Nutter Center · at Wright St
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | WRST | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 FAU 79–76 · win probability FAU 59%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 155.4
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: WRST has more of the edges
FAU 1, WRST 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
FAU has played the 101st-hardest schedule, WRST the 264th. A record against a soft schedule means less
FAU offense vs WRST defense
Offense 85th of 366 against a defense 215th, on the model’s ratings
Free throws
Free throw rate: FAU 33.3, WRST 37.4. Allowed: FAU 36.2, WRST 33.3
Turnovers
Turnover rate: FAU 17.6%, WRST 16.1%. Forced: FAU 15.5%, WRST 16.6%
Three-pointers
FAU hits 33.3% and allows 33.8%; WRST hits 36.4% and allows 34.3%. Threes are 38.2% and 34.2% of their shots
Home court
WRST at home. This season: WRST 0-0 at home, FAU 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: FAU plays 71.1 a game (71st fastest), WRST 69.1 (171st). Faster games mean more points
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: FAU 52.2 and allows 49.5; WRST 54.3 and allows 52.4
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: FAU 17%, WRST 32%. Transfers in: FAU 5, WRST 4. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
WRST offense vs FAU defense
Offense 148th of 366 against a defense 174th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: FAU 31.6%, WRST 32.8%. Defensive: FAU 71.7%, WRST 70.6%
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 | — | FAU -2.7 | — |
| Total | — | 155.4 | — |
| Projected score | — | FAU 79 · WRST 76.3 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | FAU -1.7 | — |
| 1H total | 72.6 | — |
| 1H projected score | FAU 37.2 · WRST 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% | 6-4 60% | |
| 7-3 70% | 7-3 70% | 5-5 50% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
FAU
31 games played
Straight up
16-15
52% wins
Against the spread
17-14
55% covers · avg +0.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-14
55% overs · avg +0.3 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 | vs | W 83-78 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 148.5 | O 161 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 94-77 | -5.5 | W +11.5 | 156.5 | O 171 |
| Nov 9 | @ | L 68-88 | +7.5 | L −12.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 82-59 | -7.5 | W +15.5 | 154.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 76-65 | -3.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 65-74 | +4.5 | L −4.5 | 143.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 30 | vs | L 65-70 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 146.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 7 | @ | W 81-76 | -2.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 105-79 | -18.5 | W +7.5 | 147.5 | O 184 |
| Dec 19 | @ | L 75-88 | +13.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | O 163 |
| Dec 23 | @ | L 80-85 | +8.5 | W +3.5 | 162.5 | O 165 |
| Dec 31 | vs | W 110-70 | -16.5 | W +23.5 | 158.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 66-69 | -3.5 | L −6.5 | 158.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 7 | @ | W 76-71 | +3.5 | W +8.5 | 162.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 11 | vs | W 89-78 | -1.5 | W +9.5 | 152.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 85-67 | -3.5 | W +14.5 | 155.5 | U 152 |
| Jan 18 | @ | W 79-73 | -2.5 | W +3.5 | 148.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 79-74 | -10.5 | L −5.5 | 155.5 | U 153 |
| Jan 25 | @ | L 75-89 | +5.5 | L −8.5 | 166.5 | U 164 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 65-92 | +3.5 | L −23.5 | 152.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 1 | vs | L 75-76 | -10.5 | L −11.5 | 153.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 4 | vs | L 76-78 | +3.5 | W +1.5 | 162.5 | U 154 |
| Feb 11 | @ | L 73-81 | -3.5 | L −11.5 | 151.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 15 | vs | L 81-83 | +4.5 | W +2.5 | 165.5 | U 164 |
| Feb 18 | @ | W 60-52 | -11.5 | L −3.5 | 157.5 | U 112 |
| Feb 22 | @ | L 72-73 | +2.5 | W +1.5 | 140.5 | O 145 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 77-73 | -4.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 150 |
| Mar 1 | vs | W 77-76 | -6.5 | L −5.5 | 147.5 | O 153 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 70-88 | +8.5 | L −9.5 | 150.5 | O 158 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 63-59 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 144.5 | U 122 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 70-74 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 136.5 | O 144 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
BC
W 83-78
+3.5
8
vs
COFC
W 94-77
+11.5
9
@
LIB
L 68-88
−12.5
20
vs
PAC
W 82-59
+15.5
24
vs
LMU
W 76-65
+7.5
25
vs
GMU
L 65-74
−4.5
30
vs
SBU
L 65-70
−6.5
7
@
FGCU
W 81-76
+2.5
13
vs
UALB
W 105-79
+7.5
19
@
SMC
L 75-88
+0.5
23
@
UCF
L 80-85
+3.5
31
vs
UTSA
W 110-70
+23.5
4
@
TULN
L 66-69
−6.5
7
@
UAB
W 76-71
+8.5
11
vs
MEM
W 89-78
+9.5
15
vs
WICH
W 85-67
+14.5
18
@
TEM
W 79-73
+3.5
21
vs
TULN
W 79-74
−5.5
25
@
USF
L 75-89
−8.5
29
@
MEM
L 65-92
−23.5
1
vs
ECU
L 75-76
−11.5
4
vs
TLSA
L 76-78
+1.5
11
@
RICE
L 73-81
−11.5
15
vs
USF
L 81-83
+2.5
18
@
UTSA
W 60-52
−3.5
22
@
UNT
L 72-73
+1.5
26
vs
TEM
W 77-73
−0.5
1
vs
CLT
W 77-76
−5.5
7
@
WICH
L 70-88
−9.5
11
vs
TEM
W 63-59
+5.5
12
vs
UNT
L 70-74
−2.5
covered 17didn’t cover 14avg +0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
BC
W 83-78
+12.5
8
vs
COFC
W 94-77
+14.5
9
@
LIB
L 68-88
+3.5
20
vs
PAC
W 82-59
−13.5
24
vs
LMU
W 76-65
−3.5
25
vs
GMU
L 65-74
−4.5
30
vs
SBU
L 65-70
−11.5
7
@
FGCU
W 81-76
+6.5
13
vs
UALB
W 105-79
+36.5
19
@
SMC
L 75-88
+17.5
23
@
UCF
L 80-85
+2.5
31
vs
UTSA
W 110-70
+21.5
4
@
TULN
L 66-69
−23.5
7
@
UAB
W 76-71
−15.5
11
vs
MEM
W 89-78
+14.5
15
vs
WICH
W 85-67
−3.5
18
@
TEM
W 79-73
+3.5
21
vs
TULN
W 79-74
−2.5
25
@
USF
L 75-89
−2.5
29
@
MEM
L 65-92
+4.5
1
vs
ECU
L 75-76
−2.5
4
vs
TLSA
L 76-78
−8.5
11
@
RICE
L 73-81
+2.5
15
vs
USF
L 81-83
−1.5
18
@
UTSA
W 60-52
−45.5
22
@
UNT
L 72-73
+4.5
26
vs
TEM
W 77-73
+4.5
1
vs
CLT
W 77-76
+5.5
7
@
WICH
L 70-88
+7.5
11
vs
TEM
W 63-59
−22.5
12
vs
UNT
L 70-74
+7.5
over 17under 14avg +0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Wright St
33 games played
Straight up
21-12
64% wins
Against the spread
21-12
64% covers · avg +2.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-17
48% overs · avg +3.4 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 6 | @ | L 67-77 | +14.5 | W +4.5 | 148.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 11 | vs | L 71-81 | -5.5 | L −15.5 | 159.5 | U 152 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 92-59 | +6.5 | W +39.5 | 156.5 | U 151 |
| Nov 16 | vs | L 72-76 | +4.5 | W +0.5 | 157.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 25 | @ | W 79-62 | -9.5 | W +7.5 | 147.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 28 | @ | L 69-94 | +14.5 | L −10.5 | 150.5 | O 163 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 68-69 | +3.5 | W +2.5 | 144.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 86-58 | -6.5 | W +21.5 | 142.5 | O 144 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 74-76 | +3.5 | W +1.5 | 149.5 | O 150 |
| Dec 16 | vs | L 76-83 | +1.5 | L −5.5 | 149.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 70-64 | -10.5 | L −4.5 | 142.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 29 | vs | W 88-73 | -3.5 | W +11.5 | 159.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 76-70 | -3.5 | W +2.5 | 147.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 4 | @ | W 81-77 | -8.5 | L −4.5 | 162.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 9 | @ | W 84-82 | -5.5 | L −3.5 | 148.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 11 | @ | W 94-84 | +4.5 | W +14.5 | 161.5 | O 178 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 93-83 | -4.5 | W +5.5 | 141.5 | O 176 |
| Jan 21 | vs | L 79-85 | -15.5 | L −21.5 | 156.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 88-80 | -1.5 | W +6.5 | 155.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 30 | @ | W 76-69 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 151.5 | U 145 |
| Feb 1 | @ | W 83-75 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 144.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 4 | @ | L 66-72 | -1.5 | L −7.5 | 147.5 | U 138 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 73-68 | -6.5 | L −1.5 | 150.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 74-77 | -11.5 | L −14.5 | 151.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 15 | @ | W 102-90 | -7.5 | W +4.5 | 157.5 | O 192 |
| Feb 19 | vs | W 85-73 | -11.5 | W +0.5 | 160.5 | U 158 |
| Feb 22 | vs | L 68-81 | -4.5 | L −17.5 | 146.5 | O 149 |
| Feb 25 | @ | W 74-70 | -1.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 92-91 | +3.5 | W +4.5 | 153.5 | O 183 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 90-61 | -14.5 | W +14.5 | 162.5 | U 151 |
| Mar 9 | vs | W 103-90 | +1.5 | W +14.5 | 157.5 | O 193 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 66-63 | -4.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | U 129 |
| Mar 20 | vs | L 73-82 | +17.5 | W +8.5 | 146.5 | O 155 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
6
@
CAL
L 67-77
+4.5
11
vs
TOL
L 71-81
−15.5
15
vs
RAD
W 92-59
+39.5
16
vs
KENT
L 72-76
+0.5
25
@
STET
W 79-62
+7.5
28
@
BTLR
L 69-94
−10.5
3
@
YSU
L 68-69
+2.5
7
vs
GB
W 86-58
+21.5
13
@
MRSH
L 74-76
+1.5
16
vs
M-OH
L 76-83
−5.5
22
vs
EMU
W 70-64
−4.5
29
vs
OAK
W 88-73
+11.5
1
vs
MILW
W 76-70
+2.5
4
@
IUIN
W 81-77
−4.5
9
@
DETM
W 84-82
−3.5
11
@
OAK
W 94-84
+14.5
15
vs
YSU
W 93-83
+5.5
21
vs
CLE
L 79-85
−21.5
24
vs
NKU
W 88-80
+6.5
30
@
MILW
W 76-69
+4.5
1
@
GB
W 83-75
+4.5
4
@
RMU
L 66-72
−7.5
7
vs
PFW
W 73-68
−1.5
12
vs
DETM
L 74-77
−14.5
15
@
CLE
W 102-90
+4.5
19
vs
IUIN
W 85-73
+0.5
22
vs
RMU
L 68-81
−17.5
25
@
PFW
W 74-70
+2.5
28
@
NKU
W 92-91
+4.5
4
vs
CLE
W 90-61
+14.5
9
vs
NKU
W 103-90
+14.5
10
vs
DETM
W 66-63
−1.5
20
vs
UVA
L 73-82
+8.5
covered 21didn’t cover 12avg +2.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
6
@
CAL
L 67-77
−4.5
11
vs
TOL
L 71-81
−7.5
15
vs
RAD
W 92-59
−5.5
16
vs
KENT
L 72-76
−9.5
25
@
STET
W 79-62
−6.5
28
@
BTLR
L 69-94
+12.5
3
@
YSU
L 68-69
−7.5
7
vs
GB
W 86-58
+1.5
13
@
MRSH
L 74-76
+0.5
16
vs
M-OH
L 76-83
+9.5
22
vs
EMU
W 70-64
−8.5
29
vs
OAK
W 88-73
+1.5
1
vs
MILW
W 76-70
−1.5
4
@
IUIN
W 81-77
−4.5
9
@
DETM
W 84-82
+17.5
11
@
OAK
W 94-84
+16.5
15
vs
YSU
W 93-83
+34.5
21
vs
CLE
L 79-85
+7.5
24
vs
NKU
W 88-80
+12.5
30
@
MILW
W 76-69
−6.5
1
@
GB
W 83-75
+13.5
4
@
RMU
L 66-72
−9.5
7
vs
PFW
W 73-68
−9.5
12
vs
DETM
L 74-77
−0.5
15
@
CLE
W 102-90
+34.5
19
vs
IUIN
W 85-73
−2.5
22
vs
RMU
L 68-81
+2.5
25
@
PFW
W 74-70
−6.5
28
@
NKU
W 92-91
+29.5
4
vs
CLE
W 90-61
−11.5
9
vs
NKU
W 103-90
+35.5
10
vs
DETM
W 66-63
−24.5
20
vs
UVA
L 73-82
+8.5
over 16under 17avg +3.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
FAU has the better starters
Position by position: FAU 3, Wright St 2, even 0
FAUBetterWright St
G B. Speed TR15.8 pts · 4.4 reb · 3.7 ast
Score 82
←FAUSmall
G C. O'Hara TR14.2 pts · 4.4 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 66
G J. Hamilton TR17.8 pts · 4.5 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 93
←FAUBig
G D. Pangonis8.9 pts · 2.5 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 30
G K. Carlyle14.5 pts · 3.7 reb · 2.8 ast
Score 73
←FAUBig
G C. Traylor TR3.8 pts · 1.1 reb · 2 ast
Score 21
G M. Charles TR10.5 pts · 4 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 32
→WRSTBig
G A. Holden5.8 pts · 3.8 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 78
F M. Porter-Brown TR7.8 pts · 3.2 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 42
→WRSTSmall
F K. Pickett8.5 pts · 5.5 reb · 1 ast
Score 67
FAUBetterWright St
FAU offense85th of 366 · +0.4
←FAUBig
WRST defense215th of 366 · -5.6
FAU defense174th of 366 · -3.9
=Even
WRST offense148th of 366 · -4.5
Backcourt+4.0 · 4 players
←FAUBig
Backcourt-2.5 · 4 players
Frontcourt-0.6 · 1 player
→WRSTSmall
Frontcourt+0.6 · 1 player
Bench-0.2 · 3 players
=Even
Bench-0.7 · 2 players
Score, worst to bestFAU betterWRST betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
B. Speed34 min · TRJ. Hamilton32 min · TRK. Carlyle31 minM. Charles30 min · TRL. Dayco-Green2 minL. Smith1 min
Forwards
M. Porter-Brown20 min · TRJ. HarrisNewM. PuodziukaitisNewD. MusisNew
Centers
K. Mullen6 min · TRT. IfaolaNew
Guards
C. O'Hara33 min · TRD. Pangonis27 minC. Traylor17 min · TRA. Holden14 minI. Milijasevic8 min · TRP. DouglasNew
Forwards
K. Pickett23 minS. JohnsonNewN. LewisNew
Centers
N. Djapa10 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 77.2 #111 | Points per game | 79.8 #72 |
| 1.09 #170 | Points per possession | 1.16 #54 |
| 71.1 #71 | Pace (possessions) | 69.1 #171 |
| Shooting | ||
| 52.2 #135 | Effective FG% | 54.3 #56 |
| 33.3 #210 | 3-point % | 36.4 #44 |
| 38.2 #208 | 3-point attempt rate | 34.2 #290 |
| 33.3 #231 | Free throw rate | 37.4 #120 |
| Possessions | ||
| 17.6 #246 | Turnover rate | 16.1 #149 |
| 31.6 #140 | Offensive rebound rate | 32.8 #91 |
| 13.0 #210 | Assists per game | 13.2 #199 |
| Defense | ||
| 75.3 #198 | Points allowed | 75.6 #206 |
| 1.06 #108 | Points allowed per possession | 1.09 #201 |
| 49.5 #81 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.4 #238 |
| 33.8 #169 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.3 #203 |
| 15.5 #252 | Turnovers forced | 16.6 #179 |
| 71.7 #78 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.6 #129 |
| 5.7 #272 | Steals per game | 7.1 #114 |
| 5.3 #11 | Blocks per game | 4.4 #47 |
FAU
16-15 in 2025-26 overall · 10-10 in conference · American Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs North Texas70–74
- Wvs Temple63–59
- L@ Wichita St70–88
- Wvs Charlotte77–76
- Wvs Temple77–73
A week or more of rest.
Wright St
21-12 in 2025-26 overall · 18-5 in conference · Horizon League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Virginia73–82
- Wvs Detroit Mercy66–63
- Wvs N Kentucky103–90
- Wvs Cleveland St90–61
- W@ N Kentucky92–91
A week or more of rest.