Calihan Hall · at Detroit Mercy · Conference game
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | DETM | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 DETM 77–76 · win probability DETM 52%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 152.8
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: NKU has more of the edges
NKU 4, DETM 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Three-pointers
NKU hits 33.6% and allows 36.6%; DETM hits 35.1% and allows 33.3%. Threes are 44.9% and 30.7% of their shots
Turnovers
Turnover rate: NKU 16.3%, DETM 16.0%. Forced: NKU 18.6%, DETM 14.4%
NKU offense vs DETM defense
Offense 209th of 366 against a defense 310th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
NKU has played the 289th-hardest schedule, DETM the 208th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Home court
DETM at home. This season: DETM 0-0 at home, NKU 0-0 away
Free throws
Free throw rate: NKU 35.9, DETM 32.6. Allowed: NKU 37.2, DETM 37.6
Shooting
Effective FG%: NKU 53.2 and allows 54.2; DETM 49.5 and allows 52.2
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: NKU 26%, DETM 49%. Transfers in: NKU 4, DETM 0. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: NKU 32.2%, DETM 33.3%. Defensive: NKU 68.4%, DETM 69.2%
Context
Tempo
About 71 possessions: NKU plays 71.5 a game (55th fastest), DETM 69.7 (132nd). Faster games mean more points
Even
DETM offense vs NKU defense
Offense 236th of 366 against a defense 249th, on the model’s ratings
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 | — | DETM -0.4 | — |
| Total | — | 152.8 | — |
| Projected score | — | NKU 76.2 · DETM 76.6 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | DETM -0.1 | — |
| 1H total | 71.4 | — |
| 1H projected score | NKU 35.6 · DETM 35.8 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% | 7-3 70% | |
| 7-3 70% | 8-2 80% | 2-8 20% |
Recent meetings
Last 5 of 12 since 2021-22
NKU 8–4 DETMNKU leads · 12 games since 2021-22 · NKU 4-8 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 30, 2025-26 | NKU 77 @ DETM 90 | DETM +5.5 | DETM W |
| Jan 15, 2025-26 | DETM 71 @ NKU 96 | NKU -10.5 | NKU W |
| Mar 4, 2024-25 | DETM 75 @ NKU 99 | NKU -14.5 | NKU W |
| Jan 30, 2024-25 | NKU 57 @ DETM 68 | DETM +7.5 | DETM W |
| Dec 18, 2024-25 | DETM 60 @ NKU 73 | NKU -13.5 | DETM W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
N Kentucky
31 games played
Straight up
17-14
55% wins
Against the spread
13-18
42% covers · avg −0.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
21-10
68% overs · avg +5.2 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 56-95 | +27.5 | L −11.5 | 137.5 | O 151 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 63-75 | +6.5 | L −5.5 | 142.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 20 | @ | W 90-66 | +4.5 | W +28.5 | 146.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 82-71 | -4.5 | W +6.5 | 156.5 | U 153 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 93-83 | -3.5 | W +6.5 | 149.5 | O 176 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 74-65 | -7.5 | W +1.5 | 143.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 95-80 | -14.5 | W +0.5 | 158.5 | O 175 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 77-79 | +1.5 | L −0.5 | 153.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 13 | @ | W 80-76 | -4.5 | L −0.5 | 146.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 17 | vs | L 77-82 | -3.5 | L −8.5 | 163.5 | U 159 |
| Dec 21 | vs | L 74-85 | -5.5 | L −16.5 | 153.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 29 | @ | W 79-77 | -1.5 | W +0.5 | 149.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 81-72 | -13.5 | L −4.5 | 176.5 | U 153 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 94-79 | -4.5 | W +10.5 | 146.5 | O 173 |
| Jan 9 | @ | W 85-67 | +1.5 | W +19.5 | 157.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 11 | @ | L 78-80 | -4.5 | L −6.5 | 144.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 96-71 | -10.5 | W +14.5 | 159.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 89-92 | -7.5 | L −10.5 | 153.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 80-88 | +1.5 | L −6.5 | 155.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 30 | @ | L 77-90 | -5.5 | L −18.5 | 161.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 1 | @ | L 65-76 | +3.5 | L −7.5 | 166.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 4 | vs | L 84-87 | -7.5 | L −10.5 | 149.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 67-62 | -6.5 | L −1.5 | 156.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 84-81 | -5.5 | L −2.5 | 164.5 | O 165 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 87-71 | -5.5 | W +10.5 | 153.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 22 | @ | L 58-64 | +2.5 | L −3.5 | 152.5 | U 122 |
| Feb 25 | @ | W 81-70 | -8.5 | W +2.5 | 166.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 91-92 | -3.5 | L −4.5 | 153.5 | O 183 |
| Mar 4 | @ | W 85-84 | +1.5 | W +2.5 | 161.5 | O 169 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 96-76 | -3.5 | W +16.5 | 146.5 | O 172 |
| Mar 9 | vs | L 90-103 | -1.5 | L −14.5 | 157.5 | O 193 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
@
TENN
L 56-95
−11.5
12
@
ETSU
L 63-75
−5.5
20
@
CMU
W 90-66
+28.5
24
vs
EKU
W 82-71
+6.5
26
vs
WOF
W 93-83
+6.5
29
vs
BU
W 74-65
+1.5
3
vs
CLE
W 95-80
+0.5
6
@
PFW
L 77-79
−0.5
13
@
BELL
W 80-76
−0.5
17
vs
OAK
L 77-82
−8.5
21
vs
COFC
L 74-85
−16.5
29
@
RMU
W 79-77
+0.5
1
vs
IUIN
W 81-72
−4.5
4
vs
YSU
W 94-79
+10.5
9
@
MILW
W 85-67
+19.5
11
@
GB
L 78-80
−6.5
15
vs
DETM
W 96-71
+14.5
17
vs
RMU
L 89-92
−10.5
24
@
WRST
L 80-88
−6.5
30
@
DETM
L 77-90
−18.5
1
@
OAK
L 65-76
−7.5
4
vs
GB
L 84-87
−10.5
7
vs
MILW
W 67-62
−1.5
12
@
IUIN
W 84-81
−2.5
18
vs
PFW
W 87-71
+10.5
22
@
YSU
L 58-64
−3.5
25
@
CLE
W 81-70
+2.5
28
vs
WRST
L 91-92
−4.5
4
@
OAK
W 85-84
+2.5
8
vs
GB
W 96-76
+16.5
9
vs
WRST
L 90-103
−14.5
covered 13didn’t cover 18avg −0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
@
TENN
L 56-95
+13.5
12
@
ETSU
L 63-75
−4.5
20
@
CMU
W 90-66
+9.5
24
vs
EKU
W 82-71
−3.5
26
vs
WOF
W 93-83
+26.5
29
vs
BU
W 74-65
−4.5
3
vs
CLE
W 95-80
+16.5
6
@
PFW
L 77-79
+2.5
13
@
BELL
W 80-76
+9.5
17
vs
OAK
L 77-82
−4.5
21
vs
COFC
L 74-85
+5.5
29
@
RMU
W 79-77
+6.5
1
vs
IUIN
W 81-72
−23.5
4
vs
YSU
W 94-79
+26.5
9
@
MILW
W 85-67
−5.5
11
@
GB
L 78-80
+13.5
15
vs
DETM
W 96-71
+7.5
17
vs
RMU
L 89-92
+27.5
24
@
WRST
L 80-88
+12.5
30
@
DETM
L 77-90
+5.5
1
@
OAK
L 65-76
−25.5
4
vs
GB
L 84-87
+21.5
7
vs
MILW
W 67-62
−27.5
12
@
IUIN
W 84-81
+0.5
18
vs
PFW
W 87-71
+4.5
22
@
YSU
L 58-64
−30.5
25
@
CLE
W 81-70
−15.5
28
vs
WRST
L 91-92
+29.5
4
@
OAK
W 85-84
+7.5
8
vs
GB
W 96-76
+25.5
9
vs
WRST
L 90-103
+35.5
over 21under 10avg +5.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Detroit Mercy
30 games played
Straight up
15-15
50% wins
Against the spread
20-10
67% covers · avg +3.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-16
47% overs · avg +0.5 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 3 | @ | L 71-91 | +9.5 | L −10.5 | 142.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 7 | @ | L 70-102 | +21.5 | L −10.5 | 147.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 83-90 | +10.5 | W +3.5 | 159.5 | O 173 |
| Nov 18 | vs | L 62-72 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 157.5 | U 134 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 56-84 | +30.5 | W +2.5 | 149.5 | U 140 |
| Nov 23 | @ | L 75-95 | +19.5 | L −0.5 | 151.5 | O 170 |
| Nov 29 | @ | W 70-66 | -1.5 | W +2.5 | 142.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 92-78 | -3.5 | W +10.5 | 180.5 | U 170 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 71-59 | +1.5 | W +13.5 | 158.5 | U 130 |
| Dec 14 | @ | L 77-81 | +9.5 | W +5.5 | 153.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 29 | @ | W 73-68 | +9.5 | W +14.5 | 146.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 2 | vs | L 77-85 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 148.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 9 | vs | L 82-84 | +5.5 | W +3.5 | 148.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 11 | vs | W 94-84 | -6.5 | W +3.5 | 162.5 | O 178 |
| Jan 15 | @ | L 71-96 | +10.5 | L −14.5 | 159.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 80-77 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 169.5 | U 157 |
| Jan 21 | vs | L 76-83 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 155.5 | O 159 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 87-95 | +6.5 | L −1.5 | 167.5 | O 182 |
| Jan 30 | vs | W 90-77 | +5.5 | W +18.5 | 161.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 76-63 | +6.5 | W +19.5 | 155.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 63-76 | +3.5 | L −9.5 | 149.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 77-74 | +11.5 | W +14.5 | 151.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 15 | vs | W 76-70 | +4.5 | W +10.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 20 | vs | W 91-86 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 153.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 22 | vs | W 74-70 | -1.5 | W +2.5 | 147.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 62-73 | +8.5 | L −2.5 | 150.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 95-89 | +8.5 | W +14.5 | 160.5 | O 184 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 84-63 | -1.5 | W +19.5 | 151.5 | U 147 |
| Mar 9 | vs | W 70-64 | +4.5 | W +10.5 | 146.5 | U 134 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 63-66 | +4.5 | W +1.5 | 153.5 | U 129 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
UIC
L 71-91
−10.5
7
@
ND
L 70-102
−10.5
15
@
TOL
L 83-90
+3.5
18
vs
EMU
L 62-72
−11.5
21
@
MSU
L 56-84
+2.5
23
@
DEP
L 75-95
−0.5
29
@
NIA
W 70-66
+2.5
3
vs
IUIN
W 92-78
+10.5
6
@
CLE
W 71-59
+13.5
14
@
PFW
L 77-81
+5.5
29
@
YSU
W 73-68
+14.5
2
vs
RMU
L 77-85
−4.5
9
vs
WRST
L 82-84
+3.5
11
vs
CLE
W 94-84
+3.5
15
@
NKU
L 71-96
−14.5
17
@
IUIN
W 80-77
+4.5
21
vs
PFW
L 76-83
−4.5
24
vs
OAK
L 87-95
−1.5
30
vs
NKU
W 90-77
+18.5
4
@
MILW
W 76-63
+19.5
7
@
GB
L 63-76
−9.5
12
@
WRST
W 77-74
+14.5
15
vs
YSU
W 76-70
+10.5
20
vs
MILW
W 91-86
+6.5
22
vs
GB
W 74-70
+2.5
25
@
RMU
L 62-73
−2.5
28
@
OAK
W 95-89
+14.5
4
vs
MILW
W 84-63
+19.5
9
vs
RMU
W 70-64
+10.5
10
vs
WRST
L 63-66
+1.5
covered 20didn’t cover 10avg +3.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
UIC
L 71-91
+19.5
7
@
ND
L 70-102
+24.5
15
@
TOL
L 83-90
+13.5
18
vs
EMU
L 62-72
−23.5
21
@
MSU
L 56-84
−9.5
23
@
DEP
L 75-95
+18.5
29
@
NIA
W 70-66
−6.5
3
vs
IUIN
W 92-78
−10.5
6
@
CLE
W 71-59
−28.5
14
@
PFW
L 77-81
+4.5
29
@
YSU
W 73-68
−5.5
2
vs
RMU
L 77-85
+13.5
9
vs
WRST
L 82-84
+17.5
11
vs
CLE
W 94-84
+15.5
15
@
NKU
L 71-96
+7.5
17
@
IUIN
W 80-77
−12.5
21
vs
PFW
L 76-83
+3.5
24
vs
OAK
L 87-95
+14.5
30
vs
NKU
W 90-77
+5.5
4
@
MILW
W 76-63
−16.5
7
@
GB
L 63-76
−10.5
12
@
WRST
W 77-74
−0.5
15
vs
YSU
W 76-70
−5.5
20
vs
MILW
W 91-86
+23.5
22
vs
GB
W 74-70
−3.5
25
@
RMU
L 62-73
−15.5
28
@
OAK
W 95-89
+23.5
4
vs
MILW
W 84-63
−4.5
9
vs
RMU
W 70-64
−12.5
10
vs
WRST
L 63-66
−24.5
over 14under 16avg +0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
N Kentucky has the better starters
Position by position: N Kentucky 2, Detroit Mercy 1, even 2
N KentuckyBetterDetroit Mercy
G E. Elliott4.8 pts · 2.8 reb · 4.4 ast
Score 3
→DETMBig
G T. Spratt10.1 pts · 3.5 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 54
G E. Acker TR5.7 pts · 1.3 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 38
=No call
G A. Carter11.9 pts · 3.9 reb · 1.4 ast
Not ranked
F N. Pagotto TR10.5 pts · 5.6 reb · 1 ast
Score 68
←NKUBig
G L. Stone6.6 pts · 1.1 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 9
F W. Shortt TR6.6 pts · 4.4 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 51
←NKUSmall
F L. Maiden6.5 pts · 3 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 28
F D. Rakotonanahary3 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 25
=No call
C X. Istomin-Monroe1.6 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
N KentuckyBetterDetroit Mercy
NKU offense209th of 366 · -6.3
←NKUSmall
DETM defense310th of 366 · -8.1
NKU defense249th of 366 · -6.5
=Even
DETM offense236th of 366 · -7.2
Backcourt-5.4 · 2 players
→DETMBig
Backcourt-2.0 · 3 players
Frontcourt-0.2 · 3 players
←NKUSmall
Frontcourt-1.9 · 2 players
Bench-2.4 · 3 players
→DETMSmall
Bench-0.7 · 1 player
Score, worst to bestNKU betterDETM betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
E. Elliott29 minE. Acker19 min · TRB. Davis-Ray7 min · TRB. Darbyshire6 minJ. ApathjangNewW. FosterNew
Forwards
N. Pagotto27 min · TRW. Shortt20 min · TRD. Rakotonanahary12 minR. Tolliver6 minJ. RuizNewP. Otto MaeNew
Guards
T. Spratt25 minA. Carter21 minL. Stone21 minJ. Cotton7 minJ. BriggsNewE. PalssonNew
Forwards
L. Maiden16 minD. FavorNewV. SemerychNewC. HouserNewT. OwensNew
Centers
X. Istomin-Monroe8 min
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 80.9 #47 | Points per game | 76.3 #135 |
| 1.13 #81 | Points per possession | 1.09 #153 |
| 71.5 #55 | Pace (possessions) | 69.7 #132 |
| Shooting | ||
| 53.2 #93 | Effective FG% | 49.5 #267 |
| 33.6 #193 | 3-point % | 35.1 #108 |
| 44.9 #71 | 3-point attempt rate | 30.7 #343 |
| 35.9 #158 | Free throw rate | 32.6 #247 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.3 #158 | Turnover rate | 16.0 #138 |
| 32.2 #117 | Offensive rebound rate | 33.3 #81 |
| 15.5 #65 | Assists per game | 13.1 #208 |
| Defense | ||
| 78.7 #284 | Points allowed | 78.7 #285 |
| 1.10 #225 | Points allowed per possession | 1.13 #290 |
| 54.2 #305 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.2 #223 |
| 36.6 #333 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.3 #140 |
| 18.6 #66 | Turnovers forced | 14.4 #324 |
| 68.4 #236 | Defensive rebound rate | 69.2 #193 |
| 8.3 #25 | Steals per game | 5.8 #264 |
| 3.5 #134 | Blocks per game | 3.3 #182 |
N Kentucky
17-14 in 2025-26 overall · 12-11 in conference · Horizon League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Wright St90–103
- Wvs Green Bay96–76
- W@ Oakland85–84
- Lvs Wright St91–92
- W@ Cleveland St81–70
A week or more of rest.
Detroit Mercy
15-15 in 2025-26 overall · 14-9 in conference · Horizon League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Wright St63–66
- Wvs Robert Morris70–64
- Wvs Milwaukee84–63
- W@ Oakland95–89
- L@ Robert Morris62–73
A week or more of rest.