W +7.5 | 159.5 | O 167 |
| Dec 2 | vs | W 93-83 | -13.5 | L −3.5 | 169.5 | O 176 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 84-78 | -1.5 | W +4.5 | 155.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 76-85 | +2.5 | L −6.5 | 169.5 | U 161 |
| Dec 18 | vs | W 91-79 | -27.5 | L −15.5 | 161.5 | O 170 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 94-89 | -19.5 | L −14.5 | 176.5 | O 183 |
| Dec 29 | vs | W 103-77 | -20.5 | W +5.5 | 164.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 80-102 | +12.5 | L −9.5 | 167.5 | O 182 |
| Jan 6 | vs | W 87-76 | -1.5 | W +9.5 | 175.5 | U 163 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 71-83 | +19.5 | W +7.5 | 165.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 13 | vs | L 79-94 | +1.5 | L −13.5 | 165.5 | O 173 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 84-83 | -2.5 | L −1.5 | 175.5 | U 167 |
| Jan 20 | @ | L 65-68 | +8.5 | W +5.5 | 161.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 71-84 | +10.5 | L −2.5 | 162.5 | U 155 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 81-69 | -1.5 | W +10.5 | 166.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 99-92 | +8.5 | W +15.5 | 167.5 | O 191 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 47-84 | +20.5 | L −16.5 | 168.5 | U 131 |
| Feb 10 | @ | L 76-85 | +3.5 | L −5.5 | 163.5 | U 161 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 92-95 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 156.5 | O 187 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 69-81 | +7.5 | L −4.5 | 158.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 69-83 | +3.5 | L −10.5 | 162.5 | U 152 |
| Feb 24 | vs | W 91-84 | -1.5 | W +5.5 | 144.5 | O 175 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 68-91 | +9.5 | L −13.5 | 151.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 3 | @ | W 111-104 | +8.5 | W +15.5 | 167.5 | O 215 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 75-82 | +13.5 | W +6.5 | 151.5 | O 157 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 92-83 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 164.5 | O 175 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 88-95 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 158.5 | O 183 |
| Mar 17 | vs | W 84-80 | -6.5 | L −2.5 | 154.5 | O 164 |
| Mar 22 | vs | L 70-96 | -2.5 | L −28.5 | 164.5 | O 166 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
vs
ORU
W 95-71
+3.5
9
vs
TA&M
W 87-63
+26.5
12
vs
PV
W 94-67
−3.5
16
vs
AMCC
W 85-69
−4.5
19
vs
USF
W 103-95
+4.5
22
vs
NICH
W 95-81
−9.5
27
@
NU
W 86-81
+7.5
2
vs
SHSU
W 93-83
−3.5
6
vs
GCU
W 84-78
+4.5
13
vs
OU
L 76-85
−6.5
18
vs
KC
W 91-79
−15.5
21
vs
CSUF
W 94-89
−14.5
29
vs
BCU
W 103-77
+5.5
3
@
TTU
L 80-102
−9.5
6
vs
UCF
W 87-76
+9.5
10
@
ISU
L 71-83
+7.5
13
vs
BAY
L 79-94
−13.5
17
vs
KSU
W 84-83
−1.5
20
@
TCU
L 65-68
+5.5
24
vs
ISU
L 71-84
−2.5
31
@
UTAH
W 81-69
+10.5
4
vs
BYU
W 99-92
+15.5
7
@
ARIZ
L 47-84
−16.5
10
@
ASU
L 76-85
−5.5
14
vs
TCU
L 92-95
−1.5
18
vs
KU
L 69-81
−4.5
21
@
COLO
L 69-83
−10.5
24
vs
WVU
W 91-84
+5.5
28
@
CIN
L 68-91
−13.5
3
@
UCF
W 111-104
+15.5
7
vs
HOU
L 75-82
+6.5
10
vs
COLO
W 92-83
+10.5
11
vs
TCU
L 88-95
+0.5
17
vs
DAV
W 84-80
−2.5
22
vs
WICH
L 70-96
−28.5
covered 16didn’t cover 19avg −0.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
vs
ORU
W 95-71
+0.5
9
vs
TA&M
W 87-63
−24.5
12
vs
PV
W 94-67
−7.5
16
vs
AMCC
W 85-69
−0.5
19
vs
USF
W 103-95
+20.5
22
vs
NICH
W 95-81
+20.5
27
@
NU
W 86-81
+7.5
2
vs
SHSU
W 93-83
+6.5
6
vs
GCU
W 84-78
+6.5
13
vs
OU
L 76-85
−8.5
18
vs
KC
W 91-79
+8.5
21
vs
CSUF
W 94-89
+6.5
29
vs
BCU
W 103-77
+15.5
3
@
TTU
L 80-102
+14.5
6
vs
UCF
W 87-76
−12.5
10
@
ISU
L 71-83
−11.5
13
vs
BAY
L 79-94
+7.5
17
vs
KSU
W 84-83
−8.5
20
@
TCU
L 65-68
−28.5
24
vs
ISU
L 71-84
−7.5
31
@
UTAH
W 81-69
−16.5
4
vs
BYU
W 99-92
+23.5
7
@
ARIZ
L 47-84
−37.5
10
@
ASU
L 76-85
−2.5
14
vs
TCU
L 92-95
+30.5
18
vs
KU
L 69-81
−8.5
21
@
COLO
L 69-83
−10.5
24
vs
WVU
W 91-84
+30.5
28
@
CIN
L 68-91
+7.5
3
@
UCF
W 111-104
+47.5
7
vs
HOU
L 75-82
+5.5
10
vs
COLO
W 92-83
+10.5
11
vs
TCU
L 88-95
+24.5
17
vs
DAV
W 84-80
+9.5
22
vs
WICH
L 70-96
+1.5
over 21under 14avg +3.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Oklahoma St has the better starters
Position by position: Tennessee St 0, Oklahoma St 2, even 3
Tennessee StBetterOklahoma St
G T. Johnson TR15 pts · 2.8 reb · 4.2 ast
Score 85
=Even
G K. Clary10.6 pts · 2.9 reb · 4.6 ast
Score 78
G A. Morris TR11.1 pts · 3.7 reb · 2.7 ast
Score 30
→OKSTBig
G K. Natt TR11.3 pts · 8.2 reb · 2.5 ast
Score 94
G C. Alston TR4.5 pts · 1.9 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 42
=Even
G J. Walker TR11.2 pts · 2.1 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 55
F A. Bradshaw TR8.6 pts · 4.2 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 79
=Even
F J. Burks TR13.3 pts · 4.8 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 90
F J. Rivera TR3.3 pts · 2 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 47
→OKSTBig
F P. Fallah14.7 pts · 6 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 97
Tennessee StBetterOklahoma St
TNST offense207th of 366 · -6.3
→OKSTSmall
OKST defense99th of 366 · -0.7
TNST defense290th of 366 · -7.3
→OKSTBig
OKST offense23rd of 366 · +7.5
Backcourt-0.4 · 3 players
→OKSTBig
Backcourt+4.0 · 3 players
Frontcourt+1.0 · 2 players
→OKSTBig
Frontcourt+7.7 · 2 players
Bench-2.4 · 5 players
→OKSTBig
Bench+2.4 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestTNST betterOKST betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
T. Johnson29 min · TRA. Morris28 min · TRC. Alston11 min · TRD. Howard8 minI. Stewart4 min · TRJ. Jones3 min
Forwards
A. Bradshaw19 min · TRJ. Rivera12 min · TRK. Jones11 minD. LindseyNew
Guards
K. Clary28 minK. Natt27 min · TRJ. Walker26 min · TRL. Bogavac24 min · TRR. Crotty10 minJ. MontonatiNew
Forwards
J. Burks28 min · TRP. Fallah26 minA. Grbovic20 min · TRB. Ahmed13 minM. Ragland6 minL. AllmondNew
Centers
J. Halaifonua20 min · TR
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Matchup stats
2025-26 · rank among 365 teams
Scoring
Points per game
Points per possession
Pace (possessions)
Shooting
Effective FG%
3-point %
3-point attempt rate
Free throw rate
Possessions
Turnover rate
Offensive rebound rate
Assists per game
Defense
Points allowed
Points allowed per possession
Opponent effective FG%
Opponent 3-point %
Turnovers forced
Defensive rebound rate
Steals per game
Blocks per game
| Scoring | ||
|---|---|---|
| 77.9 #96 | Points per game | 83.9 #21 |
| 1.10 #146 | Points per possession | 1.12 #110 |
| 71.1 #66 | Pace (possessions) | 74.8 #6 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.0 #237 | Effective FG% | 52.0 #144 |
| 33.3 #211 | 3-point % | 33.9 #176 |
| 30.7 #344 | 3-point attempt rate | 35.5 #260 |
| 33.4 #228 | Free throw rate | 39.4 #70 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.7 #177 | Turnover rate | 15.7 #117 |
| 34.8 #53 | Offensive rebound rate | 30.8 #169 |
| 12.7 #237 | Assists per game | 14.6 #113 |
| Defense | ||
| 75.1 #191 | Points allowed | 83.2 #349 |
| 1.06 #97 | Points allowed per possession | 1.12 #265 |
| 51.6 #190 | Opponent effective FG% | 53.1 #272 |
| 34.0 #183 | Opponent 3-point % | 36.0 #304 |
| 19.8 #26 | Turnovers forced | 15.7 #240 |
| 69.4 #184 | Defensive rebound rate | 69.7 #178 |
| 9.0 #10 | Steals per game | 7.1 #120 |
| 3.8 #99 | Blocks per game | 2.7 #285 |
Tennessee St
20-10 in 2025-26 overall · 17-5 in conference · Ohio Valley Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Iowa State74–108
- Wvs Morehead St93–67
- Wvs UT Martin68–55
- W@ UT Martin67–42
- W@ SE Missouri79–71
A week or more of rest.
Oklahoma St
20-15 in 2025-26 overall · 7-13 in conference · Big 12 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Wichita St70–96
- Wvs Davidson84–80
- Lvs TCU88–95
- Wvs Colorado92–83
- Lvs Houston75–82
A week or more of rest.