Alumni Gymnasium (Rider) · at Rider
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | RID | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 NAVY 73–67 · win probability NAVY 73%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 139.9
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: NAVY has more of the edges
NAVY 8, RID 1 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Three-pointers
NAVY hits 35.9% and allows 30.0%; RID hits 27.6% and allows 38.0%. Threes are 33.1% and 27.5% of their shots
Shooting
Effective FG%: NAVY 53.1 and allows 48.3; RID 42.8 and allows 55.2
RID offense vs NAVY defense
Offense 348th of 366 against a defense 146th, on the model’s ratings
Free throws
Free throw rate: NAVY 38.8, RID 30.1. Allowed: NAVY 26.0, RID 32.5
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: NAVY 31.9%, RID 32.6%. Defensive: NAVY 72.6%, RID 67.2%
Context
Schedule so far
NAVY has played the 311th-hardest schedule, RID the 201st. A record against a soft schedule means less
Turnovers
Turnover rate: NAVY 16.8%, RID 16.9%. Forced: NAVY 18.3%, RID 15.3%
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: NAVY 46%, RID 0%. Transfers in: NAVY 0, RID 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Home court
RID at home. This season: RID 0-0 at home, NAVY 0-0 away
NAVY offense vs RID defense
Offense 270th of 366 against a defense 315th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 66 possessions: NAVY plays 66.0 a game (316th fastest), RID 65.7 (323rd). Faster games mean more points
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 | — | NAVY -6.9 | — |
| Total | — | 139.9 | — |
| Projected score | — | NAVY 73.4 · RID 66.5 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | NAVY -4.2 | — |
| 1H total | 65.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | NAVY 34.9 · RID 30.6 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8-2 80% | 7-3 70% | 8-2 80% | |
| 2-8 20% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
NAVY 0–1 RIDRID leads · 1 game since 2021-22 · NAVY 0-1 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 12, 2024-25 | RID 90 @ NAVY 79 | NAVY -5.5 | RID W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Navy
32 games played
Straight up
24-8
75% wins
Against the spread
21-11
66% covers · avg +3.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-17
47% 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 | @ | W 76-55 | -3.5 | W +17.5 | 141.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 7 | vs | L 68-97 | +5.5 | L −23.5 | 147.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 71-80 | +11.5 | W +2.5 | 155.5 | U 151 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 61-73 | +26.5 | W +14.5 | 160.5 | U 134 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 86-70 | -17.5 | L −1.5 | 140.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 84-51 | -10.5 | W +22.5 | 153.5 | U 135 |
| Nov 28 | @ | L 57-87 | +8.5 | L −21.5 | 138.5 | O 144 |
| Nov 29 | vs | L 65-69 | -3.5 | L −7.5 | 136.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 3 | @ | W 66-59 | -15.5 | L −8.5 | 132.5 | U 125 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 61-56 | -9.5 | L −4.5 | 133.5 | U 117 |
| Dec 19 | vs | W 88-55 | -20.5 | W +12.5 | 145.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 31 | vs | W 82-77 | -4.5 | W +0.5 | 137.5 | O 159 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 65-58 | -5.5 | W +1.5 | 137.5 | U 123 |
| Jan 7 | vs | W 76-55 | -8.5 | W +12.5 | 137.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 76-50 | -8.5 | W +17.5 | 141.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 12 | @ | L 51-65 | -2.5 | L −16.5 | 139.5 | U 116 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 82-79 | -3.5 | L −0.5 | 137.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 85-68 | -11.5 | W +5.5 | 134.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 84-56 | -10.5 | W +17.5 | 143.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 58-50 | -1.5 | W +6.5 | 138.5 | U 108 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 87-71 | -9.5 | W +6.5 | 143.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 65-50 | -3.5 | W +11.5 | 139.5 | U 115 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 82-73 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 134.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 9 | @ | W 76-60 | -6.5 | W +9.5 | 135.5 | O 136 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 84-80 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 139.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 72-49 | -9.5 | W +13.5 | 139.5 | U 121 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 81-63 | -8.5 | W +9.5 | 139.5 | O 144 |
| Feb 25 | @ | W 78-51 | -6.5 | W +20.5 | 147.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 85-69 | -6.5 | W +9.5 | 141.5 | O 154 |
| Mar 5 | vs | W 74-69 | -15.5 | L −10.5 | 133.5 | O 143 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 72-73 | -6.5 | L −7.5 | 136.5 | O 145 |
| Mar 18 | @ | L 72-82 | +9.5 | L −0.5 | 148.5 | O 154 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
PRES
W 76-55
+17.5
7
vs
YALE
L 68-97
−23.5
11
@
PSU
L 71-80
+2.5
18
@
UNC
L 61-73
+14.5
22
vs
NJIT
W 86-70
−1.5
26
vs
GWEB
W 84-51
+22.5
28
@
UNCW
L 57-87
−21.5
29
vs
SELA
L 65-69
−7.5
3
@
DSU
W 66-59
−8.5
7
vs
AF
W 61-56
−4.5
19
vs
COPP
W 88-55
+12.5
31
vs
BU
W 82-77
+0.5
3
@
HC
W 65-58
+1.5
7
vs
BUCK
W 76-55
+12.5
10
vs
LAF
W 76-50
+17.5
12
@
AMER
L 51-65
−16.5
17
@
LEH
W 82-79
−0.5
21
vs
HC
W 85-68
+5.5
24
vs
ARMY
W 84-56
+17.5
28
@
BU
W 58-50
+6.5
31
vs
L-MD
W 87-71
+6.5
4
@
LAF
W 65-50
+11.5
7
vs
AMER
W 82-73
+4.5
9
@
BUCK
W 76-60
+9.5
14
@
COLG
W 84-80
+5.5
18
vs
LEH
W 72-49
+13.5
21
@
ARMY
W 81-63
+9.5
25
@
L-MD
W 78-51
+20.5
28
vs
COLG
W 85-69
+9.5
5
vs
BUCK
W 74-69
−10.5
8
vs
BU
L 72-73
−7.5
18
@
WAKE
L 72-82
−0.5
covered 21didn’t cover 11avg +3.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
PRES
W 76-55
−10.5
7
vs
YALE
L 68-97
+17.5
11
@
PSU
L 71-80
−4.5
18
@
UNC
L 61-73
−26.5
22
vs
NJIT
W 86-70
+15.5
26
vs
GWEB
W 84-51
−18.5
28
@
UNCW
L 57-87
+5.5
29
vs
SELA
L 65-69
−2.5
3
@
DSU
W 66-59
−7.5
7
vs
AF
W 61-56
−16.5
19
vs
COPP
W 88-55
−2.5
31
vs
BU
W 82-77
+21.5
3
@
HC
W 65-58
−14.5
7
vs
BUCK
W 76-55
−6.5
10
vs
LAF
W 76-50
−15.5
12
@
AMER
L 51-65
−23.5
17
@
LEH
W 82-79
+23.5
21
vs
HC
W 85-68
+18.5
24
vs
ARMY
W 84-56
−3.5
28
@
BU
W 58-50
−30.5
31
vs
L-MD
W 87-71
+14.5
4
@
LAF
W 65-50
−24.5
7
vs
AMER
W 82-73
+20.5
9
@
BUCK
W 76-60
+0.5
14
@
COLG
W 84-80
+24.5
18
vs
LEH
W 72-49
−18.5
21
@
ARMY
W 81-63
+4.5
25
@
L-MD
W 78-51
−18.5
28
vs
COLG
W 85-69
+12.5
5
vs
BUCK
W 74-69
+9.5
8
vs
BU
L 72-73
+8.5
18
@
WAKE
L 72-82
+5.5
over 15under 17avg −1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Rider
28 games played
Straight up
3-25
11% wins
Against the spread
9-19
32% covers · avg −3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
9-19
32% overs · avg +0 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 53-87 | +26.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | U 140 |
| Nov 5 | @ | L 53-81 | +18.5 | L −9.5 | 139.5 | U 134 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 65-99 | +30.5 | L −3.5 | 143.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 45-91 | +40.5 | L −5.5 | 134.5 | O 136 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 65-68 | -8.5 | L −11.5 | 139.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 4 | @ | L 66-68 | +9.5 | W +7.5 | 138.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 58-72 | +14.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | U 130 |
| Dec 9 | vs | L 38-51 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 135.5 | U 89 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 57-65 | +8.5 | W +0.5 | 129.5 | U 122 |
| Dec 22 | @ | L 79-100 | +30.5 | W +9.5 | 145.5 | O 179 |
| Dec 29 | vs | L 71-74 | +2.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 4 | vs | L 65-74 | +8.5 | L −0.5 | 135.5 | O 139 |
| Jan 9 | @ | L 62-68 | +8.5 | W +2.5 | 145.5 | U 130 |
| Jan 11 | vs | L 49-71 | +10.5 | L −11.5 | 131.5 | U 120 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 72-68 | +7.5 | W +11.5 | 141.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 58-69 | +10.5 | L −0.5 | 134.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 19 | vs | L 85-105 | +4.5 | L −15.5 | 144.5 | O 190 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 61-71 | +9.5 | L −0.5 | 139.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 30 | @ | L 90-95 | +5.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | O 185 |
| Feb 1 | vs | W 81-78 | +7.5 | W +10.5 | 136.5 | O 159 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 52-81 | +14.5 | L −14.5 | 135.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 47-73 | +8.5 | L −17.5 | 137.5 | U 120 |
| Feb 13 | vs | L 55-65 | +5.5 | L −4.5 | 137.5 | U 120 |
| Feb 15 | @ | L 75-86 | +9.5 | L −1.5 | 146.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 20 | vs | L 66-72 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 131.5 | O 138 |
| Feb 22 | vs | W 67-62 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 131.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 27 | @ | L 58-80 | +11.5 | L −10.5 | 141.5 | U 138 |
| Mar 1 | @ | L 61-76 | +14.5 | L −0.5 | 137.5 | U 137 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
UVA
L 53-87
−7.5
5
@
RUTG
L 53-81
−9.5
18
@
TEX
L 65-99
−3.5
20
@
HOU
L 45-91
−5.5
25
vs
COPP
L 65-68
−11.5
4
@
MRMK
L 66-68
+7.5
7
@
QUIN
L 58-72
+0.5
9
vs
BUCK
L 38-51
−10.5
16
@
DEL
L 57-65
+0.5
22
@
VCU
L 79-100
+9.5
29
vs
MAN
L 71-74
−0.5
4
vs
SIE
L 65-74
−0.5
9
@
FAIR
L 62-68
+2.5
11
vs
MRST
L 49-71
−11.5
14
vs
IONA
W 72-68
+11.5
17
@
SPU
L 58-69
−0.5
19
vs
SHU
L 85-105
−15.5
24
@
MSM
L 61-71
−0.5
30
@
MAN
L 90-95
+0.5
1
vs
SPU
W 81-78
+10.5
5
@
MRST
L 52-81
−14.5
7
vs
MRMK
L 47-73
−17.5
13
vs
MSM
L 55-65
−4.5
15
@
SHU
L 75-86
−1.5
20
vs
CAN
L 66-72
−7.5
22
vs
NIA
W 67-62
+6.5
27
@
IONA
L 58-80
−10.5
1
@
SIE
L 61-76
−0.5
covered 9didn’t cover 19avg −3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
UVA
L 53-87
−8.5
5
@
RUTG
L 53-81
−5.5
18
@
TEX
L 65-99
+20.5
20
@
HOU
L 45-91
+1.5
25
vs
COPP
L 65-68
−6.5
4
@
MRMK
L 66-68
−4.5
7
@
QUIN
L 58-72
−17.5
9
vs
BUCK
L 38-51
−46.5
16
@
DEL
L 57-65
−7.5
22
@
VCU
L 79-100
+33.5
29
vs
MAN
L 71-74
−2.5
4
vs
SIE
L 65-74
+3.5
9
@
FAIR
L 62-68
−15.5
11
vs
MRST
L 49-71
−11.5
14
vs
IONA
W 72-68
−1.5
17
@
SPU
L 58-69
−7.5
19
vs
SHU
L 85-105
+45.5
24
@
MSM
L 61-71
−7.5
30
@
MAN
L 90-95
+39.5
1
vs
SPU
W 81-78
+22.5
5
@
MRST
L 52-81
−2.5
7
vs
MRMK
L 47-73
−17.5
13
vs
MSM
L 55-65
−17.5
15
@
SHU
L 75-86
+14.5
20
vs
CAN
L 66-72
+6.5
22
vs
NIA
W 67-62
−2.5
27
@
IONA
L 58-80
−3.5
1
@
SIE
L 61-76
−0.5
over 9under 19avg +0 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: Navy 0, Rider 0, even 5
NavyBetterRider
G J. Kim10 pts · 3.1 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 35
=Even
G M. Butler TR10.9 pts · 2.2 reb · 4.3 ast
Score 44
G J. Pennick7.5 pts · 2.1 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 12
=Even
G K. Farmer TR3.5 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 6
G C. Cole6 pts · 1.9 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 41
=No call
G B. Baker TR1.6 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.4 ast
Not ranked
G D. Burnett1.4 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G T. Bevins TR0.6 pts · 0.7 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
G N. Howard1.6 pts · 0.7 reb · 0.6 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F H. Simmons TR1.7 pts · 0.8 reb · 0.2 ast
Not ranked
NavyBetterRider
NAVY offense270th of 366 · -8.2
=Even
RID defense315th of 366 · -8.2
NAVY defense146th of 366 · -3.1
←NAVYBig
RID offense348th of 366 · -12.2
Backcourt-5.8 · 5 players
=Even
Backcourt-5.5 · 4 players
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
=No call
Frontcourt-0.3 · 1 player
Bench-0.2 · 5 players
=Even
Bench-0.3 · 1 player
Score, worst to bestNAVY betterRID betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Kim31 minJ. Pennick25 minC. Cole19 minD. Burnett6 minN. Howard3 minJ. Gabbidon1 min
Forwards
C. Jackson2 minJ. Ashley2 minO. Gray2 minT. RajiNewC. PollockNewS. GriffinNew
Centers
C. CraneNew
Guards
M. Butler34 min · TRK. Farmer14 min · TRB. Baker13 min · TRT. Bevins5 min · TRN. WashingtonNewR. RosaNew
Forwards
H. Simmons6 min · TRR. Brisco2 min · TRK. WylieNewS. Ezekiel ObeNew
Centers
S. Avegah SemeyNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 74.1 #194 | Points per game | 62.6 #359 |
| 1.12 #97 | Points per possession | 0.95 #355 |
| 66.0 #316 | Pace (possessions) | 65.7 #323 |
| Shooting | ||
| 53.1 #100 | Effective FG% | 42.8 #365 |
| 35.9 #64 | 3-point % | 27.6 #365 |
| 33.1 #314 | 3-point attempt rate | 27.5 #361 |
| 38.8 #82 | Free throw rate | 30.1 #307 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.8 #190 | Turnover rate | 16.9 #197 |
| 31.9 #126 | Offensive rebound rate | 32.6 #101 |
| 15.8 #52 | Assists per game | 10.1 #356 |
| Defense | ||
| 65.6 #10 | Points allowed | 76.8 #236 |
| 1.00 #23 | Points allowed per possession | 1.17 #341 |
| 48.3 #42 | Opponent effective FG% | 55.2 #335 |
| 30.0 #7 | Opponent 3-point % | 38.0 #356 |
| 18.3 #84 | Turnovers forced | 15.3 #266 |
| 72.6 #49 | Defensive rebound rate | 67.2 #294 |
| 7.5 #84 | Steals per game | 5.9 #247 |
| 3.3 #185 | Blocks per game | 3.2 #188 |
Navy
24-8 in 2025-26 overall · 18-2 in conference · Patriot League
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Wake Forest72–82
- Lvs Boston U72–73
- Wvs Bucknell74–69
- Wvs Colgate85–69
- W@ Loyola MD78–51
A week or more of rest.
Rider
3-25 in 2025-26 overall · 3-17 in conference · Metro Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Siena61–76
- L@ Iona58–80
- Wvs Niagara67–62
- Lvs Canisius66–72
- L@ Sacred Heart75–86
A week or more of rest.