Gallagher Center · at Niagara · Conference game
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | NIA | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 MSM 69–67 · win probability MSM 56%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 136.5
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: MSM has more of the edges
MSM 5, NIA 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: MSM 32.3%, NIA 24.8%. Defensive: MSM 70.9%, NIA 67.1%
NIA offense vs MSM defense
Offense 355th of 366 against a defense 199th, on the model’s ratings
Shooting
Effective FG%: MSM 50.6 and allows 47.2; NIA 50.5 and allows 52.8
Context
Tempo
About 66 possessions: MSM plays 68.0 a game (231st fastest), NIA 63.4 (364th). Faster games mean more points
Three-pointers
MSM hits 32.7% and allows 32.3%; NIA hits 33.7% and allows 35.3%. Threes are 42.6% and 40.5% of their shots
Turnovers
Turnover rate: MSM 22.4%, NIA 18.9%. Forced: MSM 15.3%, NIA 16.6%
Home court
NIA at home. This season: NIA 0-0 at home, MSM 0-0 away
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: MSM 42%, NIA 15%. Transfers in: MSM 3, NIA 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Context
Schedule so far
MSM has played the 290th-hardest schedule, NIA the 335th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
MSM offense vs NIA defense
Offense 319th of 366 against a defense 278th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: MSM 33.3, NIA 26.6. Allowed: MSM 37.3, NIA 33.8
Market vs model
The model’s numbers beside the market’s
MarketModelModel edge
Spread
Market—
ModelMSM -1.8
Model edge—
Total
Market—
Model136.5
Model edge—
Projected score
MSM 69.2 · NIA 67.3
Win probability
MSM 56%
1st half
Spread
MSM -1.2
Total
63.9
Projected score
MSM 32.6 · NIA 31.4
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.
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% | 3-7 30% | |
| 3-7 30% | 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% |
Recent meetings
Last 5 of 8 since 2021-22
MSM 6–2 NIAMSM leads · 8 games since 2021-22 · MSM has won the last 5 meetings · MSM 6-2 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 20, 2025-26 | NIA 63 @ MSM 76 | MSM -7.5 | MSM W |
| Jan 19, 2025-26 | MSM 68 @ NIA 58 | NIA +3.5 | MSM W |
| Feb 14, 2024-25 | MSM 84 @ NIA 83 | NIA -1.5 | MSM W |
| Jan 5, 2024-25 | NIA 62 @ MSM 68 | MSM -4.5 | MSM W |
| Mar 3, 2023-24 | MSM 91 @ NIA 72 | NIA -4.5 | MSM W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Mount St Marys
31 games played
Straight up
14-17
45% wins
Against the spread
18-13
58% covers · avg −0 pts vs the line
Over / Under
10-21
32% overs · avg −3.9 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 54-70 | +19.5 | W +3.5 | 136.5 | U 124 |
| Nov 7 | vs | L 62-73 | -1.5 | L −12.5 | 143.5 | U 135 |
| Nov 11 | @ | W 74-66 | -6.5 | W +1.5 | 149.5 | U 140 |
| Nov 16 | @ | L 55-72 | +25.5 | W +8.5 | 145.5 | U 127 |
| Nov 19 | @ | L 90-95 | +17.5 | W +12.5 | 145.5 | O 185 |
| Nov 23 | @ | L 60-83 | +1.5 | L −21.5 | 150.5 | U 143 |
| Nov 25 | @ | L 60-113 | +30.5 | L −22.5 | 151.5 | O 173 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 79-75 | -2.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | O 154 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 80-87 | +1.5 | L −5.5 | 152.5 | O 167 |
| Dec 5 | @ | L 56-64 | +8.5 | W +0.5 | 136.5 | U 120 |
| Dec 13 | @ | W 81-73 | -2.5 | W +5.5 | 151.5 | O 154 |
| Dec 19 | @ | L 67-75 | +4.5 | L −3.5 | 137.5 | O 142 |
| Dec 29 | vs | W 66-59 | +2.5 | W +9.5 | 153.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 2 | @ | L 65-75 | +3.5 | L −6.5 | 141.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 69-80 | +7.5 | L −3.5 | 150.5 | U 149 |
| Jan 9 | vs | W 70-65 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 141.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 11 | vs | L 50-67 | +2.5 | L −14.5 | 139.5 | U 117 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 78-68 | -3.5 | W +6.5 | 135.5 | O 146 |
| Jan 19 | @ | W 68-58 | -3.5 | W +6.5 | 131.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 22 | vs | L 62-77 | +4.5 | L −10.5 | 148.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 71-61 | -9.5 | W +0.5 | 139.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 30 | @ | L 58-66 | +5.5 | L −2.5 | 138.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 1 | vs | W 72-65 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 5 | vs | L 70-87 | +2.5 | L −14.5 | 134.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 83-76 | +3.5 | W +10.5 | 141.5 | O 159 |
| Feb 13 | @ | W 65-55 | -5.5 | W +4.5 | 137.5 | U 120 |
| Feb 20 | vs | W 76-63 | -7.5 | W +5.5 | 130.5 | O 139 |
| Feb 22 | vs | W 68-47 | -7.5 | W +13.5 | 137.5 | U 115 |
| Feb 27 | @ | L 69-77 | +2.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 1 | @ | W 69-47 | +4.5 | W +26.5 | 145.5 | U 116 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 58-63 | +2.5 | L −2.5 | 135.5 | U 121 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
@
WVU
L 54-70
+3.5
7
vs
BUCK
L 62-73
−12.5
11
@
SFPA
W 74-66
+1.5
16
@
CIN
L 55-72
+8.5
19
@
MD
L 90-95
+12.5
23
@
WMU
L 60-83
−21.5
25
@
OSU
L 60-113
−22.5
29
vs
HOW
W 79-75
+1.5
3
vs
SHU
L 80-87
−5.5
5
@
MRST
L 56-64
+0.5
13
@
L-MD
W 81-73
+5.5
19
@
DREX
L 67-75
−3.5
29
vs
IONA
W 66-59
+9.5
2
@
MRMK
L 65-75
−6.5
4
@
QUIN
L 69-80
−3.5
9
vs
SPU
W 70-65
+6.5
11
vs
SIE
L 50-67
−14.5
17
@
CAN
W 78-68
+6.5
19
@
NIA
W 68-58
+6.5
22
vs
QUIN
L 62-77
−10.5
24
vs
RID
W 71-61
+0.5
30
@
SPU
L 58-66
−2.5
1
vs
MAN
W 72-65
+0.5
5
vs
MRMK
L 70-87
−14.5
7
@
IONA
W 83-76
+10.5
13
@
RID
W 65-55
+4.5
20
vs
NIA
W 76-63
+5.5
22
vs
CAN
W 68-47
+13.5
27
@
SHU
L 69-77
−5.5
1
@
FAIR
W 69-47
+26.5
7
vs
SIE
L 58-63
−2.5
covered 18didn’t cover 13avg −0 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
@
WVU
L 54-70
−12.5
7
vs
BUCK
L 62-73
−8.5
11
@
SFPA
W 74-66
−9.5
16
@
CIN
L 55-72
−18.5
19
@
MD
L 90-95
+39.5
23
@
WMU
L 60-83
−7.5
25
@
OSU
L 60-113
+21.5
29
vs
HOW
W 79-75
+7.5
3
vs
SHU
L 80-87
+14.5
5
@
MRST
L 56-64
−16.5
13
@
L-MD
W 81-73
+2.5
19
@
DREX
L 67-75
+4.5
29
vs
IONA
W 66-59
−28.5
2
@
MRMK
L 65-75
−1.5
4
@
QUIN
L 69-80
−1.5
9
vs
SPU
W 70-65
−6.5
11
vs
SIE
L 50-67
−22.5
17
@
CAN
W 78-68
+10.5
19
@
NIA
W 68-58
−5.5
22
vs
QUIN
L 62-77
−9.5
24
vs
RID
W 71-61
−7.5
30
@
SPU
L 58-66
−14.5
1
vs
MAN
W 72-65
−10.5
5
vs
MRMK
L 70-87
+22.5
7
@
IONA
W 83-76
+17.5
13
@
RID
W 65-55
−17.5
20
vs
NIA
W 76-63
+8.5
22
vs
CAN
W 68-47
−22.5
27
@
SHU
L 69-77
−4.5
1
@
FAIR
W 69-47
−29.5
7
vs
SIE
L 58-63
−14.5
over 10under 21avg −3.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Niagara
29 games played
Straight up
7-22
24% wins
Against the spread
13-16
45% covers · avg −0.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-15
48% overs · avg −0.9 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 63-83 | +17.5 | L −2.5 | 139.5 | O 146 |
| Nov 8 | @ | W 67-59 | +2.5 | W +10.5 | 138.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 10 | vs | W 68-57 | -5.5 | W +5.5 | 137.5 | U 125 |
| Nov 17 | @ | L 68-74 | +2.5 | L −3.5 | 138.5 | O 142 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 42-100 | +39.5 | L −18.5 | 146.5 | U 142 |
| Nov 22 | vs | L 70-80 | +4.5 | L −5.5 | 138.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 29 | vs | L 66-70 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 142.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 5 | @ | L 54-83 | +12.5 | L −16.5 | 129.5 | O 137 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 43-71 | +5.5 | L −22.5 | 131.5 | U 114 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 73-81 | +1.5 | L −6.5 | 140.5 | O 154 |
| Dec 15 | @ | L 58-84 | +30.5 | W +4.5 | 143.5 | U 142 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 64-61 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 139.5 | U 125 |
| Jan 4 | vs | L 75-83 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 138.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 9 | @ | L 53-71 | +10.5 | L −7.5 | 140.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 11 | @ | L 70-79 | +5.5 | L −3.5 | 140.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 14 | @ | W 59-54 | +2.5 | W +7.5 | 126.5 | U 113 |
| Jan 19 | vs | L 58-68 | +3.5 | L −6.5 | 131.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 61-62 | +10.5 | W +9.5 | 139.5 | U 123 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 70-71 | +9.5 | W +8.5 | 139.5 | O 141 |
| Jan 30 | vs | L 79-82 | +9.5 | W +6.5 | 128.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 1 | vs | L 46-58 | +9.5 | L −2.5 | 128.5 | U 104 |
| Feb 3 | vs | W 65-56 | -2.5 | W +6.5 | 129.5 | U 121 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 55-56 | +12.5 | W +11.5 | 137.5 | U 111 |
| Feb 13 | vs | L 69-76 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 136.5 | O 145 |
| Feb 15 | vs | W 70-68 | +3.5 | W +5.5 | 132.5 | O 138 |
| Feb 20 | @ | L 63-76 | +7.5 | L −5.5 | 130.5 | O 139 |
| Feb 22 | @ | L 62-67 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 131.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 27 | vs | W 78-76 | +8.5 | W +10.5 | 136.5 | O 154 |
| Mar 1 | vs | L 66-73 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 126.5 | O 139 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
DUQ
L 63-83
−2.5
8
@
BING
W 67-59
+10.5
10
vs
DSU
W 68-57
+5.5
17
@
LEM
L 68-74
−3.5
21
@
DUKE
L 42-100
−18.5
22
vs
HOW
L 70-80
−5.5
29
vs
DETM
L 66-70
−2.5
5
@
SIE
L 54-83
−16.5
7
@
SPU
L 43-71
−22.5
13
@
MORG
L 73-81
−6.5
15
@
VCU
L 58-84
+4.5
2
vs
SHU
W 64-61
+4.5
4
vs
FAIR
L 75-83
−4.5
9
@
IONA
L 53-71
−7.5
11
@
MAN
L 70-79
−3.5
14
@
CAN
W 59-54
+7.5
19
vs
MSM
L 58-68
−6.5
22
@
FAIR
L 61-62
+9.5
24
@
SHU
L 70-71
+8.5
30
vs
SIE
L 79-82
+6.5
1
vs
MRST
L 46-58
−2.5
3
vs
CAN
W 65-56
+6.5
7
@
QUIN
L 55-56
+11.5
13
vs
MAN
L 69-76
−4.5
15
vs
IONA
W 70-68
+5.5
20
@
MSM
L 63-76
−5.5
22
@
RID
L 62-67
−6.5
27
vs
QUIN
W 78-76
+10.5
1
vs
MRMK
L 66-73
+0.5
covered 13didn’t cover 16avg −0.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
DUQ
L 63-83
+6.5
8
@
BING
W 67-59
−12.5
10
vs
DSU
W 68-57
−12.5
17
@
LEM
L 68-74
+3.5
21
@
DUKE
L 42-100
−4.5
22
vs
HOW
L 70-80
+11.5
29
vs
DETM
L 66-70
−6.5
5
@
SIE
L 54-83
+7.5
7
@
SPU
L 43-71
−17.5
13
@
MORG
L 73-81
+13.5
15
@
VCU
L 58-84
−1.5
2
vs
SHU
W 64-61
−14.5
4
vs
FAIR
L 75-83
+19.5
9
@
IONA
L 53-71
−16.5
11
@
MAN
L 70-79
+8.5
14
@
CAN
W 59-54
−13.5
19
vs
MSM
L 58-68
−5.5
22
@
FAIR
L 61-62
−16.5
24
@
SHU
L 70-71
+1.5
30
vs
SIE
L 79-82
+32.5
1
vs
MRST
L 46-58
−24.5
3
vs
CAN
W 65-56
−8.5
7
@
QUIN
L 55-56
−26.5
13
vs
MAN
L 69-76
+8.5
15
vs
IONA
W 70-68
+5.5
20
@
MSM
L 63-76
+8.5
22
@
RID
L 62-67
−2.5
27
vs
QUIN
W 78-76
+17.5
1
vs
MRMK
L 66-73
+12.5
over 14under 15avg −0.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Mount St Marys has the better starters
Position by position: Mount St Marys 2, Niagara 0, even 3
Mount St MarysBetterNiagara
G A. Khadre Kebe7.5 pts · 5.8 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 55
←MSMSmall
G T. Walters7.2 pts · 1.6 reb · 2.7 ast
Score 27
G R. Thompson TR10.4 pts · 1.6 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 49
←MSMBig
G C. Farrell TR6 pts · 2.2 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 11
G A. Arrington5.5 pts · 2.1 reb · 1 ast
Score 2
=Even
G L. Woods TR4.9 pts · 1.8 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 15
G M. So3.9 pts · 2.3 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 13
=Even
G B. Rieber TR3.9 pts · 1.2 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 7
F W. Jr. Exacte TR7 pts · 4.1 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 43
=Even
G T. Blackshear TR6.3 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 43
Mount St MarysBetterNiagara
MSM offense319th of 366 · -10.5
=Even
NIA defense278th of 366 · -7.0
MSM defense199th of 366 · -4.8
←MSMBig
NIA offense355th of 366 · -13.3
Backcourt-5.9 · 4 players
←MSMSmall
Backcourt-8.7 · 5 players
Frontcourt-0.5 · 1 player
=No call
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
Bench-2.4 · 4 players
=Even
Bench-1.5 · 2 players
Score, worst to bestMSM betterNIA betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
A. Khadre Kebe22 minR. Thompson22 min · TRA. Arrington19 minM. So18 minA. Rozakeas14 minC. Orness3 min · TR
Forwards
W. Jr. Exacte19 min · TRY. Diop9 minL. JoyceNewR. BrzezanskiNewN. LimolNewC. GardNew
Guards
T. Walters22 minC. Farrell21 min · TRL. Woods18 min · TRB. Rieber16 min · TRT. Blackshear14 min · TRG. Dalmau7 min
Forwards
V. Todorovic10 min · TRN. SlingerlandNewF. RottaNewB. AngelettiNewD. EmokhareNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 67.9 #315 | Points per game | 63.3 #355 |
| 1.00 #327 | Points per possession | 1.00 #330 |
| 68.0 #231 | Pace (possessions) | 63.4 #364 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.6 #208 | Effective FG% | 50.5 #214 |
| 32.7 #244 | 3-point % | 33.7 #188 |
| 42.6 #125 | 3-point attempt rate | 40.5 #159 |
| 33.3 #230 | Free throw rate | 26.6 #353 |
| Possessions | ||
| 22.4 #364 | Turnover rate | 18.9 #318 |
| 32.3 #115 | Offensive rebound rate | 24.8 #344 |
| 13.2 #196 | Assists per game | 13.8 #162 |
| Defense | ||
| 71.0 #74 | Points allowed | 71.7 #98 |
| 1.05 #84 | Points allowed per possession | 1.13 #300 |
| 47.2 #23 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.8 #260 |
| 32.3 #81 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.3 #268 |
| 15.3 #262 | Turnovers forced | 16.6 #177 |
| 70.9 #114 | Defensive rebound rate | 67.1 #297 |
| 5.8 #261 | Steals per game | 5.6 #284 |
| 2.9 #248 | Blocks per game | 2.8 #254 |
Mount St Marys
14-17 in 2025-26 overall · 11-10 in conference · Metro Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Siena58–63
- W@ Fairfield69–47
- L@ Sacred Heart69–77
- Wvs Canisius68–47
- Wvs Niagara76–63
A week or more of rest.
Niagara
7-22 in 2025-26 overall · 5-15 in conference · Metro Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Merrimack66–73
- Wvs Quinnipiac78–76
- L@ Rider62–67
- L@ Mount St Marys63–76
- Wvs Iona70–68
A week or more of rest.