James T. Morris Arena · at IU Indy
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | IUIN | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 IUIN 76–74 · win probability IUIN 57%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 149.1
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: UTM has more of the edges
UTM 4, IUIN 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Free throws
Free throw rate: UTM 37.4, IUIN 21.7. Allowed: UTM 35.8, IUIN 46.6
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UTM 37.0%, IUIN 28.7%. Defensive: UTM 68.0%, IUIN 64.5%
Context
Tempo
About 71 possessions: UTM plays 66.2 a game (303rd fastest), IUIN 75.3 (4th). Faster games mean more points
Three-pointers
UTM hits 30.4% and allows 30.2%; IUIN hits 32.4% and allows 38.5%. Threes are 47.1% and 42.1% of their shots
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UTM 21.4%, IUIN 15.8%. Forced: UTM 20.0%, IUIN 19.2%
Shooting
Effective FG%: UTM 48.7 and allows 46.1; IUIN 52.2 and allows 58.2
Context
Schedule so far
UTM has played the 364th-hardest schedule, IUIN the 284th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Home court
IUIN at home. This season: IUIN 0-0 at home, UTM 0-0 away
Even
IUIN offense vs UTM defense
Offense 249th of 366 against a defense 276th, on the model’s ratings
Even
UTM offense vs IUIN defense
Offense 352nd of 366 against a defense 364th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UTM 20%, IUIN 14%. Transfers in: UTM 1, IUIN 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
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 | — | IUIN -2.1 | — |
| Total | — | 149.1 | — |
| Projected score | — | UTM 73.5 · IUIN 75.6 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | IUIN -1.1 | — |
| 1H total | 69.7 | — |
| 1H projected score | UTM 34.3 · IUIN 35.4 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 4-6 40% | 3-7 30% | |
| 1-9 10% | 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
UT Martin
30 games played
Straight up
19-11
63% wins
Against the spread
15-15
50% covers · avg +1.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
9-21
30% 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 | @ | W 86-81 | +16.5 | W +21.5 | 146.5 | O 167 |
| Nov 12 | @ | W 78-67 | +15.5 | W +26.5 | 144.5 | O 145 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 73-87 | +19.5 | W +5.5 | 165.5 | U 160 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 69-68 | -10.5 | L −9.5 | 155.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 23 | vs | L 60-70 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 146.5 | U 130 |
| Dec 2 | vs | W 73-56 | -3.5 | W +13.5 | 147.5 | U 129 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 74-64 | -6.5 | W +3.5 | 144.5 | U 138 |
| Dec 10 | @ | L 54-83 | +8.5 | L −20.5 | 146.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 18 | @ | L 71-78 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 141.5 | O 149 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 86-62 | -2.5 | W +21.5 | 145.5 | O 148 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 67-60 | -13.5 | L −6.5 | 140.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 65-61 | -10.5 | L −6.5 | 133.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 8 | @ | W 76-68 | -2.5 | W +5.5 | 135.5 | O 144 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 73-56 | -5.5 | W +11.5 | 137.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 65-59 | -7.5 | L −1.5 | 131.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 69-55 | -2.5 | W +11.5 | 147.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 20 | @ | L 50-66 | +2.5 | L −13.5 | 140.5 | U 116 |
| Jan 29 | @ | W 76-68 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 129.5 | O 144 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 84-44 | -10.5 | W +29.5 | 137.5 | U 128 |
| Feb 3 | vs | W 55-52 | -6.5 | L −3.5 | 139.5 | U 107 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 76-54 | -10.5 | W +11.5 | 132.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 55-61 | -8.5 | L −14.5 | 136.5 | U 116 |
| Feb 12 | @ | L 74-75 | +1.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | O 149 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 81-76 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 129.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 17 | vs | L 53-56 | -2.5 | L −5.5 | 138.5 | U 109 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 65-67 | -2.5 | L −4.5 | 136.5 | U 132 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 64-49 | -7.5 | W +7.5 | 134.5 | U 113 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 42-67 | -2.5 | L −27.5 | 143.5 | U 109 |
| Mar 5 | vs | W 66-63 | -7.5 | L −4.5 | 126.5 | O 129 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 55-68 | +1.5 | L −11.5 | 137.5 | U 123 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
@
UNLV
W 86-81
+21.5
12
@
BRAD
W 78-67
+26.5
18
@
FSU
L 73-87
+5.5
22
vs
PV
W 69-68
−9.5
23
vs
USM
L 60-70
−11.5
2
vs
CHSO
W 73-56
+13.5
7
vs
ALST
W 74-64
+3.5
10
@
SIU
L 54-83
−20.5
18
@
TNST
L 71-78
−4.5
20
@
TNTC
W 86-62
+21.5
1
vs
WIU
W 67-60
−6.5
3
vs
EIU
W 65-61
−6.5
8
@
MORE
W 76-68
+5.5
10
@
USI
W 73-56
+11.5
15
vs
SIUE
W 65-59
−1.5
17
vs
LIN
W 69-55
+11.5
20
@
SEMO
L 50-66
−13.5
29
@
EIU
W 76-68
+4.5
31
@
WIU
W 84-44
+29.5
3
vs
LR
W 55-52
−3.5
5
vs
USI
W 76-54
+11.5
7
vs
MORE
L 55-61
−14.5
12
@
LIN
L 74-75
+0.5
14
@
SIUE
W 81-76
+3.5
17
vs
SEMO
L 53-56
−5.5
19
@
LR
L 65-67
−4.5
26
vs
TNTC
W 64-49
+7.5
28
vs
TNST
L 42-67
−27.5
5
vs
EIU
W 66-63
−4.5
6
vs
TNST
L 55-68
−11.5
covered 15didn’t cover 15avg +1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
@
UNLV
W 86-81
+20.5
12
@
BRAD
W 78-67
+0.5
18
@
FSU
L 73-87
−5.5
22
vs
PV
W 69-68
−18.5
23
vs
USM
L 60-70
−16.5
2
vs
CHSO
W 73-56
−18.5
7
vs
ALST
W 74-64
−6.5
10
@
SIU
L 54-83
−9.5
18
@
TNST
L 71-78
+7.5
20
@
TNTC
W 86-62
+2.5
1
vs
WIU
W 67-60
−13.5
3
vs
EIU
W 65-61
−7.5
8
@
MORE
W 76-68
+8.5
10
@
USI
W 73-56
−8.5
15
vs
SIUE
W 65-59
−7.5
17
vs
LIN
W 69-55
−23.5
20
@
SEMO
L 50-66
−24.5
29
@
EIU
W 76-68
+14.5
31
@
WIU
W 84-44
−9.5
3
vs
LR
W 55-52
−32.5
5
vs
USI
W 76-54
−2.5
7
vs
MORE
L 55-61
−20.5
12
@
LIN
L 74-75
+3.5
14
@
SIUE
W 81-76
+27.5
17
vs
SEMO
L 53-56
−29.5
19
@
LR
L 65-67
−4.5
26
vs
TNTC
W 64-49
−21.5
28
vs
TNST
L 42-67
−34.5
5
vs
EIU
W 66-63
+2.5
6
vs
TNST
L 55-68
−14.5
over 9under 21avg −8.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
IU Indy
30 games played
Straight up
5-25
17% wins
Against the spread
12-18
40% covers · avg −2.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
13-17
43% overs · avg −0.7 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 102-118 | +33.5 | W +17.5 | 172.5 | O 220 |
| Nov 6 | vs | L 90-94 | -4.5 | L −8.5 | 185.5 | U 184 |
| Nov 8 | @ | L 80-112 | +20.5 | L −11.5 | 192.5 | U 192 |
| Nov 14 | @ | W 90-83 | +4.5 | W +11.5 | 186.5 | U 173 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 91-103 | -1.5 | L −13.5 | 188.5 | O 194 |
| Nov 21 | vs | L 80-101 | -2.5 | L −23.5 | 181.5 | U 181 |
| Nov 23 | @ | L 85-98 | +3.5 | L −9.5 | 175.5 | O 183 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 85-80 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 181.5 | U 165 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 78-92 | +3.5 | L −10.5 | 180.5 | U 170 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 55-78 | +6.5 | L −16.5 | 171.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 11 | vs | L 75-85 | -3.5 | L −13.5 | 165.5 | U 160 |
| Dec 22 | @ | L 78-91 | +23.5 | W +10.5 | 169.5 | U 169 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 86-99 | +1.5 | L −11.5 | 172.5 | O 185 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 72-81 | +13.5 | W +4.5 | 176.5 | U 153 |
| Jan 4 | vs | L 77-81 | +8.5 | W +4.5 | 162.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 9 | @ | L 59-75 | +6.5 | L −9.5 | 156.5 | U 134 |
| Jan 11 | @ | L 83-95 | +8.5 | L −3.5 | 165.5 | O 178 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 96-93 | +5.5 | W +8.5 | 160.5 | O 189 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 77-80 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 169.5 | U 157 |
| Jan 21 | @ | W 103-85 | +14.5 | W +32.5 | 176.5 | O 188 |
| Jan 28 | @ | L 58-74 | +8.5 | L −7.5 | 162.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 30 | @ | L 76-85 | +10.5 | W +1.5 | 153.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 82-74 | -2.5 | W +5.5 | 169.5 | U 156 |
| Feb 10 | vs | L 88-92 | +2.5 | L −1.5 | 158.5 | O 180 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 81-84 | +5.5 | W +2.5 | 164.5 | O 165 |
| Feb 15 | @ | L 78-83 | +7.5 | W +2.5 | 159.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 73-85 | +11.5 | L −0.5 | 160.5 | U 158 |
| Feb 25 | vs | L 74-86 | +5.5 | L −6.5 | 169.5 | U 160 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 81-87 | +1.5 | L −4.5 | 163.5 | O 168 |
| Mar 2 | @ | L 93-101 | -2.5 | L −10.5 | 169.5 | O 194 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
OSU
L 102-118
+17.5
6
vs
LIU
L 90-94
−8.5
8
@
BTLR
L 80-112
−11.5
14
@
EMU
W 90-83
+11.5
18
@
CHSO
L 91-103
−13.5
21
vs
ALST
L 80-101
−23.5
23
@
AF
L 85-98
−9.5
29
vs
MORE
W 85-80
+1.5
3
@
DETM
L 78-92
−10.5
6
vs
YSU
L 55-78
−16.5
11
vs
GB
L 75-85
−13.5
22
@
GCU
L 78-91
+10.5
29
@
CLE
L 86-99
−11.5
1
@
NKU
L 72-81
+4.5
4
vs
WRST
L 77-81
+4.5
9
@
GB
L 59-75
−9.5
11
@
MILW
L 83-95
−3.5
15
vs
RMU
W 96-93
+8.5
17
vs
DETM
L 77-80
−4.5
21
@
OAK
W 103-85
+32.5
28
@
RMU
L 58-74
−7.5
30
@
YSU
L 76-85
+1.5
7
vs
CLE
W 82-74
+5.5
10
vs
MILW
L 88-92
−1.5
12
vs
NKU
L 81-84
+2.5
15
@
PFW
L 78-83
+2.5
19
@
WRST
L 73-85
−0.5
25
vs
OAK
L 74-86
−6.5
28
vs
PFW
L 81-87
−4.5
2
@
CLE
L 93-101
−10.5
covered 12didn’t cover 18avg −2.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
OSU
L 102-118
+47.5
6
vs
LIU
L 90-94
−1.5
8
@
BTLR
L 80-112
−0.5
14
@
EMU
W 90-83
−13.5
18
@
CHSO
L 91-103
+5.5
21
vs
ALST
L 80-101
−0.5
23
@
AF
L 85-98
+7.5
29
vs
MORE
W 85-80
−16.5
3
@
DETM
L 78-92
−10.5
6
vs
YSU
L 55-78
−38.5
11
vs
GB
L 75-85
−5.5
22
@
GCU
L 78-91
−0.5
29
@
CLE
L 86-99
+12.5
1
@
NKU
L 72-81
−23.5
4
vs
WRST
L 77-81
−4.5
9
@
GB
L 59-75
−22.5
11
@
MILW
L 83-95
+12.5
15
vs
RMU
W 96-93
+28.5
17
vs
DETM
L 77-80
−12.5
21
@
OAK
W 103-85
+11.5
28
@
RMU
L 58-74
−30.5
30
@
YSU
L 76-85
+7.5
7
vs
CLE
W 82-74
−13.5
10
vs
MILW
L 88-92
+21.5
12
vs
NKU
L 81-84
+0.5
15
@
PFW
L 78-83
+1.5
19
@
WRST
L 73-85
−2.5
25
vs
OAK
L 74-86
−9.5
28
vs
PFW
L 81-87
+4.5
2
@
CLE
L 93-101
+24.5
over 13under 17avg −0.7 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: UT Martin 0, IU Indy 0, even 5
UT MartinBetterIU Indy
G F. Petkovski5.5 pts · 3.1 reb · 2.6 ast
Score 5
=Even
G B. Smith TR8.2 pts · 2.9 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 18
G D. Remagen TR1.6 pts · 1.2 reb · 0.7 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G G. Etchison TR9 pts · 1.3 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 93
G E. Moya NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
=No call
G J. Clarke TR3.3 pts · 1.5 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 34
F V. Khryapa2.2 pts · 2.3 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 5
=Even
F K. Tinsley7.7 pts · 2.4 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 17
F G. Sulaberidze NEWNo Division I numbers yet
Not ranked
=No call
F R. Hagy2.1 pts · 1.8 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 2
UT MartinBetterIU Indy
UTM offense352nd of 366 · -13.0
=Even
IUIN defense364th of 366 · -12.3
UTM defense276th of 366 · -7.0
=Even
IUIN offense249th of 366 · -7.5
Backcourt-4.5 · 3 players
→IUINSmall
Backcourt-1.6 · 3 players
Frontcourt-1.8 · 2 players
←UTMSmall
Frontcourt-3.2 · 2 players
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
BenchNo numbers yet
Score, worst to bestUTM betterIUIN betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
F. Petkovski27 minD. Remagen11 min · TRE. MoyaNewR. ConleyNewS. SavkovNewN. StuknysNew
Forwards
V. Khryapa14 minG. SulaberidzeNewA. BanceviciusNewO. SambeNewG. BubnysNewA. VilkasNew
Guards
B. Smith24 min · TRG. Etchison14 min · TRJ. Clarke13 min · TRM. Pastorcic-StraunNewP. HeissNewT. DrexlerNew
Forwards
K. Tinsley18 minR. Hagy11 minP. IdiaruNewA. ArnettNewM. StackhouseNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 67.8 #319 | Points per game | 80.9 #49 |
| 1.03 #294 | Points per possession | 1.07 #200 |
| 66.2 #303 | Pace (possessions) | 75.3 #4 |
| Shooting | ||
| 48.7 #297 | Effective FG% | 52.2 #136 |
| 30.4 #337 | 3-point % | 32.4 #258 |
| 47.1 #32 | 3-point attempt rate | 42.1 #134 |
| 37.4 #118 | Free throw rate | 21.7 #365 |
| Possessions | ||
| 21.4 #358 | Turnover rate | 15.8 #127 |
| 37.0 #17 | Offensive rebound rate | 28.7 #243 |
| 12.9 #222 | Assists per game | 18.9 #3 |
| Defense | ||
| 64.7 #5 | Points allowed | 89.2 #364 |
| 0.98 #11 | Points allowed per possession | 1.19 #353 |
| 46.1 #11 | Opponent effective FG% | 58.2 #362 |
| 30.2 #9 | Opponent 3-point % | 38.5 #361 |
| 20.0 #24 | Turnovers forced | 19.2 #41 |
| 68.0 #259 | Defensive rebound rate | 64.5 #348 |
| 8.3 #27 | Steals per game | 8.0 #39 |
| 4.1 #65 | Blocks per game | 2.9 #243 |
UT Martin
19-11 in 2025-26 overall · 14-8 in conference · Ohio Valley Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Tennessee St55–68
- Wvs E Illinois66–63
- Lvs Tennessee St42–67
- Wvs Tennessee Tech64–49
- L@ Little Rock65–67
A week or more of rest.
IU Indy
5-25 in 2025-26 overall · 3-18 in conference · Horizon League
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Cleveland St93–101
- Lvs Purdue FW81–87
- Lvs Oakland74–86
- L@ Wright St73–85
- L@ Purdue FW78–83
A week or more of rest.