Icardo Center · at Bakersfield
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | CSUB | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 NDSU 78–73 · win probability NDSU 70%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 150.8
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: NDSU has more of the edges
NDSU 6, CSUB 1 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: NDSU 32.9%, CSUB 30.4%. Defensive: NDSU 74.5%, CSUB 64.4%
Three-pointers
NDSU hits 35.4% and allows 33.9%; CSUB hits 29.0% and allows 36.0%. Threes are 42.8% and 28.9% of their shots
Shooting
Effective FG%: NDSU 53.2 and allows 52.0; CSUB 45.7 and allows 54.0
NDSU offense vs CSUB defense
Offense 212th of 366 against a defense 348th, on the model’s ratings
Turnovers
Turnover rate: NDSU 15.6%, CSUB 18.8%. Forced: NDSU 18.7%, CSUB 17.9%
Context
Schedule so far
NDSU has played the 315th-hardest schedule, CSUB the 211th. A record against a soft schedule means less
CSUB offense vs NDSU defense
Offense 287th of 366 against a defense 209th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 71 possessions: NDSU plays 69.2 a game (169th fastest), CSUB 72.7 (22nd). Faster games mean more points
Home court
CSUB at home. This season: CSUB 0-0 at home, NDSU 0-0 away
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: NDSU 25%, CSUB 10%. Transfers in: NDSU 4, CSUB 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: NDSU 30.6, CSUB 42.2. Allowed: NDSU 29.2, CSUB 42.6
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 | — | NDSU -5.9 | — |
| Total | — | 150.8 | — |
| Projected score | — | NDSU 78.3 · CSUB 72.5 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | NDSU -3.6 | — |
| 1H total | 70.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | NDSU 37.1 · CSUB 33.4 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8-2 80% | 5-5 50% | 4-6 40% | |
| 0-10 0% | 4-6 40% | 7-3 70% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
NDSU 2–1 CSUBNDSU leads · 3 games since 2021-22 · NDSU has won the last 2 meetings · NDSU 2-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 11, 2025-26 | NDSU 80 @ CSUB 69 | CSUB +7.5 | NDSU W |
| Dec 23, 2024-25 | CSUB 60 @ NDSU 94 | NDSU -9.5 | NDSU W |
| Nov 11, 2024-25 | NDSU 81 @ CSUB 86 | CSUB -2.5 | CSUB W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
N Dakota St
32 games played
Straight up
24-8
75% wins
Against the spread
18-14
56% covers · avg +2.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-17
47% overs · avg +0.3 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 3 | @ | L 65-67 | +9.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | U 132 |
| Nov 5 | @ | L 68-80 | +1.5 | L −10.5 | 142.5 | O 148 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 90-68 | -4.5 | W +17.5 | 156.5 | O 158 |
| Nov 17 | vs | W 92-85 | -1.5 | W +5.5 | 153.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 56-43 | -3.5 | W +9.5 | 142.5 | U 99 |
| Nov 28 | @ | L 80-85 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 160.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 3 | @ | W 81-72 | +3.5 | W +12.5 | 153.5 | U 153 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 69-68 | -12.5 | L −11.5 | 147.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 11 | @ | W 80-69 | -7.5 | W +3.5 | 149.5 | U 149 |
| Dec 13 | @ | W 99-94 | +5.5 | W +10.5 | 145.5 | O 193 |
| Dec 21 | vs | L 73-74 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 146.5 | O 147 |
| Dec 22 | @ | L 66-76 | -2.5 | L −12.5 | 139.5 | O 142 |
| Dec 31 | vs | W 84-61 | -11.5 | W +11.5 | 164.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 79-77 | -13.5 | L −11.5 | 146.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 8 | @ | W 97-73 | -9.5 | W +14.5 | 144.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 78-76 | -5.5 | L −3.5 | 147.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 76-65 | -5.5 | W +5.5 | 151.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 68-65 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 151.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 82-77 | -4.5 | W +0.5 | 160.5 | U 159 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 86-58 | -10.5 | W +17.5 | 151.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 89-84 | -8.5 | L −3.5 | 154.5 | O 173 |
| Feb 5 | vs | L 71-78 | -12.5 | L −19.5 | 156.5 | U 149 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 92-84 | -9.5 | L −1.5 | 146.5 | O 176 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 83-66 | -5.5 | W +11.5 | 149.5 | U 149 |
| Feb 18 | @ | W 74-66 | -1.5 | W +6.5 | 146.5 | U 140 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 95-59 | -19.5 | W +16.5 | 148.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 62-84 | +3.5 | L −18.5 | 155.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 96-63 | -11.5 | W +21.5 | 152.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 5 | vs | W 76-65 | -12.5 | L −1.5 | 147.5 | U 141 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 74-50 | -8.5 | W +15.5 | 146.5 | U 124 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 70-62 | -11.5 | L −3.5 | 147.5 | U 132 |
| Mar 19 | vs | L 67-92 | +16.5 | L −8.5 | 144.5 | O 159 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
ORST
L 65-67
+7.5
5
@
UCD
L 68-80
−10.5
11
vs
CSUN
W 90-68
+17.5
17
vs
SIU
W 92-85
+5.5
26
vs
JXST
W 56-43
+9.5
28
@
ARST
L 80-85
−1.5
3
@
MONT
W 81-72
+12.5
6
vs
NAU
W 69-68
−11.5
11
@
CSUB
W 80-69
+3.5
13
@
DRKE
W 99-94
+10.5
21
vs
UCI
L 73-74
−2.5
22
@
UTEP
L 66-76
−12.5
31
vs
SDAK
W 84-61
+11.5
3
vs
ORU
W 79-77
−11.5
8
@
KC
W 97-73
+14.5
10
@
OMA
W 78-76
−3.5
14
vs
SDST
W 76-65
+5.5
17
vs
STMN
W 68-65
+0.5
22
@
DEN
W 82-77
+0.5
24
@
ORU
W 86-58
+17.5
31
@
SDAK
W 89-84
−3.5
5
vs
DEN
L 71-78
−19.5
7
vs
OMA
W 92-84
−1.5
14
@
UND
W 83-66
+11.5
18
@
SDST
W 74-66
+6.5
21
vs
KC
W 95-59
+16.5
26
@
STMN
L 62-84
−18.5
28
vs
UND
W 96-63
+21.5
5
vs
ORU
W 76-65
−1.5
7
vs
OMA
W 74-50
+15.5
8
vs
UND
W 70-62
−3.5
19
vs
MSU
L 67-92
−8.5
covered 18didn’t cover 14avg +2.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
ORST
L 65-67
−12.5
5
@
UCD
L 68-80
+5.5
11
vs
CSUN
W 90-68
+1.5
17
vs
SIU
W 92-85
+23.5
26
vs
JXST
W 56-43
−43.5
28
@
ARST
L 80-85
+4.5
3
@
MONT
W 81-72
−0.5
6
vs
NAU
W 69-68
−10.5
11
@
CSUB
W 80-69
−0.5
13
@
DRKE
W 99-94
+47.5
21
vs
UCI
L 73-74
+0.5
22
@
UTEP
L 66-76
+2.5
31
vs
SDAK
W 84-61
−19.5
3
vs
ORU
W 79-77
+9.5
8
@
KC
W 97-73
+25.5
10
@
OMA
W 78-76
+6.5
14
vs
SDST
W 76-65
−10.5
17
vs
STMN
W 68-65
−18.5
22
@
DEN
W 82-77
−1.5
24
@
ORU
W 86-58
−7.5
31
@
SDAK
W 89-84
+18.5
5
vs
DEN
L 71-78
−7.5
7
vs
OMA
W 92-84
+29.5
14
@
UND
W 83-66
−0.5
18
@
SDST
W 74-66
−6.5
21
vs
KC
W 95-59
+5.5
26
@
STMN
L 62-84
−9.5
28
vs
UND
W 96-63
+6.5
5
vs
ORU
W 76-65
−6.5
7
vs
OMA
W 74-50
−22.5
8
vs
UND
W 70-62
−15.5
19
vs
MSU
L 67-92
+14.5
over 15under 17avg +0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Bakersfield
30 games played
Straight up
6-24
20% wins
Against the spread
12-18
40% covers · avg −3.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-14
53% overs · avg +5.1 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 60-87 | +15.5 | L −11.5 | 147.5 | U 147 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 74-58 | -7.5 | W +8.5 | 141.5 | U 132 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 60-82 | +23.5 | W +1.5 | 140.5 | O 142 |
| Nov 17 | @ | L 80-93 | +8.5 | L −4.5 | 141.5 | O 173 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 86-70 | -21.5 | L −5.5 | 138.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 25 | @ | L 59-89 | +26.5 | L −3.5 | 159.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 30 | vs | W 76-71 | +10.5 | W +15.5 | 150.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 4 | @ | L 66-87 | +5.5 | L −15.5 | 155.5 | U 153 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 84-109 | +12.5 | L −12.5 | 145.5 | O 193 |
| Dec 11 | vs | L 69-80 | +7.5 | L −3.5 | 149.5 | U 149 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 62-70 | -1.5 | L −9.5 | 147.5 | U 132 |
| Dec 23 | vs | W 64-63 | +7.5 | W +8.5 | 150.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 1 | vs | L 77-81 | +11.5 | W +7.5 | 143.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 81-79 | +9.5 | W +11.5 | 151.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 67-66 | -3.5 | L −2.5 | 147.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 75-81 | +6.5 | W +0.5 | 142.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 15 | vs | L 69-75 | +7.5 | W +1.5 | 144.5 | U 144 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 62-83 | +8.5 | L −12.5 | 147.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 71-98 | +17.5 | L −9.5 | 144.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 29 | vs | L 79-104 | +1.5 | L −23.5 | 161.5 | O 183 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 72-80 | +5.5 | L −2.5 | 152.5 | U 152 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 62-78 | +16.5 | W +0.5 | 144.5 | U 140 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 66-82 | +9.5 | L −6.5 | 157.5 | U 148 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 74-89 | +13.5 | L −1.5 | 151.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 65-93 | +6.5 | L −21.5 | 150.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 80-88 | +5.5 | L −2.5 | 160.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 72-84 | +14.5 | W +2.5 | 148.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 87-88 | +3.5 | W +2.5 | 152.5 | O 175 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 84-86 | +8.5 | W +6.5 | 163.5 | O 170 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 76-108 | +8.5 | L −23.5 | 174.5 | O 184 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
CAL
L 60-87
−11.5
11
vs
WIU
W 74-58
+8.5
14
@
MISS
L 60-82
+1.5
17
@
PRST
L 80-93
−4.5
22
vs
MVSU
W 86-70
−5.5
25
@
FSU
L 59-89
−3.5
30
vs
FRES
W 76-71
+15.5
4
@
CSUN
L 66-87
−15.5
6
@
UCSB
L 84-109
−12.5
11
vs
NDSU
L 69-80
−3.5
13
vs
PEPP
L 62-70
−9.5
23
vs
IDHO
W 64-63
+8.5
1
vs
UCI
L 77-81
+7.5
3
@
UCD
W 81-79
+11.5
8
vs
UCR
W 67-66
−2.5
10
@
LBSU
L 75-81
+0.5
15
vs
UCSB
L 69-75
+1.5
17
vs
UCSD
L 62-83
−12.5
22
@
HAW
L 71-98
−9.5
29
vs
CP
L 79-104
−23.5
31
vs
UCD
L 72-80
−2.5
5
@
UCI
L 62-78
+0.5
7
@
CSUF
L 66-82
−6.5
12
vs
HAW
L 74-89
−1.5
19
@
UCR
L 65-93
−21.5
21
vs
CSUF
L 80-88
−2.5
26
@
UCSD
L 72-84
+2.5
28
vs
LBSU
L 87-88
+2.5
5
vs
CSUN
L 84-86
+6.5
7
@
CP
L 76-108
−23.5
covered 12didn’t cover 18avg −3.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
CAL
L 60-87
−0.5
11
vs
WIU
W 74-58
−9.5
14
@
MISS
L 60-82
+1.5
17
@
PRST
L 80-93
+31.5
22
vs
MVSU
W 86-70
+17.5
25
@
FSU
L 59-89
−11.5
30
vs
FRES
W 76-71
−3.5
4
@
CSUN
L 66-87
−2.5
6
@
UCSB
L 84-109
+47.5
11
vs
NDSU
L 69-80
−0.5
13
vs
PEPP
L 62-70
−15.5
23
vs
IDHO
W 64-63
−23.5
1
vs
UCI
L 77-81
+14.5
3
@
UCD
W 81-79
+8.5
8
vs
UCR
W 67-66
−14.5
10
@
LBSU
L 75-81
+13.5
15
vs
UCSB
L 69-75
−0.5
17
vs
UCSD
L 62-83
−2.5
22
@
HAW
L 71-98
+24.5
29
vs
CP
L 79-104
+21.5
31
vs
UCD
L 72-80
−0.5
5
@
UCI
L 62-78
−4.5
7
@
CSUF
L 66-82
−9.5
12
vs
HAW
L 74-89
+11.5
19
@
UCR
L 65-93
+7.5
21
vs
CSUF
L 80-88
+7.5
26
@
UCSD
L 72-84
+7.5
28
vs
LBSU
L 87-88
+22.5
5
vs
CSUN
L 84-86
+6.5
7
@
CP
L 76-108
+9.5
over 16under 14avg +5.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Bakersfield has the better starters
Position by position: N Dakota St 0, Bakersfield 2, even 3
N Dakota StBetterBakersfield
G M. Bell TR8.8 pts · 4 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 19
→CSUBSmall
G B. Cofield TR9.8 pts · 4.8 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 42
G A. Stefonowicz9.3 pts · 3 reb · 4.7 ast
Score 42
→CSUBSmall
G J. Alexander9.4 pts · 3.4 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 62
G R. Diaz TR8.1 pts · 3.6 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 79
=No call
G S. Pouedet TR0.6 pts · 0.2 reb · 0.4 ast
Not ranked
G C. Smith2.3 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F C. Dioramma TR4.8 pts · 4.1 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 38
F K. Poom TR8.6 pts · 3.3 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 31
=No call
F C. Barnes TR0.3 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
N Dakota StBetterBakersfield
NDSU offense212th of 366 · -6.5
←NDSUBig
CSUB defense348th of 366 · -9.5
NDSU defense209th of 366 · -5.3
←NDSUSmall
CSUB offense287th of 366 · -8.9
Backcourt-4.6 · 4 players
→CSUBBig
Backcourt-1.4 · 3 players
Frontcourt-1.0 · 1 player
=Even
Frontcourt-0.9 · 2 players
Bench-1.0 · 2 players
=No call
BenchNo numbers yet
Score, worst to bestNDSU betterCSUB betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
M. Bell34 min · TRA. Stefonowicz33 minR. Diaz22 min · TRC. Smith9 minR. Massey8 minJ. Robison2 min · TR
Forwards
K. Poom20 min · TRA. NagyNewK. TateNewC. SchoenfeldNewO. JunkerNewC. StackNew
Guards
B. Cofield21 min · TRJ. Alexander20 minS. Pouedet5 min · TRS. WigingtonNewK. BradleyNewE. BrysonNew
Forwards
C. Dioramma15 min · TRC. Barnes6 min · TRT. KoppensNewP. IvancicNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 78.7 #87 | Points per game | 72.0 #244 |
| 1.14 #76 | Points per possession | 0.99 #336 |
| 69.2 #169 | Pace (possessions) | 72.7 #22 |
| Shooting | ||
| 53.2 #92 | Effective FG% | 45.7 #355 |
| 35.4 #93 | 3-point % | 29.0 #353 |
| 42.8 #122 | 3-point attempt rate | 28.9 #356 |
| 30.6 #289 | Free throw rate | 42.2 #27 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.6 #108 | Turnover rate | 18.8 #313 |
| 32.9 #89 | Offensive rebound rate | 30.4 #181 |
| 14.8 #97 | Assists per game | 10.9 #340 |
| Defense | ||
| 71.4 #90 | Points allowed | 83.4 #351 |
| 1.03 #63 | Points allowed per possession | 1.15 #326 |
| 52.0 #215 | Opponent effective FG% | 54.0 #301 |
| 33.9 #173 | Opponent 3-point % | 36.0 #306 |
| 18.7 #62 | Turnovers forced | 17.9 #101 |
| 74.5 #15 | Defensive rebound rate | 64.4 #349 |
| 7.7 #64 | Steals per game | 7.4 #91 |
| 2.8 #265 | Blocks per game | 5.0 #18 |
N Dakota St
24-8 in 2025-26 overall · 17-2 in conference · Summit League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Michigan St67–92
- Wvs North Dakota70–62
- Wvs Omaha74–50
- Wvs Oral Roberts76–65
- Wvs North Dakota96–63
A week or more of rest.
Bakersfield
6-24 in 2025-26 overall · 2-18 in conference · Big West Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Cal Poly76–108
- Lvs CSU Northridge84–86
- Lvs Long Beach St87–88
- L@ UC San Diego72–84
- Lvs Fullerton80–88
A week or more of rest.