Cal State Bakersfield Roadrunners at Pepperdine Waves: Model Line and Edge

Wed, Nov 25, 8:00 PM ETFirestone Fieldhouse · at Pepperdine

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Bakersfield and Pepperdine
CSUB	This season	PEPP
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 PEPP 83–71 · win probability PEPP 86%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 154.4

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: PEPP has more of the edges

CSUB 0, PEPP 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

PEPPBig

PEPP offense vs CSUB defense

Offense 139th of 366 against a defense 348th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Schedule so far

CSUB has played the 211th-hardest schedule, PEPP the 128th. A record against a soft schedule means less

PEPPSmall

CSUB offense vs PEPP defense

Offense 287th of 366 against a defense 216th, on the model’s ratings

PEPPSmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: CSUB 42.2, PEPP 33.9. Allowed: CSUB 42.6, PEPP 28.5

PEPPSmall

Home court

PEPP at home. This season: PEPP 0-0 at home, CSUB 0-0 away

Context

Tempo

About 71 possessions: CSUB plays 72.7 a game (22nd fastest), PEPP 70.0 (117th). Faster games mean more points

Even

Three-pointers

CSUB hits 29.0% and allows 36.0%; PEPP hits 31.4% and allows 35.5%. Threes are 28.9% and 39.2% of their shots

Even

Turnovers

Turnover rate: CSUB 18.8%, PEPP 18.3%. Forced: CSUB 17.9%, PEPP 16.5%

Even

Shooting

Effective FG%: CSUB 45.7 and allows 54.0; PEPP 47.6 and allows 54.2

Even

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: CSUB 30.4%, PEPP 29.1%. Defensive: CSUB 64.4%, PEPP 66.0%

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: CSUB 10%, PEPP 5%. Transfers in: CSUB 4, PEPP 7. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

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	—	PEPP -12.5	—
Total	—	154.4	—
Projected score	—	CSUB 71 · PEPP 83.4

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	PEPP -7.3	—
1H total	72.2	—
1H projected score	CSUB 32.4 · PEPP 39.7	—

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
CSUB LWWWL	12-18	40%	5-9	—
PEPP WLWWL	14-16	47%	6-9	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
CSUB OOOOO	16-14	53%	6-24
PEPP OOOOU	15-15	50%	7-23

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
CSUB	0-10 0%	4-6 40%	7-3 70%
PEPP	3-7 30%	5-5 50%	9-1 90%

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

Bakersfield

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 28	vs NAU	L64–74LO
Dec 3	vs UCSB	L69–75WU
Dec 5	vs CSUN	L84–86WO

Pepperdine

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 28	vs LEH	No recent meeting
Dec 1	@ ACU	L63–71LU
Dec 5	vs FGCU	No recent meeting

Last meeting: result, against the spread, over / under. Hover a result for its date.

Recent meetings

Since 2021-22

CSUB 0–1 PEPPPEPP leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · CSUB 0-1 ATS

Date	Result	Line	Covered
Dec 13, 2025-26	PEPP 70 @ CSUB 62	CSUB -1.5	PEPP W

ATS History · 2025-26

WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total

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

Straight up

6-2420%

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

15 straight losses0 of last 4 won

Against the spread

12-1840%

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

3 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

16-1453%

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

7 straight overs4 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	@CAL	L 60-87	+15.5	L −11.5	147.5	U 147
Nov 11	vsWIU	W 74-58	-7.5	W +8.5	141.5	U 132
Nov 14	@MISS	L 60-82	+23.5	W +1.5	140.5	O 142
Nov 17	@PRST	L 80-93	+8.5	L −4.5	141.5	O 173
Nov 22	vsMVSU	W 86-70	-21.5	L −5.5	138.5	O 156
Nov 25	@FSU	L 59-89	+26.5	L −3.5	159.5	U 148
Nov 30	vsFRES	W 76-71	+10.5	W +15.5	150.5	U 147
Dec 4	@CSUN	L 66-87	+5.5	L −15.5	155.5	U 153
Dec 6	@UCSB	L 84-109	+12.5	L −12.5	145.5	O 193
Dec 11	vsNDSU	L 69-80	+7.5	L −3.5	149.5	U 149
Dec 13	vsPEPP	L 62-70	-1.5	L −9.5	147.5	U 132
Dec 23	vsIDHO	W 64-63	+7.5	W +8.5	150.5	U 127
Jan 1	vsUCI	L 77-81	+11.5	W +7.5	143.5	O 158
Jan 3	@UCD	W 81-79	+9.5	W +11.5	151.5	O 160
Jan 8	vsUCR	W 67-66	-3.5	L −2.5	147.5	U 133
Jan 10	@LBSU	L 75-81	+6.5	W +0.5	142.5	O 156
Jan 15	vsUCSB	L 69-75	+7.5	W +1.5	144.5	U 144
Jan 17	vsUCSD	L 62-83	+8.5	L −12.5	147.5	U 145
Jan 22	@HAW	L 71-98	+17.5	L −9.5	144.5	O 169
Jan 29	vsCP	L 79-104	+1.5	L −23.5	161.5	O 183
Jan 31	vsUCD	L 72-80	+5.5	L −2.5	152.5	U 152
Feb 5	@UCI	L 62-78	+16.5	W +0.5	144.5	U 140
Feb 7	@CSUF	L 66-82	+9.5	L −6.5	157.5	U 148
Feb 12	vsHAW	L 74-89	+13.5	L −1.5	151.5	O 163
Feb 19	@UCR	L 65-93	+6.5	L −21.5	150.5	O 158
Feb 21	vsCSUF	L 80-88	+5.5	L −2.5	160.5	O 168
Feb 26	@UCSD	L 72-84	+14.5	W +2.5	148.5	O 156
Feb 28	vsLBSU	L 87-88	+3.5	W +2.5	152.5	O 175
Mar 5	vsCSUN	L 84-86	+8.5	W +6.5	163.5	O 170
Mar 7	@CP	L 76-108	+8.5	L −23.5	174.5	O 184

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

CAL

L 60-87

−11.5

WIU

W 74-58

+8.5

MISS

L 60-82

+1.5

PRST

L 80-93

−4.5

MVSU

W 86-70

−5.5

FSU

L 59-89

−3.5

FRES

W 76-71

+15.5

CSUN

L 66-87

−15.5

UCSB

L 84-109

−12.5

NDSU

L 69-80

−3.5

PEPP

L 62-70

−9.5

IDHO

W 64-63

+8.5

UCI

L 77-81

+7.5

UCD

W 81-79

+11.5

UCR

W 67-66

−2.5

LBSU

L 75-81

+0.5

UCSB

L 69-75

+1.5

UCSD

L 62-83

−12.5

HAW

L 71-98

−9.5

L 79-104

−23.5

UCD

L 72-80

−2.5

UCI

L 62-78

+0.5

CSUF

L 66-82

−6.5

HAW

L 74-89

−1.5

UCR

L 65-93

−21.5

CSUF

L 80-88

−2.5

UCSD

L 72-84

+2.5

LBSU

L 87-88

+2.5

CSUN

L 84-86

+6.5

L 76-108

−23.5

covered 12didn’t cover 18avg −3.5 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

CAL

L 60-87

−0.5

WIU

W 74-58

−9.5

MISS

L 60-82

+1.5

PRST

L 80-93

+31.5

MVSU

W 86-70

+17.5

FSU

L 59-89

−11.5

FRES

W 76-71

−3.5

CSUN

L 66-87

−2.5

UCSB

L 84-109

+47.5

NDSU

L 69-80

−0.5

PEPP

L 62-70

−15.5

IDHO

W 64-63

−23.5

UCI

L 77-81

+14.5

UCD

W 81-79

+8.5

UCR

W 67-66

−14.5

LBSU

L 75-81

+13.5

UCSB

L 69-75

−0.5

UCSD

L 62-83

−2.5

HAW

L 71-98

+24.5

L 79-104

+21.5

UCD

L 72-80

−0.5

UCI

L 62-78

−4.5

CSUF

L 66-82

−9.5

HAW

L 74-89

+11.5

UCR

L 65-93

+7.5

CSUF

L 80-88

+7.5

UCSD

L 72-84

+7.5

LBSU

L 87-88

+22.5

CSUN

L 84-86

+6.5

L 76-108

+9.5

over 16under 14avg +5.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

Pepperdine

30 games played

Straight up

7-23

23% wins

Against the spread

14-16

47% covers · avg −0.5 pts vs the line

Over / Under

15-15

50% overs · avg +2.2 pts vs the total

Straight up

7-2323%

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

1 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

14-1647%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

15-1550%

U O O U U U U U U O O U U U O U U U U O O O O O O 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	@UCLA	L 63-74	+29.5	W +18.5	152.5	U 137
Nov 15	vsUNCO	L 81-88	+1.5	L −5.5	153.5	O 169
Nov 18	vsNOLA	W 90-79	-5.5	W +5.5	157.5	O 169
Nov 21	vsSFA	L 60-63	+1.5	L −1.5	148.5	U 123
Nov 26	vsFRES	L 53-76	+2.5	L −20.5	150.5	U 129
Nov 29	@CSUF	L 69-83	+1.5	L −12.5	161.5	U 152
Dec 2	vsACU	L 63-71	+1.5	L −6.5	137.5	U 134
Dec 6	vsUVM	L 56-65	+1.5	L −7.5	142.5	U 121
Dec 13	@CSUB	W 70-62	+1.5	W +9.5	147.5	U 132
Dec 18	@LBSU	L 78-81	+4.5	W +1.5	141.5	O 159
Dec 20	vsRICE	W 84-62	+1.5	W +23.5	140.5	O 146
Dec 28	vsGONZ	L 56-96	+29.5	L −10.5	152.5	U 152
Dec 30	vsSMC	L 45-72	+19.5	L −7.5	141.5	U 117
Jan 2	@SCU	L 63-82	+20.5	W +1.5	150.5	U 145
Jan 4	@PAC	L 69-74	+11.5	W +6.5	138.5	O 143
Jan 8	@USD	L 63-83	+4.5	L −15.5	149.5	U 146
Jan 10	vsSF	L 60-80	+7.5	L −12.5	140.5	U 140
Jan 14	vsPORT	W 67-63	+1.5	W +5.5	147.5	U 130
Jan 21	@GONZ	L 60-84	+28.5	W +4.5	150.5	U 144
Jan 24	@WSU	L 79-95	+11.5	L −4.5	146.5	O 174
Jan 28	vsUSD	L 88-92	+2.5	L −1.5	151.5	O 180
Feb 4	@SEA	L 81-83	+12.5	W +10.5	139.5	O 164
Feb 7	vsPAC	L 59-92	+7.5	L −25.5	142.5	O 151
Feb 11	@SMC	L 60-88	+24.5	L −3.5	144.5	O 148
Feb 14	vsLMU	W 90-89	+5.5	W +6.5	147.5	O 179
Feb 18	@PORT	W 95-87	+7.5	W +15.5	150.5	O 182
Feb 21	@ORST	L 73-83	+9.5	L −0.5	148.5	O 156
Feb 25	vsSEA	L 80-87	+7.5	W +0.5	145.5	O 167
Feb 28	vsWSU	W 88-79	+7.5	W +16.5	158.5	O 167
Mar 5	vsPORT	L 68-77	+3.5	L −5.5	154.5	U 145

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

UCLA

L 63-74

+18.5

UNCO

L 81-88

−5.5

NOLA

W 90-79

+5.5

SFA

L 60-63

−1.5

FRES

L 53-76

−20.5

CSUF

L 69-83

−12.5

ACU

L 63-71

−6.5

UVM

L 56-65

−7.5

CSUB

W 70-62

+9.5

LBSU

L 78-81

+1.5

RICE

W 84-62

+23.5

GONZ

L 56-96

−10.5

SMC

L 45-72

−7.5

SCU

L 63-82

+1.5

PAC

L 69-74

+6.5

USD

L 63-83

−15.5

L 60-80

−12.5

PORT

W 67-63

+5.5

GONZ

L 60-84

+4.5

WSU

L 79-95

−4.5

USD

L 88-92

−1.5

SEA

L 81-83

+10.5

PAC

L 59-92

−25.5

SMC

L 60-88

−3.5

LMU

W 90-89

+6.5

PORT

W 95-87

+15.5

ORST

L 73-83

−0.5

SEA

L 80-87

+0.5

WSU

W 88-79

+16.5

PORT

L 68-77

−5.5

covered 14didn’t cover 16avg −0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

UCLA

L 63-74

−15.5

UNCO

L 81-88

+15.5

NOLA

W 90-79

+11.5

SFA

L 60-63

−25.5

FRES

L 53-76

−21.5

CSUF

L 69-83

−9.5

ACU

L 63-71

−3.5

UVM

L 56-65

−21.5

CSUB

W 70-62

−15.5

LBSU

L 78-81

+17.5

RICE

W 84-62

+5.5

GONZ

L 56-96

−0.5

SMC

L 45-72

−24.5

SCU

L 63-82

−5.5

PAC

L 69-74

+4.5

USD

L 63-83

−3.5

L 60-80

−0.5

PORT

W 67-63

−17.5

GONZ

L 60-84

−6.5

WSU

L 79-95

+27.5

USD

L 88-92

+28.5

SEA

L 81-83

+24.5

PAC

L 59-92

+8.5

SMC

L 60-88

+3.5

LMU

W 90-89

+31.5

PORT

W 95-87

+31.5

ORST

L 73-83

+7.5

SEA

L 80-87

+21.5

WSU

W 88-79

+8.5

PORT

L 68-77

−9.5

over 15under 15avg +2.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

Pepperdine has the better starters

Position by position: Bakersfield 0, Pepperdine 2, even 3

BakersfieldBetterPepperdine

G B. Cofield TR9.8 pts · 4.8 reb · 2.2 ast Score 42

PEPPSmall

G J. Williamson TR10.4 pts · 2 reb · 0.8 ast Score 58

G J. Alexander9.4 pts · 3.4 reb · 0.6 ast Score 62

No call

G W. McClendon TR13.7 pts · 3 reb · 1.3 ast Not ranked

G S. Pouedet TR0.6 pts · 0.2 reb · 0.4 ast Not ranked

No call

F P. Majstorovic TR14.4 pts · 6.3 reb · 1.8 ast Score 78

F C. Dioramma TR4.8 pts · 4.1 reb · 0.7 ast Score 38

PEPPSmall

F Y. Fritz TR9.8 pts · 5.4 reb · 1.5 ast Score 58

F C. Barnes TR0.3 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.3 ast Not ranked

No call

F E. Meuser TR6.1 pts · 5.2 reb · 1.3 ast Score 39

BakersfieldBetterPepperdine

CSUB offense287th of 366 · -8.9

PEPPSmall

PEPP defense216th of 366 · -5.6

CSUB defense348th of 366 · -9.5

PEPPBig

PEPP offense139th of 366 · -4.2

Backcourt-1.4 · 3 players

PEPPSmall

Backcourt+1.6 · 2 players

Frontcourt-0.9 · 2 players

PEPPSmall

Frontcourt+1.2 · 3 players

BenchNo numbers yet

No call

Bench-1.6 · 3 players

Score, worst to bestCSUB betterPEPP 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

Bakersfield

Guards

B. Cofield21 min · TRJ. Alexander20 minS. Pouedet5 min · TRS. WigingtonNewK. BradleyNewE. BrysonNew

Forwards

C. Dioramma15 min · TRC. Barnes6 min · TRT. KoppensNewP. IvancicNew

Pepperdine

Guards

J. Williamson26 min · TRW. McClendon25 min · TRE. Haywood19 min · TRD. Mager10 minA. BalianNewC. ChouNew

Forwards

P. Majstorovic32 min · TRY. Fritz26 min · TRE. Meuser21 min · TRA. Robinson10 min · TRA. ConstanzaNewF. BiberovicNew

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

CSUB72.0 #244

PEPP70.4 #277

Points per possession

CSUB0.99 #336

PEPP1.00 #320

Pace (possessions)

CSUB72.7 #22

PEPP70.0 #117

Shooting

Effective FG%

CSUB45.7 #355

PEPP47.6 #323

3-point %

CSUB29.0 #353

PEPP31.4 #310

3-point attempt rate

CSUB28.9 #356

PEPP39.2 #187

Free throw rate

CSUB42.2 #27

PEPP33.9 #216

Possessions

Turnover rate

CSUB18.8 #313

PEPP18.3 #288

Offensive rebound rate

CSUB30.4 #181

PEPP29.1 #234

Assists per game

CSUB10.9 #340

PEPP13.6 #176

Defense

Points allowed

CSUB83.4 #351

PEPP79.7 #311

Points allowed per possession

CSUB1.15 #326

PEPP1.14 #303

Opponent effective FG%

CSUB54.0 #301

PEPP54.2 #306

Opponent 3-point %

CSUB36.0 #306

PEPP35.5 #276

Turnovers forced

CSUB17.9 #101

PEPP16.5 #184

Defensive rebound rate

CSUB64.4 #349

PEPP66.0 #318

Steals per game

CSUB7.4 #91

PEPP5.9 #246

Blocks per game

CSUB5.0 #18

PEPP2.8 #269

CSUB		PEPP
Scoring
72.0 #244	Points per game	70.4 #277
0.99 #336	Points per possession	1.00 #320
72.7 #22	Pace (possessions)	70.0 #117
Shooting
45.7 #355	Effective FG%	47.6 #323
29.0 #353	3-point %	31.4 #310
28.9 #356	3-point attempt rate	39.2 #187
42.2 #27	Free throw rate	33.9 #216
Possessions
18.8 #313	Turnover rate	18.3 #288
30.4 #181	Offensive rebound rate	29.1 #234
10.9 #340	Assists per game	13.6 #176
Defense
83.4 #351	Points allowed	79.7 #311
1.15 #326	Points allowed per possession	1.14 #303
54.0 #301	Opponent effective FG%	54.2 #306
36.0 #306	Opponent 3-point %	35.5 #276
17.9 #101	Turnovers forced	16.5 #184
64.4 #349	Defensive rebound rate	66.0 #318
7.4 #91	Steals per game	5.9 #246
5.0 #18	Blocks per game	2.8 #269

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.

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.

Pepperdine

7-23 in 2025-26 overall · 4-15 in conference · West Coast Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Portland68–77
Wvs Washington St88–79
Lvs Seattle U80–87
L@ Oregon St73–83
W@ Portland95–87

A week or more of rest.

Cal State Bakersfield Roadrunners at Pepperdine Waves

What could decide it: PEPP has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

Recent meetings

ATS History · 2025-26

Bakersfield

Pepperdine

Pepperdine has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Bakersfield

Pepperdine