Carnesecca Arena · at St John's
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SJU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SJU 94–53 · win probability SJU 100%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 146.9
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: SJU has more of the edges
WAG 0, SJU 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
WAG offense vs SJU defense
Offense 359th of 366 against a defense 11th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
WAG has played the 349th-hardest schedule, SJU the 15th. A record against a soft schedule means less
SJU offense vs WAG defense
Offense 8th of 366 against a defense 293rd, on the model’s ratings
Turnovers
Turnover rate: WAG 18.6%, SJU 14.4%. Forced: WAG 14.9%, SJU 19.1%
Free throws
Free throw rate: WAG 32.4, SJU 40.2. Allowed: WAG 40.8, SJU 31.8
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: WAG plays 66.4 a game (299th fastest), SJU 70.8 (82nd). Faster games mean more points
Shooting
Effective FG%: WAG 49.6 and allows 50.4; SJU 51.0 and allows 47.5
Home court
SJU at home. This season: SJU 0-0 at home, WAG 0-0 away
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: WAG 0%, SJU 22%. Transfers in: WAG 8, SJU 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: WAG 32.8%, SJU 35.2%. Defensive: WAG 70.5%, SJU 70.1%
Even
Three-pointers
WAG hits 36.6% and allows 34.3%; SJU hits 33.5% and allows 31.3%. Threes are 36.1% and 35.2% 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 | — | SJU -41.7 | — |
| Total | — | 146.9 | — |
| Projected score | — | WAG 52.6 · SJU 94.3 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SJU -24.7 | — |
| 1H total | 68.7 | — |
| 1H projected score | WAG 22 · SJU 46.7 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% | |
| 8-2 80% | 7-3 70% | 2-8 20% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
WAG 0–1 SJUSJU leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · WAG 1-0 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 13, 2024-25 | WAG 45 @ SJU 66 | SJU -25.5 | WAG W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Wagner
28 games played
Straight up
11-17
39% wins
Against the spread
16-12
57% covers · avg +1.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-13
54% overs · avg +4.5 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 74-103 | +25.5 | L −3.5 | 133.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 7 | @ | L 61-68 | +21.5 | W +14.5 | 134.5 | U 129 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 61-63 | +12.5 | W +10.5 | 139.5 | U 124 |
| Nov 16 | @ | L 70-71 | +6.5 | W +5.5 | 140.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 22 | @ | L 75-92 | +25.5 | W +8.5 | 140.5 | O 167 |
| Nov 26 | @ | W 103-101 | +2.5 | W +4.5 | 144.5 | O 204 |
| Dec 2 | @ | L 63-89 | +22.5 | L −3.5 | 143.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 78-64 | -4.5 | W +9.5 | 131.5 | O 142 |
| Jan 2 | @ | W 79-72 | -1.5 | W +5.5 | 146.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 4 | vs | L 60-69 | -7.5 | L −16.5 | 139.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 8 | vs | L 69-71 | -7.5 | L −9.5 | 144.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 69-70 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 132.5 | O 139 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 74-80 | +1.5 | L −4.5 | 129.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 19 | @ | L 61-68 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 137.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 23 | @ | L 67-69 | +7.5 | W +5.5 | 143.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 29 | vs | L 55-62 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 136.5 | U 117 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 75-72 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 133.5 | O 147 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 79-78 | +1.5 | W +2.5 | 138.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 67-84 | +5.5 | L −11.5 | 136.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 57-67 | +6.5 | L −3.5 | 135.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 68-57 | +3.5 | W +14.5 | 128.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 16 | @ | L 65-83 | +10.5 | L −7.5 | 138.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 19 | @ | W 83-80 | +3.5 | W +6.5 | 133.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 65-56 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 151.5 | U 121 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 65-62 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 131.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 80-61 | -4.5 | W +14.5 | 134.5 | O 141 |
| Mar 4 | @ | W 70-60 | +3.5 | W +13.5 | 139.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 56-64 | +6.5 | L −1.5 | 138.5 | U 120 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
VCU
L 74-103
−3.5
7
@
HALL
L 61-68
+14.5
11
@
FOR
L 61-63
+10.5
16
@
UMBC
L 70-71
+5.5
22
@
GTWN
L 75-92
+8.5
26
@
MAN
W 103-101
+4.5
2
@
MD
L 63-89
−3.5
17
vs
UMES
W 78-64
+9.5
2
@
CHST
W 79-72
+5.5
4
vs
STO
L 60-69
−16.5
8
vs
SFPA
L 69-71
−9.5
10
vs
MERC
L 69-70
−2.5
17
@
NHVN
L 74-80
−4.5
19
@
FDU
L 61-68
−4.5
23
@
LEM
L 67-69
+5.5
29
vs
CCSU
L 55-62
−4.5
31
vs
FDU
W 75-72
+1.5
5
vs
LEM
W 79-78
+2.5
7
@
CCSU
L 67-84
−11.5
12
vs
LIU
L 57-67
−3.5
14
@
STO
W 68-57
+14.5
16
@
LIU
L 65-83
−7.5
19
@
MERC
W 83-80
+6.5
21
@
SFPA
W 65-56
+7.5
26
vs
NHVN
W 65-62
+0.5
28
vs
CHST
W 80-61
+14.5
4
@
CCSU
W 70-60
+13.5
7
@
LIU
L 56-64
−1.5
covered 16didn’t cover 12avg +1.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
VCU
L 74-103
+43.5
7
@
HALL
L 61-68
−5.5
11
@
FOR
L 61-63
−15.5
16
@
UMBC
L 70-71
+0.5
22
@
GTWN
L 75-92
+26.5
26
@
MAN
W 103-101
+59.5
2
@
MD
L 63-89
+8.5
17
vs
UMES
W 78-64
+10.5
2
@
CHST
W 79-72
+4.5
4
vs
STO
L 60-69
−10.5
8
vs
SFPA
L 69-71
−4.5
10
vs
MERC
L 69-70
+6.5
17
@
NHVN
L 74-80
+24.5
19
@
FDU
L 61-68
−8.5
23
@
LEM
L 67-69
−7.5
29
vs
CCSU
L 55-62
−19.5
31
vs
FDU
W 75-72
+13.5
5
vs
LEM
W 79-78
+18.5
7
@
CCSU
L 67-84
+14.5
12
vs
LIU
L 57-67
−11.5
14
@
STO
W 68-57
−3.5
16
@
LIU
L 65-83
+9.5
19
@
MERC
W 83-80
+29.5
21
@
SFPA
W 65-56
−30.5
26
vs
NHVN
W 65-62
−4.5
28
vs
CHST
W 80-61
+6.5
4
@
CCSU
W 70-60
−9.5
7
@
LIU
L 56-64
−18.5
over 15under 13avg +4.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
St John's
37 games played
Straight up
30-7
81% wins
Against the spread
22-15
59% covers · avg +1.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-23
38% overs · avg −2.7 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 | W 108-74 | -26.5 | W +7.5 | 156.5 | O 182 |
| Nov 8 | vs | L 96-103 | -4.5 | L −11.5 | 172.5 | O 199 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 93-60 | -28.5 | W +4.5 | 179.5 | U 153 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 97-49 | -28.5 | W +19.5 | 158.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 82-83 | +2.5 | W +1.5 | 158.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 96-81 | -5.5 | W +9.5 | 159.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 74-85 | -4.5 | L −15.5 | 166.5 | U 159 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 63-58 | -13.5 | L −8.5 | 151.5 | U 121 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 91-64 | -28.5 | L −1.5 | 159.5 | U 155 |
| Dec 16 | vs | W 79-66 | -19.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 20 | vs | L 66-78 | +1.5 | L −10.5 | 154.5 | U 144 |
| Dec 23 | vs | W 85-59 | -26.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | U 144 |
| Dec 31 | @ | W 95-83 | -8.5 | W +3.5 | 152.5 | O 178 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 71-77 | -14.5 | L −20.5 | 166.5 | U 148 |
| Jan 6 | @ | W 84-70 | -4.5 | W +9.5 | 162.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 90-73 | -2.5 | W +14.5 | 152.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 13 | vs | W 92-68 | -15.5 | W +8.5 | 155.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 86-79 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 147.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 20 | vs | W 65-60 | -11.5 | L −6.5 | 145.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 88-83 | -8.5 | L −3.5 | 159.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 92-70 | -12.5 | W +9.5 | 158.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 3 | @ | W 68-56 | -9.5 | W +2.5 | 145.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 6 | vs | W 81-72 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 143.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 9 | vs | W 87-82 | -16.5 | L −11.5 | 159.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 79-69 | -6.5 | W +3.5 | 167.5 | U 148 |
| Feb 18 | @ | W 76-70 | -8.5 | L −2.5 | 157.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 81-52 | -12.5 | W +16.5 | 156.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 40-72 | +5.5 | L −26.5 | 145.5 | U 112 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 89-57 | -7.5 | W +24.5 | 147.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 3 | vs | W 72-69 | -15.5 | L −12.5 | 148.5 | U 141 |
| Mar 6 | @ | W 72-65 | -5.5 | W +1.5 | 138.5 | U 137 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 85-72 | -11.5 | W +1.5 | 158.5 | U 157 |
| Mar 13 | vs | W 78-68 | -8.5 | W +1.5 | 135.5 | O 146 |
| Mar 14 | vs | W 72-52 | +2.5 | W +22.5 | 139.5 | U 124 |
| Mar 20 | vs | W 79-53 | -10.5 | W +15.5 | 133.5 | U 132 |
| Mar 22 | vs | W 67-65 | -3.5 | L −1.5 | 144.5 | U 132 |
| Mar 27 | vs | L 75-80 | +6.5 | W +1.5 | 140.5 | O 155 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
QUIN
W 108-74
+7.5
8
vs
ALA
L 96-103
−11.5
15
vs
W&M
W 93-60
+4.5
20
vs
BUCK
W 97-49
+19.5
24
vs
ISU
L 82-83
+1.5
25
vs
BAY
W 96-81
+9.5
26
vs
AUB
L 74-85
−15.5
6
vs
MISS
W 63-58
−8.5
13
vs
IONA
W 91-64
−1.5
16
vs
DEP
W 79-66
−6.5
20
vs
UK
L 66-78
−10.5
23
vs
HARV
W 85-59
−0.5
31
@
GTWN
W 95-83
+3.5
3
vs
PROV
L 71-77
−20.5
6
@
BTLR
W 84-70
+9.5
10
@
CREI
W 90-73
+14.5
13
vs
MARQ
W 92-68
+8.5
17
@
VILL
W 86-79
+4.5
20
vs
HALL
W 65-60
−6.5
24
@
XAV
W 88-83
−3.5
28
vs
BTLR
W 92-70
+9.5
3
@
DEP
W 68-56
+2.5
6
vs
CONN
W 81-72
+10.5
9
vs
XAV
W 87-82
−11.5
14
@
PROV
W 79-69
+3.5
18
@
MARQ
W 76-70
−2.5
21
vs
CREI
W 81-52
+16.5
25
@
CONN
L 40-72
−26.5
28
vs
VILL
W 89-57
+24.5
3
vs
GTWN
W 72-69
−12.5
6
@
HALL
W 72-65
+1.5
12
vs
PROV
W 85-72
+1.5
13
vs
HALL
W 78-68
+1.5
14
vs
CONN
W 72-52
+22.5
20
vs
UNI
W 79-53
+15.5
22
vs
KU
W 67-65
−1.5
27
vs
DUKE
L 75-80
+1.5
covered 22didn’t cover 15avg +1.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
QUIN
W 108-74
+25.5
8
vs
ALA
L 96-103
+26.5
15
vs
W&M
W 93-60
−26.5
20
vs
BUCK
W 97-49
−12.5
24
vs
ISU
L 82-83
+6.5
25
vs
BAY
W 96-81
+17.5
26
vs
AUB
L 74-85
−7.5
6
vs
MISS
W 63-58
−30.5
13
vs
IONA
W 91-64
−4.5
16
vs
DEP
W 79-66
−2.5
20
vs
UK
L 66-78
−10.5
23
vs
HARV
W 85-59
−1.5
31
@
GTWN
W 95-83
+25.5
3
vs
PROV
L 71-77
−18.5
6
@
BTLR
W 84-70
−8.5
10
@
CREI
W 90-73
+10.5
13
vs
MARQ
W 92-68
+4.5
17
@
VILL
W 86-79
+17.5
20
vs
HALL
W 65-60
−20.5
24
@
XAV
W 88-83
+11.5
28
vs
BTLR
W 92-70
+3.5
3
@
DEP
W 68-56
−21.5
6
vs
CONN
W 81-72
+9.5
9
vs
XAV
W 87-82
+9.5
14
@
PROV
W 79-69
−19.5
18
@
MARQ
W 76-70
−11.5
21
vs
CREI
W 81-52
−23.5
25
@
CONN
L 40-72
−33.5
28
vs
VILL
W 89-57
−1.5
3
vs
GTWN
W 72-69
−7.5
6
@
HALL
W 72-65
−1.5
12
vs
PROV
W 85-72
−1.5
13
vs
HALL
W 78-68
+10.5
14
vs
CONN
W 72-52
−15.5
20
vs
UNI
W 79-53
−1.5
22
vs
KU
W 67-65
−12.5
27
vs
DUKE
L 75-80
+14.5
over 14under 23avg −2.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
St John's has the better starters
Position by position: Wagner 0, St John's 3, even 2
WagnerBetterSt John's
G T. Bryant TR3.1 pts · 3.2 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 8
→SJUBig
G T. Yessoufou TR17.5 pts · 5.8 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 96
G C. Estevez TR3.4 pts · 1.2 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 14
→SJUBig
G I. Jackson9.4 pts · 2.3 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 93
G R. Pettis TR1.3 pts · 1.8 reb · 0.8 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F K. Hall TR19.3 pts · 7.1 reb · 2.6 ast
Score 98
F K. Watson TR4.3 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 31
→SJUBig
F D. Freeman TR16.5 pts · 7.2 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 92
C B. Smith TR1.5 pts · 1.6 reb · 0.2 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F R. Bailey TR8.3 pts · 3.4 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 90
WagnerBetterSt John's
WAG offense359th of 366 · -14.0
→SJUBig
SJU defense11th of 366 · +7.0
WAG defense293rd of 366 · -7.4
→SJUBig
SJU offense8th of 366 · +10.5
Backcourt-3.1 · 3 players
→SJUBig
Backcourt+6.5 · 2 players
Frontcourt-1.5 · 2 players
→SJUBig
Frontcourt+12.5 · 3 players
Bench-1.9 · 3 players
=Even
Bench-1.7 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestWAG betterSJU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
T. Bryant14 min · TRC. Estevez12 min · TRR. Pettis10 min · TRL. McGradyNewJ. CurtisNewG. EdwardsNew
Forwards
K. Watson12 min · TRT. Jones5 min · TRA. RodriguezNewD. KabaNewF. HassanNew
Centers
B. Smith8 min · TRY. Singar8 min · TRW. Patterson4 min · TR
Guards
T. Yessoufou33 min · TRI. Jackson18 minK. Cuffe16 min · TRA. Brown15 min · TRL. Liotopoulos8 minC. Pohto5 min
Forwards
K. Hall34 min · TRD. Freeman31 min · TRR. Bailey19 min · TRR. Prey11 minZ. MaronkaNewB. SaneNew
Centers
T. EdemaNewL. StojkovicNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 69.6 #292 | Points per game | 80.9 #45 |
| 1.05 #250 | Points per possession | 1.14 #68 |
| 66.4 #299 | Pace (possessions) | 70.8 #82 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.6 #262 | Effective FG% | 51.0 #192 |
| 36.6 #36 | 3-point % | 33.5 #197 |
| 36.1 #249 | 3-point attempt rate | 35.2 #272 |
| 32.4 #252 | Free throw rate | 40.2 #57 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.6 #303 | Turnover rate | 14.4 #38 |
| 32.8 #96 | Offensive rebound rate | 35.2 #43 |
| 11.9 #289 | Assists per game | 16.1 #44 |
| Defense | ||
| 72.7 #126 | Points allowed | 69.7 #59 |
| 1.09 #208 | Points allowed per possession | 0.98 #15 |
| 50.4 #123 | Opponent effective FG% | 47.5 #32 |
| 34.3 #202 | Opponent 3-point % | 31.3 #39 |
| 14.9 #295 | Turnovers forced | 19.1 #46 |
| 70.5 #139 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.1 #154 |
| 5.2 #321 | Steals per game | 7.7 #58 |
| 2.3 #320 | Blocks per game | 4.8 #22 |
Wagner
11-17 in 2025-26 overall · 9-11 in conference · Northeast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Long Island56–64
- W@ C Connecticut70–60
- Wvs Chicago St80–61
- Wvs New Haven65–62
- W@ Saint Francis Red Wolves65–56
A week or more of rest.
St John's
30-7 in 2025-26 overall · 21-2 in conference · Big East Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Duke75–80
- Wvs Kansas67–65
- Wvs Northern Iowa79–53
- Wvs UConn72–52
- Wvs Seton Hall78–68
A week or more of rest.