Templeton Center · at Presbyterian
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | PRES | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 PRES 77–73 · win probability PRES 61%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 150.0
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: PRES has more of the edges
SAC 1, PRES 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Turnovers
Turnover rate: SAC 14.1%, PRES 19.4%. Forced: SAC 17.1%, PRES 15.7%
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: SAC 25.2%, PRES 33.1%. Defensive: SAC 66.6%, PRES 69.3%
Shooting
Effective FG%: SAC 47.0 and allows 55.0; PRES 51.0 and allows 51.2
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: SAC plays 72.6 a game (24th fastest), PRES 66.9 (283rd). Faster games mean more points
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: SAC 42%, PRES 86%. Transfers in: SAC 6, PRES 0. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Home court
PRES at home. This season: PRES 0-0 at home, SAC 0-0 away
Even
PRES offense vs SAC defense
Offense 222nd of 366 against a defense 262nd, on the model’s ratings
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: SAC 41.2, PRES 39.4. Allowed: SAC 36.2, PRES 37.1
Context
Schedule so far
SAC has played the 248th-hardest schedule, PRES the 272nd. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
SAC offense vs PRES defense
Offense 146th of 366 against a defense 160th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Three-pointers
SAC hits 31.9% and allows 35.1%; PRES hits 31.6% and allows 34.7%. Threes are 35.6% and 28.0% of their shots
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 | — | PRES -3.2 | — |
| Total | — | 150.0 | — |
| Projected score | — | SAC 73.4 · PRES 76.6 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | PRES -1.8 | — |
| 1H total | 70.1 | — |
| 1H projected score | SAC 34.2 · PRES 35.9 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2-8 20% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% | |
| 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
SAC 1–0 PRESSAC leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · SAC 0-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 16, 2025-26 | PRES 62 @ SAC 64 | SAC -6.5 | PRES W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Sacramento St
28 games played
Straight up
7-21
25% wins
Against the spread
12-16
43% covers · avg 0 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-13
54% overs · avg +1.6 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 11 | vs | L 87-92 | +7.5 | W +2.5 | 161.5 | O 179 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 73-77 | +4.5 | W +0.5 | 151.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 16 | vs | W 64-62 | -6.5 | L −4.5 | 150.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 48-79 | +27.5 | L −3.5 | 146.5 | U 127 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 67-91 | +21.5 | L −2.5 | 154.5 | O 158 |
| Nov 29 | @ | L 54-68 | +10.5 | L −3.5 | 146.5 | U 122 |
| Dec 2 | @ | L 88-110 | +29.5 | W +7.5 | 158.5 | O 198 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 67-74 | +14.5 | W +7.5 | 158.5 | U 141 |
| Dec 22 | @ | L 88-100 | +8.5 | L −3.5 | 164.5 | O 188 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 84-97 | +8.5 | L −4.5 | 153.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 82-95 | +6.5 | L −6.5 | 168.5 | O 177 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 69-96 | +9.5 | L −17.5 | 160.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 83-69 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 153.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 93-89 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 163.5 | O 182 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 76-86 | +10.5 | W +0.5 | 161.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 67-75 | +5.5 | L −2.5 | 163.5 | U 142 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 83-80 | +4.5 | W +7.5 | 153.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 86-79 | +3.5 | W +10.5 | 155.5 | O 165 |
| Feb 2 | vs | W 104-90 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 162.5 | O 194 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 73-74 | +3.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 147 |
| Feb 12 | @ | L 79-95 | +11.5 | L −4.5 | 164.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 74-79 | +2.5 | L −2.5 | 154.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 19 | vs | L 94-102 | +2.5 | L −5.5 | 160.5 | O 196 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 80-86 | +4.5 | L −1.5 | 163.5 | O 166 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 73-81 | +7.5 | L −0.5 | 161.5 | U 154 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 61-82 | +6.5 | L −14.5 | 158.5 | U 143 |
| Mar 2 | vs | W 83-65 | +1.5 | W +19.5 | 160.5 | U 148 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 45-68 | +6.5 | L −16.5 | 158.5 | U 113 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
11
vs
UCSB
L 87-92
+2.5
14
@
UCD
L 73-77
+0.5
16
vs
PRES
W 64-62
−4.5
18
@
UCLA
L 48-79
−3.5
21
@
CAL
L 67-91
−2.5
29
@
PAC
L 54-68
−3.5
2
@
BAY
L 88-110
+7.5
20
@
CBU
L 67-74
+7.5
22
@
CSUN
L 88-100
−3.5
1
@
IDST
L 84-97
−4.5
3
@
WEB
L 82-95
−6.5
10
@
PRST
L 69-96
−17.5
15
vs
NAU
W 83-69
+12.5
17
vs
UNCO
W 93-89
+10.5
22
@
IDHO
L 76-86
+0.5
24
@
EWU
L 67-75
−2.5
29
vs
MTST
W 83-80
+7.5
31
vs
MONT
W 86-79
+10.5
2
vs
WEB
W 104-90
+12.5
7
vs
PRST
L 73-74
+2.5
12
@
UNCO
L 79-95
−4.5
14
@
NAU
L 74-79
−2.5
19
vs
EWU
L 94-102
−5.5
21
vs
IDHO
L 80-86
−1.5
26
@
MONT
L 73-81
−0.5
28
@
MTST
L 61-82
−14.5
2
vs
IDST
W 83-65
+19.5
7
vs
IDHO
L 45-68
−16.5
covered 12didn’t cover 16avg 0 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
11
vs
UCSB
L 87-92
+17.5
14
@
UCD
L 73-77
−1.5
16
vs
PRES
W 64-62
−24.5
18
@
UCLA
L 48-79
−19.5
21
@
CAL
L 67-91
+3.5
29
@
PAC
L 54-68
−24.5
2
@
BAY
L 88-110
+39.5
20
@
CBU
L 67-74
−17.5
22
@
CSUN
L 88-100
+23.5
1
@
IDST
L 84-97
+27.5
3
@
WEB
L 82-95
+8.5
10
@
PRST
L 69-96
+4.5
15
vs
NAU
W 83-69
−1.5
17
vs
UNCO
W 93-89
+18.5
22
@
IDHO
L 76-86
+0.5
24
@
EWU
L 67-75
−21.5
29
vs
MTST
W 83-80
+9.5
31
vs
MONT
W 86-79
+9.5
2
vs
WEB
W 104-90
+31.5
7
vs
PRST
L 73-74
−3.5
12
@
UNCO
L 79-95
+9.5
14
@
NAU
L 74-79
−1.5
19
vs
EWU
L 94-102
+35.5
21
vs
IDHO
L 80-86
+2.5
26
@
MONT
L 73-81
−7.5
28
@
MTST
L 61-82
−15.5
2
vs
IDST
W 83-65
−12.5
7
vs
IDHO
L 45-68
−45.5
over 15under 13avg +1.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Presbyterian
30 games played
Straight up
12-18
40% wins
Against the spread
17-13
57% covers · avg +0.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-14
53% overs · avg +1.3 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 | vs | L 55-76 | +3.5 | L −17.5 | 141.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 68-64 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 141.5 | U 132 |
| Nov 10 | @ | W 63-61 | +3.5 | W +5.5 | 141.5 | U 124 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 61-81 | +16.5 | L −3.5 | 137.5 | O 142 |
| Nov 16 | @ | L 62-64 | +6.5 | W +4.5 | 150.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 57-67 | +10.5 | W +0.5 | 124.5 | U 124 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 46-86 | +25.5 | L −14.5 | 131.5 | O 132 |
| Nov 30 | vs | W 69-41 | -8.5 | W +19.5 | 133.5 | U 110 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 56-63 | +4.5 | L −2.5 | 138.5 | U 119 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 80-72 | -7.5 | W +0.5 | 134.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 17 | @ | L 53-74 | +4.5 | L −16.5 | 131.5 | U 127 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 81-87 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 138.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 86-77 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 137.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 61-80 | +6.5 | L −12.5 | 147.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 70-77 | +3.5 | L −3.5 | 139.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 71-70 | +2.5 | W +3.5 | 138.5 | O 141 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 92-55 | -8.5 | W +28.5 | 145.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 87-83 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 147.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 72-82 | +5.5 | L −4.5 | 146.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 81-84 | +14.5 | W +11.5 | 149.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 84-93 | -1.5 | L −10.5 | 151.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 68-62 | -17.5 | L −11.5 | 145.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 12 | @ | L 67-84 | +1.5 | L −15.5 | 146.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 58-57 | +5.5 | W +6.5 | 137.5 | U 115 |
| Feb 19 | vs | W 72-65 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 139.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 74-76 | -1.5 | L −3.5 | 141.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 26 | vs | L 73-79 | +12.5 | W +6.5 | 151.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 70-74 | +7.5 | W +3.5 | 150.5 | U 144 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 91-85 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 146.5 | O 176 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 71-73 | +7.5 | W +5.5 | 145.5 | U 144 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
NAVY
L 55-76
−17.5
8
vs
ETSU
W 68-64
+10.5
10
@
GAST
W 63-61
+5.5
12
@
SC
L 61-81
−3.5
16
@
SAC
L 62-64
+4.5
18
@
CAL
L 57-67
+0.5
21
@
UCLA
L 46-86
−14.5
30
vs
CIT
W 69-41
+19.5
3
@
WOF
L 56-63
−2.5
6
vs
MORE
W 80-72
+0.5
17
@
ECU
L 53-74
−16.5
21
@
MAN
L 81-87
−8.5
3
vs
UPST
W 86-77
+7.5
7
@
RAD
L 61-80
−12.5
10
@
LONG
L 70-77
−3.5
14
vs
UNCA
W 71-70
+3.5
17
@
GWEB
W 92-55
+28.5
21
vs
CHSO
W 87-83
+5.5
24
vs
WIN
L 72-82
−4.5
29
@
HPU
L 81-84
+11.5
31
vs
RAD
L 84-93
−10.5
7
vs
GWEB
W 68-62
−11.5
12
@
CHSO
L 67-84
−15.5
14
@
UNCA
W 58-57
+6.5
19
vs
LONG
W 72-65
+4.5
21
@
UPST
L 74-76
−3.5
26
vs
HPU
L 73-79
+6.5
28
@
WIN
L 70-74
+3.5
6
vs
RAD
W 91-85
+8.5
7
vs
WIN
L 71-73
+5.5
covered 17didn’t cover 13avg +0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
NAVY
L 55-76
−10.5
8
vs
ETSU
W 68-64
−9.5
10
@
GAST
W 63-61
−17.5
12
@
SC
L 61-81
+4.5
16
@
SAC
L 62-64
−24.5
18
@
CAL
L 57-67
−0.5
21
@
UCLA
L 46-86
+0.5
30
vs
CIT
W 69-41
−23.5
3
@
WOF
L 56-63
−19.5
6
vs
MORE
W 80-72
+17.5
17
@
ECU
L 53-74
−4.5
21
@
MAN
L 81-87
+29.5
3
vs
UPST
W 86-77
+25.5
7
@
RAD
L 61-80
−6.5
10
@
LONG
L 70-77
+7.5
14
vs
UNCA
W 71-70
+2.5
17
@
GWEB
W 92-55
+1.5
21
vs
CHSO
W 87-83
+22.5
24
vs
WIN
L 72-82
+7.5
29
@
HPU
L 81-84
+15.5
31
vs
RAD
L 84-93
+25.5
7
vs
GWEB
W 68-62
−15.5
12
@
CHSO
L 67-84
+4.5
14
@
UNCA
W 58-57
−22.5
19
vs
LONG
W 72-65
−2.5
21
@
UPST
L 74-76
+8.5
26
vs
HPU
L 73-79
+0.5
28
@
WIN
L 70-74
−6.5
6
vs
RAD
W 91-85
+29.5
7
vs
WIN
L 71-73
−1.5
over 16under 14avg +1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Sacramento St has the better starters
Position by position: Sacramento St 2, Presbyterian 1, even 2
Sacramento StBetterPresbyterian
G M. Williams18.1 pts · 2.9 reb · 4.1 ast
Score 56
=Even
G C. Parrish14.7 pts · 2.9 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 56
G L. Hughes TR17.9 pts · 2.8 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 77
←SACSmall
G T. Wilson11.6 pts · 3.3 reb · 3.8 ast
Score 52
G M. Wilson TR12.5 pts · 3.1 reb · 3.9 ast
Score 76
=No call
G E. Taylor5.6 pts · 1.8 reb · 3.6 ast
Not ranked
G A. Madi7.6 pts · 2.9 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 44
←SACBig
G I. King3.7 pts · 2.7 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 2
F O. Grady TR9.7 pts · 5.2 reb · 1.7 ast
Score 21
→PRESBig
F J. Peterson11 pts · 7.2 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 71
Sacramento StBetterPresbyterian
SAC offense146th of 366 · -4.4
=Even
PRES defense160th of 366 · -3.5
SAC defense262nd of 366 · -6.8
=Even
PRES offense222nd of 366 · -6.8
Backcourt+0.9 · 4 players
←SACBig
Backcourt-4.4 · 4 players
Frontcourt-2.3 · 1 player
→PRESBig
Frontcourt+1.1 · 1 player
Bench-3.4 · 5 players
→PRESSmall
Bench-1.6 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestSAC betterPRES betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
M. Williams36 minL. Hughes32 min · TRM. Wilson27 min · TRA. Madi24 minT. Glover14 minR. Robinson11 min
Forwards
O. Grady31 min · TRR. Tutic23 min · TRS. Ciani10 min · TRM. HuntNewG. AsimakopoulosNew
Centers
J. Das Chagas7 min · TR
Guards
C. Parrish35 minT. Wilson32 minE. Taylor21 minI. King19 minK. Hudson11 minJ. Bowden8 min
Forwards
J. Peterson30 minC. Chiakwelu11 minA. AyelyineNewL. HackworthNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 75.9 #144 | Points per game | 70.0 #286 |
| 1.05 #258 | Points per possession | 1.05 #249 |
| 72.6 #24 | Pace (possessions) | 66.9 #283 |
| Shooting | ||
| 47.0 #337 | Effective FG% | 51.0 #196 |
| 31.9 #284 | 3-point % | 31.6 #302 |
| 35.6 #257 | 3-point attempt rate | 28.0 #360 |
| 41.2 #41 | Free throw rate | 39.4 #71 |
| Possessions | ||
| 14.1 #26 | Turnover rate | 19.4 #335 |
| 25.2 #336 | Offensive rebound rate | 33.1 #86 |
| 12.1 #275 | Assists per game | 12.4 #260 |
| Defense | ||
| 83.6 #352 | Points allowed | 73.1 #133 |
| 1.15 #327 | Points allowed per possession | 1.09 #192 |
| 55.0 #331 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.2 #170 |
| 35.1 #257 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.7 #235 |
| 17.1 #140 | Turnovers forced | 15.7 #237 |
| 66.6 #306 | Defensive rebound rate | 69.3 #188 |
| 7.5 #76 | Steals per game | 5.5 #303 |
| 2.7 #280 | Blocks per game | 4.5 #35 |
Sacramento St
7-21 in 2025-26 overall · 6-13 in conference · Big West Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Idaho45–68
- Wvs Idaho St83–65
- L@ Montana St61–82
- L@ Montana73–81
- Lvs Idaho80–86
A week or more of rest.
Presbyterian
12-18 in 2025-26 overall · 8-10 in conference · Big South Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Winthrop71–73
- Wvs Radford91–85
- L@ Winthrop70–74
- Lvs High Point73–79
- L@ SC Upstate74–76
A week or more of rest.