Lee & Penny Anderson Arena · at St Thomas
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | STMN | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 STMN 77–73 · win probability STMN 64%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 149.2
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: STMN has more of the edges
GB 0, STMN 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Turnovers
Turnover rate: GB 15.9%, STMN 14.4%. Forced: GB 13.2%, STMN 17.0%
Three-pointers
GB hits 36.4% and allows 36.3%; STMN hits 36.0% and allows 31.7%. Threes are 37.3% and 46.3% of their shots
Context
Tempo
About 67 possessions: GB plays 65.2 a game (339th fastest), STMN 69.7 (137th). Faster games mean more points
Shooting
Effective FG%: GB 54.9 and allows 53.6; STMN 58.9 and allows 50.7
Context
Schedule so far
GB has played the 255th-hardest schedule, STMN the 341st. A record against a soft schedule means less
Home court
STMN at home. This season: STMN 0-0 at home, GB 0-0 away
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: GB 25.1%, STMN 22.6%. Defensive: GB 70.4%, STMN 73.4%
Even
STMN offense vs GB defense
Offense 192nd of 366 against a defense 227th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: GB 40%, STMN 35%. Transfers in: GB 3, STMN 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: GB 41.6, STMN 33.8. Allowed: GB 37.4, STMN 30.7
Even
GB offense vs STMN defense
Offense 219th of 366 against a defense 223rd, on the model’s ratings
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 | — | STMN -4.0 | — |
| Total | — | 149.2 | — |
| Projected score | — | GB 72.6 · STMN 76.6 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | STMN -2.3 | — |
| 1H total | 69.8 | — |
| 1H projected score | GB 33.7 · STMN 36 | — |
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% | 5-5 50% | |
| 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | 3-7 30% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
GB 1–3 STMNSTMN leads · 4 games since 2021-22 · STMN has won the last 2 meetings · GB 1-3 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 13, 2025-26 | GB 61 @ STMN 80 | STMN -13.5 | STMN W |
| Nov 8, 2024-25 | STMN 90 @ GB 76 | GB +3.5 | STMN W |
| Nov 25, 2023-24 | STMN 51 @ GB 64 | GB +4.5 | GB W |
| Dec 13, 2022-23 | GB 61 @ STMN 82 | STMN -11.5 | STMN W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Green Bay
31 games played
Straight up
16-15
52% wins
Against the spread
19-12
61% covers · avg +3.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-15
52% overs · avg +2.3 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 | @ | L 51-94 | +30.5 | L −12.5 | 152.5 | U 145 |
| Nov 7 | @ | L 76-83 | +3.5 | L −3.5 | 147.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 13 | @ | L 61-80 | +13.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 65-72 | +25.5 | W +18.5 | 146.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 21 | vs | L 67-73 | +17.5 | W +11.5 | 148.5 | U 140 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 79-75 | +5.5 | W +9.5 | 146.5 | O 154 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 80-75 | +5.5 | W +10.5 | 150.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 4 | vs | L 78-80 | +1.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 58-86 | +6.5 | L −21.5 | 142.5 | O 144 |
| Dec 11 | @ | W 85-75 | +3.5 | W +13.5 | 165.5 | U 160 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 67-64 | +7.5 | W +10.5 | 140.5 | U 131 |
| Dec 23 | @ | L 79-102 | +5.5 | L −17.5 | 145.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 1 | @ | W 72-54 | +8.5 | W +26.5 | 145.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 5 | vs | W 79-76 | +3.5 | W +6.5 | 144.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 9 | vs | W 75-59 | -6.5 | W +9.5 | 156.5 | U 134 |
| Jan 11 | vs | W 80-78 | +4.5 | W +6.5 | 144.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 15 | @ | W 88-73 | -3.5 | W +11.5 | 150.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 18 | vs | L 63-88 | +4.5 | L −20.5 | 153.5 | U 151 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 81-88 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 139.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 71-67 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 142.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 30 | vs | L 82-89 | -7.5 | L −14.5 | 150.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 1 | vs | L 75-83 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 144.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 87-84 | +7.5 | W +10.5 | 149.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 76-63 | -3.5 | W +9.5 | 149.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 76-59 | +1.5 | W +18.5 | 144.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 15 | @ | L 72-75 | +2.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 147 |
| Feb 20 | @ | W 73-68 | +6.5 | W +11.5 | 153.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 22 | @ | L 70-74 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 147.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 85-63 | -1.5 | W +20.5 | 141.5 | O 148 |
| Mar 3 | vs | W 64-56 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | U 120 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 76-96 | +3.5 | L −16.5 | 146.5 | O 172 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
KU
L 51-94
−12.5
7
@
BUF
L 76-83
−3.5
13
@
STMN
L 61-80
−5.5
15
@
MINN
L 65-72
+18.5
21
vs
YALE
L 67-73
+11.5
22
vs
MASS
W 79-75
+9.5
24
vs
IONA
W 80-75
+10.5
4
vs
RMU
L 78-80
−0.5
7
@
WRST
L 58-86
−21.5
11
@
IUIN
W 85-75
+13.5
17
vs
UCSB
W 67-64
+10.5
23
@
CAM
L 79-102
−17.5
1
@
PFW
W 72-54
+26.5
5
vs
MILW
W 79-76
+6.5
9
vs
IUIN
W 75-59
+9.5
11
vs
NKU
W 80-78
+6.5
15
@
CLE
W 88-73
+11.5
18
vs
OAK
L 63-88
−20.5
22
@
YSU
L 81-88
+0.5
24
@
RMU
W 71-67
+10.5
30
vs
CLE
L 82-89
−14.5
1
vs
WRST
L 75-83
−4.5
4
@
NKU
W 87-84
+10.5
7
vs
DETM
W 76-63
+9.5
12
vs
PFW
W 76-59
+18.5
15
@
MILW
L 72-75
−0.5
20
@
OAK
W 73-68
+11.5
22
@
DETM
L 70-74
−2.5
28
vs
YSU
W 85-63
+20.5
3
vs
PFW
W 64-56
+4.5
8
vs
NKU
L 76-96
−16.5
covered 19didn’t cover 12avg +3.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
KU
L 51-94
−7.5
7
@
BUF
L 76-83
+11.5
13
@
STMN
L 61-80
−9.5
15
@
MINN
L 65-72
−9.5
21
vs
YALE
L 67-73
−8.5
22
vs
MASS
W 79-75
+7.5
24
vs
IONA
W 80-75
+4.5
4
vs
RMU
L 78-80
+17.5
7
@
WRST
L 58-86
+1.5
11
@
IUIN
W 85-75
−5.5
17
vs
UCSB
W 67-64
−9.5
23
@
CAM
L 79-102
+35.5
1
@
PFW
W 72-54
−19.5
5
vs
MILW
W 79-76
+10.5
9
vs
IUIN
W 75-59
−22.5
11
vs
NKU
W 80-78
+13.5
15
@
CLE
W 88-73
+10.5
18
vs
OAK
L 63-88
−2.5
22
@
YSU
L 81-88
+29.5
24
@
RMU
W 71-67
−4.5
30
vs
CLE
L 82-89
+20.5
1
vs
WRST
L 75-83
+13.5
4
@
NKU
W 87-84
+21.5
7
vs
DETM
W 76-63
−10.5
12
vs
PFW
W 76-59
−9.5
15
@
MILW
L 72-75
+1.5
20
@
OAK
W 73-68
−12.5
22
@
DETM
L 70-74
−3.5
28
vs
YSU
W 85-63
+6.5
3
vs
PFW
W 64-56
−25.5
8
vs
NKU
L 76-96
+25.5
over 16under 15avg +2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
St Thomas
31 games played
Straight up
21-10
68% wins
Against the spread
15-16
48% covers · avg +0.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-15
52% overs · avg −0.4 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 58-84 | +13.5 | L −12.5 | 141.5 | O 142 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 83-76 | -18.5 | L −11.5 | 151.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 10 | @ | L 71-81 | +2.5 | L −7.5 | 157.5 | U 152 |
| Nov 13 | vs | W 80-61 | -13.5 | W +5.5 | 150.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 15 | @ | W 84-72 | -2.5 | W +9.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 73-72 | -4.5 | L −3.5 | 157.5 | U 145 |
| Nov 22 | vs | L 80-88 | -11.5 | L −19.5 | 162.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 23 | @ | W 76-66 | -5.5 | W +4.5 | 155.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 74-82 | +2.5 | L −5.5 | 147.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 88-65 | -7.5 | W +15.5 | 154.5 | U 153 |
| Dec 13 | @ | W 80-59 | -3.5 | W +17.5 | 148.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 92-78 | -14.5 | L −0.5 | 152.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 92-88 | -11.5 | L −7.5 | 163.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 7 | vs | W 99-86 | -14.5 | L −1.5 | 162.5 | O 185 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 82-71 | -8.5 | W +2.5 | 152.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 15 | @ | W 91-80 | -10.5 | W +0.5 | 151.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 65-68 | +2.5 | L −0.5 | 151.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 74-69 | -6.5 | L −1.5 | 155.5 | U 143 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 90-78 | -10.5 | W +1.5 | 161.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 29 | vs | L 80-81 | -11.5 | L −12.5 | 152.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 1 | vs | W 99-64 | -17.5 | W +17.5 | 151.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 77-62 | +1.5 | W +16.5 | 157.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 92-75 | -15.5 | W +1.5 | 151.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 12 | @ | L 94-98 | -4.5 | L −8.5 | 156.5 | O 192 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 104-64 | -12.5 | W +27.5 | 154.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 80-82 | -3.5 | L −5.5 | 168.5 | U 162 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 84-62 | -3.5 | W +18.5 | 155.5 | U 146 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 68-53 | -11.5 | W +3.5 | 158.5 | U 121 |
| Mar 5 | vs | W 80-67 | -4.5 | W +8.5 | 150.5 | U 147 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 66-67 | -11.5 | L −12.5 | 153.5 | U 133 |
| Mar 17 | @ | L 52-67 | +2.5 | L −12.5 | 145.5 | U 119 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
SMC
L 58-84
−12.5
8
vs
ARMY
W 83-76
−11.5
10
@
WSU
L 71-81
−7.5
13
vs
GB
W 80-61
+5.5
15
@
SEMO
W 84-72
+9.5
21
vs
UNCO
W 73-72
−3.5
22
vs
CSUF
L 80-88
−19.5
23
@
PORT
W 76-66
+4.5
3
@
MTST
L 74-82
−5.5
7
vs
WEB
W 88-65
+15.5
13
@
UNCA
W 80-59
+17.5
20
vs
UCR
W 92-78
−0.5
4
vs
DEN
W 92-88
−7.5
7
vs
SDAK
W 99-86
−1.5
10
@
ORU
W 82-71
+2.5
15
@
UND
W 91-80
+0.5
17
@
NDSU
L 65-68
−0.5
22
vs
SDST
W 74-69
−1.5
24
@
SDAK
W 90-78
+1.5
29
vs
UND
L 80-81
−12.5
1
vs
KC
W 99-64
+17.5
4
@
SDST
W 77-62
+16.5
7
vs
ORU
W 92-75
+1.5
12
@
OMA
L 94-98
−8.5
14
@
KC
W 104-64
+27.5
21
@
DEN
L 80-82
−5.5
26
vs
NDSU
W 84-62
+18.5
28
vs
OMA
W 68-53
+3.5
5
vs
SDST
W 80-67
+8.5
7
vs
UND
L 66-67
−12.5
17
@
SEA
L 52-67
−12.5
covered 15didn’t cover 16avg +0.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
SMC
L 58-84
+0.5
8
vs
ARMY
W 83-76
+7.5
10
@
WSU
L 71-81
−5.5
13
vs
GB
W 80-61
−9.5
15
@
SEMO
W 84-72
+3.5
21
vs
UNCO
W 73-72
−12.5
22
vs
CSUF
L 80-88
+5.5
23
@
PORT
W 76-66
−13.5
3
@
MTST
L 74-82
+8.5
7
vs
WEB
W 88-65
−1.5
13
@
UNCA
W 80-59
−9.5
20
vs
UCR
W 92-78
+17.5
4
vs
DEN
W 92-88
+16.5
7
vs
SDAK
W 99-86
+22.5
10
@
ORU
W 82-71
+0.5
15
@
UND
W 91-80
+19.5
17
@
NDSU
L 65-68
−18.5
22
vs
SDST
W 74-69
−12.5
24
@
SDAK
W 90-78
+6.5
29
vs
UND
L 80-81
+8.5
1
vs
KC
W 99-64
+11.5
4
@
SDST
W 77-62
−18.5
7
vs
ORU
W 92-75
+15.5
12
@
OMA
L 94-98
+35.5
14
@
KC
W 104-64
+13.5
21
@
DEN
L 80-82
−6.5
26
vs
NDSU
W 84-62
−9.5
28
vs
OMA
W 68-53
−37.5
5
vs
SDST
W 80-67
−3.5
7
vs
UND
L 66-67
−20.5
17
@
SEA
L 52-67
−26.5
over 16under 15avg −0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Green Bay has the better starters
Position by position: Green Bay 2, St Thomas 1, even 2
Green BayBetterSt Thomas
G O. Lovejoy TR16 pts · 3.6 reb · 3.7 ast
Score 85
←GBSmall
G A. Herro5.7 pts · 4 reb · 3.6 ast
Score 57
G L. Thomas4.2 pts · 2 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 31
=Even
G H. Tibbits2.7 pts · 1 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 24
G M. Wrecke2.8 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.2 ast
Score 8
→STMNSmall
F C. Bjerke9.2 pts · 3.4 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 25
F M. Hall13.7 pts · 5 reb · 2.5 ast
Score 49
←GBBig
F C. Wilkins TR6.9 pts · 2.9 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 9
F A. Hadaway TR14.5 pts · 7.6 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 71
=No call
F J. Lorenz TR2.2 pts · 1.8 reb · 1 ast
Not ranked
Green BayBetterSt Thomas
GB offense219th of 366 · -6.7
=Even
STMN defense223rd of 366 · -5.8
GB defense227th of 366 · -6.0
=Even
STMN offense192nd of 366 · -5.9
Backcourt-0.1 · 3 players
=Even
Backcourt-1.0 · 2 players
Frontcourt+0.7 · 2 players
←GBBig
Frontcourt-4.0 · 3 players
Bench-3.9 · 4 players
→STMNSmall
Bench-1.0 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestGB betterSTMN betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
O. Lovejoy31 min · TRL. Thomas12 minM. Wrecke11 minK. Van Kauwenberg10 minB. Fitzgerald1 minS. ErhartNew
Forwards
M. Hall35 minA. Hadaway33 min · TRI. Sutherland10 min · TRH. GruetzmacherNewT. ColnaricNew
Centers
M. Cicic11 min
Guards
A. Herro24 minH. Tibbits10 minK. Blue4 min · TRT. Franks3 minT. Humphries2 minA. Tauer2 min
Forwards
C. Bjerke25 minC. Wilkins22 min · TRJ. Lorenz10 min · TRK. Counts4 minL. MomcilovicNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 73.9 #201 | Points per game | 80.9 #48 |
| 1.13 #83 | Points per possession | 1.16 #45 |
| 65.2 #339 | Pace (possessions) | 69.7 #137 |
| Shooting | ||
| 54.9 #41 | Effective FG% | 58.9 #5 |
| 36.4 #42 | 3-point % | 36.0 #57 |
| 37.3 #224 | 3-point attempt rate | 46.3 #41 |
| 41.6 #36 | Free throw rate | 33.8 #220 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.9 #133 | Turnover rate | 14.4 #37 |
| 25.1 #339 | Offensive rebound rate | 22.6 #353 |
| 13.7 #172 | Assists per game | 16.4 #37 |
| Defense | ||
| 75.9 #215 | Points allowed | 73.1 #135 |
| 1.17 #338 | Points allowed per possession | 1.05 #82 |
| 53.6 #287 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.7 #139 |
| 36.3 #316 | Opponent 3-point % | 31.7 #52 |
| 13.2 #350 | Turnovers forced | 17.0 #152 |
| 70.4 #140 | Defensive rebound rate | 73.4 #25 |
| 4.2 #361 | Steals per game | 7.5 #87 |
| 2.7 #282 | Blocks per game | 2.6 #296 |
Green Bay
16-15 in 2025-26 overall · 13-9 in conference · Horizon League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs N Kentucky76–96
- Wvs Purdue FW64–56
- Wvs Youngstown St85–63
- L@ Detroit Mercy70–74
- W@ Oakland73–68
A week or more of rest.
St Thomas
21-10 in 2025-26 overall · 13-5 in conference · Summit League
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Seattle U52–67
- Lvs North Dakota66–67
- Wvs S Dakota St80–67
- Wvs Omaha68–53
- Wvs N Dakota St84–62
A week or more of rest.