Banterra Center · at S Illinois
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SIU | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SIU 74–74 · win probability SIU 50%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 148.1
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
WSU 2, SIU 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Turnovers
Turnover rate: WSU 18.5%, SIU 17.1%. Forced: WSU 14.5%, SIU 18.5%
SIU offense vs WSU defense
Offense 227th of 366 against a defense 166th, on the model’s ratings
Home court
SIU at home. This season: SIU 0-0 at home, WSU 0-0 away
WSU offense vs SIU defense
Offense 130th of 366 against a defense 181st, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: WSU plays 68.9 a game (183rd fastest), SIU 70.6 (91st). Faster games mean more points
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: WSU 29.5%, SIU 30.9%. Defensive: WSU 71.8%, SIU 72.7%
Context
Schedule so far
WSU has played the 100th-hardest schedule, SIU the 139th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: WSU 1%, SIU 22%. Transfers in: WSU 8, SIU 0. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: WSU 30.2, SIU 31.3. Allowed: WSU 33.0, SIU 31.4
Even
Three-pointers
WSU hits 36.5% and allows 35.4%; SIU hits 27.8% and allows 30.4%. Threes are 44.8% and 29.2% of their shots
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: WSU 54.7 and allows 52.6; SIU 49.1 and allows 49.0
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 | — | PK | — |
| Total | — | 148.1 | — |
| Projected score | — | WSU 74 · SIU 74 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | WSU -0.1 | — |
| 1H total | 69.3 | — |
| 1H projected score | WSU 34.7 · SIU 34.6 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3-7 30% | 5-5 50% | 5-5 50% | |
| 7-3 70% | 7-3 70% | 3-7 30% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Washington St
31 games played
Straight up
11-20
35% wins
Against the spread
15-16
48% covers · avg −0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-15
52% 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 3 | vs | L 81-83 | -7.5 | L −9.5 | 154.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 7 | @ | L 69-85 | +4.5 | L −11.5 | 153.5 | O 154 |
| Nov 10 | vs | W 81-71 | -2.5 | W +7.5 | 157.5 | U 152 |
| Nov 14 | vs | L 69-81 | +8.5 | L −3.5 | 158.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 19 | vs | W 98-74 | -12.5 | W +11.5 | 157.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 94-100 | +4.5 | L −1.5 | 157.5 | O 194 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 61-75 | +8.5 | L −5.5 | 147.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 2 | @ | L 60-64 | +5.5 | W +1.5 | 148.5 | U 124 |
| Dec 7 | vs | L 64-78 | -2.5 | L −16.5 | 145.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 14 | @ | L 61-68 | +12.5 | W +5.5 | 156.5 | U 129 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 78-63 | -6.5 | W +8.5 | 153.5 | U 141 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 84-78 | -7.5 | L −1.5 | 151.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 28 | @ | W 67-62 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 152.5 | U 129 |
| Dec 30 | @ | L 55-69 | +6.5 | L −7.5 | 144.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 78-76 | -3.5 | L −1.5 | 142.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 81-67 | -6.5 | W +7.5 | 140.5 | O 148 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 82-88 | +15.5 | W +9.5 | 143.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 15 | vs | L 65-86 | +16.5 | L −4.5 | 155.5 | U 151 |
| Jan 18 | @ | L 80-85 | +5.5 | W +0.5 | 146.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 92-96 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 152.5 | O 188 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 95-79 | -11.5 | W +4.5 | 146.5 | O 174 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 70-58 | -1.5 | W +10.5 | 142.5 | U 128 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 104-74 | -8.5 | W +21.5 | 152.5 | O 178 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 64-74 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 147.5 | U 138 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 92-96 | +8.5 | W +4.5 | 160.5 | O 188 |
| Feb 10 | @ | L 53-83 | +21.5 | L −8.5 | 156.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 87-70 | -2.5 | W +14.5 | 144.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 67-83 | +8.5 | L −7.5 | 149.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 66-67 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 149.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 79-88 | -7.5 | L −16.5 | 158.5 | O 167 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 68-74 | -5.5 | L −11.5 | 149.5 | U 142 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
IDHO
L 81-83
−9.5
7
@
DAV
L 69-85
−11.5
10
vs
STMN
W 81-71
+7.5
14
vs
WASH
L 69-81
−3.5
19
vs
SUU
W 98-74
+11.5
25
vs
ASU
L 94-100
−1.5
26
vs
HALL
L 61-75
−5.5
2
@
BRAD
L 60-64
+1.5
7
vs
NEV
L 64-78
−16.5
14
@
USC
L 61-68
+5.5
17
vs
EWU
W 78-63
+8.5
20
vs
MER
W 84-78
−1.5
28
@
PORT
W 67-62
+1.5
30
@
SEA
L 55-69
−7.5
2
vs
LMU
W 78-76
−1.5
4
vs
ORST
W 81-67
+7.5
10
@
SMC
L 82-88
+9.5
15
vs
GONZ
L 65-86
−4.5
18
@
SF
L 80-85
+0.5
21
@
USD
L 92-96
−5.5
24
vs
PEPP
W 95-79
+4.5
28
vs
SEA
W 70-58
+10.5
31
vs
PORT
W 104-74
+21.5
4
@
ORST
L 64-74
−11.5
7
vs
SCU
L 92-96
+4.5
10
@
GONZ
L 53-83
−8.5
18
vs
PAC
W 87-70
+14.5
21
vs
SMC
L 67-83
−7.5
25
@
LMU
L 66-67
+0.5
28
@
PEPP
L 79-88
−16.5
6
vs
PORT
L 68-74
−11.5
covered 15didn’t cover 16avg −0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
IDHO
L 81-83
+9.5
7
@
DAV
L 69-85
+0.5
10
vs
STMN
W 81-71
−5.5
14
vs
WASH
L 69-81
−8.5
19
vs
SUU
W 98-74
+14.5
25
vs
ASU
L 94-100
+36.5
26
vs
HALL
L 61-75
−11.5
2
@
BRAD
L 60-64
−24.5
7
vs
NEV
L 64-78
−3.5
14
@
USC
L 61-68
−27.5
17
vs
EWU
W 78-63
−12.5
20
vs
MER
W 84-78
+10.5
28
@
PORT
W 67-62
−23.5
30
@
SEA
L 55-69
−20.5
2
vs
LMU
W 78-76
+11.5
4
vs
ORST
W 81-67
+7.5
10
@
SMC
L 82-88
+26.5
15
vs
GONZ
L 65-86
−4.5
18
@
SF
L 80-85
+18.5
21
@
USD
L 92-96
+35.5
24
vs
PEPP
W 95-79
+27.5
28
vs
SEA
W 70-58
−14.5
31
vs
PORT
W 104-74
+25.5
4
@
ORST
L 64-74
−9.5
7
vs
SCU
L 92-96
+27.5
10
@
GONZ
L 53-83
−20.5
18
vs
PAC
W 87-70
+12.5
21
vs
SMC
L 67-83
+0.5
25
@
LMU
L 66-67
−16.5
28
@
PEPP
L 79-88
+8.5
6
vs
PORT
L 68-74
−7.5
over 16under 15avg +2 ptslonger = bigger margin
S Illinois
31 games played
Straight up
15-16
48% wins
Against the spread
16-15
52% covers · avg +1.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
9-22
29% overs · avg −5.3 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 7 | vs | W 101-78 | -12.5 | W +10.5 | 141.5 | O 179 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 81-86 | +11.5 | W +6.5 | 152.5 | O 167 |
| Nov 17 | @ | L 85-92 | +1.5 | L −5.5 | 153.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 79-59 | -8.5 | W +11.5 | 153.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 73-81 | +2.5 | L −5.5 | 161.5 | U 154 |
| Nov 26 | @ | L 58-74 | +10.5 | L −5.5 | 156.5 | U 132 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 74-65 | -13.5 | L −4.5 | 141.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 3 | @ | W 86-84 | +9.5 | W +11.5 | 162.5 | O 170 |
| Dec 10 | vs | W 83-54 | -8.5 | W +20.5 | 146.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 84-93 | +3.5 | L −5.5 | 153.5 | O 177 |
| Dec 18 | vs | L 68-75 | -1.5 | L −8.5 | 153.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 69-73 | +6.5 | W +2.5 | 152.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 81-84 | +6.5 | W +3.5 | 165.5 | U 165 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 75-70 | -7.5 | L −2.5 | 145.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 4 | @ | W 68-67 | +6.5 | W +7.5 | 158.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 57-70 | -1.5 | L −14.5 | 146.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 14 | vs | L 73-76 | -5.5 | L −8.5 | 144.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 68-73 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 151.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 63-69 | +1.5 | L −4.5 | 142.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 65-50 | +1.5 | W +16.5 | 130.5 | U 115 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 66-68 | -3.5 | L −5.5 | 142.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 3 | @ | W 54-50 | +8.5 | W +12.5 | 140.5 | U 104 |
| Feb 6 | vs | L 81-91 | +1.5 | L −8.5 | 157.5 | O 172 |
| Feb 9 | @ | W 80-65 | -1.5 | W +13.5 | 146.5 | U 145 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 86-60 | -12.5 | W +13.5 | 142.5 | O 146 |
| Feb 15 | vs | L 60-70 | -2.5 | L −12.5 | 146.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 18 | @ | W 66-61 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 149.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 59-57 | +6.5 | W +8.5 | 134.5 | U 116 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 66-55 | -8.5 | W +2.5 | 147.5 | U 121 |
| Mar 1 | @ | W 81-67 | -9.5 | W +4.5 | 139.5 | O 148 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 63-67 | -5.5 | L −9.5 | 140.5 | U 130 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
vs
KC
W 101-78
+10.5
12
@
NEV
L 81-86
+6.5
17
@
NDSU
L 85-92
−5.5
23
vs
DEL
W 79-59
+11.5
24
vs
UAB
L 73-81
−5.5
26
@
MEM
L 58-74
−5.5
29
vs
LR
W 74-65
−4.5
3
@
HPU
W 86-84
+11.5
10
vs
UTM
W 83-54
+20.5
13
@
RICH
L 84-93
−5.5
18
vs
ILST
L 68-75
−8.5
21
@
BRAD
L 69-73
+2.5
29
@
MUR
L 81-84
+3.5
1
vs
VAL
W 75-70
−2.5
4
@
BEL
W 68-67
+7.5
7
@
UIC
L 57-70
−14.5
14
vs
DRKE
L 73-76
−8.5
17
vs
BEL
L 68-73
−1.5
21
@
VAL
L 63-69
−4.5
28
vs
UNI
W 65-50
+16.5
31
vs
UIC
L 66-68
−5.5
3
@
ILST
W 54-50
+12.5
6
vs
MUR
L 81-91
−8.5
9
@
INST
W 80-65
+13.5
12
vs
EVAN
W 86-60
+13.5
15
vs
BRAD
L 60-70
−12.5
18
@
DRKE
W 66-61
+3.5
21
@
UNI
W 59-57
+8.5
25
vs
INST
W 66-55
+2.5
1
@
EVAN
W 81-67
+4.5
5
vs
DRKE
L 63-67
−9.5
covered 16didn’t cover 15avg +1.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
vs
KC
W 101-78
+37.5
12
@
NEV
L 81-86
+14.5
17
@
NDSU
L 85-92
+23.5
23
vs
DEL
W 79-59
−15.5
24
vs
UAB
L 73-81
−7.5
26
@
MEM
L 58-74
−24.5
29
vs
LR
W 74-65
−2.5
3
@
HPU
W 86-84
+7.5
10
vs
UTM
W 83-54
−9.5
13
@
RICH
L 84-93
+23.5
18
vs
ILST
L 68-75
−10.5
21
@
BRAD
L 69-73
−10.5
29
@
MUR
L 81-84
−0.5
1
vs
VAL
W 75-70
−0.5
4
@
BEL
W 68-67
−23.5
7
@
UIC
L 57-70
−19.5
14
vs
DRKE
L 73-76
+4.5
17
vs
BEL
L 68-73
−10.5
21
@
VAL
L 63-69
−10.5
28
vs
UNI
W 65-50
−15.5
31
vs
UIC
L 66-68
−8.5
3
@
ILST
W 54-50
−36.5
6
vs
MUR
L 81-91
+14.5
9
@
INST
W 80-65
−1.5
12
vs
EVAN
W 86-60
+3.5
15
vs
BRAD
L 60-70
−16.5
18
@
DRKE
W 66-61
−22.5
21
@
UNI
W 59-57
−18.5
25
vs
INST
W 66-55
−26.5
1
@
EVAN
W 81-67
+8.5
5
vs
DRKE
L 63-67
−10.5
over 9under 22avg −5.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Washington St has the better starters
Position by position: Washington St 1, S Illinois 0, even 4
Washington StBetterS Illinois
G S. Akins TR5.3 pts · 1.5 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 57
=Even
G J. Haynes7.9 pts · 2.4 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 71
F F. Roxburgh TR10.9 pts · 5.7 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 21
=No call
G C. Hawkins1.1 pts · 0.3 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
F R. Harrison TR14.2 pts · 6.2 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 67
←WSUBig
F M. Pikaar1.7 pts · 1.8 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 19
F L. Dembele TR5.2 pts · 4.2 reb · 1.4 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F D. Hill NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
F T. Kropp TR3.1 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 48
=No call
C J. Webber1.2 pts · 1.6 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
Washington StBetterS Illinois
WSU offense130th of 366 · -3.5
=Even
SIU defense181st of 366 · -4.1
WSU defense166th of 366 · -3.7
←WSUSmall
SIU offense227th of 366 · -7.0
Backcourt-0.2 · 1 player
=Even
Backcourt+0.1 · 2 players
Frontcourt-2.6 · 4 players
→SIUSmall
Frontcourt-1.0 · 3 players
Bench-0.5 · 4 players
=No call
BenchNo numbers yet
Score, worst to bestWSU betterSIU betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
S. Akins15 min · TRJ. Phillips11 min · TRJ. Harrell9 min · TRR. Jones7 min · TRD. Blakely1 minC. JonesNew
Forwards
F. Roxburgh31 min · TRR. Harrison31 min · TRL. Dembele20 min · TRT. Kropp12 min · TRM. SankheNewB. KymanNew
Guards
J. Haynes21 minC. Hawkins5 minB. McClureNewJ. FugateNewL. WalshNewJ. JacksonNew
Forwards
M. Pikaar11 minD. HillNewD. PauliukonisNewP. RanieriNewT. LaurNew
Centers
J. Webber7 min
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 75.7 #152 | Points per game | 72.7 #229 |
| 1.10 #136 | Points per possession | 1.03 #285 |
| 68.9 #183 | Pace (possessions) | 70.6 #91 |
| Shooting | ||
| 54.7 #48 | Effective FG% | 49.1 #286 |
| 36.5 #40 | 3-point % | 27.8 #363 |
| 44.8 #73 | 3-point attempt rate | 29.2 #355 |
| 30.2 #305 | Free throw rate | 31.3 #275 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.5 #295 | Turnover rate | 17.1 #207 |
| 29.5 #221 | Offensive rebound rate | 30.9 #167 |
| 13.8 #163 | Assists per game | 13.3 #188 |
| Defense | ||
| 77.3 #245 | Points allowed | 70.5 #62 |
| 1.12 #266 | Points allowed per possession | 1.00 #25 |
| 52.6 #248 | Opponent effective FG% | 49.0 #70 |
| 35.4 #273 | Opponent 3-point % | 30.4 #17 |
| 14.5 #322 | Turnovers forced | 18.5 #74 |
| 71.8 #71 | Defensive rebound rate | 72.7 #44 |
| 5.5 #299 | Steals per game | 8.0 #38 |
| 2.9 #242 | Blocks per game | 3.4 #157 |
Washington St
11-20 in 2025-26 overall · 7-12 in conference · Pac-12 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Portland68–74
- L@ Pepperdine79–88
- L@ LMU66–67
- Lvs Saint Mary's67–83
- Wvs Pacific87–70
A week or more of rest.
S Illinois
15-16 in 2025-26 overall · 10-11 in conference · Missouri Valley Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Drake63–67
- W@ Evansville81–67
- Wvs Indiana St66–55
- W@ Northern Iowa59–57
- W@ Drake66–61
A week or more of rest.