Joel & Diane Bloom Wellness and Events Center · at NJIT
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | NJIT | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 NJIT 75–71 · win probability NJIT 61%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 146.1
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: NJIT has more of the edges
MAN 2, NJIT 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Free throws
Free throw rate: MAN 34.0, NJIT 33.2. Allowed: MAN 25.7, NJIT 37.9
Three-pointers
MAN hits 32.0% and allows 36.6%; NJIT hits 30.4% and allows 32.3%. Threes are 37.1% and 40.1% of their shots
Shooting
Effective FG%: MAN 47.9 and allows 53.9; NJIT 46.7 and allows 50.0
Turnovers
Turnover rate: MAN 15.6%, NJIT 17.1%. Forced: MAN 16.6%, NJIT 16.1%
Context
Schedule so far
MAN has played the 336th-hardest schedule, NJIT the 282nd. A record against a soft schedule means less
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: MAN 10%, NJIT 39%. Transfers in: MAN 5, NJIT 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Home court
NJIT at home. This season: NJIT 0-0 at home, MAN 0-0 away
MAN offense vs NJIT defense
Offense 301st of 366 against a defense 250th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: MAN plays 69.0 a game (182nd fastest), NJIT 67.9 (235th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: MAN 28.6%, NJIT 26.2%. Defensive: MAN 63.0%, NJIT 67.9%
Even
NJIT offense vs MAN defense
Offense 338th of 366 against a defense 346th, 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 | — | NJIT -3.3 | — |
| Total | — | 146.1 | — |
| Projected score | — | MAN 71.4 · NJIT 74.7 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | NJIT -1.8 | — |
| 1H total | 68.3 | — |
| 1H projected score | MAN 33.3 · NJIT 35.1 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% | |
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 2-8 20% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Manhattan
31 games played
Straight up
11-20
35% wins
Against the spread
11-20
35% covers · avg −3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
13-18
42% 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 9 | @ | L 83-114 | +28.5 | L −2.5 | 155.5 | O 197 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 79-75 | +2.5 | W +6.5 | 158.5 | U 154 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 56-86 | +15.5 | L −14.5 | 156.5 | U 142 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 80-73 | -20.5 | L −13.5 | 154.5 | U 153 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 68-109 | +23.5 | L −17.5 | 162.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 101-103 | -2.5 | L −4.5 | 144.5 | O 204 |
| Nov 29 | @ | L 78-81 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 152.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 5 | vs | W 70-66 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 155.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 68-80 | +7.5 | L −4.5 | 140.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 53-82 | +8.5 | L −20.5 | 147.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 18 | vs | L 68-75 | +10.5 | W +3.5 | 154.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 87-81 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 138.5 | O 168 |
| Dec 29 | @ | W 74-71 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 80-79 | +7.5 | W +8.5 | 159.5 | U 159 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 66-73 | +6.5 | L −0.5 | 148.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 9 | vs | L 64-70 | -7.5 | L −13.5 | 145.5 | U 134 |
| Jan 11 | vs | W 79-70 | -5.5 | W +3.5 | 140.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 62-98 | +6.5 | L −29.5 | 158.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 59-74 | +6.5 | L −8.5 | 144.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 19 | @ | L 92-98 | +13.5 | W +7.5 | 153.5 | O 190 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 57-66 | +7.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | U 123 |
| Jan 30 | vs | W 95-90 | -5.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 185 |
| Feb 1 | @ | L 65-72 | +6.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 5 | vs | L 75-80 | +4.5 | L −0.5 | 144.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 80-68 | +1.5 | W +13.5 | 161.5 | U 148 |
| Feb 13 | @ | W 76-69 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 136.5 | O 145 |
| Feb 15 | @ | W 69-65 | -1.5 | W +2.5 | 142.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 20 | vs | L 70-84 | +5.5 | L −8.5 | 142.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 27 | @ | L 65-75 | +7.5 | L −2.5 | 145.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 1 | vs | L 65-69 | +2.5 | L −1.5 | 151.5 | U 134 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 60-71 | +3.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | U 131 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
9
@
USC
L 83-114
−2.5
12
vs
UTU
W 79-75
+6.5
14
@
HAW
L 56-86
−14.5
15
vs
MVSU
W 80-73
−13.5
21
@
TA&M
L 68-109
−17.5
26
vs
WAG
L 101-103
−4.5
29
@
ARMY
L 78-81
−4.5
5
vs
FAIR
W 70-66
+5.5
7
@
MRST
L 68-80
−4.5
13
@
FOR
L 53-82
−20.5
18
vs
FUR
L 68-75
+3.5
21
vs
PRES
W 87-81
+8.5
29
@
RID
W 74-71
+0.5
2
vs
QUIN
W 80-79
+8.5
4
@
MRMK
L 66-73
−0.5
9
vs
CAN
L 64-70
−13.5
11
vs
NIA
W 79-70
+3.5
14
@
FAIR
L 62-98
−29.5
17
vs
SIE
L 59-74
−8.5
19
@
QUIN
L 92-98
+7.5
24
@
IONA
L 57-66
−1.5
30
vs
RID
W 95-90
−0.5
1
@
MSM
L 65-72
−0.5
5
vs
SPU
L 75-80
−0.5
7
vs
SHU
W 80-68
+13.5
13
@
NIA
W 76-69
+4.5
15
@
CAN
W 69-65
+2.5
20
vs
MRST
L 70-84
−8.5
27
@
SPU
L 65-75
−2.5
1
vs
IONA
L 65-69
−1.5
5
vs
FAIR
L 60-71
−7.5
covered 11didn’t cover 20avg −3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
9
@
USC
L 83-114
+41.5
12
vs
UTU
W 79-75
−4.5
14
@
HAW
L 56-86
−14.5
15
vs
MVSU
W 80-73
−1.5
21
@
TA&M
L 68-109
+14.5
26
vs
WAG
L 101-103
+59.5
29
@
ARMY
L 78-81
+6.5
5
vs
FAIR
W 70-66
−19.5
7
@
MRST
L 68-80
+7.5
13
@
FOR
L 53-82
−12.5
18
vs
FUR
L 68-75
−11.5
21
vs
PRES
W 87-81
+29.5
29
@
RID
W 74-71
−2.5
2
vs
QUIN
W 80-79
−0.5
4
@
MRMK
L 66-73
−9.5
9
vs
CAN
L 64-70
−11.5
11
vs
NIA
W 79-70
+8.5
14
@
FAIR
L 62-98
+1.5
17
vs
SIE
L 59-74
−11.5
19
@
QUIN
L 92-98
+36.5
24
@
IONA
L 57-66
−30.5
30
vs
RID
W 95-90
+39.5
1
@
MSM
L 65-72
−10.5
5
vs
SPU
L 75-80
+10.5
7
vs
SHU
W 80-68
−13.5
13
@
NIA
W 76-69
+8.5
15
@
CAN
W 69-65
−8.5
20
vs
MRST
L 70-84
+11.5
27
@
SPU
L 65-75
−5.5
1
vs
IONA
L 65-69
−17.5
5
vs
FAIR
L 60-71
−17.5
over 13under 18avg +2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
NJIT
32 games played
Straight up
15-17
47% wins
Against the spread
19-13
59% covers · avg +1.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-18
44% overs · avg −2.6 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 4 | @ | W 72-61 | +14.5 | W +25.5 | 147.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 8 | vs | L 53-74 | +6.5 | L −14.5 | 145.5 | U 127 |
| Nov 11 | @ | W 66-64 | +10.5 | W +12.5 | 139.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 93-81 | -2.5 | W +9.5 | 146.5 | O 174 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 43-75 | +13.5 | L −18.5 | 138.5 | U 118 |
| Nov 22 | @ | L 70-86 | +17.5 | W +1.5 | 140.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 24 | @ | L 67-94 | +34.5 | W +7.5 | 141.5 | O 161 |
| Nov 26 | @ | L 47-104 | +44.5 | L −12.5 | 158.5 | U 151 |
| Nov 28 | @ | L 55-73 | +14.5 | L −3.5 | 141.5 | U 128 |
| Dec 5 | @ | L 72-89 | +28.5 | W +11.5 | 155.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 10 | vs | W 70-64 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 130.5 | O 134 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 49-65 | +6.5 | L −9.5 | 151.5 | U 114 |
| Dec 22 | @ | L 52-101 | +32.5 | L −16.5 | 149.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 31 | @ | L 61-80 | +14.5 | L −4.5 | 151.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 73-65 | +3.5 | W +11.5 | 140.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 80-76 | +2.5 | W +6.5 | 137.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 70-74 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 130.5 | O 144 |
| Jan 15 | @ | W 73-64 | +8.5 | W +17.5 | 145.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 19 | vs | W 79-55 | -1.5 | W +22.5 | 132.5 | O 134 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 74-87 | +6.5 | L −6.5 | 143.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 29 | @ | W 77-68 | +5.5 | W +14.5 | 139.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 79-77 | +13.5 | W +15.5 | 139.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 81-56 | -1.5 | W +23.5 | 149.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 73-64 | -8.5 | W +0.5 | 140.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 76-70 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 145.5 | O 146 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 67-58 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 137.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 19 | vs | L 63-81 | -3.5 | L −21.5 | 142.5 | O 144 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 64-70 | +6.5 | W +0.5 | 142.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 52-69 | -1.5 | L −18.5 | 138.5 | U 121 |
| Mar 3 | vs | L 52-91 | +4.5 | L −34.5 | 143.5 | U 143 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 60-58 | -3.5 | L −1.5 | 134.5 | U 118 |
| Mar 10 | @ | L 54-63 | +10.5 | W +1.5 | 134.5 | U 117 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
@
FOR
W 72-61
+25.5
8
vs
FAIR
L 53-74
−14.5
11
@
L-MD
W 66-64
+12.5
15
vs
FDU
W 93-81
+9.5
18
@
DREX
L 43-75
−18.5
22
@
NAVY
L 70-86
+1.5
24
@
CIN
L 67-94
+7.5
26
@
LOU
L 47-104
−12.5
28
@
EMU
L 55-73
−3.5
5
@
HPU
L 72-89
+11.5
10
vs
NHVN
W 70-64
+8.5
13
vs
SHU
L 49-65
−9.5
22
@
BTLR
L 52-101
−16.5
31
@
PENN
L 61-80
−4.5
3
@
BING
W 73-65
+11.5
8
vs
UNH
W 80-76
+6.5
10
vs
ME
L 70-74
−5.5
15
@
UML
W 73-64
+17.5
19
vs
BRY
W 79-55
+22.5
22
@
UMBC
L 74-87
−6.5
29
@
UALB
W 77-68
+14.5
31
@
UVM
W 79-77
+15.5
5
vs
UML
W 81-56
+23.5
7
vs
BING
W 73-64
+0.5
12
@
UNH
W 76-70
+8.5
14
@
ME
W 67-58
+7.5
19
vs
UALB
L 63-81
−21.5
21
vs
UVM
L 64-70
+0.5
28
@
BRY
L 52-69
−18.5
3
vs
UMBC
L 52-91
−34.5
7
vs
ME
W 60-58
−1.5
10
@
UVM
L 54-63
+1.5
covered 19didn’t cover 13avg +1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
@
FOR
W 72-61
−14.5
8
vs
FAIR
L 53-74
−18.5
11
@
L-MD
W 66-64
−9.5
15
vs
FDU
W 93-81
+27.5
18
@
DREX
L 43-75
−20.5
22
@
NAVY
L 70-86
+15.5
24
@
CIN
L 67-94
+19.5
26
@
LOU
L 47-104
−7.5
28
@
EMU
L 55-73
−13.5
5
@
HPU
L 72-89
+5.5
10
vs
NHVN
W 70-64
+3.5
13
vs
SHU
L 49-65
−37.5
22
@
BTLR
L 52-101
+3.5
31
@
PENN
L 61-80
−10.5
3
@
BING
W 73-65
−2.5
8
vs
UNH
W 80-76
+18.5
10
vs
ME
L 70-74
+13.5
15
@
UML
W 73-64
−8.5
19
vs
BRY
W 79-55
+1.5
22
@
UMBC
L 74-87
+17.5
29
@
UALB
W 77-68
+5.5
31
@
UVM
W 79-77
+16.5
5
vs
UML
W 81-56
−12.5
7
vs
BING
W 73-64
−3.5
12
@
UNH
W 76-70
+0.5
14
@
ME
W 67-58
−12.5
19
vs
UALB
L 63-81
+1.5
21
vs
UVM
L 64-70
−8.5
28
@
BRY
L 52-69
−17.5
3
vs
UMBC
L 52-91
−0.5
7
vs
ME
W 60-58
−16.5
10
@
UVM
L 54-63
−17.5
over 14under 18avg −2.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
The starting fives are even
Position by position: Manhattan 1, NJIT 1, even 3
ManhattanBetterNJIT
G B. Tweedy TR9 pts · 3 reb · 2.5 ast
Score 29
→NJITSmall
G D. Bolden12 pts · 2.8 reb · 2.8 ast
Score 47
G J. Sabino TR7.1 pts · 4.6 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 53
←MANBig
G M. Tatum TR8.1 pts · 2 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 13
G Q. Elliott3.6 pts · 1.2 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 17
=Even
G Q. Duncan4.4 pts · 1.7 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 31
G J. Delaney0.4 pts · 0.6 reb · 0.2 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F M. Coffi TR3.5 pts · 4.9 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 28
F O. Stankovic TR1.7 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.4 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F J. Kelly4.4 pts · 2.5 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 20
ManhattanBetterNJIT
MAN offense301st of 366 · -9.4
=Even
NJIT defense250th of 366 · -6.6
MAN defense346th of 366 · -9.3
=Even
NJIT offense338th of 366 · -11.1
Backcourt-4.3 · 4 players
=Even
Backcourt-4.6 · 3 players
Frontcourt-0.5 · 1 player
←MANSmall
Frontcourt-2.4 · 2 players
Bench-0.5 · 3 players
←MANSmall
Bench-3.4 · 4 players
Score, worst to bestMAN betterNJIT betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
B. Tweedy30 min · TRJ. Sabino21 min · TRQ. Elliott12 minJ. Delaney5 minA. Miguel4 minB. PearceNew
Forwards
O. Stankovic6 min · TRK. Kearney4 min · TRL. McChesney3 min · TRI. JohnsonNewD. EricNewN. ManojlovicNew
Guards
D. Bolden30 minM. Tatum26 min · TRQ. Duncan14 minR. Awad13 minB. Stores4 min · TRA. AltobelliNew
Forwards
M. Coffi19 min · TRJ. Kelly16 minB. Oliver10 min · TRZ. Scherler7 minV. VanderstraetenNew
Centers
S. Jimenez-VojnicNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 72.4 #232 | Points per game | 66.2 #344 |
| 1.05 #247 | Points per possession | 0.98 #343 |
| 69.0 #182 | Pace (possessions) | 67.9 #235 |
| Shooting | ||
| 47.9 #315 | Effective FG% | 46.7 #342 |
| 32.0 #280 | 3-point % | 30.4 #336 |
| 37.1 #228 | 3-point attempt rate | 40.1 #168 |
| 34.0 #208 | Free throw rate | 33.2 #233 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.6 #112 | Turnover rate | 17.1 #215 |
| 28.6 #247 | Offensive rebound rate | 26.2 #316 |
| 12.3 #268 | Assists per game | 10.5 #350 |
| Defense | ||
| 79.6 #309 | Points allowed | 73.7 #147 |
| 1.15 #330 | Points allowed per possession | 1.08 #167 |
| 53.9 #297 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.0 #99 |
| 36.6 #332 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.3 #79 |
| 16.6 #175 | Turnovers forced | 16.1 #214 |
| 63.0 #358 | Defensive rebound rate | 67.9 #264 |
| 7.8 #54 | Steals per game | 6.3 #204 |
| 2.3 #325 | Blocks per game | 3.1 #197 |
Manhattan
11-20 in 2025-26 overall · 8-13 in conference · Metro Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Fairfield60–71
- Lvs Iona65–69
- L@ Saint Peter's65–75
- Lvs Marist70–84
- W@ Canisius69–65
A week or more of rest.
NJIT
15-17 in 2025-26 overall · 11-7 in conference · America East Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Vermont54–63
- Wvs Maine60–58
- Lvs UMBC52–91
- L@ Bryant52–69
- Lvs Vermont64–70
A week or more of rest.