Northeastern Huskies at Stonehill Skyhawks: Model Line and Edge

Sat, Nov 21, 5:00 PM ETMerkert Gymnasium · at Stonehill

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Northeastern and Stonehill
NE	This season	STO
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 NE 74–69 · win probability NE 65%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 142.8

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: STO has more of the edges

NE 2, STO 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

NEBig

Turnovers

Turnover rate: NE 16.3%, STO 19.4%. Forced: NE 16.8%, STO 13.4%

Context

Schedule so far

NE has played the 185th-hardest schedule, STO the 352nd. A record against a soft schedule means less

STOBig

Free throws

Free throw rate: NE 29.4, STO 27.3. Allowed: NE 41.9, STO 30.3

NESmall

STO offense vs NE defense

Offense 363rd of 366 against a defense 263rd, on the model’s ratings

STOSmall

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: NE 27.3%, STO 27.5%. Defensive: NE 69.8%, STO 72.9%

Context

Tempo

About 69 possessions: NE plays 69.9 a game (120th fastest), STO 67.6 (244th). Faster games mean more points

STOSmall

Shooting

Effective FG%: NE 52.4 and allows 56.4; STO 46.9 and allows 47.8

STOSmall

Home court

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

Even

NE offense vs STO defense

Offense 194th of 366 against a defense 225th, on the model’s ratings

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: NE 43%, STO 28%. Transfers in: NE 3, STO 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Even

Three-pointers

NE hits 33.7% and allows 35.8%; STO hits 31.7% and allows 33.4%. Threes are 37.8% and 40.5% of their shots

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	—	NE -4.4	—
Total	—	142.8	—
Projected score	—	NE 73.6 · STO 69.2

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	NE -2.8	—
1H total	66.8	—
1H projected score	NE 34.8 · STO 32	—

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
NE WLLWL	11-20	35%	7-9	—
STO WWLWL	16-15	52%	5-6	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
NE UUOOO	20-11	65%	7-24
STO OOOOU	11-20	35%	10-21

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
NE	1-9 10%	2-8 20%	4-6 40%
STO	3-7 30%	4-6 40%	5-5 50%

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

Northeastern

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 25	@ WIS	No recent meeting
Nov 27	@ NU	L60–85LO
Dec 2	vs HC	L59–76LU

Stonehill

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 28	@ ND	L60–89LO
Dec 1	@ PROV	L49–76LU
Dec 5	vs HC	W81–79WO

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

Northeastern

31 games played

Straight up

7-24

23% wins

Against the spread

11-20

35% covers · avg −2.3 pts vs the line

Over / Under

20-11

65% overs · avg +7.7 pts vs the total

Straight up

7-2423%

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

1 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

11-2035%

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

1 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

20-1165%

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

3 straight overs3 of last 4 over

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	vsBU	L 75-76	-2.5	L −3.5	142.5	O 151
Nov 7	@COLG	W 68-65	+5.5	W +8.5	147.5	U 133
Nov 11	@HARV	W 77-60	+5.5	W +22.5	144.5	U 137
Nov 15	vsUVM	L 74-85	-1.5	L −12.5	134.5	O 159
Nov 20	@PRIN	L 57-70	+2.5	L −10.5	145.5	U 127
Nov 22	vsDUQ	W 93-86	+7.5	W +14.5	147.5	O 179
Nov 28	@WAKE	L 73-86	+17.5	W +4.5	154.5	O 159
Dec 3	@HC	L 59-76	-8.5	L −25.5	145.5	U 135
Dec 7	vsCCSU	W 73-56	-1.5	W +15.5	138.5	U 129
Dec 20	@SYR	L 83-91	+14.5	W +6.5	140.5	O 174
Dec 22	@URI	L 77-85	+10.5	W +2.5	144.5	O 162
Dec 29	@ELON	L 91-103	+4.5	L −7.5	153.5	O 194
Dec 31	@NCAT	W 85-74	-3.5	W +7.5	151.5	O 159
Jan 3	@CAM	L 82-97	+3.5	L −11.5	154.5	O 179
Jan 8	vsUNCW	L 78-87	+4.5	L −4.5	142.5	O 165
Jan 10	vsTOW	L 78-87	+2.5	L −6.5	143.5	O 165
Jan 15	vsELON	W 85-78	+3.5	W +10.5	157.5	O 163
Jan 19	@MONM	L 68-81	+3.5	L −9.5	143.5	O 149
Jan 22	vsSTBK	L 80-95	-3.5	L −18.5	148.5	O 175
Jan 24	@DREX	L 78-83	+4.5	L −0.5	139.5	O 161
Jan 31	vsCOFC	L 84-89	+3.5	L −1.5	161.5	O 173
Feb 5	@HOF	L 63-80	+8.5	L −8.5	153.5	U 143
Feb 7	@STBK	L 55-69	+3.5	L −10.5	153.5	U 124
Feb 12	vsW&M	L 67-94	+5.5	L −21.5	167.5	U 161
Feb 19	vsDREX	L 61-70	-1.5	L −10.5	143.5	U 131
Feb 21	vsHOF	L 68-82	+6.5	L −7.5	144.5	O 150
Feb 26	@W&M	L 77-84	+11.5	W +4.5	164.5	U 161
Feb 28	@HAMP	L 65-76	+3.5	L −7.5	145.5	U 141
Mar 3	vsMONM	L 83-89	+3.5	L −2.5	148.5	O 172
Mar 6	vsNCAT	W 88-72	-2.5	W +13.5	151.5	O 160
Mar 7	vsDREX	L 77-84	+4.5	L −2.5	138.5	O 161

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

L 75-76

−3.5

COLG

W 68-65

+8.5

HARV

W 77-60

+22.5

UVM

L 74-85

−12.5

PRIN

L 57-70

−10.5

DUQ

W 93-86

+14.5

WAKE

L 73-86

+4.5

L 59-76

−25.5

CCSU

W 73-56

+15.5

SYR

L 83-91

+6.5

URI

L 77-85

+2.5

ELON

L 91-103

−7.5

NCAT

W 85-74

+7.5

CAM

L 82-97

−11.5

UNCW

L 78-87

−4.5

TOW

L 78-87

−6.5

ELON

W 85-78

+10.5

MONM

L 68-81

−9.5

STBK

L 80-95

−18.5

DREX

L 78-83

−0.5

COFC

L 84-89

−1.5

HOF

L 63-80

−8.5

STBK

L 55-69

−10.5

W&M

L 67-94

−21.5

DREX

L 61-70

−10.5

HOF

L 68-82

−7.5

W&M

L 77-84

+4.5

HAMP

L 65-76

−7.5

MONM

L 83-89

−2.5

NCAT

W 88-72

+13.5

DREX

L 77-84

−2.5

covered 11didn’t cover 20avg −2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

L 75-76

+8.5

COLG

W 68-65

−14.5

HARV

W 77-60

−7.5

UVM

L 74-85

+24.5

PRIN

L 57-70

−18.5

DUQ

W 93-86

+31.5

WAKE

L 73-86

+4.5

L 59-76

−10.5

CCSU

W 73-56

−9.5

SYR

L 83-91

+33.5

URI

L 77-85

+17.5

ELON

L 91-103

+40.5

NCAT

W 85-74

+7.5

CAM

L 82-97

+24.5

UNCW

L 78-87

+22.5

TOW

L 78-87

+21.5

ELON

W 85-78

+5.5

MONM

L 68-81

+5.5

STBK

L 80-95

+26.5

DREX

L 78-83

+21.5

COFC

L 84-89

+11.5

HOF

L 63-80

−10.5

STBK

L 55-69

−29.5

W&M

L 67-94

−6.5

DREX

L 61-70

−12.5

HOF

L 68-82

+5.5

W&M

L 77-84

−3.5

HAMP

L 65-76

−4.5

MONM

L 83-89

+23.5

NCAT

W 88-72

+8.5

DREX

L 77-84

+22.5

over 20under 11avg +7.7 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

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

Northeastern has the better starters

Position by position: Northeastern 2, Stonehill 0, even 3

NortheasternBetterStonehill

G M. Loughnane10.2 pts · 2.9 reb · 3.8 ast Score 45

No call

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

G R. King TR5.8 pts · 2.1 reb · 1.2 ast Score 46

NESmall

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

G M. Newton5.4 pts · 2 reb · 0.9 ast Not ranked

No call

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

G R. Williams7.4 pts · 1.1 reb · 1.6 ast Score 89

NEBig

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

C P. Pinter3.3 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.4 ast Score 5

Even

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

NortheasternBetterStonehill

NE offense194th of 366 · -6.0

Even

STO defense225th of 366 · -5.9

NE defense263rd of 366 · -6.8

NESmall

STO offense363rd of 366 · -14.8

Backcourt-0.9 · 4 players

NEBig

Backcourt-10.2 · 5 players

Frontcourt-2.0 · 1 player

No call

FrontcourtNo numbers yet

Bench-1.8 · 3 players

NESmall

Bench-3.6 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestNE betterSTO 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

Northeastern

Guards

M. Loughnane31 minR. King19 min · TRM. Newton17 minR. Williams15 minL. Bond14 min · TRD. GrosberNew

Forwards

B. Young5 min · TRJ. IcitovicNewD. JungNewS. BaptisteNew

Centers

P. Pinter14 minL. Koelsch9 min

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

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

NE74.9 #168

STO64.2 #353

Points per possession

NE1.07 #210

STO0.95 #357

Pace (possessions)

NE69.9 #120

STO67.6 #244

Shooting

Effective FG%

NE52.4 #130

STO46.9 #339

3-point %

NE33.7 #187

STO31.7 #294

3-point attempt rate

NE37.8 #218

STO40.5 #158

Free throw rate

NE29.4 #324

STO27.3 #350

Possessions

Turnover rate

NE16.3 #159

STO19.4 #333

Offensive rebound rate

NE27.3 #286

STO27.5 #282

Assists per game

NE15.3 #75

STO11.8 #298

Defense

Points allowed

NE80.9 #331

STO69.5 #56

Points allowed per possession

NE1.16 #335

STO1.03 #57

Opponent effective FG%

NE56.4 #351

STO47.8 #36

Opponent 3-point %

NE35.8 #297

STO33.4 #150

Turnovers forced

NE16.8 #163

STO13.4 #347

Defensive rebound rate

NE69.8 #169

STO72.9 #40

Steals per game

NE7.0 #131

STO4.7 #347

Blocks per game

NE3.0 #229

STO4.0 #75

NE		STO
Scoring
74.9 #168	Points per game	64.2 #353
1.07 #210	Points per possession	0.95 #357
69.9 #120	Pace (possessions)	67.6 #244
Shooting
52.4 #130	Effective FG%	46.9 #339
33.7 #187	3-point %	31.7 #294
37.8 #218	3-point attempt rate	40.5 #158
29.4 #324	Free throw rate	27.3 #350
Possessions
16.3 #159	Turnover rate	19.4 #333
27.3 #286	Offensive rebound rate	27.5 #282
15.3 #75	Assists per game	11.8 #298
Defense
80.9 #331	Points allowed	69.5 #56
1.16 #335	Points allowed per possession	1.03 #57
56.4 #351	Opponent effective FG%	47.8 #36
35.8 #297	Opponent 3-point %	33.4 #150
16.8 #163	Turnovers forced	13.4 #347
69.8 #169	Defensive rebound rate	72.9 #40
7.0 #131	Steals per game	4.7 #347
3.0 #229	Blocks per game	4.0 #75

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.

Northeastern

7-24 in 2025-26 overall · 3-17 in conference · Coastal Athletic Association

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Drexel77–84
Wvs NC A&T88–72
Lvs Monmouth83–89
L@ Hampton65–76
L@ William & Mary77–84

A week or more of rest.

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.

Northeastern Huskies at Stonehill Skyhawks

What could decide it: STO has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Northeastern

Stonehill

Northeastern has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Northeastern

Stonehill