Stonehill Skyhawks at Texas Tech Red Raiders: Model Line and Edge

Sat, Nov 14, 12:00 AM ETUnited Supermarkets Arena · at Texas Tech

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Stonehill and Texas Tech
STO	This season	TTU
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 TTU 92–51 · win probability TTU 100%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 143.2

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: TTU has more of the edges

STO 0, TTU 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

TTUBig

STO offense vs TTU defense

Offense 363rd of 366 against a defense 12th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Schedule so far

STO has played the 352nd-hardest schedule, TTU the 12th. A record against a soft schedule means less

TTUBig

TTU offense vs STO defense

Offense 12th of 366 against a defense 225th, on the model’s ratings

TTUBig

Three-pointers

STO hits 31.7% and allows 33.4%; TTU hits 39.1% and allows 32.1%. Threes are 40.5% and 47.6% of their shots

TTUBig

Shooting

Effective FG%: STO 46.9 and allows 47.8; TTU 56.1 and allows 49.7

TTUBig

Turnovers

Turnover rate: STO 19.4%, TTU 15.8%. Forced: STO 13.4%, TTU 14.8%

TTUSmall

Home court

TTU at home. This season: TTU 0-0 at home, STO 0-0 away

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: STO 28%, TTU 45%. Transfers in: STO 6, TTU 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Even

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: STO 27.5%, TTU 33.3%. Defensive: STO 72.9%, TTU 69.4%

Context

Tempo

About 68 possessions: STO plays 67.6 a game (244th fastest), TTU 68.2 (222nd). Faster games mean more points

Even

Free throws

Free throw rate: STO 27.3, TTU 27.7. Allowed: STO 30.3, TTU 31.4

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	—	TTU -40.6	—
Total	—	143.2	—
Projected score	—	STO 51.3 · TTU 91.9

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	TTU -24.0	—
1H total	67.0	—
1H projected score	STO 21.5 · TTU 45.5	—

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
STO WWLWL	16-15	52%	11-8	—
TTU LLLWL	17-17	50%	9-7	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
STO OOOOU	11-20	35%	10-21
TTU UUUOU	15-19	44%	23-11

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
STO	3-7 30%	4-6 40%	5-5 50%
TTU	5-5 50%	5-5 50%	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

Stonehill

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 18	vs UNH	L58–59WU
Nov 21	vs NE	No recent meeting
Nov 28	@ ND	L60–89LO

Texas Tech

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 18	vs NOLA	W82–50WU
Nov 24	vs LOU	W70–38WU
Dec 8	vs OMA	W87–58WO

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

Stonehill

31 games played

Straight up

10-21

32% wins

Against the spread

16-15

52% covers · avg +0.4 pts vs the line

Over / Under

11-20

35% overs · avg −4 pts vs the total

Straight up

10-2132%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

16-1552%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

11-2035%

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

3 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 7	@DEP	L 64-72	+22.5	W +14.5	147.5	U 136
Nov 11	@URI	L 57-80	+16.5	L −6.5	151.5	U 137
Nov 14	@FAIR	L 71-73	+6.5	W +4.5	143.5	O 144
Nov 15	vsL-MD	L 63-74	+6.5	L −4.5	138.5	U 137
Nov 17	@ISU	L 57-96	+40.5	W +1.5	146.5	O 153
Nov 21	vsLAF	W 74-70	+1.5	W +5.5	141.5	O 144
Nov 26	vsUML	L 64-75	-2.5	L −13.5	148.5	U 139
Nov 30	@QUIN	L 62-76	+15.5	W +1.5	148.5	U 138
Dec 2	@BRY	L 65-77	+6.5	L −5.5	134.5	O 142
Dec 17	@UNH	L 58-59	+3.5	W +2.5	138.5	U 117
Dec 22	@SYR	L 48-77	+22.5	L −6.5	140.5	U 125
Jan 2	vsNHVN	L 55-70	-1.5	L −16.5	128.5	U 125
Jan 4	@WAG	W 69-60	+7.5	W +16.5	139.5	U 129
Jan 8	@CCSU	L 69-76	+7.5	W +0.5	134.5	O 145
Jan 10	vsCHST	W 85-82	-4.5	L −1.5	135.5	O 167
Jan 17	@MERC	W 62-57	+4.5	W +9.5	128.5	U 119
Jan 19	@SFPA	L 61-63	+1.5	L −0.5	141.5	U 124
Jan 23	vsLIU	L 63-66	+5.5	W +2.5	137.5	U 129
Jan 26	vsCCSU	W 61-59	+1.5	W +3.5	135.5	U 120
Jan 29	vsFDU	W 58-57	-2.5	L −1.5	131.5	U 115
Jan 31	@LEM	W 65-54	+2.5	W +13.5	140.5	U 119
Feb 5	@FDU	L 58-74	+1.5	L −14.5	130.5	O 132
Feb 7	@LIU	L 54-61	+10.5	W +3.5	132.5	U 115
Feb 12	@CHST	L 55-68	-2.5	L −15.5	131.5	U 123
Feb 14	vsWAG	L 57-68	-3.5	L −14.5	128.5	U 125
Feb 19	@NHVN	L 51-64	+2.5	L −10.5	121.5	U 115
Feb 21	vsLEM	W 77-68	+1.5	W +10.5	137.5	O 145
Feb 26	vsSFPA	W 103-77	-4.5	W +21.5	140.5	O 180
Feb 28	vsMERC	L 72-75	+1.5	L −1.5	137.5	O 147
Mar 4	@LEM	W 81-71	+4.5	W +14.5	140.5	O 152
Mar 7	@MERC	L 51-56	+4.5	L −0.5	134.5	U 107

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

DEP

L 64-72

+14.5

URI

L 57-80

−6.5

FAIR

L 71-73

+4.5

L-MD

L 63-74

−4.5

ISU

L 57-96

+1.5

LAF

W 74-70

+5.5

UML

L 64-75

−13.5

QUIN

L 62-76

+1.5

BRY

L 65-77

−5.5

UNH

L 58-59

+2.5

SYR

L 48-77

−6.5

NHVN

L 55-70

−16.5

WAG

W 69-60

+16.5

CCSU

L 69-76

+0.5

CHST

W 85-82

−1.5

MERC

W 62-57

+9.5

SFPA

L 61-63

−0.5

LIU

L 63-66

+2.5

CCSU

W 61-59

+3.5

FDU

W 58-57

−1.5

LEM

W 65-54

+13.5

FDU

L 58-74

−14.5

LIU

L 54-61

+3.5

CHST

L 55-68

−15.5

WAG

L 57-68

−14.5

NHVN

L 51-64

−10.5

LEM

W 77-68

+10.5

SFPA

W 103-77

+21.5

MERC

L 72-75

−1.5

LEM

W 81-71

+14.5

MERC

L 51-56

−0.5

covered 16didn’t cover 15avg +0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

DEP

L 64-72

−11.5

URI

L 57-80

−14.5

FAIR

L 71-73

+0.5

L-MD

L 63-74

−1.5

ISU

L 57-96

+6.5

LAF

W 74-70

+2.5

UML

L 64-75

−9.5

QUIN

L 62-76

−10.5

BRY

L 65-77

+7.5

UNH

L 58-59

−21.5

SYR

L 48-77

−15.5

NHVN

L 55-70

−3.5

WAG

W 69-60

−10.5

CCSU

L 69-76

+10.5

CHST

W 85-82

+31.5

MERC

W 62-57

−9.5

SFPA

L 61-63

−17.5

LIU

L 63-66

−8.5

CCSU

W 61-59

−15.5

FDU

W 58-57

−16.5

LEM

W 65-54

−21.5

FDU

L 58-74

+1.5

LIU

L 54-61

−17.5

CHST

L 55-68

−8.5

WAG

L 57-68

−3.5

NHVN

L 51-64

−6.5

LEM

W 77-68

+7.5

SFPA

W 103-77

+39.5

MERC

L 72-75

+9.5

LEM

W 81-71

+11.5

MERC

L 51-56

−27.5

over 11under 20avg −4 ptslonger = bigger margin

Texas Tech

34 games played

Straight up

23-11

68% wins

Against the spread

17-17

50% covers · avg −0.2 pts vs the line

Over / Under

15-19

44% overs · avg −1.7 pts vs the total

Straight up

23-1168%

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

1 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

17-1750%

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

1 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

15-1944%

O O U U O U U U U O O O U O U U O U O O O U U U U U O O O U 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 4	vsLIN	W 98-60	-29.5	W +8.5	146.5	O 158
Nov 7	vsSHSU	W 98-77	-31.5	L −10.5	156.5	O 175
Nov 11	@ILL	L 77-81	+3.5	L −0.5	168.5	U 158
Nov 14	vsMILW	W 80-63	-27.5	L −10.5	165.5	U 143
Nov 20	vsWAKE	W 84-83	-9.5	L −8.5	160.5	O 167
Nov 21	vsPUR	L 56-86	+3.5	L −26.5	153.5	U 142
Nov 26	vsNOLA	W 82-50	-29.5	W +2.5	157.5	U 132
Nov 30	vsWYO	W 76-72	-19.5	L −15.5	152.5	U 148
Dec 7	vsLSU	W 82-58	-5.5	W +18.5	154.5	U 140
Dec 13	vsARK	L 86-93	-2.5	L −9.5	155.5	O 179
Dec 16	vsUNCO	W 101-90	-25.5	L −14.5	152.5	O 191
Dec 20	vsDUKE	W 82-81	+9.5	W +10.5	152.5	O 163
Dec 28	vsWIN	W 87-57	-17.5	W +12.5	163.5	U 144
Jan 3	vsOKST	W 102-80	-12.5	W +9.5	167.5	O 182
Jan 6	@HOU	L 65-69	+7.5	W +3.5	142.5	U 134
Jan 10	@COLO	W 73-71	-5.5	L −3.5	161.5	U 144
Jan 14	vsUTAH	W 88-74	-17.5	L −3.5	159.5	O 162
Jan 17	vsBYU	W 84-71	-2.5	W +10.5	165.5	U 155
Jan 20	@BAY	W 92-73	-1.5	W +17.5	154.5	O 165
Jan 24	vsHOU	W 90-86	+1.5	W +5.5	141.5	O 176
Jan 31	@UCF	L 80-88	-5.5	L −13.5	159.5	O 168
Feb 2	vsKU	L 61-64	-3.5	L −6.5	155.5	U 125
Feb 8	@WVU	W 70-63	-4.5	W +2.5	139.5	U 133
Feb 11	vsCOLO	W 78-44	-13.5	W +20.5	155.5	U 122
Feb 14	@ARIZ	W 78-75	+8.5	W +11.5	156.5	U 153
Feb 17	@ASU	L 67-72	-7.5	L −12.5	156.5	U 139
Feb 21	vsKSU	W 100-72	-12.5	W +15.5	158.5	O 172
Feb 24	vsCIN	W 80-68	-6.5	W +5.5	143.5	O 148
Feb 28	@ISU	W 82-73	+10.5	W +19.5	145.5	O 155
Mar 3	vsTCU	L 65-73	-8.5	L −16.5	147.5	U 138
Mar 7	@BYU	L 76-82	+2.5	L −3.5	159.5	U 158
Mar 12	vsISU	L 53-75	+7.5	L −14.5	143.5	U 128
Mar 20	vsAKR	W 91-71	-6.5	W +13.5	154.5	O 162
Mar 22	vsALA	L 65-90	+1.5	L −23.5	164.5	U 155

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

LIN

W 98-60

+8.5

SHSU

W 98-77

−10.5

ILL

L 77-81

−0.5

MILW

W 80-63

−10.5

WAKE

W 84-83

−8.5

PUR

L 56-86

−26.5

NOLA

W 82-50

+2.5

WYO

W 76-72

−15.5

LSU

W 82-58

+18.5

ARK

L 86-93

−9.5

UNCO

W 101-90

−14.5

DUKE

W 82-81

+10.5

WIN

W 87-57

+12.5

OKST

W 102-80

+9.5

HOU

L 65-69

+3.5

COLO

W 73-71

−3.5

UTAH

W 88-74

−3.5

BYU

W 84-71

+10.5

BAY

W 92-73

+17.5

HOU

W 90-86

+5.5

UCF

L 80-88

−13.5

L 61-64

−6.5

WVU

W 70-63

+2.5

COLO

W 78-44

+20.5

ARIZ

W 78-75

+11.5

ASU

L 67-72

−12.5

KSU

W 100-72

+15.5

CIN

W 80-68

+5.5

ISU

W 82-73

+19.5

TCU

L 65-73

−16.5

BYU

L 76-82

−3.5

ISU

L 53-75

−14.5

AKR

W 91-71

+13.5

ALA

L 65-90

−23.5

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

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

LIN

W 98-60

+11.5

SHSU

W 98-77

+18.5

ILL

L 77-81

−10.5

MILW

W 80-63

−22.5

WAKE

W 84-83

+6.5

PUR

L 56-86

−11.5

NOLA

W 82-50

−25.5

WYO

W 76-72

−4.5

LSU

W 82-58

−14.5

ARK

L 86-93

+23.5

UNCO

W 101-90

+38.5

DUKE

W 82-81

+10.5

WIN

W 87-57

−19.5

OKST

W 102-80

+14.5

HOU

L 65-69

−8.5

COLO

W 73-71

−17.5

UTAH

W 88-74

+2.5

BYU

W 84-71

−10.5

BAY

W 92-73

+10.5

HOU

W 90-86

+34.5

UCF

L 80-88

+8.5

L 61-64

−30.5

WVU

W 70-63

−6.5

COLO

W 78-44

−33.5

ARIZ

W 78-75

−3.5

ASU

L 67-72

−17.5

KSU

W 100-72

+13.5

CIN

W 80-68

+4.5

ISU

W 82-73

+9.5

TCU

L 65-73

−9.5

BYU

L 76-82

−1.5

ISU

L 53-75

−15.5

AKR

W 91-71

+7.5

ALA

L 65-90

−9.5

over 15under 19avg −1.7 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

Texas Tech has the better starters

Position by position: Stonehill 0, Texas Tech 4, even 1

StonehillBetterTexas Tech

G W. Batchelder8 pts · 2.5 reb · 1.5 ast Not ranked

No call

G C. Davis TR20.1 pts · 3.5 reb · 4.6 ast Score 91

G A. Boldin TR5.3 pts · 2.8 reb · 1 ast Score 29

TTUBig

G D. Atwell13.5 pts · 3.2 reb · 0.8 ast Score 88

G D. Arlington TR2.7 pts · 1.9 reb · 1.3 ast Score 5

TTUBig

G D. Gibbs-Lawhorn TR20.7 pts · 3.1 reb · 2.5 ast Score 95

G E. Greenberg TR2.3 pts · 1.2 reb · 1.5 ast Score 0

TTUBig

F J. Toppin21.8 pts · 10.8 reb · 2.1 ast Score 100

G A. Allen TR3.6 pts · 1.6 reb · 0.3 ast Score 15

TTUBig

F D. Williams TR14 pts · 4.6 reb · 2.8 ast Score 76

StonehillBetterTexas Tech

STO offense363rd of 366 · -14.8

TTUBig

TTU defense12th of 366 · +6.6

STO defense225th of 366 · -5.9

TTUBig

TTU offense12th of 366 · +9.9

Backcourt-10.2 · 5 players

TTUBig

Backcourt+10.4 · 3 players

FrontcourtNo numbers yet

No call

Frontcourt+10.8 · 2 players

Bench-3.6 · 5 players

TTUBig

Bench+7.2 · 4 players

Score, worst to bestSTO betterTTU 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

Stonehill

Guards

W. Batchelder32 minA. Boldin18 min · TRD. Arlington14 min · TRE. Greenberg14 min · TRA. Allen14 min · TRT. Ruth11 min

Forwards

P. McGuinn9 minE. Steele4 min · TRJ. MedalieNewB. LeonsNew

Centers

D. ChengNew

Texas Tech

Guards

C. Davis39 min · TRD. Atwell35 minD. Gibbs-Lawhorn35 min · TRD. Dennis24 min · TRD. SpearNewA. BarrettNew

Forwards

J. Toppin35 minD. Williams30 min · TRJ. Stillwell28 min · TRJ. Moseley14 minM. Akuentok6 minL. HooverNew

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

STO64.2 #353

TTU80.3 #62

Points per possession

STO0.95 #357

TTU1.18 #35

Pace (possessions)

STO67.6 #244

TTU68.2 #222

Shooting

Effective FG%

STO46.9 #339

TTU56.1 #21

3-point %

STO31.7 #294

TTU39.1 #4

3-point attempt rate

STO40.5 #158

TTU47.6 #29

Free throw rate

STO27.3 #350

TTU27.7 #347

Possessions

Turnover rate

STO19.4 #333

TTU15.8 #123

Offensive rebound rate

STO27.5 #282

TTU33.3 #82

Assists per game

STO11.8 #298

TTU15.7 #59

Defense

Points allowed

STO69.5 #56

TTU73.1 #134

Points allowed per possession

STO1.03 #57

TTU1.07 #138

Opponent effective FG%

STO47.8 #36

TTU49.7 #86

Opponent 3-point %

STO33.4 #150

TTU32.1 #67

Turnovers forced

STO13.4 #347

TTU14.8 #305

Defensive rebound rate

STO72.9 #40

TTU69.4 #186

Steals per game

STO4.7 #347

TTU6.0 #239

Blocks per game

STO4.0 #75

TTU3.8 #103

STO		TTU
Scoring
64.2 #353	Points per game	80.3 #62
0.95 #357	Points per possession	1.18 #35
67.6 #244	Pace (possessions)	68.2 #222
Shooting
46.9 #339	Effective FG%	56.1 #21
31.7 #294	3-point %	39.1 #4
40.5 #158	3-point attempt rate	47.6 #29
27.3 #350	Free throw rate	27.7 #347
Possessions
19.4 #333	Turnover rate	15.8 #123
27.5 #282	Offensive rebound rate	33.3 #82
11.8 #298	Assists per game	15.7 #59
Defense
69.5 #56	Points allowed	73.1 #134
1.03 #57	Points allowed per possession	1.07 #138
47.8 #36	Opponent effective FG%	49.7 #86
33.4 #150	Opponent 3-point %	32.1 #67
13.4 #347	Turnovers forced	14.8 #305
72.9 #40	Defensive rebound rate	69.4 #186
4.7 #347	Steals per game	6.0 #239
4.0 #75	Blocks per game	3.8 #103

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.

Stonehill

10-21 in 2025-26 overall · 9-11 in conference · Northeast Conference

Last five, 2025-26

L@ Mercyhurst51–56
W@ Le Moyne81–71
Lvs Mercyhurst72–75
Wvs Saint Francis Red Wolves103–77
Wvs Le Moyne77–68

A week or more of rest.

Texas Tech

23-11 in 2025-26 overall · 12-7 in conference · Big 12 Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Alabama65–90
Wvs Akron91–71
Lvs Iowa State53–75
L@ BYU76–82
Lvs TCU65–73

A week or more of rest.

Stonehill Skyhawks at Texas Tech Red Raiders

What could decide it: TTU has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Stonehill

Texas Tech

Texas Tech has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Stonehill

Texas Tech