Watsco Center · at Miami
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | MIA | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 MIA 91–54 · win probability MIA 100%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 145.3
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: MIA has more of the edges
WAG 1, MIA 8 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
WAG offense vs MIA defense
Offense 359th of 366 against a defense 26th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
WAG has played the 349th-hardest schedule, MIA the 75th. A record against a soft schedule means less
MIA offense vs WAG defense
Offense 30th of 366 against a defense 293rd, on the model’s ratings
Free throws
Free throw rate: WAG 32.4, MIA 37.1. Allowed: WAG 40.8, MIA 29.5
Turnovers
Turnover rate: WAG 18.6%, MIA 16.1%. Forced: WAG 14.9%, MIA 18.3%
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: WAG 32.8%, MIA 37.2%. Defensive: WAG 70.5%, MIA 74.1%
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: WAG 0%, MIA 52%. Transfers in: WAG 8, MIA 8. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Three-pointers
WAG hits 36.6% and allows 34.3%; MIA hits 34.9% and allows 35.8%. Threes are 36.1% and 31.9% of their shots
Shooting
Effective FG%: WAG 49.6 and allows 50.4; MIA 55.3 and allows 51.8
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: WAG plays 66.4 a game (299th fastest), MIA 69.2 (170th). Faster games mean more points
Home court
MIA at home. This season: MIA 0-0 at home, WAG 0-0 away
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 | — | MIA -36.6 | — |
| Total | — | 145.3 | — |
| Projected score | — | WAG 54.4 · MIA 90.9 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | MIA -21.6 | — |
| 1H total | 68.0 | — |
| 1H projected score | WAG 23.2 · MIA 44.8 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% | |
| 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Wagner
28 games played
Straight up
11-17
39% wins
Against the spread
16-12
57% covers · avg +1.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-13
54% overs · avg +4.5 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 3 | @ | L 74-103 | +25.5 | L −3.5 | 133.5 | O 177 |
| Nov 7 | @ | L 61-68 | +21.5 | W +14.5 | 134.5 | U 129 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 61-63 | +12.5 | W +10.5 | 139.5 | U 124 |
| Nov 16 | @ | L 70-71 | +6.5 | W +5.5 | 140.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 22 | @ | L 75-92 | +25.5 | W +8.5 | 140.5 | O 167 |
| Nov 26 | @ | W 103-101 | +2.5 | W +4.5 | 144.5 | O 204 |
| Dec 2 | @ | L 63-89 | +22.5 | L −3.5 | 143.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 78-64 | -4.5 | W +9.5 | 131.5 | O 142 |
| Jan 2 | @ | W 79-72 | -1.5 | W +5.5 | 146.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 4 | vs | L 60-69 | -7.5 | L −16.5 | 139.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 8 | vs | L 69-71 | -7.5 | L −9.5 | 144.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 69-70 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 132.5 | O 139 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 74-80 | +1.5 | L −4.5 | 129.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 19 | @ | L 61-68 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 137.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 23 | @ | L 67-69 | +7.5 | W +5.5 | 143.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 29 | vs | L 55-62 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 136.5 | U 117 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 75-72 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 133.5 | O 147 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 79-78 | +1.5 | W +2.5 | 138.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 67-84 | +5.5 | L −11.5 | 136.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 57-67 | +6.5 | L −3.5 | 135.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 68-57 | +3.5 | W +14.5 | 128.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 16 | @ | L 65-83 | +10.5 | L −7.5 | 138.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 19 | @ | W 83-80 | +3.5 | W +6.5 | 133.5 | O 163 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 65-56 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 151.5 | U 121 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 65-62 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 131.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 80-61 | -4.5 | W +14.5 | 134.5 | O 141 |
| Mar 4 | @ | W 70-60 | +3.5 | W +13.5 | 139.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 56-64 | +6.5 | L −1.5 | 138.5 | U 120 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
VCU
L 74-103
−3.5
7
@
HALL
L 61-68
+14.5
11
@
FOR
L 61-63
+10.5
16
@
UMBC
L 70-71
+5.5
22
@
GTWN
L 75-92
+8.5
26
@
MAN
W 103-101
+4.5
2
@
MD
L 63-89
−3.5
17
vs
UMES
W 78-64
+9.5
2
@
CHST
W 79-72
+5.5
4
vs
STO
L 60-69
−16.5
8
vs
SFPA
L 69-71
−9.5
10
vs
MERC
L 69-70
−2.5
17
@
NHVN
L 74-80
−4.5
19
@
FDU
L 61-68
−4.5
23
@
LEM
L 67-69
+5.5
29
vs
CCSU
L 55-62
−4.5
31
vs
FDU
W 75-72
+1.5
5
vs
LEM
W 79-78
+2.5
7
@
CCSU
L 67-84
−11.5
12
vs
LIU
L 57-67
−3.5
14
@
STO
W 68-57
+14.5
16
@
LIU
L 65-83
−7.5
19
@
MERC
W 83-80
+6.5
21
@
SFPA
W 65-56
+7.5
26
vs
NHVN
W 65-62
+0.5
28
vs
CHST
W 80-61
+14.5
4
@
CCSU
W 70-60
+13.5
7
@
LIU
L 56-64
−1.5
covered 16didn’t cover 12avg +1.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
VCU
L 74-103
+43.5
7
@
HALL
L 61-68
−5.5
11
@
FOR
L 61-63
−15.5
16
@
UMBC
L 70-71
+0.5
22
@
GTWN
L 75-92
+26.5
26
@
MAN
W 103-101
+59.5
2
@
MD
L 63-89
+8.5
17
vs
UMES
W 78-64
+10.5
2
@
CHST
W 79-72
+4.5
4
vs
STO
L 60-69
−10.5
8
vs
SFPA
L 69-71
−4.5
10
vs
MERC
L 69-70
+6.5
17
@
NHVN
L 74-80
+24.5
19
@
FDU
L 61-68
−8.5
23
@
LEM
L 67-69
−7.5
29
vs
CCSU
L 55-62
−19.5
31
vs
FDU
W 75-72
+13.5
5
vs
LEM
W 79-78
+18.5
7
@
CCSU
L 67-84
+14.5
12
vs
LIU
L 57-67
−11.5
14
@
STO
W 68-57
−3.5
16
@
LIU
L 65-83
+9.5
19
@
MERC
W 83-80
+29.5
21
@
SFPA
W 65-56
−30.5
26
vs
NHVN
W 65-62
−4.5
28
vs
CHST
W 80-61
+6.5
4
@
CCSU
W 70-60
−9.5
7
@
LIU
L 56-64
−18.5
over 15under 13avg +4.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Miami
35 games played
Straight up
26-9
74% wins
Against the spread
19-16
54% covers · avg +1.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
21-14
60% overs · avg +0.1 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 3 | vs | W 86-69 | -18.5 | L −1.5 | 142.5 | O 155 |
| Nov 6 | vs | W 101-61 | -16.5 | W +23.5 | 154.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 10 | vs | W 102-61 | -34.5 | W +6.5 | 161.5 | O 163 |
| Nov 16 | vs | L 68-82 | +10.5 | L −3.5 | 171.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 99-72 | -19.5 | W +7.5 | 164.5 | O 171 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 97-41 | -34.5 | W +21.5 | 151.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 27 | vs | L 62-72 | +7.5 | L −2.5 | 165.5 | U 134 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 78-65 | -5.5 | W +7.5 | 151.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 2 | @ | W 75-66 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 145.5 | U 141 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 88-64 | -19.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 104-79 | -35.5 | L −10.5 | 153.5 | O 183 |
| Dec 16 | vs | W 98-81 | -22.5 | L −5.5 | 161.5 | O 179 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 105-67 | -37.5 | W +0.5 | 171.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 30 | vs | W 76-69 | -9.5 | L −2.5 | 144.5 | O 145 |
| Jan 7 | @ | W 81-77 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 157.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 91-81 | -15.5 | L −5.5 | 156.5 | O 172 |
| Jan 13 | @ | W 81-69 | -5.5 | W +6.5 | 143.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 59-69 | +4.5 | L −5.5 | 143.5 | U 128 |
| Jan 20 | vs | L 63-65 | -10.5 | L −12.5 | 163.5 | U 128 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 85-76 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 149.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 79-70 | -9.5 | L −0.5 | 147.5 | O 149 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 85-86 | -11.5 | L −12.5 | 148.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 74-68 | -8.5 | L −2.5 | 141.5 | O 142 |
| Feb 10 | vs | W 75-66 | -1.5 | W +7.5 | 156.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 77-76 | +5.5 | W +6.5 | 157.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 17 | vs | W 67-66 | -8.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 83-86 | +7.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 24 | @ | W 83-73 | -2.5 | W +7.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 76-54 | -15.5 | W +6.5 | 143.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 4 | @ | W 77-69 | +1.5 | W +9.5 | 156.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 89-92 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 155.5 | O 181 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 78-73 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 153.5 | U 151 |
| Mar 13 | vs | L 62-84 | +3.5 | L −18.5 | 146.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 20 | vs | W 80-66 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 144.5 | O 146 |
| Mar 22 | vs | L 69-79 | +8.5 | L −1.5 | 146.5 | O 148 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
JAX
W 86-69
−1.5
6
vs
BCU
W 101-61
+23.5
10
vs
STET
W 102-61
+6.5
16
vs
FLA
L 68-82
−3.5
20
vs
ELON
W 99-72
+7.5
23
vs
DSU
W 97-41
+21.5
27
vs
BYU
L 62-72
−2.5
28
vs
GTWN
W 78-65
+7.5
2
@
MISS
W 75-66
+10.5
6
vs
USM
W 88-64
+4.5
13
vs
ULM
W 104-79
−10.5
16
vs
FIU
W 98-81
−5.5
21
vs
UNF
W 105-67
+0.5
30
vs
PITT
W 76-69
−2.5
7
@
WAKE
W 81-77
+5.5
10
vs
GT
W 91-81
−5.5
13
@
ND
W 81-69
+6.5
17
@
CLEM
L 59-69
−5.5
20
vs
FSU
L 63-65
−12.5
24
@
SYR
W 85-76
+7.5
28
vs
STAN
W 79-70
−0.5
31
vs
CAL
L 85-86
−12.5
7
@
BC
W 74-68
−2.5
10
vs
UNC
W 75-66
+7.5
14
@
NCSU
W 77-76
+6.5
17
vs
VT
W 67-66
−7.5
21
@
UVA
L 83-86
+4.5
24
@
FSU
W 83-73
+7.5
28
vs
BC
W 76-54
+6.5
4
@
SMU
W 77-69
+9.5
7
vs
LOU
L 89-92
−4.5
12
vs
LOU
W 78-73
+6.5
13
vs
UVA
L 62-84
−18.5
20
vs
MIZ
W 80-66
+12.5
22
vs
PUR
L 69-79
−1.5
covered 19didn’t cover 16avg +1.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
JAX
W 86-69
+12.5
6
vs
BCU
W 101-61
+7.5
10
vs
STET
W 102-61
+1.5
16
vs
FLA
L 68-82
−21.5
20
vs
ELON
W 99-72
+6.5
23
vs
DSU
W 97-41
−13.5
27
vs
BYU
L 62-72
−31.5
28
vs
GTWN
W 78-65
−8.5
2
@
MISS
W 75-66
−4.5
6
vs
USM
W 88-64
+6.5
13
vs
ULM
W 104-79
+29.5
16
vs
FIU
W 98-81
+17.5
21
vs
UNF
W 105-67
+0.5
30
vs
PITT
W 76-69
+0.5
7
@
WAKE
W 81-77
+0.5
10
vs
GT
W 91-81
+15.5
13
@
ND
W 81-69
+6.5
17
@
CLEM
L 59-69
−15.5
20
vs
FSU
L 63-65
−35.5
24
@
SYR
W 85-76
+11.5
28
vs
STAN
W 79-70
+1.5
31
vs
CAL
L 85-86
+22.5
7
@
BC
W 74-68
+0.5
10
vs
UNC
W 75-66
−15.5
14
@
NCSU
W 77-76
−4.5
17
vs
VT
W 67-66
−15.5
21
@
UVA
L 83-86
+23.5
24
@
FSU
W 83-73
+3.5
28
vs
BC
W 76-54
−13.5
4
@
SMU
W 77-69
−10.5
7
vs
LOU
L 89-92
+25.5
12
vs
LOU
W 78-73
−2.5
13
vs
UVA
L 62-84
−0.5
20
vs
MIZ
W 80-66
+1.5
22
vs
PUR
L 69-79
+1.5
over 21under 14avg +0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Miami has the better starters
Position by position: Wagner 0, Miami 3, even 2
WagnerBetterMiami
G T. Bryant TR3.1 pts · 3.2 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 8
→MIABig
G B. Bland TR13.6 pts · 5.1 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 74
G C. Estevez TR3.4 pts · 1.2 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 14
→MIABig
G A. Lewis TR12.2 pts · 3 reb · 5.3 ast
Score 92
G R. Pettis TR1.3 pts · 1.8 reb · 0.8 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F D. Goode TR15.7 pts · 8.6 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 94
F K. Watson TR4.3 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 31
→MIABig
F S. Henderson13.8 pts · 4.9 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 81
C B. Smith TR1.5 pts · 1.6 reb · 0.2 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F M. Reneau18.9 pts · 6.5 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 98
WagnerBetterMiami
WAG offense359th of 366 · -14.0
→MIABig
MIA defense26th of 366 · +4.3
WAG defense293rd of 366 · -7.4
→MIABig
MIA offense30th of 366 · +6.0
Backcourt-3.1 · 3 players
→MIABig
Backcourt+4.0 · 2 players
Frontcourt-1.5 · 2 players
→MIABig
Frontcourt+12.3 · 3 players
Bench-1.9 · 3 players
→MIABig
Bench+3.0 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestWAG betterMIA betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
T. Bryant14 min · TRC. Estevez12 min · TRR. Pettis10 min · TRL. McGradyNewJ. CurtisNewG. EdwardsNew
Forwards
K. Watson12 min · TRT. Jones5 min · TRA. RodriguezNewD. KabaNewF. HassanNew
Centers
B. Smith8 min · TRY. Singar8 min · TRW. Patterson4 min · TR
Guards
B. Bland34 min · TRA. Lewis31 min · TRD. Allen24 minN. Dorn23 min · TRL. Cason19 min · TRQ. Berger17 min · TR
Forwards
D. Goode31 min · TRS. Henderson31 minM. Reneau29 minR. Miller19 min · TRM. Allen19 minC. GaskinsNew
Centers
S. Cyril21 min · TRE. RyzhovNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 69.6 #292 | Points per game | 81.5 #39 |
| 1.05 #250 | Points per possession | 1.18 #38 |
| 66.4 #299 | Pace (possessions) | 69.2 #170 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.6 #262 | Effective FG% | 55.3 #32 |
| 36.6 #36 | 3-point % | 34.9 #127 |
| 36.1 #249 | 3-point attempt rate | 31.9 #331 |
| 32.4 #252 | Free throw rate | 37.1 #125 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.6 #303 | Turnover rate | 16.1 #147 |
| 32.8 #96 | Offensive rebound rate | 37.2 #14 |
| 11.9 #289 | Assists per game | 16.2 #42 |
| Defense | ||
| 72.7 #126 | Points allowed | 71.2 #79 |
| 1.09 #208 | Points allowed per possession | 1.03 #60 |
| 50.4 #123 | Opponent effective FG% | 51.8 #198 |
| 34.3 #202 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.8 #296 |
| 14.9 #295 | Turnovers forced | 18.3 #87 |
| 70.5 #139 | Defensive rebound rate | 74.1 #19 |
| 5.2 #321 | Steals per game | 7.9 #48 |
| 2.3 #320 | Blocks per game | 3.3 #174 |
Wagner
11-17 in 2025-26 overall · 9-11 in conference · Northeast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Long Island56–64
- W@ C Connecticut70–60
- Wvs Chicago St80–61
- Wvs New Haven65–62
- W@ Saint Francis Red Wolves65–56
A week or more of rest.
Miami
26-9 in 2025-26 overall · 14-6 in conference · Atlantic Coast Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Purdue69–79
- Wvs Missouri80–66
- Lvs Virginia62–84
- Wvs Louisville78–73
- Lvs Louisville89–92
A week or more of rest.