Canisius Golden Griffins vs UAlbany Great Danes: Model Line and Edge

Sat, Nov 21, 4:00 PM ETKoessler Athletic Center · Neutral site

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Canisius and UAlbany
CAN	This season	UALB
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 UALB 72–67 · win probability UALB 67%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 139.2

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: UALB has more of the edges

CAN 2, UALB 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

CANSmall

Three-pointers

CAN hits 33.3% and allows 33.0%; UALB hits 32.6% and allows 36.0%. Threes are 39.5% and 37.6% of their shots

UALBSmall

CAN offense vs UALB defense

Offense 358th of 366 against a defense 259th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Schedule so far

CAN has played the 337th-hardest schedule, UALB the 260th. A record against a soft schedule means less

UALBSmall

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: CAN 1%, UALB 38%. Transfers in: CAN 6, UALB 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

UALBSmall

Shooting

Effective FG%: CAN 46.3 and allows 52.2; UALB 51.4 and allows 53.2

CANSmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: CAN 31.4, UALB 24.9. Allowed: CAN 35.2, UALB 35.7

Even

Turnovers

Turnover rate: CAN 19.6%, UALB 18.5%. Forced: CAN 16.0%, UALB 15.8%

Context

Tempo

About 65 possessions: CAN plays 64.6 a game (353rd fastest), UALB 65.6 (324th). Faster games mean more points

Even

UALB offense vs CAN defense

Offense 313th of 366 against a defense 321st, on the model’s ratings

Context

Neutral floor

No home court: the model takes it out of the line

Even

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: CAN 29.3%, UALB 32.7%. Defensive: CAN 70.2%, UALB 67.6%

Sorted by how lopsided each matchup is, from national ranks. Reasons to look, not picks: the market already knows most of this.

Model vs market

	Market	Model	Model edge
Spread	—	UALB -4.9	—
Total	—	139.2	—
Projected score	—	CAN 67.2 · UALB 72.1

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	UALB -2.8	—
1H total	65.2	—
1H projected score	CAN 31.2 · UALB 34	—

The 1st-half model is fitted from the full-game model and past halves. ESPN has no 1st-half lines for college games, so there is no market to compare it with.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

ATS

2025-26 season

	Season	Cover	Neutral	Role
CAN LWLWW	15-15	50%	—	—
UALB WLWLL	11-18	38%	2-1	—

Venue/role: CAN neutral site; UALB neutral site. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
CAN UOUUU	9-21	30%	9-21
UALB UUOUO	14-15	48%	8-21

Squares: last 5 games (O over, U under), oldest first. Tap for the score and line.

Last 10 games

2025-26

	Straight up	Spread	Over / under
CAN	2-8 20%	5-5 50%	3-7 30%
UALB	4-6 40%	4-6 40%	5-5 50%

Wins-losses (pushes last). Spread and over / under skip games without a line.

Next 3 games

With how the last meeting with each opponent went

Canisius

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 22	vs WIU	No recent meeting
Nov 29	@ UIC	No recent meeting
Dec 4	vs RID	W72–66WO

UAlbany

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 22	vs MERC	No recent meeting
Nov 25	@ SYR	L85–102LO
Dec 1	@ PSU	No recent meeting

Last meeting: result, against the spread, over / under. Hover a result for its date.

ATS History · 2025-26

WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total

Canisius

30 games played

Straight up

9-21

30% wins

Against the spread

15-15

50% covers · avg −0.1 pts vs the line

Over / Under

9-21

30% overs · avg −3.3 pts vs the total

Straight up

9-2130%

L L W L W W L L L W L L W W W L L L L L L L L L L L W L W L

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

15-1550%

L W W L L W L L L W W L W W W L L L W W W L L W L L W L W W

2 straight covers3 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

9-2130%

U O U U U O U U U U U O O O U U U O U U O O U U U U O U U U

3 straight unders1 of last 4 over

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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	@DAY	L 48-88	+25.5	L −14.5	142.5	U 136
Nov 8	@SBU	L 70-89	+21.5	W +2.5	136.5	O 159
Nov 12	vsMERC	W 58-55	+1.5	W +4.5	135.5	U 113
Nov 17	@HPU	L 50-93	+23.5	L −19.5	152.5	U 143
Nov 21	vsUMES	W 60-57	-3.5	L −0.5	128.5	U 117
Nov 23	vsBING	W 75-66	-2.5	W +6.5	129.5	O 141
Nov 29	vsBUF	L 53-71	+9.5	L −8.5	139.5	U 124
Dec 5	@SPU	L 57-69	+9.5	L −2.5	129.5	U 126
Dec 7	@SIE	L 52-74	+17.5	L −4.5	131.5	U 126
Dec 13	@ME	W 70-43	+6.5	W +33.5	127.5	U 113
Dec 16	@URI	L 45-62	+21.5	W +4.5	138.5	U 107
Dec 22	@DUQ	L 59-103	+19.5	L −24.5	143.5	O 162
Jan 2	vsFAIR	W 85-81	+6.5	W +10.5	140.5	O 166
Jan 4	vsSHU	W 82-78	+5.5	W +9.5	141.5	O 160
Jan 9	@MAN	W 70-64	+7.5	W +13.5	145.5	U 134
Jan 11	@IONA	L 48-74	+11.5	L −14.5	141.5	U 122
Jan 14	vsNIA	L 54-59	-2.5	L −7.5	126.5	U 113
Jan 17	vsMSM	L 68-78	+3.5	L −6.5	135.5	O 146
Jan 22	@SHU	L 66-69	+10.5	W +7.5	145.5	U 135
Jan 24	@FAIR	L 55-61	+10.5	W +4.5	141.5	U 116
Jan 30	vsMRST	L 86-88	+9.5	W +7.5	129.5	O 174
Feb 1	vsSIE	L 63-78	+8.5	L −6.5	135.5	O 141
Feb 3	@NIA	L 56-65	+2.5	L −6.5	129.5	U 121
Feb 5	@QUIN	L 60-75	+15.5	W +0.5	141.5	U 135
Feb 13	vsIONA	L 63-69	+4.5	L −1.5	137.5	U 132
Feb 15	vsMAN	L 65-69	+1.5	L −2.5	142.5	U 134
Feb 20	@RID	W 72-66	+1.5	W +7.5	131.5	O 138
Feb 22	@MSM	L 47-68	+7.5	L −13.5	137.5	U 115
Feb 27	vsMRMK	W 67-62	+8.5	W +13.5	129.5	U 129
Mar 1	vsQUIN	L 63-67	+7.5	W +3.5	138.5	U 130

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

DAY

L 48-88

−14.5

SBU

L 70-89

+2.5

MERC

W 58-55

+4.5

HPU

L 50-93

−19.5

UMES

W 60-57

−0.5

BING

W 75-66

+6.5

BUF

L 53-71

−8.5

SPU

L 57-69

−2.5

SIE

L 52-74

−4.5

W 70-43

+33.5

URI

L 45-62

+4.5

DUQ

L 59-103

−24.5

FAIR

W 85-81

+10.5

SHU

W 82-78

+9.5

MAN

W 70-64

+13.5

IONA

L 48-74

−14.5

NIA

L 54-59

−7.5

MSM

L 68-78

−6.5

SHU

L 66-69

+7.5

FAIR

L 55-61

+4.5

MRST

L 86-88

+7.5

SIE

L 63-78

−6.5

NIA

L 56-65

−6.5

QUIN

L 60-75

+0.5

IONA

L 63-69

−1.5

MAN

L 65-69

−2.5

RID

W 72-66

+7.5

MSM

L 47-68

−13.5

MRMK

W 67-62

+13.5

QUIN

L 63-67

+3.5

covered 15didn’t cover 15avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

DAY

L 48-88

−6.5

SBU

L 70-89

+22.5

MERC

W 58-55

−22.5

HPU

L 50-93

−9.5

UMES

W 60-57

−11.5

BING

W 75-66

+11.5

BUF

L 53-71

−15.5

SPU

L 57-69

−3.5

SIE

L 52-74

−5.5

W 70-43

−14.5

URI

L 45-62

−31.5

DUQ

L 59-103

+18.5

FAIR

W 85-81

+25.5

SHU

W 82-78

+18.5

MAN

W 70-64

−11.5

IONA

L 48-74

−19.5

NIA

L 54-59

−13.5

MSM

L 68-78

+10.5

SHU

L 66-69

−10.5

FAIR

L 55-61

−25.5

MRST

L 86-88

+44.5

SIE

L 63-78

+5.5

NIA

L 56-65

−8.5

QUIN

L 60-75

−6.5

IONA

L 63-69

−5.5

MAN

L 65-69

−8.5

RID

W 72-66

+6.5

MSM

L 47-68

−22.5

MRMK

W 67-62

−0.5

QUIN

L 63-67

−8.5

over 9under 21avg −3.3 ptslonger = bigger margin

UAlbany

29 games played

Straight up

8-21

28% wins

Against the spread

11-18

38% covers · avg −0.2 pts vs the line

Over / Under

14-15

48% overs · avg +0.2 pts vs the total

Straight up

8-2128%

L L L L L L L L L W L L L W W W L L L L W L W W L L W L L

2 straight losses1 of last 4 won

Against the spread

11-1838%

L L L W W L L W L W L L L W W W L L L L W L L W W L W L L

2 straight misses ATS1 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

14-1548%

U U U U U O O O O U U O O U U O U O O U U O O O U U O U O

2 of last 4 overno streak

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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	@MARQ	L 53-80	+24.5	L −2.5	149.5	U 133
Nov 8	@MASS	L 62-83	+9.5	L −11.5	155.5	U 145
Nov 14	@URI	L 61-80	+15.5	L −3.5	150.5	U 141
Nov 21	@SIE	L 63-73	+10.5	W +0.5	140.5	U 136
Nov 28	vsCOLG	L 67-69	+7.5	W +5.5	141.5	U 136
Nov 29	vsFOR	L 68-88	+10.5	L −9.5	143.5	O 156
Dec 6	@COLU	L 65-93	+13.5	L −14.5	144.5	O 158
Dec 10	vsYALE	L 82-93	+17.5	W +6.5	145.5	O 175
Dec 13	@FAU	L 79-105	+18.5	L −7.5	147.5	O 184
Dec 17	@STBK	W 71-55	+10.5	W +26.5	146.5	U 126
Dec 21	vsCOR	L 75-83	+6.5	L −1.5	167.5	U 158
Dec 30	@SC	L 67-96	+19.5	L −9.5	148.5	O 163
Jan 3	@UML	L 71-83	+2.5	L −9.5	150.5	O 154
Jan 10	vsBRY	W 71-46	-3.5	W +21.5	136.5	U 117
Jan 15	vsBING	W 69-53	-8.5	W +7.5	138.5	U 122
Jan 19	vsUVM	W 75-68	+5.5	W +12.5	139.5	O 143
Jan 22	@ME	L 49-52	-2.5	L −5.5	131.5	U 101
Jan 24	@UNH	L 72-80	+2.5	L −5.5	137.5	O 152
Jan 29	vsNJIT	L 68-77	-5.5	L −14.5	139.5	O 145
Jan 31	vsUMBC	L 65-68	+1.5	L −1.5	141.5	U 133
Feb 5	@BRY	W 65-63	+1.5	W +3.5	133.5	U 128
Feb 7	vsUML	L 79-89	-4.5	L −14.5	143.5	O 168
Feb 14	@BING	W 77-74	-4.5	L −1.5	136.5	O 151
Feb 19	@NJIT	W 81-63	+3.5	W +21.5	142.5	O 144
Feb 21	@UMBC	L 62-66	+7.5	W +3.5	144.5	U 128
Feb 26	vsME	L 59-70	-4.5	L −15.5	130.5	U 129
Feb 28	vsUNH	W 84-61	-3.5	W +19.5	138.5	O 145
Mar 3	@UVM	L 56-69	+9.5	L −3.5	136.5	U 125
Mar 7	@UML	L 76-81	+2.5	L −2.5	146.5	O 157

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

MARQ

L 53-80

−2.5

MASS

L 62-83

−11.5

URI

L 61-80

−3.5

SIE

L 63-73

+0.5

COLG

L 67-69

+5.5

FOR

L 68-88

−9.5

COLU

L 65-93

−14.5

YALE

L 82-93

+6.5

FAU

L 79-105

−7.5

STBK

W 71-55

+26.5

COR

L 75-83

−1.5

L 67-96

−9.5

UML

L 71-83

−9.5

BRY

W 71-46

+21.5

BING

W 69-53

+7.5

UVM

W 75-68

+12.5

L 49-52

−5.5

UNH

L 72-80

−5.5

NJIT

L 68-77

−14.5

UMBC

L 65-68

−1.5

BRY

W 65-63

+3.5

UML

L 79-89

−14.5

BING

W 77-74

−1.5

NJIT

W 81-63

+21.5

UMBC

L 62-66

+3.5

L 59-70

−15.5

UNH

W 84-61

+19.5

UVM

L 56-69

−3.5

UML

L 76-81

−2.5

covered 11didn’t cover 18avg −0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

MARQ

L 53-80

−16.5

MASS

L 62-83

−10.5

URI

L 61-80

−9.5

SIE

L 63-73

−4.5

COLG

L 67-69

−5.5

FOR

L 68-88

+12.5

COLU

L 65-93

+13.5

YALE

L 82-93

+29.5

FAU

L 79-105

+36.5

STBK

W 71-55

−20.5

COR

L 75-83

−9.5

L 67-96

+14.5

UML

L 71-83

+3.5

BRY

W 71-46

−19.5

BING

W 69-53

−16.5

UVM

W 75-68

+3.5

L 49-52

−30.5

UNH

L 72-80

+14.5

NJIT

L 68-77

+5.5

UMBC

L 65-68

−8.5

BRY

W 65-63

−5.5

UML

L 79-89

+24.5

BING

W 77-74

+14.5

NJIT

W 81-63

+1.5

UMBC

L 62-66

−16.5

L 59-70

−1.5

UNH

W 84-61

+6.5

UVM

L 56-69

−11.5

UML

L 76-81

+10.5

over 14under 15avg +0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.

UAlbany has the better starters

Position by position: Canisius 0, UAlbany 1, even 4

CanisiusBetterUAlbany

G V. Sigona TR7.5 pts · 1 reb · 1.7 ast Score 22

Even

G A. Fall9.6 pts · 3.4 reb · 1.1 ast Score 27

G M. Wilson TR4.9 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.6 ast Score 18

UALBSmall

G Z. Matulu9.7 pts · 5.8 reb · 1.9 ast Score 48

G D. Winters TR1.6 pts · 0.6 reb · 0.2 ast Not ranked

No call

G P. Santos TR6.9 pts · 3.8 reb · 0.7 ast Score 51

F P. Ryan TR6.8 pts · 4 reb · 1.1 ast Score 7

Even

G M. Rose2.8 pts · 1.5 reb · 1.1 ast Score 1

F C. Efinda TR4.2 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.6 ast Score 8

Even

F B. Michaels TR1.9 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.4 ast Score 3

CanisiusBetterUAlbany

CAN offense358th of 366 · -14.0

UALBSmall

UALB defense259th of 366 · -6.7

CAN defense321st of 366 · -8.3

Even

UALB offense313th of 366 · -10.0

Backcourt-3.5 · 3 players

CANSmall

Backcourt-6.0 · 4 players

Frontcourt-4.4 · 2 players

UALBSmall

Frontcourt-1.8 · 1 player

Bench-0.4 · 2 players

Even

Bench-0.2 · 1 player

Score, worst to bestCAN betterUALB betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers

Projected starters: college teams publish no depth chart, so these come from minutes played, and a freshman or a new starter can change them. The score is the share of ranked players at the position that player is ahead of. Numbers are this season's once a player has 30 minutes, 2025-26's before that. Bench is the next five by minutes. Tap a player for the full numbers.

Depth chart

Projected rotation by position, starters outlined

Canisius

Guards

V. Sigona20 min · TRM. Wilson13 min · TRD. Winters6 min · TRT. Augustine2 minC. FrancisNewW. FowlerNew

Forwards

P. Ryan23 min · TRC. Efinda15 min · TRN. Deer3 min · TRN. FoutsNewW. TaylorNewA. RiakNew

UAlbany

Guards

A. Fall31 minZ. Matulu30 minP. Santos19 min · TRM. Rose15 minP. KountaNewO. EngenNew

Forwards

B. Michaels13 min · TRE. BussingNewP. MiovicNewU. GrahamNew

Centers

K. Webb3 min · TRC. SmithNew

In order of minutes, from rosters as of today. ESPN lists players only as guards, forwards or centers, and no injury report exists for college basketball, so a player who is out may still show here.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

Matchup stats

2025-26 · rank among 365 teams

ChartTable

Scoring

Points per game

CAN62.2 #361

UALB68.7 #302

Points per possession

CAN0.96 #349

UALB1.05 #259

Pace (possessions)

CAN64.6 #353

UALB65.6 #324

Shooting

Effective FG%

CAN46.3 #348

UALB51.4 #182

3-point %

CAN33.3 #213

UALB32.6 #248

3-point attempt rate

CAN39.5 #182

UALB37.6 #220

Free throw rate

CAN31.4 #271

UALB24.9 #364

Possessions

Turnover rate

CAN19.6 #341

UALB18.5 #299

Offensive rebound rate

CAN29.3 #226

UALB32.7 #99

Assists per game

CAN11.9 #293

UALB12.8 #232

Defense

Points allowed

CAN71.4 #87

UALB74.5 #176

Points allowed per possession

CAN1.10 #228

UALB1.14 #302

Opponent effective FG%

CAN52.2 #225

UALB53.2 #275

Opponent 3-point %

CAN33.0 #124

UALB36.0 #302

Turnovers forced

CAN16.0 #222

UALB15.8 #228

Defensive rebound rate

CAN70.2 #151

UALB67.6 #277

Steals per game

CAN4.8 #342

UALB6.7 #153

Blocks per game

CAN2.6 #292

UALB3.9 #82

CAN		UALB
Scoring
62.2 #361	Points per game	68.7 #302
0.96 #349	Points per possession	1.05 #259
64.6 #353	Pace (possessions)	65.6 #324
Shooting
46.3 #348	Effective FG%	51.4 #182
33.3 #213	3-point %	32.6 #248
39.5 #182	3-point attempt rate	37.6 #220
31.4 #271	Free throw rate	24.9 #364
Possessions
19.6 #341	Turnover rate	18.5 #299
29.3 #226	Offensive rebound rate	32.7 #99
11.9 #293	Assists per game	12.8 #232
Defense
71.4 #87	Points allowed	74.5 #176
1.10 #228	Points allowed per possession	1.14 #302
52.2 #225	Opponent effective FG%	53.2 #275
33.0 #124	Opponent 3-point %	36.0 #302
16.0 #222	Turnovers forced	15.8 #228
70.2 #151	Defensive rebound rate	67.6 #277
4.8 #342	Steals per game	6.7 #153
2.6 #292	Blocks per game	3.9 #82

From the box scores. A longer bar is a better national rank, on every row; the better team's bar is solid. A green rank is near the top of Division I, a red one near the bottom. Pace and 3-point rate are styles, so they have no better side.

Canisius

9-21 in 2025-26 overall · 5-15 in conference · Metro Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Quinnipiac63–67
Wvs Merrimack67–62
L@ Mount St Marys47–68
W@ Rider72–66
Lvs Manhattan65–69

A week or more of rest.

UAlbany

8-21 in 2025-26 overall · 7-10 in conference · America East Conference

Last five, 2025-26

L@ UMass Lowell76–81
L@ Vermont56–69
Wvs New Hampshire84–61
Lvs Maine59–70
L@ UMBC62–66

A week or more of rest.

Canisius vs UAlbany

What could decide it: UALB has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Canisius

UAlbany

UAlbany has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Canisius

UAlbany