Brooklyn Athletic Center · at Long Island
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | LIU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 UNCW 76–67 · win probability UNCW 78%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 143.5
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: UNCW has more of the edges
UNCW 5, LIU 1 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
LIU offense vs UNCW defense
Offense 339th of 366 against a defense 119th, on the model’s ratings
UNCW offense vs LIU defense
Offense 131st of 366 against a defense 283rd, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UNCW 35.3%, LIU 33.9%. Defensive: UNCW 72.4%, LIU 67.0%
Free throws
Free throw rate: UNCW 40.4, LIU 34.0. Allowed: UNCW 31.7, LIU 34.7
Context
Schedule so far
UNCW has played the 228th-hardest schedule, LIU the 290th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UNCW 35%, LIU 6%. Transfers in: UNCW 4, LIU 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Context
Tempo
About 67 possessions: UNCW plays 66.1 a game (310th fastest), LIU 68.5 (206th). Faster games mean more points
Home court
LIU at home. This season: LIU 0-0 at home, UNCW 0-0 away
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: UNCW 50.4 and allows 47.5; LIU 52.8 and allows 50.0
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UNCW 14.9%, LIU 19.0%. Forced: UNCW 14.9%, LIU 18.7%
Even
Three-pointers
UNCW hits 35.0% and allows 29.7%; LIU hits 35.8% and allows 32.2%. Threes are 38.8% and 29.3% of their shots
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 | — | UNCW -9.0 | — |
| Total | — | 143.5 | — |
| Projected score | — | UNCW 76.3 · LIU 67.3 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | UNCW -5.5 | — |
| 1H total | 67.2 | — |
| 1H projected score | UNCW 36.3 · LIU 30.8 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7-3 70% | 7-3 70% | 5-5 50% | |
| 7-3 70% | 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
UNC Wilmington
32 games played
Straight up
25-7
78% wins
Against the spread
16-16
50% covers · avg +0.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
18-14
56% overs · avg −2.2 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 10 | @ | L 77-86 | +3.5 | L −5.5 | 156.5 | O 163 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 73-60 | -14.5 | L −1.5 | 155.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 85-60 | -6.5 | W +18.5 | 145.5 | U 145 |
| Nov 21 | @ | W 81-73 | -4.5 | W +3.5 | 151.5 | O 154 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 70-57 | -11.5 | W +1.5 | 137.5 | U 127 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 87-57 | -8.5 | W +21.5 | 138.5 | O 144 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 88-62 | -18.5 | W +7.5 | 147.5 | O 150 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 70-69 | -8.5 | L −7.5 | 150.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 70-63 | -12.5 | L −5.5 | 130.5 | O 133 |
| Dec 13 | @ | W 73-70 | -4.5 | L −1.5 | 136.5 | O 143 |
| Dec 20 | vs | L 66-67 | -15.5 | L −16.5 | 141.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 29 | @ | W 87-78 | -10.5 | L −1.5 | 146.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 31 | vs | W 65-53 | -12.5 | L −0.5 | 137.5 | U 118 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 49-45 | -12.5 | L −8.5 | 140.5 | U 94 |
| Jan 8 | @ | W 87-78 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 142.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 75-71 | -6.5 | L −2.5 | 133.5 | O 146 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 78-75 | -6.5 | L −3.5 | 149.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 70-77 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 159.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 75-67 | -4.5 | W +3.5 | 136.5 | O 142 |
| Jan 29 | @ | W 82-73 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 135.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 5 | vs | L 78-85 | -4.5 | L −11.5 | 159.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 9 | @ | W 76-64 | +1.5 | W +13.5 | 148.5 | U 140 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 65-54 | -8.5 | W +2.5 | 149.5 | U 119 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 70-66 | -2.5 | W +1.5 | 137.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 19 | vs | W 79-69 | -7.5 | W +2.5 | 144.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 73-68 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 150.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 88-65 | -13.5 | W +9.5 | 146.5 | O 153 |
| Mar 1 | vs | L 76-79 | -5.5 | L −8.5 | 146.5 | O 155 |
| Mar 3 | @ | W 76-57 | -4.5 | W +14.5 | 145.5 | U 133 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 70-85 | -6.5 | L −21.5 | 149.5 | O 155 |
| Mar 17 | @ | W 68-67 | +4.5 | W +5.5 | 148.5 | U 135 |
| Mar 21 | vs | L 61-80 | +3.5 | L −15.5 | 138.5 | O 141 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
10
@
KENT
L 77-86
−5.5
15
vs
UPST
W 73-60
−1.5
18
vs
ECU
W 85-60
+18.5
21
@
RAD
W 81-73
+3.5
26
vs
SELA
W 70-57
+1.5
28
vs
NAVY
W 87-57
+21.5
29
vs
GWEB
W 88-62
+7.5
3
vs
MRSH
W 70-69
−7.5
6
@
UL
W 70-63
−5.5
13
@
VAL
W 73-70
−1.5
20
vs
HOW
L 66-67
−16.5
29
@
NCAT
W 87-78
−1.5
31
vs
DREX
W 65-53
−0.5
3
vs
HAMP
W 49-45
−8.5
8
@
NE
W 87-78
+4.5
10
@
STBK
W 75-71
−2.5
17
vs
CAM
W 78-75
−3.5
22
@
W&M
L 70-77
−4.5
24
@
HAMP
W 75-67
+3.5
29
@
TOW
W 82-73
+10.5
5
vs
W&M
L 78-85
−11.5
9
@
COFC
W 76-64
+13.5
12
vs
ELON
W 65-54
+2.5
14
vs
HOF
W 70-66
+1.5
19
vs
MONM
W 79-69
+2.5
21
@
CAM
W 73-68
+1.5
26
vs
NCAT
W 88-65
+9.5
1
vs
COFC
L 76-79
−8.5
3
@
ELON
W 76-57
+14.5
8
vs
CAM
L 70-85
−21.5
17
@
YALE
W 68-67
+5.5
21
vs
DAY
L 61-80
−15.5
covered 16didn’t cover 16avg +0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
10
@
KENT
L 77-86
+6.5
15
vs
UPST
W 73-60
−22.5
18
vs
ECU
W 85-60
−0.5
21
@
RAD
W 81-73
+2.5
26
vs
SELA
W 70-57
−10.5
28
vs
NAVY
W 87-57
+5.5
29
vs
GWEB
W 88-62
+2.5
3
vs
MRSH
W 70-69
−11.5
6
@
UL
W 70-63
+2.5
13
@
VAL
W 73-70
+6.5
20
vs
HOW
L 66-67
−8.5
29
@
NCAT
W 87-78
+18.5
31
vs
DREX
W 65-53
−19.5
3
vs
HAMP
W 49-45
−46.5
8
@
NE
W 87-78
+22.5
10
@
STBK
W 75-71
+12.5
17
vs
CAM
W 78-75
+3.5
22
@
W&M
L 70-77
−12.5
24
@
HAMP
W 75-67
+5.5
29
@
TOW
W 82-73
+19.5
5
vs
W&M
L 78-85
+3.5
9
@
COFC
W 76-64
−8.5
12
vs
ELON
W 65-54
−30.5
14
vs
HOF
W 70-66
−1.5
19
vs
MONM
W 79-69
+3.5
21
@
CAM
W 73-68
−9.5
26
vs
NCAT
W 88-65
+6.5
1
vs
COFC
L 76-79
+8.5
3
@
ELON
W 76-57
−12.5
8
vs
CAM
L 70-85
+5.5
17
@
YALE
W 68-67
−13.5
21
vs
DAY
L 61-80
+2.5
over 18under 14avg −2.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Long Island
35 games played
Straight up
24-11
69% wins
Against the spread
17-18
49% covers · avg +1.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-20
43% overs · avg −0.2 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 3 | @ | L 67-89 | +15.5 | L −6.5 | 135.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 6 | @ | W 94-90 | +4.5 | W +8.5 | 185.5 | U 184 |
| Nov 11 | @ | W 76-72 | -5.5 | L −1.5 | 137.5 | O 148 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 88-79 | -3.5 | W +5.5 | 147.5 | O 167 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 53-69 | +4.5 | L −11.5 | 145.5 | U 122 |
| Nov 22 | @ | L 58-98 | +34.5 | L −5.5 | 160.5 | U 156 |
| Nov 24 | @ | W 75-61 | +4.5 | W +18.5 | 145.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 2 | vs | L 92-94 | +5.5 | W +3.5 | 153.5 | O 186 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 87-82 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 142.5 | O 169 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 70-60 | -2.5 | W +7.5 | 143.5 | U 130 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 83-87 | +16.5 | W +12.5 | 152.5 | O 170 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 79-86 | +6.5 | L −0.5 | 161.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 74-89 | +30.5 | W +15.5 | 179.5 | U 163 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 84-78 | -6.5 | L −0.5 | 146.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 4 | @ | W 74-55 | -7.5 | W +11.5 | 151.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 60-58 | -8.5 | L −6.5 | 139.5 | U 118 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 67-63 | -15.5 | L −11.5 | 148.5 | U 130 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 66-59 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 143.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 19 | @ | L 77-83 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 150.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 23 | @ | W 66-63 | -5.5 | L −2.5 | 137.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 83-61 | -8.5 | W +13.5 | 147.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 80-59 | -2.5 | W +18.5 | 142.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 60-55 | -9.5 | L −4.5 | 135.5 | U 115 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 61-54 | -10.5 | L −3.5 | 132.5 | U 115 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 67-57 | -6.5 | W +3.5 | 135.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 52-55 | -6.5 | L −9.5 | 129.5 | U 107 |
| Feb 16 | vs | W 83-65 | -10.5 | W +7.5 | 138.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 19 | @ | W 91-89 | -9.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | O 180 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 83-91 | -3.5 | L −11.5 | 140.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 73-56 | -11.5 | W +5.5 | 141.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 74-60 | -9.5 | W +4.5 | 137.5 | U 134 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 79-75 | -10.5 | L −6.5 | 137.5 | O 154 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 64-56 | -6.5 | W +1.5 | 138.5 | U 120 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 79-70 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 134.5 | O 149 |
| Mar 20 | vs | L 58-92 | +30.5 | L −3.5 | 147.5 | O 150 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
ND
L 67-89
−6.5
6
@
IUIN
W 94-90
+8.5
11
@
AF
W 76-72
−1.5
15
vs
JMU
W 88-79
+5.5
20
@
FOR
L 53-69
−11.5
22
@
ILL
L 58-98
−5.5
24
@
MOST
W 75-61
+18.5
2
vs
WIN
L 92-94
+3.5
6
@
LEH
W 87-82
+3.5
13
vs
LAS
W 70-60
+7.5
16
@
MSST
L 83-87
+12.5
20
@
FIU
L 79-86
−0.5
29
@
UGA
L 74-89
+15.5
2
vs
CCSU
W 84-78
−0.5
4
@
CHST
W 74-55
+11.5
8
vs
MERC
W 60-58
−6.5
10
vs
SFPA
W 67-63
−11.5
17
@
FDU
W 66-59
−0.5
19
@
LEM
L 77-83
−7.5
23
@
STO
W 66-63
−2.5
29
vs
LEM
W 83-61
+13.5
31
@
CCSU
W 80-59
+18.5
5
vs
NHVN
W 60-55
−4.5
7
vs
STO
W 61-54
−3.5
12
@
WAG
W 67-57
+3.5
14
@
NHVN
L 52-55
−9.5
16
vs
WAG
W 83-65
+7.5
19
@
SFPA
W 91-89
−7.5
21
@
MERC
L 83-91
−11.5
26
vs
CHST
W 73-56
+5.5
28
vs
FDU
W 74-60
+4.5
4
vs
CHST
W 79-75
−6.5
7
vs
WAG
W 64-56
+1.5
10
vs
MERC
W 79-70
+4.5
20
vs
ARIZ
L 58-92
−3.5
covered 17didn’t cover 18avg +1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
ND
L 67-89
+20.5
6
@
IUIN
W 94-90
−1.5
11
@
AF
W 76-72
+10.5
15
vs
JMU
W 88-79
+19.5
20
@
FOR
L 53-69
−23.5
22
@
ILL
L 58-98
−4.5
24
@
MOST
W 75-61
−9.5
2
vs
WIN
L 92-94
+32.5
6
@
LEH
W 87-82
+26.5
13
vs
LAS
W 70-60
−13.5
16
@
MSST
L 83-87
+17.5
20
@
FIU
L 79-86
+3.5
29
@
UGA
L 74-89
−16.5
2
vs
CCSU
W 84-78
+15.5
4
@
CHST
W 74-55
−22.5
8
vs
MERC
W 60-58
−21.5
10
vs
SFPA
W 67-63
−18.5
17
@
FDU
W 66-59
−18.5
19
@
LEM
L 77-83
+9.5
23
@
STO
W 66-63
−8.5
29
vs
LEM
W 83-61
−3.5
31
@
CCSU
W 80-59
−3.5
5
vs
NHVN
W 60-55
−20.5
7
vs
STO
W 61-54
−17.5
12
@
WAG
W 67-57
−11.5
14
@
NHVN
L 52-55
−22.5
16
vs
WAG
W 83-65
+9.5
19
@
SFPA
W 91-89
+31.5
21
@
MERC
L 83-91
+33.5
26
vs
CHST
W 73-56
−12.5
28
vs
FDU
W 74-60
−3.5
4
vs
CHST
W 79-75
+16.5
7
vs
WAG
W 64-56
−18.5
10
vs
MERC
W 79-70
+14.5
20
vs
ARIZ
L 58-92
+2.5
over 15under 20avg −0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
UNC Wilmington has the better starters
Position by position: UNC Wilmington 3, Long Island 0, even 2
UNC WilmingtonBetterLong Island
G W. Kermoury TR13.1 pts · 3.2 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 75
←UNCWBig
G J. Pickett TR5.7 pts · 1.5 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 2
G T. Pettway TR8.8 pts · 2.1 reb · 2 ast
Score 64
←UNCWBig
G K. Jones TR4.4 pts · 1 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 13
F G. Walsh9.1 pts · 6.3 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 57
=No call
G D. Davis TR0.7 pts · 0.3 reb · 1 ast
Not ranked
F S. Elliott TR4.1 pts · 2.7 reb · 1 ast
Score 23
=No call
G D. Jean-Charles TR0.8 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.5 ast
Not ranked
C P. Wessler13.5 pts · 9.4 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 87
←UNCWBig
F J. Johnson TR6.5 pts · 2.4 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 33
UNC WilmingtonBetterLong Island
UNCW offense131st of 366 · -3.7
←UNCWBig
LIU defense283rd of 366 · -7.1
UNCW defense119th of 366 · -1.8
←UNCWBig
LIU offense339th of 366 · -11.1
Backcourt+1.0 · 2 players
←UNCWBig
Backcourt-6.7 · 4 players
Frontcourt+2.5 · 3 players
←UNCWBig
Frontcourt-0.8 · 1 player
Bench-1.4 · 3 players
=Even
Bench-1.6 · 3 players
Score, worst to bestUNCW betterLIU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
W. Kermoury27 min · TRT. Pettway22 min · TRJ. Lamothe15 minX. Brown12 min · TRM. Smith3 minC. LusterNew
Forwards
G. Walsh26 minS. Elliott17 min · TRT. NelsonNewM. ProdanovicNewW. SewardNew
Centers
P. Wessler27 min
Guards
J. Pickett27 min · TRK. Jones11 min · TRD. Davis9 min · TRD. Jean-Charles9 min · TRM. Ndlovu-Fraser8 minV. AlletteNew
Forwards
J. Johnson15 min · TRJ. Howard7 min · TRX. Li4 minM. BewleyNewR. BewleyNewT. BowlesNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 74.6 #174 | Points per game | 73.6 #214 |
| 1.13 #84 | Points per possession | 1.08 #185 |
| 66.1 #310 | Pace (possessions) | 68.5 #206 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.4 #220 | Effective FG% | 52.8 #112 |
| 35.0 #124 | 3-point % | 35.8 #67 |
| 38.8 #194 | 3-point attempt rate | 29.3 #354 |
| 40.4 #54 | Free throw rate | 34.0 #207 |
| Possessions | ||
| 14.9 #57 | Turnover rate | 19.0 #320 |
| 35.3 #40 | Offensive rebound rate | 33.9 #70 |
| 13.1 #204 | Assists per game | 13.7 #170 |
| Defense | ||
| 68.1 #32 | Points allowed | 71.7 #99 |
| 1.03 #56 | Points allowed per possession | 1.04 #80 |
| 47.5 #30 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.0 #102 |
| 29.7 #6 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.2 #72 |
| 14.9 #297 | Turnovers forced | 18.7 #61 |
| 72.4 #51 | Defensive rebound rate | 67.0 #299 |
| 5.1 #330 | Steals per game | 7.8 #56 |
| 2.4 #312 | Blocks per game | 5.4 #9 |
UNC Wilmington
25-7 in 2025-26 overall · 15-4 in conference · Coastal Athletic Association
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Dayton61–80
- W@ Yale68–67
- Lvs Campbell70–85
- W@ Elon76–57
- Lvs Charleston76–79
A week or more of rest.
Long Island
24-11 in 2025-26 overall · 18-3 in conference · Northeast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Arizona58–92
- Wvs Mercyhurst79–70
- Wvs Wagner64–56
- Wvs Chicago St79–75
- Wvs FDU74–60
A week or more of rest.