Ellis T. Johnson Arena · at Morehead St
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | MORE | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 PRES 75–68 · win probability PRES 73%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 142.1
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: PRES has more of the edges
PRES 4, MORE 1 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
MORE offense vs PRES defense
Offense 349th of 366 against a defense 160th, on the model’s ratings
PRES offense vs MORE defense
Offense 222nd of 366 against a defense 333rd, on the model’s ratings
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: PRES 86%, MORE 29%. Transfers in: PRES 0, MORE 0. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Context
Schedule so far
PRES has played the 272nd-hardest schedule, MORE the 346th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: PRES 33.1%, MORE 35.8%. Defensive: PRES 69.3%, MORE 64.2%
Home court
MORE at home. This season: MORE 0-0 at home, PRES 0-0 away
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: PRES 19.4%, MORE 18.1%. Forced: PRES 15.7%, MORE 15.4%
Even
Three-pointers
PRES hits 31.6% and allows 34.7%; MORE hits 32.0% and allows 34.5%. Threes are 28.0% and 30.5% of their shots
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: PRES 51.0 and allows 51.2; MORE 49.1 and allows 50.2
Context
Tempo
About 67 possessions: PRES plays 66.9 a game (283rd fastest), MORE 67.4 (262nd). Faster games mean more points
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: PRES 39.4, MORE 37.7. Allowed: PRES 37.1, MORE 35.6
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 | — | PRES -7.0 | — |
| Total | — | 142.1 | — |
| Projected score | — | PRES 74.5 · MORE 67.5 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | PRES -4.3 | — |
| 1H total | 66.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | PRES 35.4 · MORE 31.1 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% | |
| 8-2 80% | 7-3 70% | 5-5 50% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
PRES 1–1 MORESeries tied · 2 games since 2021-22 · PRES 2-0 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 6, 2025-26 | MORE 72 @ PRES 80 | PRES -7.5 | PRES W |
| Dec 6, 2021-22 | PRES 66 @ MORE 71 | MORE -11 | PRES W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Presbyterian
30 games played
Straight up
12-18
40% wins
Against the spread
17-13
57% covers · avg +0.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-14
53% overs · avg +1.3 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 | vs | L 55-76 | +3.5 | L −17.5 | 141.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 68-64 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 141.5 | U 132 |
| Nov 10 | @ | W 63-61 | +3.5 | W +5.5 | 141.5 | U 124 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 61-81 | +16.5 | L −3.5 | 137.5 | O 142 |
| Nov 16 | @ | L 62-64 | +6.5 | W +4.5 | 150.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 57-67 | +10.5 | W +0.5 | 124.5 | U 124 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 46-86 | +25.5 | L −14.5 | 131.5 | O 132 |
| Nov 30 | vs | W 69-41 | -8.5 | W +19.5 | 133.5 | U 110 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 56-63 | +4.5 | L −2.5 | 138.5 | U 119 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 80-72 | -7.5 | W +0.5 | 134.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 17 | @ | L 53-74 | +4.5 | L −16.5 | 131.5 | U 127 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 81-87 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 138.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 86-77 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 137.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 61-80 | +6.5 | L −12.5 | 147.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 70-77 | +3.5 | L −3.5 | 139.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 71-70 | +2.5 | W +3.5 | 138.5 | O 141 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 92-55 | -8.5 | W +28.5 | 145.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 87-83 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 147.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 72-82 | +5.5 | L −4.5 | 146.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 81-84 | +14.5 | W +11.5 | 149.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 84-93 | -1.5 | L −10.5 | 151.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 68-62 | -17.5 | L −11.5 | 145.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 12 | @ | L 67-84 | +1.5 | L −15.5 | 146.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 58-57 | +5.5 | W +6.5 | 137.5 | U 115 |
| Feb 19 | vs | W 72-65 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 139.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 74-76 | -1.5 | L −3.5 | 141.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 26 | vs | L 73-79 | +12.5 | W +6.5 | 151.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 70-74 | +7.5 | W +3.5 | 150.5 | U 144 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 91-85 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 146.5 | O 176 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 71-73 | +7.5 | W +5.5 | 145.5 | U 144 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
NAVY
L 55-76
−17.5
8
vs
ETSU
W 68-64
+10.5
10
@
GAST
W 63-61
+5.5
12
@
SC
L 61-81
−3.5
16
@
SAC
L 62-64
+4.5
18
@
CAL
L 57-67
+0.5
21
@
UCLA
L 46-86
−14.5
30
vs
CIT
W 69-41
+19.5
3
@
WOF
L 56-63
−2.5
6
vs
MORE
W 80-72
+0.5
17
@
ECU
L 53-74
−16.5
21
@
MAN
L 81-87
−8.5
3
vs
UPST
W 86-77
+7.5
7
@
RAD
L 61-80
−12.5
10
@
LONG
L 70-77
−3.5
14
vs
UNCA
W 71-70
+3.5
17
@
GWEB
W 92-55
+28.5
21
vs
CHSO
W 87-83
+5.5
24
vs
WIN
L 72-82
−4.5
29
@
HPU
L 81-84
+11.5
31
vs
RAD
L 84-93
−10.5
7
vs
GWEB
W 68-62
−11.5
12
@
CHSO
L 67-84
−15.5
14
@
UNCA
W 58-57
+6.5
19
vs
LONG
W 72-65
+4.5
21
@
UPST
L 74-76
−3.5
26
vs
HPU
L 73-79
+6.5
28
@
WIN
L 70-74
+3.5
6
vs
RAD
W 91-85
+8.5
7
vs
WIN
L 71-73
+5.5
covered 17didn’t cover 13avg +0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
NAVY
L 55-76
−10.5
8
vs
ETSU
W 68-64
−9.5
10
@
GAST
W 63-61
−17.5
12
@
SC
L 61-81
+4.5
16
@
SAC
L 62-64
−24.5
18
@
CAL
L 57-67
−0.5
21
@
UCLA
L 46-86
+0.5
30
vs
CIT
W 69-41
−23.5
3
@
WOF
L 56-63
−19.5
6
vs
MORE
W 80-72
+17.5
17
@
ECU
L 53-74
−4.5
21
@
MAN
L 81-87
+29.5
3
vs
UPST
W 86-77
+25.5
7
@
RAD
L 61-80
−6.5
10
@
LONG
L 70-77
+7.5
14
vs
UNCA
W 71-70
+2.5
17
@
GWEB
W 92-55
+1.5
21
vs
CHSO
W 87-83
+22.5
24
vs
WIN
L 72-82
+7.5
29
@
HPU
L 81-84
+15.5
31
vs
RAD
L 84-93
+25.5
7
vs
GWEB
W 68-62
−15.5
12
@
CHSO
L 67-84
+4.5
14
@
UNCA
W 58-57
−22.5
19
vs
LONG
W 72-65
−2.5
21
@
UPST
L 74-76
+8.5
26
vs
HPU
L 73-79
+0.5
28
@
WIN
L 70-74
−6.5
6
vs
RAD
W 91-85
+29.5
7
vs
WIN
L 71-73
−1.5
over 16under 14avg +1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Morehead St
30 games played
Straight up
17-13
57% wins
Against the spread
18-12
60% covers · avg +0.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-14
53% 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 7 | @ | L 65-81 | +22.5 | W +6.5 | 152.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 9 | @ | L 81-120 | +28.5 | L −10.5 | 150.5 | O 201 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 56-83 | +29.5 | W +2.5 | 151.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 62-77 | +10.5 | L −4.5 | 144.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 83-80 | -6.5 | L −3.5 | 145.5 | O 163 |
| Nov 29 | @ | L 80-85 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 181.5 | U 165 |
| Dec 2 | @ | L 52-84 | +16.5 | L −15.5 | 158.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 72-80 | +7.5 | L −0.5 | 134.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 16 | vs | W 78-64 | -2.5 | W +11.5 | 136.5 | O 142 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 64-60 | -1.5 | W +2.5 | 145.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 64-77 | +6.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 73-72 | +4.5 | W +5.5 | 131.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 8 | vs | L 68-76 | +2.5 | L −5.5 | 135.5 | O 144 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 71-69 | +5.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 15 | @ | L 100-105 | +7.5 | W +2.5 | 148.5 | O 205 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 76-70 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 141.5 | O 146 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 71-66 | -8.5 | L −3.5 | 138.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 73-68 | -4.5 | W +0.5 | 134.5 | O 141 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 67-65 | -1.5 | W +0.5 | 130.5 | O 132 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 78-79 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 148.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 70-82 | +7.5 | L −4.5 | 144.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 61-55 | +8.5 | W +14.5 | 136.5 | U 116 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 73-66 | -4.5 | W +2.5 | 143.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 94-86 | +1.5 | W +9.5 | 148.5 | O 180 |
| Feb 19 | @ | W 73-70 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 137.5 | O 143 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 81-59 | -8.5 | W +13.5 | 143.5 | U 140 |
| Feb 24 | vs | W 64-63 | -7.5 | L −6.5 | 142.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 26 | @ | W 76-70 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 138.5 | O 146 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 66-61 | +3.5 | W +8.5 | 139.5 | U 127 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 67-93 | +5.5 | L −20.5 | 143.5 | O 160 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
@
WAKE
L 65-81
+6.5
9
@
UGA
L 81-120
−10.5
11
@
CLEM
L 56-83
+2.5
21
@
ETSU
L 62-77
−4.5
22
vs
ULM
W 83-80
−3.5
29
@
IUIN
L 80-85
−1.5
2
@
MUR
L 52-84
−15.5
6
@
PRES
L 72-80
−0.5
16
vs
LR
W 78-64
+11.5
20
@
USI
W 64-60
+2.5
1
@
LIN
L 64-77
−6.5
3
@
SIUE
W 73-72
+5.5
8
vs
UTM
L 68-76
−5.5
10
vs
SEMO
W 71-69
+7.5
15
@
TNST
L 100-105
+2.5
17
@
TNTC
W 76-70
+7.5
22
vs
WIU
W 71-66
−3.5
24
vs
EIU
W 73-68
+0.5
29
vs
SIUE
W 67-65
+0.5
31
vs
LIN
L 78-79
+0.5
5
@
SEMO
L 70-82
−4.5
7
@
UTM
W 61-55
+14.5
12
vs
TNTC
W 73-66
+2.5
14
vs
TNST
W 94-86
+9.5
19
@
EIU
W 73-70
+1.5
21
@
WIU
W 81-59
+13.5
24
vs
USI
W 64-63
−6.5
26
@
LR
W 76-70
+8.5
6
vs
SEMO
W 66-61
+8.5
7
vs
TNST
L 67-93
−20.5
covered 18didn’t cover 12avg +0.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
@
WAKE
L 65-81
−6.5
9
@
UGA
L 81-120
+50.5
11
@
CLEM
L 56-83
−12.5
21
@
ETSU
L 62-77
−5.5
22
vs
ULM
W 83-80
+17.5
29
@
IUIN
L 80-85
−16.5
2
@
MUR
L 52-84
−22.5
6
@
PRES
L 72-80
+17.5
16
vs
LR
W 78-64
+5.5
20
@
USI
W 64-60
−21.5
1
@
LIN
L 64-77
−6.5
3
@
SIUE
W 73-72
+13.5
8
vs
UTM
L 68-76
+8.5
10
vs
SEMO
W 71-69
−4.5
15
@
TNST
L 100-105
+56.5
17
@
TNTC
W 76-70
+4.5
22
vs
WIU
W 71-66
−1.5
24
vs
EIU
W 73-68
+6.5
29
vs
SIUE
W 67-65
+1.5
31
vs
LIN
L 78-79
+8.5
5
@
SEMO
L 70-82
+7.5
7
@
UTM
W 61-55
−20.5
12
vs
TNTC
W 73-66
−4.5
14
vs
TNST
W 94-86
+31.5
19
@
EIU
W 73-70
+5.5
21
@
WIU
W 81-59
−3.5
24
vs
USI
W 64-63
−15.5
26
@
LR
W 76-70
+7.5
6
vs
SEMO
W 66-61
−12.5
7
vs
TNST
L 67-93
+16.5
over 16under 14avg +3.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Presbyterian has the better starters
Position by position: Presbyterian 3, Morehead St 0, even 2
PresbyterianBetterMorehead St
G C. Parrish14.7 pts · 2.9 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 56
←PRESSmall
G C. Dawson8.1 pts · 1.4 reb · 2.7 ast
Score 22
G T. Wilson11.6 pts · 3.3 reb · 3.8 ast
Score 52
←PRESBig
G V. Dawson3.3 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 7
G E. Taylor5.6 pts · 1.8 reb · 3.6 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G J. Winkleman1 pts · 0 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
G I. King3.7 pts · 2.7 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 2
=No call
G I. Day NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
F J. Peterson11 pts · 7.2 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 71
←PRESBig
F C. Parker2.7 pts · 2.3 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 1
PresbyterianBetterMorehead St
PRES offense222nd of 366 · -6.8
←PRESSmall
MORE defense333rd of 366 · -8.7
PRES defense160th of 366 · -3.5
←PRESBig
MORE offense349th of 366 · -12.3
Backcourt-4.4 · 4 players
=Even
Backcourt-4.4 · 4 players
Frontcourt+1.1 · 1 player
←PRESBig
Frontcourt-2.7 · 1 player
Bench-1.6 · 5 players
=No call
BenchNo numbers yet
Score, worst to bestPRES betterMORE betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
C. Parrish35 minT. Wilson32 minE. Taylor21 minI. King19 minK. Hudson11 minJ. Bowden8 min
Forwards
J. Peterson30 minC. Chiakwelu11 minA. AyelyineNewL. HackworthNew
Guards
C. Dawson26 minV. Dawson16 minJ. Winkleman1 minI. DayNewK. CarbonNewK. ShawNew
Forwards
C. Parker16 minD. AlexanderNewL. BassNewT. TangioraNewJ. PriesterNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 70.0 #286 | Points per game | 72.0 #243 |
| 1.05 #249 | Points per possession | 1.07 #202 |
| 66.9 #283 | Pace (possessions) | 67.4 #262 |
| Shooting | ||
| 51.0 #196 | Effective FG% | 49.1 #285 |
| 31.6 #302 | 3-point % | 32.0 #281 |
| 28.0 #360 | 3-point attempt rate | 30.5 #349 |
| 39.4 #71 | Free throw rate | 37.7 #109 |
| Possessions | ||
| 19.4 #335 | Turnover rate | 18.1 #275 |
| 33.1 #86 | Offensive rebound rate | 35.8 #27 |
| 12.4 #260 | Assists per game | 12.0 #285 |
| Defense | ||
| 73.1 #133 | Points allowed | 75.5 #205 |
| 1.09 #192 | Points allowed per possession | 1.12 #264 |
| 51.2 #170 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.2 #109 |
| 34.7 #235 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.5 #221 |
| 15.7 #237 | Turnovers forced | 15.4 #259 |
| 69.3 #188 | Defensive rebound rate | 64.2 #351 |
| 5.5 #303 | Steals per game | 6.0 #234 |
| 4.5 #35 | Blocks per game | 3.0 #213 |
Presbyterian
12-18 in 2025-26 overall · 8-10 in conference · Big South Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Winthrop71–73
- Wvs Radford91–85
- L@ Winthrop70–74
- Lvs High Point73–79
- L@ SC Upstate74–76
A week or more of rest.
Morehead St
17-13 in 2025-26 overall · 16-6 in conference · Ohio Valley Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Tennessee St67–93
- Wvs SE Missouri66–61
- W@ Little Rock76–70
- Wvs Southern Indiana Screaming Eagles64–63
- W@ W Illinois81–59
A week or more of rest.