The Sobrato Center · at San Francisco
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SF | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SF 81–72 · win probability SF 81%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 153.0
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: SF has more of the edges
SDAK 0, SF 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
SDAK has played the 305th-hardest schedule, SF the 98th. A record against a soft schedule means less
SF offense vs SDAK defense
Offense 178th of 366 against a defense 355th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: SDAK plays 72.6 a game (23rd fastest), SF 67.3 (271st). Faster games mean more points
Shooting
Effective FG%: SDAK 49.9 and allows 54.5; SF 51.3 and allows 50.8
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: SDAK 28.7%, SF 31.4%. Defensive: SDAK 69.7%, SF 71.0%
Three-pointers
SDAK hits 32.4% and allows 34.5%; SF hits 34.6% and allows 34.1%. Threes are 35.9% and 46.1% of their shots
Home court
SF at home. This season: SF 0-0 at home, SDAK 0-0 away
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: SDAK 26%, SF 3%. Transfers in: SDAK 6, SF 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: SDAK 16.5%, SF 15.9%. Forced: SDAK 15.9%, SF 14.1%
Even
SDAK offense vs SF defense
Offense 197th of 366 against a defense 165th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: SDAK 45.2, SF 40.1. Allowed: SDAK 31.0, SF 29.6
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 | — | SF -9.9 | — |
| Total | — | 153.0 | — |
| Projected score | — | SDAK 71.5 · SF 81.4 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SF -5.8 | — |
| 1H total | 71.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | SDAK 32.9 · SF 38.6 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 3-7 30% | |
| 4-6 40% | 4-6 40% | 7-3 70% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
South Dakota
29 games played
Straight up
13-16
45% wins
Against the spread
16-13
55% covers · avg +0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
12-17
41% overs · avg −1.2 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 79-81 | -1.5 | L −3.5 | 164.5 | U 160 |
| Nov 5 | @ | L 76-92 | +29.5 | W +13.5 | 169.5 | U 168 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 89-74 | -7.5 | W +7.5 | 164.5 | U 163 |
| Nov 16 | vs | W 83-78 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 172.5 | U 161 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 68-102 | +24.5 | L −9.5 | 171.5 | U 170 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 82-81 | -15.5 | L −14.5 | 160.5 | O 163 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 80-63 | -3.5 | W +13.5 | 147.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 71-77 | +2.5 | L −3.5 | 158.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 87-89 | +8.5 | W +6.5 | 162.5 | O 176 |
| Dec 9 | @ | L 79-106 | +14.5 | L −12.5 | 161.5 | O 185 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 97-85 | -6.5 | W +5.5 | 168.5 | O 182 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 76-106 | +21.5 | L −8.5 | 176.5 | O 182 |
| Dec 31 | @ | L 61-84 | +11.5 | L −11.5 | 164.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 86-99 | +14.5 | W +1.5 | 162.5 | O 185 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 82-72 | +1.5 | W +11.5 | 169.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 99-83 | -7.5 | W +8.5 | 156.5 | O 182 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 80-96 | +1.5 | L −14.5 | 160.5 | O 176 |
| Jan 21 | @ | W 68-64 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 160.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 78-90 | +10.5 | L −1.5 | 161.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 77-69 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 154.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 84-89 | +8.5 | W +3.5 | 154.5 | O 173 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 82-75 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 156.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 68-67 | +11.5 | W +12.5 | 159.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 71-72 | -2.5 | L −3.5 | 156.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 70-90 | +5.5 | L −14.5 | 163.5 | U 160 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 62-67 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 151.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 89-72 | -1.5 | W +15.5 | 152.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 75-70 | +3.5 | W +8.5 | 151.5 | U 145 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 62-76 | +1.5 | L −12.5 | 150.5 | U 138 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
UTU
L 79-81
−3.5
5
@
CREI
L 76-92
+13.5
12
vs
USI
W 89-74
+7.5
16
vs
WMU
W 83-78
+1.5
20
@
MIZ
L 68-102
−9.5
23
vs
SCST
W 82-81
−14.5
29
vs
AF
W 80-63
+13.5
3
vs
PRST
L 71-77
−3.5
6
@
UNCO
L 87-89
+6.5
9
@
WYO
L 79-106
−12.5
13
vs
PV
W 97-85
+5.5
20
@
KSU
L 76-106
−8.5
31
@
NDSU
L 61-84
−11.5
7
@
STMN
L 86-99
+1.5
10
vs
DEN
W 82-72
+11.5
15
vs
KC
W 99-83
+8.5
17
@
UND
L 80-96
−14.5
21
@
OMA
W 68-64
+10.5
24
vs
STMN
L 78-90
−1.5
29
vs
ORU
W 77-69
+4.5
31
vs
NDSU
L 84-89
+3.5
4
@
KC
W 82-75
+4.5
7
@
SDST
W 68-67
+12.5
11
vs
UND
L 71-72
−3.5
19
@
DEN
L 70-90
−14.5
21
@
ORU
L 62-67
−3.5
25
vs
OMA
W 89-72
+15.5
28
vs
SDST
W 75-70
+8.5
6
vs
OMA
L 62-76
−12.5
covered 16didn’t cover 13avg +0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
UTU
L 79-81
−4.5
5
@
CREI
L 76-92
−1.5
12
vs
USI
W 89-74
−1.5
16
vs
WMU
W 83-78
−11.5
20
@
MIZ
L 68-102
−1.5
23
vs
SCST
W 82-81
+2.5
29
vs
AF
W 80-63
−4.5
3
vs
PRST
L 71-77
−10.5
6
@
UNCO
L 87-89
+13.5
9
@
WYO
L 79-106
+23.5
13
vs
PV
W 97-85
+13.5
20
@
KSU
L 76-106
+5.5
31
@
NDSU
L 61-84
−19.5
7
@
STMN
L 86-99
+22.5
10
vs
DEN
W 82-72
−15.5
15
vs
KC
W 99-83
+25.5
17
@
UND
L 80-96
+15.5
21
@
OMA
W 68-64
−28.5
24
vs
STMN
L 78-90
+6.5
29
vs
ORU
W 77-69
−8.5
31
vs
NDSU
L 84-89
+18.5
4
@
KC
W 82-75
+0.5
7
@
SDST
W 68-67
−24.5
11
vs
UND
L 71-72
−13.5
19
@
DEN
L 70-90
−3.5
21
@
ORU
L 62-67
−22.5
25
vs
OMA
W 89-72
+8.5
28
vs
SDST
W 75-70
−6.5
6
vs
OMA
L 62-76
−12.5
over 12under 17avg −1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
San Francisco
32 games played
Straight up
16-16
50% wins
Against the spread
14-18
44% covers · avg −2.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-15
53% overs · avg +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 8 | @ | L 70-76 | +2.5 | L −3.5 | 157.5 | U 146 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 80-70 | -13.5 | L −3.5 | 154.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 75-64 | -9.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 84-64 | -16.5 | W +3.5 | 143.5 | O 148 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 77-65 | +1.5 | W +13.5 | 140.5 | O 142 |
| Nov 27 | vs | L 69-79 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 150.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 65-81 | -5.5 | L −21.5 | 142.5 | O 146 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 63-65 | -16.5 | L −18.5 | 145.5 | U 128 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 65-62 | +4.5 | W +7.5 | 150.5 | U 127 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 75-85 | +12.5 | W +2.5 | 155.5 | O 160 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 85-71 | -11.5 | W +2.5 | 143.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 94-64 | -25.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 28 | @ | W 67-59 | +2.5 | W +10.5 | 146.5 | U 126 |
| Dec 30 | @ | L 62-70 | -4.5 | L −12.5 | 144.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 74-64 | -12.5 | L −2.5 | 152.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 73-68 | -11.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 82-84 | +1.5 | L −0.5 | 141.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 80-60 | -7.5 | W +12.5 | 140.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 13 | vs | L 68-82 | +5.5 | L −8.5 | 141.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 18 | vs | W 85-80 | -5.5 | L −0.5 | 146.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 66-68 | +15.5 | W +13.5 | 149.5 | U 134 |
| Jan 28 | @ | L 73-88 | +9.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 87-82 | -4.5 | W +0.5 | 138.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 4 | vs | L 75-84 | -8.5 | L −17.5 | 145.5 | O 159 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 54-79 | +11.5 | L −13.5 | 142.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 63-90 | -8.5 | L −35.5 | 140.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 15 | @ | W 92-79 | -5.5 | W +7.5 | 148.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 59-80 | +15.5 | L −5.5 | 151.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 73-94 | +6.5 | L −14.5 | 158.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 72-61 | +3.5 | W +14.5 | 142.5 | U 133 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 82-65 | -6.5 | W +10.5 | 146.5 | O 147 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 77-78 | -3.5 | L −4.5 | 144.5 | O 155 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
@
MEM
L 70-76
−3.5
12
vs
PRST
W 80-70
−3.5
15
vs
BRAD
W 75-64
+1.5
18
vs
NWST
W 84-64
+3.5
22
vs
MINN
W 77-65
+13.5
27
vs
COLO
L 69-79
−11.5
28
vs
NEV
L 65-81
−21.5
3
vs
UNA
L 63-65
−18.5
7
vs
MSST
W 65-62
+7.5
13
@
SLU
L 75-85
+2.5
17
vs
LUC
W 85-71
+2.5
21
vs
MORG
W 94-64
+4.5
28
@
SEA
W 67-59
+10.5
30
@
ORST
L 62-70
−12.5
2
vs
USD
W 74-64
−2.5
4
vs
PORT
W 73-68
−6.5
8
@
LMU
L 82-84
−0.5
10
@
PEPP
W 80-60
+12.5
13
vs
SMC
L 68-82
−8.5
18
vs
WSU
W 85-80
−0.5
24
@
GONZ
L 66-68
+13.5
28
@
SCU
L 73-88
−5.5
31
vs
PAC
W 87-82
+0.5
4
vs
LMU
L 75-84
−17.5
7
@
SMC
L 54-79
−13.5
12
vs
ORST
L 63-90
−35.5
15
@
USD
W 92-79
+7.5
18
vs
GONZ
L 59-80
−5.5
21
vs
SCU
L 73-94
−14.5
28
@
PAC
W 72-61
+14.5
7
vs
PORT
W 82-65
+10.5
8
vs
ORST
L 77-78
−4.5
covered 14didn’t cover 18avg −2.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
@
MEM
L 70-76
−11.5
12
vs
PRST
W 80-70
−4.5
15
vs
BRAD
W 75-64
−7.5
18
vs
NWST
W 84-64
+4.5
22
vs
MINN
W 77-65
+1.5
27
vs
COLO
L 69-79
−2.5
28
vs
NEV
L 65-81
+3.5
3
vs
UNA
L 63-65
−17.5
7
vs
MSST
W 65-62
−23.5
13
@
SLU
L 75-85
+4.5
17
vs
LUC
W 85-71
+12.5
21
vs
MORG
W 94-64
+12.5
28
@
SEA
W 67-59
−20.5
30
@
ORST
L 62-70
−12.5
2
vs
USD
W 74-64
−14.5
4
vs
PORT
W 73-68
−6.5
8
@
LMU
L 82-84
+24.5
10
@
PEPP
W 80-60
−0.5
13
vs
SMC
L 68-82
+8.5
18
vs
WSU
W 85-80
+18.5
24
@
GONZ
L 66-68
−15.5
28
@
SCU
L 73-88
+10.5
31
vs
PAC
W 87-82
+30.5
4
vs
LMU
L 75-84
+13.5
7
@
SMC
L 54-79
−9.5
12
vs
ORST
L 63-90
+12.5
15
@
USD
W 92-79
+22.5
18
vs
GONZ
L 59-80
−12.5
21
vs
SCU
L 73-94
+8.5
28
@
PAC
W 72-61
−9.5
7
vs
PORT
W 82-65
+0.5
8
vs
ORST
L 77-78
+10.5
over 17under 15avg +1 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: South Dakota 0, San Francisco 0, even 5
South DakotaBetterSan Francisco
G J. Summers TR9.8 pts · 2.4 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 22
=No call
G A. Bashir TR2.4 pts · 0.6 reb · 0.6 ast
Not ranked
G M. Sanchez TR9.7 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 34
=No call
G A. Braccia0.4 pts · 0.5 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
G V. Buzelis7.1 pts · 4.4 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 27
=Even
F B. Oosterbaan TR7.6 pts · 4.1 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 31
G K. Kublickas TR5.5 pts · 2.4 reb · 2.7 ast
Score 19
=No call
F N. Newbury NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
F E. Kizer4 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.2 ast
Score 5
=No call
C I. Diagne TR1.1 pts · 2.4 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
South DakotaBetterSan Francisco
SDAK offense197th of 366 · -6.1
=Even
SF defense165th of 366 · -3.7
SDAK defense355th of 366 · -10.1
→SFBig
SF offense178th of 366 · -5.5
Backcourt-7.3 · 4 players
→SFBig
Backcourt-0.9 · 2 players
Frontcourt-2.0 · 1 player
=Even
Frontcourt-1.6 · 3 players
Bench-1.8 · 4 players
=No call
BenchNo numbers yet
Score, worst to bestSDAK betterSF betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Summers27 min · TRM. Sanchez25 min · TRV. Buzelis24 minK. Kublickas20 min · TRC. Kelderman4 min · TRE. WarrenNew
Forwards
E. Kizer15 minJ. Brack14 minJ. Townley-Thomas5 min · TRT. NetolickyNewB. DomschNew
Centers
S. van Bussel5 min · TR
Guards
A. Bashir10 min · TRA. Braccia5 minW. FodeNewM. MageeNewY. VitlemNewD. BordonNew
Forwards
B. Oosterbaan25 min · TRN. NewburyNewA. TysonNewG. KnudsenNewD. WileyNewJ. PihtovsNew
Centers
I. Diagne7 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 78.0 #94 | Points per game | 73.9 #198 |
| 1.07 #207 | Points per possession | 1.10 #131 |
| 72.6 #23 | Pace (possessions) | 67.3 #271 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.9 #239 | Effective FG% | 51.3 #184 |
| 32.4 #264 | 3-point % | 34.6 #140 |
| 35.9 #251 | 3-point attempt rate | 46.1 #45 |
| 45.2 #4 | Free throw rate | 40.1 #59 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.5 #168 | Turnover rate | 15.9 #129 |
| 28.7 #242 | Offensive rebound rate | 31.4 #148 |
| 11.9 #295 | Assists per game | 13.6 #174 |
| Defense | ||
| 81.7 #337 | Points allowed | 73.8 #149 |
| 1.13 #284 | Points allowed per possession | 1.09 #206 |
| 54.5 #318 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.8 #143 |
| 34.5 #219 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.1 #187 |
| 15.9 #225 | Turnovers forced | 14.1 #331 |
| 69.7 #172 | Defensive rebound rate | 71.0 #105 |
| 6.1 #223 | Steals per game | 5.1 #332 |
| 2.6 #293 | Blocks per game | 2.9 #238 |
South Dakota
13-16 in 2025-26 overall · 8-9 in conference · Summit League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Omaha62–76
- Wvs S Dakota St75–70
- Wvs Omaha89–72
- L@ Oral Roberts62–67
- L@ Denver70–90
A week or more of rest.
San Francisco
16-16 in 2025-26 overall · 9-11 in conference · West Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Oregon St77–78
- Wvs Portland82–65
- W@ Pacific72–61
- Lvs Santa Clara73–94
- Lvs Gonzaga59–80
A week or more of rest.