John J. Lee Amphitheater · at Yale
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | YALE | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 YALE 77–67 · win probability YALE 80%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 144.2
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: YALE has more of the edges
UVM 0, YALE 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
UVM has played the 325th-hardest schedule, YALE the 141st. A record against a soft schedule means less
Free throws
Free throw rate: UVM 31.1, YALE 35.1. Allowed: UVM 36.4, YALE 26.8
UVM offense vs YALE defense
Offense 264th of 366 against a defense 136th, on the model’s ratings
Three-pointers
UVM hits 33.3% and allows 35.3%; YALE hits 39.4% and allows 35.0%. Threes are 44.6% and 36.1% of their shots
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UVM 14.3%, YALE 14.0%. Forced: UVM 14.8%, YALE 16.2%
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UVM 26.2%, YALE 34.2%. Defensive: UVM 77.0%, YALE 70.3%
Home court
YALE at home. This season: YALE 0-0 at home, UVM 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 66 possessions: UVM plays 65.2 a game (342nd fastest), YALE 66.4 (301st). Faster games mean more points
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UVM 31%, YALE 42%. Transfers in: UVM 4, YALE 0. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
YALE offense vs UVM defense
Offense 125th of 366 against a defense 134th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: UVM 53.1 and allows 50.4; YALE 55.6 and allows 51.6
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 | — | YALE -9.8 | — |
| Total | — | 144.2 | — |
| Projected score | — | UVM 67.2 · YALE 77 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | YALE -5.7 | — |
| 1H total | 67.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | UVM 30.9 · YALE 36.6 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8-2 80% | 4-6 40% | 3-7 30% | |
| 7-3 70% | 3-7 30% | 5-5 50% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
UVM 2–3 YALEYALE leads · 5 games since 2021-22 · YALE has won the last 2 meetings · UVM 2-3 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 30, 2025-26 | YALE 77 @ UVM 74 | UVM +6.5 | UVM W |
| Dec 7, 2024-25 | UVM 50 @ YALE 65 | YALE -5.5 | YALE W |
| Dec 2, 2023-24 | YALE 65 @ UVM 66 | UVM -1.5 | YALE W |
| Nov 22, 2022-23 | UVM 44 @ YALE 73 | YALE +1.5 | YALE W |
| Nov 19, 2021-22 | YALE 53 @ UVM 61 | UVM -5.5 | UVM W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Vermont
32 games played
Straight up
20-12
63% wins
Against the spread
14-18
44% covers · avg −2.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-15
53% overs · avg +2 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 9 | @ | W 89-84 | -5.5 | L −0.5 | 131.5 | O 173 |
| Nov 15 | @ | W 85-74 | +1.5 | W +12.5 | 134.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 90-94 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 141.5 | O 184 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 73-79 | +8.5 | W +2.5 | 141.5 | O 152 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 65-80 | +4.5 | L −10.5 | 144.5 | O 145 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 79-74 | -5.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | O 153 |
| Nov 30 | vs | L 74-77 | +6.5 | W +3.5 | 147.5 | O 151 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 58-80 | +3.5 | L −18.5 | 143.5 | U 138 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 65-56 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 142.5 | U 121 |
| Dec 14 | vs | W 66-59 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 136.5 | U 125 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 83-69 | -2.5 | W +11.5 | 134.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 20 | vs | L 78-83 | -6.5 | L −11.5 | 152.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 30 | @ | L 69-75 | -3.5 | L −9.5 | 136.5 | O 144 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 80-61 | -7.5 | W +11.5 | 139.5 | O 141 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 60-59 | -20.5 | L −19.5 | 140.5 | U 119 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 67-62 | -14.5 | L −9.5 | 130.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 19 | @ | L 68-75 | -5.5 | L −12.5 | 139.5 | O 143 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 77-68 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 62-52 | -8.5 | W +1.5 | 133.5 | U 114 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 64-55 | -8.5 | W +0.5 | 141.5 | U 119 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 77-79 | -13.5 | L −15.5 | 139.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 70-76 | -8.5 | L −14.5 | 130.5 | O 146 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 80-57 | -9.5 | W +13.5 | 138.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 73-65 | -11.5 | L −3.5 | 136.5 | O 138 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 90-63 | -13.5 | W +13.5 | 133.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 62-75 | -1.5 | L −14.5 | 142.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 70-64 | -6.5 | L −0.5 | 142.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 66-64 | -9.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 3 | vs | W 69-56 | -9.5 | W +3.5 | 136.5 | U 125 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 77-57 | -11.5 | W +8.5 | 130.5 | O 134 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 63-54 | -10.5 | L −1.5 | 134.5 | U 117 |
| Mar 14 | @ | L 59-74 | +1.5 | L −13.5 | 134.5 | U 133 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
9
@
BRWN
W 89-84
−0.5
15
@
NE
W 85-74
+12.5
18
@
BUF
L 90-94
−5.5
24
vs
LIB
L 73-79
+2.5
25
vs
URI
L 65-80
−10.5
26
vs
PRIN
W 79-74
−0.5
30
vs
YALE
L 74-77
+3.5
3
@
ORST
L 58-80
−18.5
6
@
PEPP
W 65-56
+7.5
14
vs
MRMK
W 66-59
+0.5
17
vs
SIE
W 83-69
+11.5
20
vs
IONA
L 78-83
−11.5
30
@
PRIN
L 69-75
−9.5
3
@
UNH
W 80-61
+11.5
8
vs
BING
W 60-59
−19.5
15
vs
ME
W 67-62
−9.5
19
@
UALB
L 68-75
−12.5
22
@
UML
W 77-68
+4.5
24
@
BRY
W 62-52
+1.5
29
vs
UMBC
W 64-55
+0.5
31
vs
NJIT
L 77-79
−15.5
5
@
ME
L 70-76
−14.5
7
vs
UNH
W 80-57
+13.5
12
@
BING
W 73-65
−3.5
14
vs
BRY
W 90-63
+13.5
19
@
UMBC
L 62-75
−14.5
21
@
NJIT
W 70-64
−0.5
26
vs
UML
W 66-64
−7.5
3
vs
UALB
W 69-56
+3.5
7
vs
BRY
W 77-57
+8.5
10
vs
NJIT
W 63-54
−1.5
14
@
UMBC
L 59-74
−13.5
covered 14didn’t cover 18avg −2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
9
@
BRWN
W 89-84
+41.5
15
@
NE
W 85-74
+24.5
18
@
BUF
L 90-94
+42.5
24
vs
LIB
L 73-79
+10.5
25
vs
URI
L 65-80
+0.5
26
vs
PRIN
W 79-74
+12.5
30
vs
YALE
L 74-77
+3.5
3
@
ORST
L 58-80
−5.5
6
@
PEPP
W 65-56
−21.5
14
vs
MRMK
W 66-59
−11.5
17
vs
SIE
W 83-69
+17.5
20
vs
IONA
L 78-83
+8.5
30
@
PRIN
L 69-75
+7.5
3
@
UNH
W 80-61
+1.5
8
vs
BING
W 60-59
−21.5
15
vs
ME
W 67-62
−1.5
19
@
UALB
L 68-75
+3.5
22
@
UML
W 77-68
−0.5
24
@
BRY
W 62-52
−19.5
29
vs
UMBC
W 64-55
−22.5
31
vs
NJIT
L 77-79
+16.5
5
@
ME
L 70-76
+15.5
7
vs
UNH
W 80-57
−1.5
12
@
BING
W 73-65
+1.5
14
vs
BRY
W 90-63
+19.5
19
@
UMBC
L 62-75
−5.5
21
@
NJIT
W 70-64
−8.5
26
vs
UML
W 66-64
−16.5
3
vs
UALB
W 69-56
−11.5
7
vs
BRY
W 77-57
+3.5
10
vs
NJIT
W 63-54
−17.5
14
@
UMBC
L 59-74
−1.5
over 17under 15avg +2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Yale
29 games played
Straight up
22-7
76% wins
Against the spread
12-17
41% covers · avg −0.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-14
52% overs · avg +1.2 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 7 | @ | W 97-68 | -5.5 | W +23.5 | 147.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 11 | @ | W 97-60 | -6.5 | W +30.5 | 156.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 86-79 | -20.5 | L −13.5 | 150.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 18 | vs | L 77-86 | -8.5 | L −17.5 | 153.5 | O 163 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 73-67 | -17.5 | L −11.5 | 148.5 | U 140 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 74-63 | -6.5 | W +4.5 | 148.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 97-94 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 156.5 | O 191 |
| Nov 30 | @ | W 77-74 | -6.5 | L −3.5 | 147.5 | O 151 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 80-66 | -12.5 | W +1.5 | 148.5 | U 146 |
| Dec 10 | vs | W 93-82 | -17.5 | L −6.5 | 145.5 | O 175 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 78-102 | +15.5 | L −8.5 | 171.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 5 | @ | W 70-53 | -8.5 | W +8.5 | 142.5 | U 123 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 60-76 | -7.5 | L −23.5 | 142.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 102-68 | -9.5 | W +24.5 | 174.5 | U 170 |
| Jan 19 | vs | W 91-74 | -9.5 | W +7.5 | 150.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 77-60 | -6.5 | W +10.5 | 157.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 30 | vs | W 83-68 | -15.5 | L −0.5 | 155.5 | U 151 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 65-67 | -11.5 | L −13.5 | 141.5 | U 132 |
| Feb 6 | vs | W 81-69 | -15.5 | L −3.5 | 140.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 9 | @ | W 87-81 | -6.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 13 | @ | W 83-70 | -9.5 | W +3.5 | 151.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 76-75 | -4.5 | L −3.5 | 138.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 74-70 | -9.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 27 | @ | L 69-72 | -4.5 | L −7.5 | 164.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 60-54 | -6.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | U 114 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 78-53 | -14.5 | W +10.5 | 137.5 | U 131 |
| Mar 14 | vs | W 88-76 | -5.5 | W +6.5 | 163.5 | O 164 |
| Mar 15 | vs | L 84-88 | -9.5 | L −13.5 | 144.5 | O 172 |
| Mar 17 | vs | L 67-68 | -4.5 | L −5.5 | 148.5 | U 135 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
@
NAVY
W 97-68
+23.5
11
@
QUIN
W 97-60
+30.5
15
vs
STBK
W 86-79
−13.5
18
vs
URI
L 77-86
−17.5
21
vs
GB
W 73-67
−11.5
23
vs
COFC
W 74-63
+4.5
24
vs
AKR
W 97-94
+4.5
30
@
UVM
W 77-74
−3.5
7
vs
UIC
W 80-66
+1.5
10
vs
UALB
W 93-82
−6.5
29
@
ALA
L 78-102
−8.5
5
@
BRWN
W 70-53
+8.5
10
@
PRIN
L 60-76
−23.5
17
vs
COR
W 102-68
+24.5
19
vs
COLU
W 91-74
+7.5
24
@
PENN
W 77-60
+10.5
30
vs
DART
W 83-68
−0.5
31
vs
HARV
L 65-67
−13.5
6
vs
BRWN
W 81-69
−3.5
9
@
HOW
W 87-81
−0.5
13
@
DART
W 83-70
+3.5
14
@
HARV
W 76-75
−3.5
21
vs
PENN
W 74-70
−5.5
27
@
COR
L 69-72
−7.5
28
@
COLU
W 60-54
−0.5
7
vs
PRIN
W 78-53
+10.5
14
vs
COR
W 88-76
+6.5
15
vs
PENN
L 84-88
−13.5
17
vs
UNCW
L 67-68
−5.5
covered 12didn’t cover 17avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
@
NAVY
W 97-68
+17.5
11
@
QUIN
W 97-60
+0.5
15
vs
STBK
W 86-79
+14.5
18
vs
URI
L 77-86
+9.5
21
vs
GB
W 73-67
−8.5
23
vs
COFC
W 74-63
−11.5
24
vs
AKR
W 97-94
+34.5
30
@
UVM
W 77-74
+3.5
7
vs
UIC
W 80-66
−2.5
10
vs
UALB
W 93-82
+29.5
29
@
ALA
L 78-102
+8.5
5
@
BRWN
W 70-53
−19.5
10
@
PRIN
L 60-76
−6.5
17
vs
COR
W 102-68
−4.5
19
vs
COLU
W 91-74
+14.5
24
@
PENN
W 77-60
−20.5
30
vs
DART
W 83-68
−4.5
31
vs
HARV
L 65-67
−9.5
6
vs
BRWN
W 81-69
+9.5
9
@
HOW
W 87-81
+20.5
13
@
DART
W 83-70
+1.5
14
@
HARV
W 76-75
+12.5
21
vs
PENN
W 74-70
−6.5
27
@
COR
L 69-72
−23.5
28
@
COLU
W 60-54
−33.5
7
vs
PRIN
W 78-53
−6.5
14
vs
COR
W 88-76
+0.5
15
vs
PENN
L 84-88
+27.5
17
vs
UNCW
L 67-68
−13.5
over 15under 14avg +1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Yale has the better starters
Position by position: Vermont 1, Yale 2, even 2
VermontBetterYale
G D. Yepdo TR10.6 pts · 3.2 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 24
→YALEBig
G T. Mullin11.8 pts · 2.4 reb · 2.6 ast
Score 63
G J. Broom TR2 pts · 2.7 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 14
→YALESmall
G J. Brathwaite6.6 pts · 1.8 reb · 1 ast
Score 35
G M. Nkugwa2.9 pts · 2.3 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 31
=No call
G C. Wallace1.2 pts · 0.6 reb · 0.6 ast
Not ranked
F G. Yalden16.1 pts · 5.8 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 96
←UVMSmall
F R. Fox9.8 pts · 1.9 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 76
F N. Barnett5.7 pts · 3.5 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 41
=No call
F J. Sullivan1.3 pts · 0.7 reb · 0.2 ast
Not ranked
VermontBetterYale
UVM offense264th of 366 · -8.1
→YALEBig
YALE defense136th of 366 · -2.8
UVM defense134th of 366 · -2.5
=Even
YALE offense125th of 366 · -3.3
Backcourt-5.2 · 3 players
→YALEBig
Backcourt-1.1 · 3 players
Frontcourt+3.3 · 2 players
←UVMSmall
Frontcourt+0.5 · 2 players
Bench-1.4 · 3 players
=Even
Bench-0.5 · 4 players
Score, worst to bestUVM betterYALE betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
D. Yepdo32 min · TRJ. Broom15 min · TRM. Nkugwa13 minD. Glazkov13 min · TRK. Badru10 min · TRS. Clemons2 min
Forwards
G. Yalden26 minN. Barnett22 minM. BrunettoNewM. MasicNewS. GbiegbaNew
Guards
T. Mullin28 minJ. Brathwaite19 minC. Wallace4 minJ. Basima3 minA. Loving3 minJ. Tsai2 min
Forwards
R. Fox18 minJ. Sullivan5 minD. Ogunyemi3 minC. MayNewT. WinklerNewC. BolteNew
Centers
J. OwareNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 72.1 #237 | Points per game | 80.1 #64 |
| 1.11 #124 | Points per possession | 1.21 #10 |
| 65.2 #342 | Pace (possessions) | 66.4 #301 |
| Shooting | ||
| 53.1 #95 | Effective FG% | 55.6 #26 |
| 33.3 #208 | 3-point % | 39.4 #3 |
| 44.6 #77 | 3-point attempt rate | 36.1 #247 |
| 31.1 #279 | Free throw rate | 35.1 #172 |
| Possessions | ||
| 14.3 #34 | Turnover rate | 14.0 #22 |
| 26.2 #318 | Offensive rebound rate | 34.2 #62 |
| 12.3 #266 | Assists per game | 15.8 #53 |
| Defense | ||
| 68.8 #44 | Points allowed | 71.8 #102 |
| 1.05 #96 | Points allowed per possession | 1.08 #166 |
| 50.4 #121 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.6 #192 |
| 35.3 #267 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.0 #250 |
| 14.8 #307 | Turnovers forced | 16.2 #207 |
| 77.0 #2 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.3 #147 |
| 4.5 #354 | Steals per game | 5.3 #314 |
| 2.7 #279 | Blocks per game | 3.2 #193 |
Vermont
20-12 in 2025-26 overall · 14-5 in conference · America East Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ UMBC59–74
- Wvs NJIT63–54
- Wvs Bryant77–57
- Wvs UAlbany69–56
- Wvs UMass Lowell66–64
A week or more of rest.
Yale
22-7 in 2025-26 overall · 12-4 in conference · Ivy League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs UNC Wilmington67–68
- Lvs Penn84–88
- Wvs Cornell88–76
- Wvs Princeton78–53
- W@ Columbia60–54
A week or more of rest.