Longwood Lancers at Saint Joseph's Hawks: Model Line and Edge

Wed, Nov 4, 7:00 PM ETMichael J. Hagan '85 Arena · at Saint Joseph's

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Longwood and Saint Joseph's
LONG	This season	JOES
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 JOES 80–68 · win probability JOES 84%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 148.0

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: JOES has more of the edges

LONG 2, JOES 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

Context

Schedule so far

LONG has played the 330th-hardest schedule, JOES the 102nd. A record against a soft schedule means less

JOESBig

Shooting

Effective FG%: LONG 49.7 and allows 53.8; JOES 49.2 and allows 47.6

LONGSmall

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: LONG 34.6%, JOES 31.4%. Defensive: LONG 72.3%, JOES 69.4%

JOESSmall

JOES offense vs LONG defense

Offense 134th of 366 against a defense 242nd, on the model’s ratings

JOESSmall

LONG offense vs JOES defense

Offense 182nd of 366 against a defense 91st, on the model’s ratings

Context

Tempo

About 70 possessions: LONG plays 71.5 a game (54th fastest), JOES 68.4 (208th). Faster games mean more points

LONGSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: LONG 19.2%, JOES 16.8%. Forced: LONG 19.7%, JOES 15.0%

JOESSmall

Three-pointers

LONG hits 31.4% and allows 33.8%; JOES hits 30.8% and allows 31.7%. Threes are 34.8% and 45.1% of their shots

JOESSmall

Home court

JOES at home. This season: JOES 0-0 at home, LONG 0-0 away

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: LONG 28%, JOES 40%. Transfers in: LONG 6, JOES 2. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Even

Free throws

Free throw rate: LONG 41.4, JOES 29.7. Allowed: LONG 42.1, JOES 26.9

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	—	JOES -11.5	—
Total	—	148.0	—
Projected score	—	LONG 68.3 · JOES 79.7

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	JOES -6.7	—
1H total	69.2	—
1H projected score	LONG 31.3 · JOES 38	—

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
LONG WLWWL	13-16	45%	6-8	—
JOES WLWWL	20-14	59%	8-6	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
LONG OUOOO	16-13	55%	13-16
JOES UUUUU	11-23	32%	22-12

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
LONG	4-6 40%	5-5 50%	6-4 60%
JOES	8-2 80%	8-2 80%	3-7 30%

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

Longwood

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 7	vs NCCU	W74–72LU
Nov 14	@ ODU	L61–62WU
Nov 18	vs VMI	W68–49WU

Saint Joseph's

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 7	vs LAF	W85–76LO
Nov 11	vs USF	L62–75LO
Nov 14	vs PENN	L74–83LU

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

Longwood

29 games played

Straight up

13-16

45% wins

Against the spread

13-16

45% covers · avg −0.3 pts vs the line

Over / Under

16-13

55% overs · avg +2.7 pts vs the total

Straight up

13-1645%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

13-1645%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

16-1355%

U O O O O U U O O O U U U U U O O U O U U O U O O 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 7	@PITT	L 60-78	+14.5	L −3.5	145.5	U 138
Nov 12	vsJMU	W 82-72	+1.5	W +11.5	149.5	O 154
Nov 15	vsBING	W 90-82	-15.5	L −7.5	147.5	O 172
Nov 18	vsUMES	L 82-83	-17.5	L −18.5	138.5	O 165
Nov 23	@COLU	L 70-95	+3.5	L −21.5	153.5	O 165
Nov 28	vsSIE	L 63-70	+5.5	L −1.5	145.5	U 133
Nov 29	vsME	W 65-61	-5.5	L −1.5	138.5	U 126
Nov 30	@AMER	L 66-92	+5.5	L −20.5	148.5	O 158
Dec 6	@MORG	W 84-80	-5.5	L −1.5	154.5	O 164
Dec 13	vsDSU	L 76-81	-13.5	L −18.5	139.5	O 157
Dec 17	@WAKE	L 68-71	+24.5	W +21.5	163.5	U 139
Dec 20	@NCCU	W 74-72	-3.5	L −1.5	146.5	U 146
Dec 31	vsWIN	W 82-70	+7.5	W +19.5	161.5	U 152
Jan 3	@HPU	L 67-80	+16.5	W +3.5	160.5	U 147
Jan 7	@UNCA	L 61-72	+2.5	L −8.5	148.5	U 133
Jan 10	vsPRES	W 77-70	-3.5	W +3.5	139.5	O 147
Jan 17	@RAD	L 83-85	+4.5	W +2.5	157.5	O 168
Jan 21	vsGWEB	W 91-56	-16.5	W +18.5	155.5	U 147
Jan 23	vsCHSO	W 81-79	-1.5	W +0.5	156.5	O 160
Jan 29	@UPST	L 60-65	-1.5	L −6.5	147.5	U 125
Jan 31	vsHPU	L 59-71	+9.5	L −2.5	156.5	U 130
Feb 4	@GWEB	W 86-66	-12.5	W +7.5	147.5	O 152
Feb 7	@WIN	L 74-79	+10.5	W +5.5	153.5	U 153
Feb 12	vsUNCA	L 74-79	-2.5	L −7.5	141.5	O 153
Feb 14	vsUPST	W 82-75	-6.5	W +0.5	147.5	O 157
Feb 19	@PRES	L 65-72	+2.5	L −4.5	139.5	U 137
Feb 21	@CHSO	W 107-96	+2.5	W +13.5	154.5	O 203
Feb 28	vsRAD	W 90-74	-1.5	W +14.5	154.5	O 164
Mar 6	vsUNCA	L 82-85	-1.5	L −4.5	140.5	O 167

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

PITT

L 60-78

−3.5

JMU

W 82-72

+11.5

BING

W 90-82

−7.5

UMES

L 82-83

−18.5

COLU

L 70-95

−21.5

SIE

L 63-70

−1.5

W 65-61

−1.5

AMER

L 66-92

−20.5

MORG

W 84-80

−1.5

DSU

L 76-81

−18.5

WAKE

L 68-71

+21.5

NCCU

W 74-72

−1.5

WIN

W 82-70

+19.5

HPU

L 67-80

+3.5

UNCA

L 61-72

−8.5

PRES

W 77-70

+3.5

RAD

L 83-85

+2.5

GWEB

W 91-56

+18.5

CHSO

W 81-79

+0.5

UPST

L 60-65

−6.5

HPU

L 59-71

−2.5

GWEB

W 86-66

+7.5

WIN

L 74-79

+5.5

UNCA

L 74-79

−7.5

UPST

W 82-75

+0.5

PRES

L 65-72

−4.5

CHSO

W 107-96

+13.5

RAD

W 90-74

+14.5

UNCA

L 82-85

−4.5

covered 13didn’t cover 16avg −0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

PITT

L 60-78

−7.5

JMU

W 82-72

+4.5

BING

W 90-82

+24.5

UMES

L 82-83

+26.5

COLU

L 70-95

+11.5

SIE

L 63-70

−12.5

W 65-61

−12.5

AMER

L 66-92

+9.5

MORG

W 84-80

+9.5

DSU

L 76-81

+17.5

WAKE

L 68-71

−24.5

NCCU

W 74-72

−0.5

WIN

W 82-70

−9.5

HPU

L 67-80

−13.5

UNCA

L 61-72

−15.5

PRES

W 77-70

+7.5

RAD

L 83-85

+10.5

GWEB

W 91-56

−8.5

CHSO

W 81-79

+3.5

UPST

L 60-65

−22.5

HPU

L 59-71

−26.5

GWEB

W 86-66

+4.5

WIN

L 74-79

−0.5

UNCA

L 74-79

+11.5

UPST

W 82-75

+9.5

PRES

L 65-72

−2.5

CHSO

W 107-96

+48.5

RAD

W 90-74

+9.5

UNCA

L 82-85

+26.5

over 16under 13avg +2.7 ptslonger = bigger margin

Saint Joseph's

34 games played

Straight up

22-12

65% wins

Against the spread

20-14

59% covers · avg +1.9 pts vs the line

Over / Under

11-23

32% overs · avg −3.4 pts vs the total

Straight up

22-1265%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

20-1459%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

11-2332%

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

5 straight unders0 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	vsLAF	W 85-76	-13.5	L −4.5	138.5	O 161
Nov 8	vsDREX	W 76-65	-9.5	W +1.5	139.5	O 141
Nov 12	@VT	L 59-94	+12.5	L −22.5	158.5	U 153
Nov 17	@PENN	L 74-83	-5.5	L −14.5	163.5	U 157
Nov 20	@UNLV	L 85-99	+10.5	L −3.5	161.5	O 184
Nov 30	vsPRIN	W 60-58	-5.5	L −3.5	146.5	U 118
Dec 6	vsTEM	W 70-69	+1.5	W +2.5	147.5	U 139
Dec 9	vsCOPP	W 87-65	-22.5	L −0.5	146.5	O 152
Dec 11	@SYR	L 63-71	+11.5	W +3.5	146.5	U 134
Dec 18	vsDSU	W 67-51	-17.5	L −1.5	137.5	U 118
Dec 22	vsCCU	L 62-68	-7.5	L −13.5	144.5	U 130
Dec 31	@SLU	L 79-102	+19.5	L −3.5	161.5	O 181
Jan 3	vsDAV	L 56-62	+1.5	L −4.5	139.5	U 118
Jan 7	vsDUQ	W 97-90	+1.5	W +8.5	149.5	O 187
Jan 11	@RICH	W 67-65	+7.5	W +9.5	150.5	U 132
Jan 14	vsSBU	W 68-64	+1.5	W +5.5	147.5	U 132
Jan 19	@VCU	L 72-79	+14.5	W +7.5	151.5	U 151
Jan 24	vsDAY	W 81-74	+6.5	W +13.5	139.5	O 155
Jan 27	@LUC	W 85-64	-1.5	W +19.5	143.5	O 149
Jan 31	@LAS	W 67-58	-2.5	W +6.5	142.5	U 125
Feb 4	vsGW	W 76-73	+1.5	W +4.5	155.5	U 149
Feb 7	@GMU	L 52-60	+6.5	L −1.5	139.5	U 112
Feb 10	vsFOR	L 64-68	-3.5	L −7.5	135.5	U 132
Feb 18	@SBU	W 71-65	+5.5	W +11.5	147.5	U 136
Feb 21	vsLUC	W 75-61	-9.5	W +4.5	142.5	U 136
Feb 25	vsGMU	W 81-63	+1.5	W +19.5	136.5	O 144
Feb 28	@URI	W 61-55	+2.5	W +8.5	141.5	U 116
Mar 4	@DAV	W 70-67	+1.5	W +4.5	136.5	O 137
Mar 7	vsLAS	W 88-76	-11.5	W +0.5	142.5	O 164
Mar 13	vsDAV	W 70-58	-2.5	W +9.5	133.5	U 128
Mar 14	vsVCU	L 64-77	+6.5	L −6.5	145.5	U 141
Mar 18	@CSU	W 69-64	+5.5	W +10.5	144.5	U 133
Mar 22	@CAL	W 76-75	+5.5	W +6.5	152.5	U 151
Mar 24	@UNM	L 69-84	+10.5	L −4.5	155.5	U 153

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

LAF

W 85-76

−4.5

DREX

W 76-65

+1.5

L 59-94

−22.5

PENN

L 74-83

−14.5

UNLV

L 85-99

−3.5

PRIN

W 60-58

−3.5

TEM

W 70-69

+2.5

COPP

W 87-65

−0.5

SYR

L 63-71

+3.5

DSU

W 67-51

−1.5

CCU

L 62-68

−13.5

SLU

L 79-102

−3.5

DAV

L 56-62

−4.5

DUQ

W 97-90

+8.5

RICH

W 67-65

+9.5

SBU

W 68-64

+5.5

VCU

L 72-79

+7.5

DAY

W 81-74

+13.5

LUC

W 85-64

+19.5

LAS

W 67-58

+6.5

W 76-73

+4.5

GMU

L 52-60

−1.5

FOR

L 64-68

−7.5

SBU

W 71-65

+11.5

LUC

W 75-61

+4.5

GMU

W 81-63

+19.5

URI

W 61-55

+8.5

DAV

W 70-67

+4.5

LAS

W 88-76

+0.5

DAV

W 70-58

+9.5

VCU

L 64-77

−6.5

CSU

W 69-64

+10.5

CAL

W 76-75

+6.5

UNM

L 69-84

−4.5

covered 20didn’t cover 14avg +1.9 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

LAF

W 85-76

+22.5

DREX

W 76-65

+1.5

L 59-94

−5.5

PENN

L 74-83

−6.5

UNLV

L 85-99

+22.5

PRIN

W 60-58

−28.5

TEM

W 70-69

−8.5

COPP

W 87-65

+5.5

SYR

L 63-71

−12.5

DSU

W 67-51

−19.5

CCU

L 62-68

−14.5

SLU

L 79-102

+19.5

DAV

L 56-62

−21.5

DUQ

W 97-90

+37.5

RICH

W 67-65

−18.5

SBU

W 68-64

−15.5

VCU

L 72-79

−0.5

DAY

W 81-74

+15.5

LUC

W 85-64

+5.5

LAS

W 67-58

−17.5

W 76-73

−6.5

GMU

L 52-60

−27.5

FOR

L 64-68

−3.5

SBU

W 71-65

−11.5

LUC

W 75-61

−6.5

GMU

W 81-63

+7.5

URI

W 61-55

−25.5

DAV

W 70-67

+0.5

LAS

W 88-76

+21.5

DAV

W 70-58

−5.5

VCU

L 64-77

−4.5

CSU

W 69-64

−11.5

CAL

W 76-75

−1.5

UNM

L 69-84

−2.5

over 11under 23avg −3.4 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

Saint Joseph's has the better starters

Position by position: Longwood 0, Saint Joseph's 3, even 2

LongwoodBetterSaint Joseph's

G M. Williams TR9.9 pts · 3.6 reb · 4.1 ast Score 65

JOESSmall

G J. Glover-Toscano15.3 pts · 4.8 reb · 0.9 ast Score 80

G A. Billups7.8 pts · 2.6 reb · 1.2 ast Score 47

Even

G A. Williford7.9 pts · 4.6 reb · 1.3 ast Score 46

G J. Benard7.3 pts · 3.6 reb · 0.9 ast Score 44

JOESSmall

G L. Carey TR9.1 pts · 2.7 reb · 2.4 ast Score 60

G T. Robinson TR9.5 pts · 1.9 reb · 2.5 ast Score 64

Even

G K. Myers4.9 pts · 2.5 reb · 2.2 ast Score 59

G E. Kelly2.1 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.3 ast Score 28

JOESSmall

F S. Logan TR3.6 pts · 3.4 reb · 0.7 ast Score 58

LongwoodBetterSaint Joseph's

LONG offense182nd of 366 · -5.7

JOESSmall

JOES defense91st of 366 · -0.3

LONG defense242nd of 366 · -6.4

JOESSmall

JOES offense134th of 366 · -3.9

Backcourt-1.7 · 5 players

JOESSmall

Backcourt+0.6 · 4 players

FrontcourtNo numbers yet

No call

Frontcourt+0.0 · 1 player

Bench-1.7 · 5 players

JOESSmall

Bench-0.2 · 3 players

Score, worst to bestLONG betterJOES 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

Longwood

Guards

M. Williams24 min · TRA. Billups23 minJ. Benard20 minT. Robinson19 min · TRE. Kelly11 minB. Wesson2 min · TR

Forwards

D. Kauzonas10 min · TRL. Milosevic8 min · TRK. Musungay4 min · TRI. Kalala3 min

Saint Joseph's

Guards

J. Glover-Toscano32 minA. Williford26 minL. Carey26 min · TRK. Myers15 minM. Johnson4 minB. Rayer1 min

Forwards

S. Logan16 min · TRW. Lange1 minG. MarrsNewL. NonfonNewD. FlamerNewK. SaccoNew

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

LONG75.9 #143

JOES71.9 #245

Points per possession

LONG1.07 #215

JOES1.05 #244

Pace (possessions)

LONG71.5 #54

JOES68.4 #208

Shooting

Effective FG%

LONG49.7 #254

JOES49.2 #284

3-point %

LONG31.4 #309

JOES30.8 #325

3-point attempt rate

LONG34.8 #279

JOES45.1 #65

Free throw rate

LONG41.4 #40

JOES29.7 #318

Possessions

Turnover rate

LONG19.2 #327

JOES16.8 #187

Offensive rebound rate

LONG34.6 #57

JOES31.4 #147

Assists per game

LONG12.2 #270

JOES15.1 #84

Defense

Points allowed

LONG76.2 #223

JOES70.6 #68

Points allowed per possession

LONG1.06 #113

JOES1.03 #59

Opponent effective FG%

LONG53.8 #293

JOES47.6 #34

Opponent 3-point %

LONG33.8 #171

JOES31.7 #51

Turnovers forced

LONG19.7 #31

JOES15.0 #286

Defensive rebound rate

LONG72.3 #58

JOES69.4 #185

Steals per game

LONG8.3 #28

JOES5.5 #290

Blocks per game

LONG2.0 #347

JOES4.6 #30

LONG		JOES
Scoring
75.9 #143	Points per game	71.9 #245
1.07 #215	Points per possession	1.05 #244
71.5 #54	Pace (possessions)	68.4 #208
Shooting
49.7 #254	Effective FG%	49.2 #284
31.4 #309	3-point %	30.8 #325
34.8 #279	3-point attempt rate	45.1 #65
41.4 #40	Free throw rate	29.7 #318
Possessions
19.2 #327	Turnover rate	16.8 #187
34.6 #57	Offensive rebound rate	31.4 #147
12.2 #270	Assists per game	15.1 #84
Defense
76.2 #223	Points allowed	70.6 #68
1.06 #113	Points allowed per possession	1.03 #59
53.8 #293	Opponent effective FG%	47.6 #34
33.8 #171	Opponent 3-point %	31.7 #51
19.7 #31	Turnovers forced	15.0 #286
72.3 #58	Defensive rebound rate	69.4 #185
8.3 #28	Steals per game	5.5 #290
2.0 #347	Blocks per game	4.6 #30

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.

Longwood

13-16 in 2025-26 overall · 8-9 in conference · Big South Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs UNC Asheville82–85
Wvs Radford90–74
W@ Charleston So107–96
L@ Presbyterian65–72
Wvs SC Upstate82–75

A week or more of rest.

Saint Joseph's

22-12 in 2025-26 overall · 14-6 in conference · Atlantic 10 Conference

Last five, 2025-26

L@ New Mexico69–84
W@ California76–75
W@ Colorado St69–64
Lvs VCU64–77
Wvs Davidson70–58

A week or more of rest.

Longwood Lancers at Saint Joseph's Hawks

What could decide it: JOES has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Longwood

Saint Joseph's

Saint Joseph's has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Longwood

Saint Joseph's