Alaska Airlines Arena · at Washington · Conference game
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | WASH | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 UCLA 74–73 · win probability UCLA 54%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 146.6
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: UCLA has more of the edges
UCLA 3, WASH 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Three-pointers
UCLA hits 37.9% and allows 32.0%; WASH hits 31.5% and allows 33.6%. Threes are 35.5% and 34.6% of their shots
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UCLA 31.1%, WASH 34.6%. Defensive: UCLA 66.7%, WASH 71.5%
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UCLA 13.4%, WASH 15.3%. Forced: UCLA 18.5%, WASH 14.4%
Home court
WASH at home. This season: WASH 0-0 at home, UCLA 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 68 possessions: UCLA plays 66.5 a game (297th fastest), WASH 68.8 (196th). Faster games mean more points
Shooting
Effective FG%: UCLA 53.4 and allows 50.4; WASH 51.2 and allows 50.1
Even
WASH offense vs UCLA defense
Offense 57th of 366 against a defense 14th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UCLA 50%, WASH 34%. Transfers in: UCLA 4, WASH 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Context
Schedule so far
UCLA has played the 22nd-hardest schedule, WASH the 46th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: UCLA 33.1, WASH 30.1. Allowed: UCLA 34.4, WASH 31.0
Even
UCLA offense vs WASH defense
Offense 47th of 366 against a defense 48th, on the model’s ratings
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 | — | UCLA -1.2 | — |
| Total | — | 146.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | UCLA 73.9 · WASH 72.7 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | UCLA -0.8 | — |
| 1H total | 68.6 | — |
| 1H projected score | UCLA 34.7 · WASH 33.9 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7-3 70% | 7-3 70% | 4-6 40% | |
| 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% | 7-3 70% |
Next 3 games
With how the last meeting with each opponent went
No more games listed yet.
No more games listed yet.
Recent meetings
Last 5 of 10 since 2021-22
UCLA 9–1 WASHUCLA leads · 10 games since 2021-22 · UCLA has won the last 4 meetings · UCLA 4-6 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 7, 2025-26 | WASH 73 @ UCLA 77 | UCLA -4.5 | WASH W |
| Dec 3, 2025-26 | UCLA 82 @ WASH 80 | WASH +2.5 | WASH W |
| Jan 24, 2024-25 | UCLA 65 @ WASH 60 | WASH +5.5 | WASH W |
| Dec 3, 2024-25 | WASH 58 @ UCLA 69 | UCLA -11.5 | WASH W |
| Feb 29, 2023-24 | UCLA 77 @ WASH 94 | WASH -3.5 | WASH W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
UCLA
36 games played
Straight up
24-12
67% wins
Against the spread
17-19
47% covers · avg −0.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-19
47% overs · avg +2.4 pts vs the total
Against the spread
17-1947%
2 straight misses ATS2 of last 4 covered
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 80-74 | -29.5 | L −23.5 | 149.5 | O 154 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 74-63 | -29.5 | L −18.5 | 152.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 10 | vs | W 83-62 | -30.5 | L −9.5 | 146.5 | U 145 |
| Nov 14 | vs | L 65-69 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 153.5 | U 134 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 79-48 | -27.5 | W +3.5 | 146.5 | U 127 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 86-46 | -25.5 | W +14.5 | 131.5 | O 132 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 72-80 | -7.5 | L −15.5 | 143.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 3 | @ | W 82-80 | -2.5 | L −0.5 | 141.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 74-63 | -8.5 | W +2.5 | 146.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 72-82 | +10.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | O 154 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 90-77 | -9.5 | W +3.5 | 142.5 | O 167 |
| Dec 19 | vs | W 108-87 | -24.5 | L −3.5 | 161.5 | O 195 |
| Dec 23 | vs | W 97-65 | -24.5 | W +7.5 | 148.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 61-74 | +6.5 | L −6.5 | 140.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 6 | @ | L 72-80 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 152.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 67-55 | -13.5 | L −1.5 | 147.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 14 | @ | W 71-60 | -4.5 | W +6.5 | 148.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 74-86 | +4.5 | L −7.5 | 146.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 20 | vs | W 69-67 | +5.5 | W +7.5 | 147.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 71-64 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 143.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 73-57 | -4.5 | W +11.5 | 136.5 | U 130 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 97-98 | -3.5 | L −4.5 | 144.5 | O 195 |
| Feb 3 | vs | W 98-66 | -13.5 | W +18.5 | 142.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 77-73 | -4.5 | L −0.5 | 144.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 56-86 | +15.5 | L −14.5 | 156.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 17 | @ | L 59-82 | +8.5 | L −14.5 | 139.5 | O 141 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 95-94 | +6.5 | W +7.5 | 146.5 | O 189 |
| Feb 24 | vs | W 81-62 | -6.5 | W +12.5 | 150.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 73-78 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 136.5 | O 151 |
| Mar 3 | vs | W 72-52 | -1.5 | W +18.5 | 144.5 | U 124 |
| Mar 7 | @ | W 89-68 | -4.5 | W +16.5 | 151.5 | O 157 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 72-59 | -10.5 | W +2.5 | 141.5 | U 131 |
| Mar 13 | vs | W 88-84 | +5.5 | W +9.5 | 141.5 | O 172 |
| Mar 14 | vs | L 66-73 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 143.5 | U 139 |
| Mar 20 | vs | W 75-71 | -5.5 | L −1.5 | 151.5 | U 146 |
| Mar 22 | vs | L 57-73 | +5.5 | L −10.5 | 135.5 | U 130 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
EWU
W 80-74
−23.5
7
vs
PEPP
W 74-63
−18.5
10
vs
WGA
W 83-62
−9.5
14
vs
ARIZ
L 65-69
−2.5
18
vs
SAC
W 79-48
+3.5
21
vs
PRES
W 86-46
+14.5
25
vs
CAL
L 72-80
−15.5
3
@
WASH
W 82-80
−0.5
6
vs
ORE
W 74-63
+2.5
13
vs
GONZ
L 72-82
+0.5
17
vs
ASU
W 90-77
+3.5
19
vs
CP
W 108-87
−3.5
23
vs
UCR
W 97-65
+7.5
3
@
IOWA
L 61-74
−6.5
6
@
WIS
L 72-80
−4.5
10
vs
MD
W 67-55
−1.5
14
@
PSU
W 71-60
+6.5
17
@
OSU
L 74-86
−7.5
20
vs
PUR
W 69-67
+7.5
24
vs
NU
W 71-64
−0.5
28
@
ORE
W 73-57
+11.5
31
vs
IU
L 97-98
−4.5
3
vs
RUTG
W 98-66
+18.5
7
vs
WASH
W 77-73
−0.5
14
@
MICH
L 56-86
−14.5
17
@
MSU
L 59-82
−14.5
21
vs
ILL
W 95-94
+7.5
24
vs
USC
W 81-62
+12.5
28
@
MINN
L 73-78
−6.5
3
vs
NEB
W 72-52
+18.5
7
@
USC
W 89-68
+16.5
12
vs
RUTG
W 72-59
+2.5
13
vs
MSU
W 88-84
+9.5
14
vs
PUR
L 66-73
+0.5
20
vs
UCF
W 75-71
−1.5
22
vs
CONN
L 57-73
−10.5
covered 17didn’t cover 19avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
EWU
W 80-74
+4.5
7
vs
PEPP
W 74-63
−15.5
10
vs
WGA
W 83-62
−1.5
14
vs
ARIZ
L 65-69
−19.5
18
vs
SAC
W 79-48
−19.5
21
vs
PRES
W 86-46
+0.5
25
vs
CAL
L 72-80
+8.5
3
@
WASH
W 82-80
+20.5
6
vs
ORE
W 74-63
−9.5
13
vs
GONZ
L 72-82
+6.5
17
vs
ASU
W 90-77
+24.5
19
vs
CP
W 108-87
+33.5
23
vs
UCR
W 97-65
+13.5
3
@
IOWA
L 61-74
−5.5
6
@
WIS
L 72-80
−0.5
10
vs
MD
W 67-55
−25.5
14
@
PSU
W 71-60
−17.5
17
@
OSU
L 74-86
+13.5
20
vs
PUR
W 69-67
−11.5
24
vs
NU
W 71-64
−8.5
28
@
ORE
W 73-57
−6.5
31
vs
IU
L 97-98
+50.5
3
vs
RUTG
W 98-66
+21.5
7
vs
WASH
W 77-73
+5.5
14
@
MICH
L 56-86
−14.5
17
@
MSU
L 59-82
+1.5
21
vs
ILL
W 95-94
+42.5
24
vs
USC
W 81-62
−7.5
28
@
MINN
L 73-78
+14.5
3
vs
NEB
W 72-52
−20.5
7
@
USC
W 89-68
+5.5
12
vs
RUTG
W 72-59
−10.5
13
vs
MSU
W 88-84
+30.5
14
vs
PUR
L 66-73
−4.5
20
vs
UCF
W 75-71
−5.5
22
vs
CONN
L 57-73
−5.5
over 17under 19avg +2.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Washington
33 games played
Straight up
16-17
48% wins
Against the spread
20-13
61% covers · avg −0 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-18
45% overs · avg −0.6 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 94-50 | -34.5 | W +9.5 | 160.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 6 | vs | W 84-70 | -27.5 | L −13.5 | 153.5 | O 154 |
| Nov 9 | @ | L 69-78 | +6.5 | L −2.5 | 156.5 | U 147 |
| Nov 14 | @ | W 81-69 | -8.5 | W +3.5 | 158.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 18 | vs | W 99-93 | -23.5 | L −17.5 | 157.5 | O 192 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 83-66 | -3.5 | W +13.5 | 145.5 | O 149 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 68-81 | -2.5 | L −15.5 | 151.5 | U 149 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 80-82 | +2.5 | W +0.5 | 141.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 84-76 | +4.5 | W +12.5 | 154.5 | O 160 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 105-69 | -25.5 | W +10.5 | 153.5 | O 174 |
| Dec 19 | @ | L 66-70 | -7.5 | L −11.5 | 151.5 | U 136 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 86-56 | -18.5 | W +11.5 | 159.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 29 | vs | W 74-65 | -12.5 | L −3.5 | 157.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 80-90 | +9.5 | L −0.5 | 152.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 73-81 | +16.5 | W +8.5 | 154.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 11 | vs | W 81-74 | -1.5 | W +5.5 | 155.5 | U 155 |
| Jan 14 | vs | L 72-82 | +12.5 | W +2.5 | 165.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 63-80 | +3.5 | L −13.5 | 145.5 | U 143 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 66-76 | +10.5 | W +0.5 | 152.5 | U 142 |
| Jan 25 | vs | W 72-57 | -7.5 | W +7.5 | 143.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 66-75 | +12.5 | W +3.5 | 153.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 76-62 | +1.5 | W +15.5 | 146.5 | U 138 |
| Feb 4 | vs | L 74-84 | +2.5 | L −7.5 | 141.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 73-77 | +4.5 | W +0.5 | 144.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 60-63 | -12.5 | L −15.5 | 153.5 | U 123 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 69-57 | -6.5 | W +5.5 | 138.5 | U 126 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 60-64 | -4.5 | L −8.5 | 143.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 24 | @ | W 79-72 | -4.5 | W +2.5 | 139.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 73-90 | +1.5 | L −15.5 | 153.5 | O 163 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 91-72 | -5.5 | W +13.5 | 150.5 | O 163 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 79-85 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 145.5 | O 164 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 83-79 | -3.5 | W +0.5 | 154.5 | O 162 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 82-85 | +6.5 | W +3.5 | 157.5 | O 167 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
UAPB
W 94-50
+9.5
6
vs
DEN
W 84-70
−13.5
9
@
BAY
L 69-78
−2.5
14
@
WSU
W 81-69
+3.5
18
vs
SOU
W 99-93
−17.5
27
vs
NEV
W 83-66
+13.5
28
vs
COLO
L 68-81
−15.5
3
vs
UCLA
L 80-82
+0.5
6
@
USC
W 84-76
+12.5
13
vs
SUU
W 105-69
+10.5
19
@
SEA
L 66-70
−11.5
22
vs
USD
W 86-56
+11.5
29
vs
UTAH
W 74-65
−3.5
4
@
IU
L 80-90
−0.5
7
@
PUR
L 73-81
+8.5
11
vs
OSU
W 81-74
+5.5
14
vs
MICH
L 72-82
+2.5
17
vs
MSU
L 63-80
−13.5
21
@
NEB
L 66-76
+0.5
25
vs
ORE
W 72-57
+7.5
29
@
ILL
L 66-75
+3.5
31
@
NU
W 76-62
+15.5
4
vs
IOWA
L 74-84
−7.5
7
@
UCLA
L 73-77
+0.5
11
vs
PSU
L 60-63
−15.5
14
vs
MINN
W 69-57
+5.5
21
@
MD
L 60-64
−8.5
24
@
RUTG
W 79-72
+2.5
28
vs
WIS
L 73-90
−15.5
4
vs
USC
W 91-72
+13.5
7
@
ORE
L 79-85
−7.5
11
vs
USC
W 83-79
+0.5
12
vs
WIS
L 82-85
+3.5
covered 20didn’t cover 13avg −0 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
UAPB
W 94-50
−16.5
6
vs
DEN
W 84-70
+0.5
9
@
BAY
L 69-78
−9.5
14
@
WSU
W 81-69
−8.5
18
vs
SOU
W 99-93
+34.5
27
vs
NEV
W 83-66
+3.5
28
vs
COLO
L 68-81
−2.5
3
vs
UCLA
L 80-82
+20.5
6
@
USC
W 84-76
+5.5
13
vs
SUU
W 105-69
+20.5
19
@
SEA
L 66-70
−15.5
22
vs
USD
W 86-56
−17.5
29
vs
UTAH
W 74-65
−18.5
4
@
IU
L 80-90
+17.5
7
@
PUR
L 73-81
−0.5
11
vs
OSU
W 81-74
−0.5
14
vs
MICH
L 72-82
−11.5
17
vs
MSU
L 63-80
−2.5
21
@
NEB
L 66-76
−10.5
25
vs
ORE
W 72-57
−14.5
29
@
ILL
L 66-75
−12.5
31
@
NU
W 76-62
−8.5
4
vs
IOWA
L 74-84
+16.5
7
@
UCLA
L 73-77
+5.5
11
vs
PSU
L 60-63
−30.5
14
vs
MINN
W 69-57
−12.5
21
@
MD
L 60-64
−19.5
24
@
RUTG
W 79-72
+11.5
28
vs
WIS
L 73-90
+9.5
4
vs
USC
W 91-72
+12.5
7
@
ORE
L 79-85
+18.5
11
vs
USC
W 83-79
+7.5
12
vs
WIS
L 82-85
+9.5
over 15under 18avg −0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
UCLA has the better starters
Position by position: UCLA 1, Washington 0, even 4
UCLABetterWashington
G J. Petty TR9.9 pts · 3.9 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 70
=Even
G R. Beasley TR13.9 pts · 3.5 reb · 4.1 ast
Score 84
G T. Perry12.6 pts · 3 reb · 2.8 ast
Score 93
←UCLASmall
G W. Yates12.7 pts · 3.3 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 68
F E. Dailey11.6 pts · 5.8 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 88
=Even
G L. Watts TR11.8 pts · 6 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 87
F S. Macura TR5 pts · 4.8 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 71
=Even
G P. Friedrichsen TR10.8 pts · 2.5 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 76
C X. Booker7.3 pts · 3.5 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 75
=Even
G T. Comer TR11 pts · 1.8 reb · 3.6 ast
Score 68
UCLABetterWashington
UCLA offense47th of 366 · +3.8
=Even
WASH defense48th of 366 · +2.2
UCLA defense14th of 366 · +6.4
=Even
WASH offense57th of 366 · +2.7
Backcourt+3.8 · 2 players
→WASHSmall
Backcourt+5.8 · 5 players
Frontcourt+5.0 · 3 players
=No call
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
Bench+0.2 · 4 players
←UCLASmall
Bench-1.3 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestUCLA betterWASH betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Petty30 min · TRT. Perry30 minA. Robinson18 min · TRE. Freeny11 minM. AlstonNewJ. HouegbanNew
Forwards
E. Dailey28 minS. Macura19 min · TRB. Williams12 minJ. PhilonNewN. KusturicaNewG. GrinvaldsNew
Centers
X. Booker20 minF. Jovic18 min · TRJ. FloydNew
Guards
R. Beasley34 min · TRW. Yates31 minL. Watts27 min · TRP. Friedrichsen26 min · TRT. Comer25 min · TRH. Zrno19 min · TR
Forwards
N. Dzepina11 minJ. Rencher9 minM. TraoreNewW. BragaNew
Centers
L. Sommerville15 min
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 77.0 #115 | Points per game | 77.1 #114 |
| 1.16 #48 | Points per possession | 1.12 #103 |
| 66.5 #297 | Pace (possessions) | 68.8 #196 |
| Shooting | ||
| 53.4 #85 | Effective FG% | 51.2 #187 |
| 37.9 #19 | 3-point % | 31.5 #307 |
| 35.5 #259 | 3-point attempt rate | 34.6 #284 |
| 33.1 #237 | Free throw rate | 30.1 #308 |
| Possessions | ||
| 13.4 #14 | Turnover rate | 15.3 #81 |
| 31.1 #162 | Offensive rebound rate | 34.6 #56 |
| 16.1 #45 | Assists per game | 13.9 #152 |
| Defense | ||
| 71.1 #75 | Points allowed | 73.6 #146 |
| 1.07 #129 | Points allowed per possession | 1.07 #140 |
| 50.4 #120 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.1 #108 |
| 32.0 #64 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.6 #163 |
| 18.5 #76 | Turnovers forced | 14.4 #325 |
| 66.7 #304 | Defensive rebound rate | 71.5 #84 |
| 6.7 #156 | Steals per game | 5.7 #271 |
| 3.0 #218 | Blocks per game | 4.2 #58 |
UCLA
24-12 in 2025-26 overall · 15-8 in conference · Big Ten Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs UConn57–73
- Wvs UCF75–71
- Lvs Purdue66–73
- Wvs Michigan St88–84
- Wvs Rutgers72–59
A week or more of rest.
Washington
16-17 in 2025-26 overall · 8-14 in conference · Big Ten Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Wisconsin82–85
- Wvs USC83–79
- L@ Oregon79–85
- Wvs USC91–72
- Lvs Wisconsin73–90
A week or more of rest.