Prudential Center · at Seton Hall
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | HALL | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 HALL 84–61 · win probability HALL 98%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 144.9
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: HALL has more of the edges
UNCG 1, HALL 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
UNCG offense vs HALL defense
Offense 260th of 366 against a defense 28th, on the model’s ratings
HALL offense vs UNCG defense
Offense 97th of 366 against a defense 299th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
UNCG has played the 256th-hardest schedule, HALL the 55th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Free throws
Free throw rate: UNCG 42.0, HALL 35.3. Allowed: UNCG 30.6, HALL 42.1
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UNCG 15.0%, HALL 16.6%. Forced: UNCG 13.6%, HALL 21.5%
Shooting
Effective FG%: UNCG 52.0 and allows 56.2; HALL 47.6 and allows 47.3
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: UNCG plays 69.3 a game (157th fastest), HALL 66.5 (296th). Faster games mean more points
Home court
HALL at home. This season: HALL 0-0 at home, UNCG 0-0 away
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UNCG 28.1%, HALL 35.6%. Defensive: UNCG 71.0%, HALL 68.1%
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UNCG 5%, HALL 18%. Transfers in: UNCG 6, HALL 9. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Three-pointers
UNCG hits 35.6% and allows 38.0%; HALL hits 30.5% and allows 32.4%. Threes are 40.2% and 26.8% 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 | — | HALL -22.7 | — |
| Total | — | 144.9 | — |
| Projected score | — | UNCG 61.1 · HALL 83.8 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | HALL -13.4 | — |
| 1H total | 67.8 | — |
| 1H projected score | UNCG 27.2 · HALL 40.6 | — |
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% | 7-3 70% | |
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% |
Next 3 games
With how the last meeting with each opponent went
No more games listed yet.
No more games listed yet.
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
UNC Greensboro
32 games played
Straight up
13-19
41% wins
Against the spread
13-19
41% covers · avg −1.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
22-10
69% overs · avg +8.1 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 | @ | L 64-93 | +18.5 | L −10.5 | 148.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 8 | vs | L 90-92 | -4.5 | L −6.5 | 142.5 | O 182 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 64-110 | +30.5 | L −15.5 | 153.5 | O 174 |
| Nov 15 | vs | L 63-69 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 145.5 | U 132 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 94-101 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 150.5 | O 195 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 68-62 | +5.5 | W +11.5 | 152.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 60-73 | -1.5 | L −14.5 | 142.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 71-82 | +10.5 | L −0.5 | 150.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 2 | vs | L 77-82 | +4.5 | L −0.5 | 143.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 82-78 | +7.5 | W +11.5 | 139.5 | O 160 |
| Dec 16 | vs | L 65-71 | -6.5 | L −12.5 | 147.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 77-72 | +2.5 | W +7.5 | 147.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 89-82 | +2.5 | W +9.5 | 151.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 85-97 | +7.5 | L −4.5 | 153.5 | O 182 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 60-86 | +11.5 | L −14.5 | 148.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 69-66 | -9.5 | L −6.5 | 148.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 92-102 | +5.5 | L −4.5 | 155.5 | O 194 |
| Jan 21 | @ | W 85-78 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 151.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 23 | vs | L 66-89 | +4.5 | L −18.5 | 150.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 77-95 | +10.5 | L −7.5 | 158.5 | O 172 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 66-71 | -2.5 | L −7.5 | 147.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 81-78 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 155.5 | O 159 |
| Feb 8 | @ | W 67-64 | +10.5 | W +13.5 | 149.5 | U 131 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 92-71 | -8.5 | W +12.5 | 150.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 99-89 | +2.5 | W +12.5 | 154.5 | O 188 |
| Feb 18 | @ | L 77-91 | +5.5 | L −8.5 | 155.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 75-87 | +6.5 | L −5.5 | 148.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 26 | @ | W 85-80 | +4.5 | W +9.5 | 157.5 | O 165 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 78-87 | +8.5 | L −0.5 | 156.5 | O 165 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 84-70 | -7.5 | W +6.5 | 154.5 | U 154 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 75-72 | +4.5 | W +7.5 | 155.5 | U 147 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 75-81 | +5.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | O 156 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
@
KSU
L 64-93
−10.5
8
vs
ELON
L 90-92
−6.5
12
@
NCSU
L 64-110
−15.5
15
vs
APSU
L 63-69
−7.5
20
@
QUC
L 94-101
+0.5
23
vs
YSU
W 68-62
+11.5
25
vs
DEL
L 60-73
−14.5
26
vs
M-OH
L 71-82
−0.5
2
vs
UNCA
L 77-82
−0.5
6
@
ECU
W 82-78
+11.5
16
vs
NCAT
L 65-71
−12.5
1
vs
UTC
W 77-72
+7.5
3
vs
SAM
W 89-82
+9.5
7
@
WOF
L 85-97
−4.5
10
@
ETSU
L 60-86
−14.5
15
vs
CIT
W 69-66
−6.5
17
vs
MER
L 92-102
−4.5
21
@
VMI
W 85-78
+4.5
23
vs
FUR
L 66-89
−18.5
29
@
MER
L 77-95
−7.5
31
@
CIT
L 66-71
−7.5
4
vs
WCU
W 81-78
+4.5
8
@
FUR
W 67-64
+13.5
11
vs
VMI
W 92-71
+12.5
14
vs
WOF
W 99-89
+12.5
18
@
WCU
L 77-91
−8.5
21
vs
ETSU
L 75-87
−5.5
26
@
UTC
W 85-80
+9.5
28
@
SAM
L 78-87
−0.5
6
vs
VMI
W 84-70
+6.5
7
vs
WOF
W 75-72
+7.5
8
vs
FUR
L 75-81
−0.5
covered 13didn’t cover 19avg −1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
@
KSU
L 64-93
+8.5
8
vs
ELON
L 90-92
+39.5
12
@
NCSU
L 64-110
+20.5
15
vs
APSU
L 63-69
−13.5
20
@
QUC
L 94-101
+44.5
23
vs
YSU
W 68-62
−22.5
25
vs
DEL
L 60-73
−9.5
26
vs
M-OH
L 71-82
+2.5
2
vs
UNCA
L 77-82
+15.5
6
@
ECU
W 82-78
+20.5
16
vs
NCAT
L 65-71
−11.5
1
vs
UTC
W 77-72
+1.5
3
vs
SAM
W 89-82
+19.5
7
@
WOF
L 85-97
+28.5
10
@
ETSU
L 60-86
−2.5
15
vs
CIT
W 69-66
−13.5
17
vs
MER
L 92-102
+38.5
21
@
VMI
W 85-78
+11.5
23
vs
FUR
L 66-89
+4.5
29
@
MER
L 77-95
+13.5
31
@
CIT
L 66-71
−10.5
4
vs
WCU
W 81-78
+3.5
8
@
FUR
W 67-64
−18.5
11
vs
VMI
W 92-71
+12.5
14
vs
WOF
W 99-89
+33.5
18
@
WCU
L 77-91
+12.5
21
vs
ETSU
L 75-87
+13.5
26
@
UTC
W 85-80
+7.5
28
@
SAM
L 78-87
+8.5
6
vs
VMI
W 84-70
−0.5
7
vs
WOF
W 75-72
−8.5
8
vs
FUR
L 75-81
+8.5
over 22under 10avg +8.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Seton Hall
33 games played
Straight up
21-12
64% wins
Against the spread
19-14
58% covers · avg +1.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
13-20
39% overs · avg −3.5 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 | vs | W 77-50 | -13.5 | W +13.5 | 129.5 | U 127 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 68-61 | -21.5 | L −14.5 | 134.5 | U 129 |
| Nov 10 | vs | W 82-59 | -14.5 | W +8.5 | 137.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 13 | vs | W 70-58 | -15.5 | L −3.5 | 135.5 | U 128 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 68-45 | -25.5 | L −2.5 | 129.5 | U 113 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 85-74 | +7.5 | W +18.5 | 143.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 81-83 | +6.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 75-61 | -8.5 | W +5.5 | 147.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 77-61 | -18.5 | L −2.5 | 128.5 | O 138 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 78-67 | +2.5 | W +13.5 | 148.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 81-59 | -13.5 | W +8.5 | 136.5 | O 140 |
| Dec 19 | @ | W 72-67 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 152.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 23 | vs | L 56-64 | -1.5 | L −9.5 | 135.5 | U 120 |
| Dec 30 | @ | W 79-73 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 145.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 56-54 | -3.5 | L −1.5 | 143.5 | U 110 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 76-67 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 137.5 | O 143 |
| Jan 13 | vs | L 64-69 | +6.5 | W +1.5 | 132.5 | O 133 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 66-77 | -6.5 | L −17.5 | 144.5 | U 143 |
| Jan 20 | @ | L 60-65 | +11.5 | W +6.5 | 145.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 60-67 | -2.5 | L −9.5 | 135.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 86-68 | -5.5 | W +12.5 | 145.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 69-64 | -6.5 | L −1.5 | 143.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 60-72 | +5.5 | L −6.5 | 134.5 | U 132 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 68-69 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 140.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 87-80 | -4.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 15 | @ | W 63-56 | -5.5 | W +1.5 | 138.5 | U 119 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 57-69 | -7.5 | L −19.5 | 129.5 | U 126 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 51-47 | -6.5 | L −2.5 | 136.5 | U 98 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 67-71 | +12.5 | W +8.5 | 130.5 | O 138 |
| Mar 3 | @ | W 77-68 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | O 145 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 65-72 | +5.5 | L −1.5 | 138.5 | U 137 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 72-61 | -2.5 | W +8.5 | 136.5 | U 133 |
| Mar 13 | @ | L 68-78 | +8.5 | L −1.5 | 135.5 | O 146 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
SPU
W 77-50
+13.5
7
vs
WAG
W 68-61
−14.5
10
vs
FAIR
W 82-59
+8.5
13
vs
MONM
W 70-58
−3.5
18
vs
NHVN
W 68-45
−2.5
24
vs
NCSU
W 85-74
+18.5
25
vs
USC
L 81-83
+4.5
26
vs
WSU
W 75-61
+5.5
3
vs
CCSU
W 77-61
−2.5
6
@
KSU
W 78-67
+13.5
13
vs
RUTG
W 81-59
+8.5
19
@
PROV
W 72-67
+6.5
23
vs
VILL
L 56-64
−9.5
30
@
MARQ
W 79-73
+7.5
4
vs
CREI
W 56-54
−1.5
10
@
GTWN
W 76-67
+7.5
13
vs
CONN
L 64-69
+1.5
17
vs
BTLR
L 66-77
−17.5
20
@
SJU
L 60-65
+6.5
24
@
DEP
L 60-67
−9.5
28
vs
XAV
W 86-68
+12.5
31
vs
MARQ
W 69-64
−1.5
4
@
VILL
L 60-72
−6.5
7
@
CREI
L 68-69
+0.5
11
vs
PROV
W 87-80
+2.5
15
@
BTLR
W 63-56
+1.5
18
vs
DEP
L 57-69
−19.5
21
vs
GTWN
W 51-47
−2.5
28
@
CONN
L 67-71
+8.5
3
@
XAV
W 77-68
+7.5
6
vs
SJU
L 65-72
−1.5
12
vs
CREI
W 72-61
+8.5
13
@
SJU
L 68-78
−1.5
covered 19didn’t cover 14avg +1.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
SPU
W 77-50
−2.5
7
vs
WAG
W 68-61
−5.5
10
vs
FAIR
W 82-59
+3.5
13
vs
MONM
W 70-58
−7.5
18
vs
NHVN
W 68-45
−16.5
24
vs
NCSU
W 85-74
+15.5
25
vs
USC
L 81-83
+18.5
26
vs
WSU
W 75-61
−11.5
3
vs
CCSU
W 77-61
+9.5
6
@
KSU
W 78-67
−3.5
13
vs
RUTG
W 81-59
+3.5
19
@
PROV
W 72-67
−13.5
23
vs
VILL
L 56-64
−15.5
30
@
MARQ
W 79-73
+6.5
4
vs
CREI
W 56-54
−33.5
10
@
GTWN
W 76-67
+5.5
13
vs
CONN
L 64-69
+0.5
17
vs
BTLR
L 66-77
−1.5
20
@
SJU
L 60-65
−20.5
24
@
DEP
L 60-67
−8.5
28
vs
XAV
W 86-68
+8.5
31
vs
MARQ
W 69-64
−10.5
4
@
VILL
L 60-72
−2.5
7
@
CREI
L 68-69
−3.5
11
vs
PROV
W 87-80
+16.5
15
@
BTLR
W 63-56
−19.5
18
vs
DEP
L 57-69
−3.5
21
vs
GTWN
W 51-47
−38.5
28
@
CONN
L 67-71
+7.5
3
@
XAV
W 77-68
+0.5
6
vs
SJU
L 65-72
−1.5
12
vs
CREI
W 72-61
−3.5
13
@
SJU
L 68-78
+10.5
over 13under 20avg −3.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Seton Hall has the better starters
Position by position: UNC Greensboro 0, Seton Hall 2, even 3
UNC GreensboroBetterSeton Hall
G B. Stacker TR11.9 pts · 3.5 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 47
=Even
G R. Brown TR13.9 pts · 2.4 reb · 1.7 ast
Score 59
G C. Grant TR2.2 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 9
→HALLBig
G D. Jones TR17.9 pts · 3.7 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 74
F Z. Fitch TR6.1 pts · 5.3 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 31
→HALLBig
G K. Thomas TR15.9 pts · 2.8 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 71
F V. Collins TR1 pts · 3 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G R. Anderson TR10.9 pts · 3.3 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 81
F A. Beljan TR2.2 pts · 0.8 reb · 0.2 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F D. Williams TR7.5 pts · 5.2 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 71
UNC GreensboroBetterSeton Hall
UNCG offense260th of 366 · -8.0
→HALLBig
HALL defense28th of 366 · +3.7
UNCG defense299th of 366 · -7.7
→HALLBig
HALL offense97th of 366 · -0.8
Backcourt-2.1 · 2 players
→HALLBig
Backcourt+2.6 · 4 players
Frontcourt-1.9 · 3 players
→HALLSmall
Frontcourt+0.9 · 1 player
Bench-0.5 · 3 players
=Even
Bench-0.2 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestUNCG betterHALL betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
B. Stacker29 min · TRC. Grant11 min · TRC. Bailey6 minR. Greer6 min · TRB. MishakNewJ. ManiNew
Forwards
Z. Fitch23 min · TRV. Collins7 min · TRA. Beljan7 min · TRC. Bynum4 minC. LaFrentzNew
Guards
R. Brown33 min · TRD. Jones33 min · TRK. Thomas30 min · TRR. Anderson24 min · TRE. Fisher21 minS. Wilcher19 min · TR
Forwards
D. Williams24 min · TRM. Wol20 min · TRT. CopelandNewT. AirhienbuwaNewI. DolinskiNew
Centers
A. Fanta Kabba17 min · TR
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 76.6 #128 | Points per game | 70.3 #278 |
| 1.11 #125 | Points per possession | 1.06 #238 |
| 69.3 #157 | Pace (possessions) | 66.5 #296 |
| Shooting | ||
| 52.0 #146 | Effective FG% | 47.6 #321 |
| 35.6 #80 | 3-point % | 30.5 #334 |
| 40.2 #165 | 3-point attempt rate | 26.8 #362 |
| 42.0 #31 | Free throw rate | 35.3 #168 |
| Possessions | ||
| 15.0 #63 | Turnover rate | 16.6 #173 |
| 28.1 #259 | Offensive rebound rate | 35.6 #33 |
| 12.1 #283 | Assists per game | 13.1 #206 |
| Defense | ||
| 81.9 #341 | Points allowed | 65.3 #8 |
| 1.18 #347 | Points allowed per possession | 0.98 #16 |
| 56.2 #347 | Opponent effective FG% | 47.3 #25 |
| 38.0 #357 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.4 #87 |
| 13.6 #343 | Turnovers forced | 21.5 #5 |
| 71.0 #104 | Defensive rebound rate | 68.1 #251 |
| 5.5 #301 | Steals per game | 9.2 #7 |
| 1.9 #350 | Blocks per game | 5.7 #7 |
UNC Greensboro
13-19 in 2025-26 overall · 11-10 in conference · Southern Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Furman75–81
- Wvs Wofford75–72
- Wvs VMI84–70
- L@ Samford78–87
- W@ Chattanooga85–80
A week or more of rest.
Seton Hall
21-12 in 2025-26 overall · 11-11 in conference · Big East Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ St John's68–78
- Wvs Creighton72–61
- Lvs St John's65–72
- W@ Xavier77–68
- L@ UConn67–71
A week or more of rest.