MVP Arena · at Siena · Conference game
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SIE | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SIE 69–67 · win probability SIE 56%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 136.6
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
MRMK 3, SIE 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: MRMK 24.8%, SIE 31.8%. Defensive: MRMK 60.1%, SIE 70.5%
SIE offense vs MRMK defense
Offense 309th of 366 against a defense 139th, on the model’s ratings
MRMK offense vs SIE defense
Offense 316th of 366 against a defense 194th, on the model’s ratings
Turnovers
Turnover rate: MRMK 14.8%, SIE 15.8%. Forced: MRMK 20.4%, SIE 17.0%
Three-pointers
MRMK hits 32.7% and allows 30.3%; SIE hits 30.6% and allows 32.4%. Threes are 46.1% and 32.2% of their shots
Home court
SIE at home. This season: SIE 0-0 at home, MRMK 0-0 away
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: MRMK 38.2, SIE 33.4. Allowed: MRMK 37.1, SIE 27.5
Context
Schedule so far
MRMK has played the 286th-hardest schedule, SIE the 320th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: MRMK 49.1 and allows 46.7; SIE 50.4 and allows 48.5
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: MRMK 37%, SIE 28%. Transfers in: MRMK 3, SIE 1. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Context
Tempo
About 64 possessions: MRMK plays 64.4 a game (357th fastest), SIE 64.4 (354th). 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 | — | SIE -1.8 | — |
| Total | — | 136.6 | — |
| Projected score | — | MRMK 67.4 · SIE 69.2 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SIE -0.9 | — |
| 1H total | 64.0 | — |
| 1H projected score | MRMK 31.5 · SIE 32.4 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8-2 80% | 5-5 50% | 4-6 40% | |
| 6-4 60% | 7-3 70% | 1-9 10% |
Recent meetings
Since 2021-22
MRMK 3–1 SIEMRMK leads · 4 games since 2021-22 · MRMK 2-2 ATS
| Date | Result | Line | Covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10, 2025-26 | SIE 64 vs MRMK 54 | MRMK -2.5 | SIE W |
| Feb 20, 2025-26 | SIE 72 @ MRMK 79 | MRMK -2.5 | MRMK W |
| Jan 9, 2025-26 | MRMK 63 @ SIE 59 | SIE -5.5 | MRMK W |
| Jan 18, 2024-25 | SIE 58 @ MRMK 64 | MRMK -6.5 | SIE W |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Merrimack
34 games played
Straight up
23-11
68% wins
Against the spread
20-14
59% covers · avg +2.8 pts vs the line
Over / Under
12-22
35% overs · avg −3.3 pts vs the total
Against the spread
20-1459%
2 straight misses ATS1 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 | L 66-75 | +6.5 | L −2.5 | 143.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 6 | @ | L 57-95 | +23.5 | L −14.5 | 148.5 | O 152 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 62-76 | +4.5 | L −9.5 | 142.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 15 | @ | W 91-79 | +2.5 | W +14.5 | 135.5 | O 170 |
| Nov 19 | vs | W 72-65 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 130.5 | O 137 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 45-80 | +36.5 | W +1.5 | 158.5 | U 125 |
| Nov 28 | @ | L 65-77 | +2.5 | L −9.5 | 152.5 | U 142 |
| Nov 29 | vs | L 58-78 | +5.5 | L −14.5 | 135.5 | O 136 |
| Nov 30 | vs | W 66-60 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 132.5 | U 126 |
| Dec 4 | vs | W 68-66 | -9.5 | L −7.5 | 138.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 74-63 | -3.5 | W +7.5 | 144.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 10 | @ | W 59-56 | +2.5 | W +5.5 | 134.5 | U 115 |
| Dec 14 | @ | L 59-66 | +6.5 | L −0.5 | 136.5 | U 125 |
| Dec 29 | @ | W 80-72 | +1.5 | W +9.5 | 144.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 2 | vs | W 75-65 | -3.5 | W +6.5 | 141.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 4 | vs | W 73-66 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 148.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 9 | @ | W 63-59 | +5.5 | W +9.5 | 132.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 11 | @ | L 63-76 | +1.5 | L −11.5 | 133.5 | O 139 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 83-71 | +1.5 | W +13.5 | 141.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 19 | @ | W 68-55 | +6.5 | W +19.5 | 133.5 | U 123 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 60-61 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 143.5 | U 121 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 67-59 | -2.5 | W +5.5 | 134.5 | U 126 |
| Feb 1 | vs | W 75-58 | -5.5 | W +11.5 | 147.5 | U 133 |
| Feb 5 | @ | W 87-70 | -2.5 | W +14.5 | 134.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 73-47 | -8.5 | W +17.5 | 137.5 | U 120 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 81-56 | -2.5 | W +22.5 | 128.5 | O 137 |
| Feb 15 | @ | W 56-49 | +3.5 | W +10.5 | 141.5 | U 105 |
| Feb 20 | vs | W 79-72 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 133.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 22 | vs | W 88-86 | -6.5 | L −4.5 | 136.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 27 | @ | L 62-67 | -8.5 | L −13.5 | 129.5 | U 129 |
| Mar 1 | @ | W 73-66 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 126.5 | O 139 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 70-48 | -6.5 | W +15.5 | 143.5 | U 118 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 58-57 | -2.5 | L −1.5 | 128.5 | U 115 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 54-64 | -2.5 | L −12.5 | 128.5 | U 118 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
SDST
L 66-75
−2.5
6
@
AUB
L 57-95
−14.5
11
@
TAR
L 62-76
−9.5
15
@
BU
W 91-79
+14.5
19
vs
ME
W 72-65
+0.5
21
@
FLA
L 45-80
+1.5
28
@
PENN
L 65-77
−9.5
29
vs
HOF
L 58-78
−14.5
30
vs
LAS
W 66-60
+8.5
4
vs
RID
W 68-66
−7.5
7
vs
FAIR
W 74-63
+7.5
10
@
PRIN
W 59-56
+5.5
14
@
UVM
L 59-66
−0.5
29
@
SHU
W 80-72
+9.5
2
vs
MSM
W 75-65
+6.5
4
vs
MAN
W 73-66
+0.5
9
@
SIE
W 63-59
+9.5
11
@
SPU
L 63-76
−11.5
17
vs
QUIN
W 83-71
+13.5
19
@
MRST
W 68-55
+19.5
22
@
IONA
L 60-61
−2.5
24
vs
SPU
W 67-59
+5.5
1
vs
SHU
W 75-58
+11.5
5
@
MSM
W 87-70
+14.5
7
@
RID
W 73-47
+17.5
12
vs
MRST
W 81-56
+22.5
15
@
QUIN
W 56-49
+10.5
20
vs
SIE
W 79-72
+4.5
22
vs
IONA
W 88-86
−4.5
27
@
CAN
L 62-67
−13.5
1
@
NIA
W 73-66
−0.5
6
vs
SHU
W 70-48
+15.5
8
vs
MRST
W 58-57
−1.5
10
vs
SIE
L 54-64
−12.5
covered 20didn’t cover 14avg +2.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
SDST
L 66-75
−2.5
6
@
AUB
L 57-95
+3.5
11
@
TAR
L 62-76
−4.5
15
@
BU
W 91-79
+34.5
19
vs
ME
W 72-65
+6.5
21
@
FLA
L 45-80
−33.5
28
@
PENN
L 65-77
−10.5
29
vs
HOF
L 58-78
+0.5
30
vs
LAS
W 66-60
−6.5
4
vs
RID
W 68-66
−4.5
7
vs
FAIR
W 74-63
−7.5
10
@
PRIN
W 59-56
−19.5
14
@
UVM
L 59-66
−11.5
29
@
SHU
W 80-72
+7.5
2
vs
MSM
W 75-65
−1.5
4
vs
MAN
W 73-66
−9.5
9
@
SIE
W 63-59
−10.5
11
@
SPU
L 63-76
+5.5
17
vs
QUIN
W 83-71
+12.5
19
@
MRST
W 68-55
−10.5
22
@
IONA
L 60-61
−22.5
24
vs
SPU
W 67-59
−8.5
1
vs
SHU
W 75-58
−14.5
5
@
MSM
W 87-70
+22.5
7
@
RID
W 73-47
−17.5
12
vs
MRST
W 81-56
+8.5
15
@
QUIN
W 56-49
−36.5
20
vs
SIE
W 79-72
+17.5
22
vs
IONA
W 88-86
+37.5
27
@
CAN
L 62-67
−0.5
1
@
NIA
W 73-66
+12.5
6
vs
SHU
W 70-48
−25.5
8
vs
MRST
W 58-57
−13.5
10
vs
SIE
L 54-64
−10.5
over 12under 22avg −3.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Siena
35 games played
Straight up
23-12
66% wins
Against the spread
21-14
60% covers · avg +1.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
11-24
31% overs · avg −1.8 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 82-66 | -13.5 | W +2.5 | 148.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 7 | @ | W 62-46 | -3.5 | W +12.5 | 142.5 | U 108 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 66-75 | +9.5 | W +0.5 | 140.5 | O 141 |
| Nov 17 | vs | L 69-72 | -6.5 | L −9.5 | 146.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 73-63 | -10.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 24 | @ | W 73-69 | -9.5 | L −5.5 | 137.5 | O 142 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 70-63 | -5.5 | W +1.5 | 145.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 29 | @ | W 59-55 | -2.5 | W +1.5 | 137.5 | U 114 |
| Nov 30 | vs | W 64-60 | -9.5 | L −5.5 | 127.5 | U 124 |
| Dec 5 | vs | W 83-54 | -12.5 | W +16.5 | 129.5 | O 137 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 74-52 | -17.5 | W +4.5 | 131.5 | U 126 |
| Dec 17 | @ | L 69-83 | +2.5 | L −11.5 | 134.5 | O 152 |
| Dec 22 | @ | L 60-81 | +21.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 2 | @ | L 72-75 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 149.5 | U 147 |
| Jan 4 | @ | W 74-65 | -8.5 | W +0.5 | 135.5 | O 139 |
| Jan 9 | vs | L 59-63 | -5.5 | L −9.5 | 132.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 11 | @ | W 67-50 | -2.5 | W +14.5 | 139.5 | U 117 |
| Jan 14 | vs | L 80-86 | -8.5 | L −14.5 | 139.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 74-59 | -6.5 | W +8.5 | 144.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 19 | vs | W 85-77 | -6.5 | W +1.5 | 142.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 69-50 | -1.5 | W +17.5 | 133.5 | U 119 |
| Jan 30 | @ | W 82-79 | -9.5 | L −6.5 | 128.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 1 | @ | W 78-63 | -8.5 | W +6.5 | 135.5 | O 141 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 79-72 | -8.5 | L −1.5 | 140.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 65-70 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 135.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 13 | vs | L 62-74 | -3.5 | L −15.5 | 144.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 15 | @ | W 67-63 | +2.5 | W +6.5 | 133.5 | U 130 |
| Feb 20 | @ | L 72-79 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 133.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 22 | vs | W 72-63 | -5.5 | W +3.5 | 135.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 27 | @ | L 58-72 | -1.5 | L −15.5 | 142.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 1 | vs | W 76-61 | -14.5 | W +0.5 | 137.5 | U 137 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 63-58 | -2.5 | W +2.5 | 135.5 | U 121 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 76-61 | -1.5 | W +13.5 | 138.5 | U 137 |
| Mar 10 | vs | W 64-54 | +2.5 | W +12.5 | 128.5 | U 118 |
| Mar 19 | vs | L 65-71 | +28.5 | W +22.5 | 137.5 | U 136 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
BRY
W 82-66
+2.5
7
@
BRWN
W 62-46
+12.5
12
@
SBU
L 66-75
+0.5
17
vs
COLG
L 69-72
−9.5
21
vs
UALB
W 73-63
−0.5
24
@
HC
W 73-69
−5.5
28
vs
LONG
W 70-63
+1.5
29
@
AMER
W 59-55
+1.5
30
vs
ME
W 64-60
−5.5
5
vs
NIA
W 83-54
+16.5
7
vs
CAN
W 74-52
+4.5
17
@
UVM
L 69-83
−11.5
22
@
IU
L 60-81
+0.5
2
@
IONA
L 72-75
−4.5
4
@
RID
W 74-65
+0.5
9
vs
MRMK
L 59-63
−9.5
11
@
MSM
W 67-50
+14.5
14
vs
SHU
L 80-86
−14.5
17
@
MAN
W 74-59
+8.5
19
vs
FAIR
W 85-77
+1.5
22
vs
MRST
W 69-50
+17.5
30
@
NIA
W 82-79
−6.5
1
@
CAN
W 78-63
+6.5
5
vs
IONA
W 79-72
−1.5
7
@
SPU
L 65-70
−6.5
13
vs
QUIN
L 62-74
−15.5
15
@
MRST
W 67-63
+6.5
20
@
MRMK
L 72-79
−4.5
22
vs
SPU
W 72-63
+3.5
27
@
FAIR
L 58-72
−15.5
1
vs
RID
W 76-61
+0.5
7
vs
MSM
W 63-58
+2.5
8
vs
FAIR
W 76-61
+13.5
10
vs
MRMK
W 64-54
+12.5
19
vs
DUKE
L 65-71
+22.5
covered 21didn’t cover 14avg +1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
BRY
W 82-66
−0.5
7
@
BRWN
W 62-46
−34.5
12
@
SBU
L 66-75
+0.5
17
vs
COLG
L 69-72
−5.5
21
vs
UALB
W 73-63
−4.5
24
@
HC
W 73-69
+4.5
28
vs
LONG
W 70-63
−12.5
29
@
AMER
W 59-55
−23.5
30
vs
ME
W 64-60
−3.5
5
vs
NIA
W 83-54
+7.5
7
vs
CAN
W 74-52
−5.5
17
@
UVM
L 69-83
+17.5
22
@
IU
L 60-81
−4.5
2
@
IONA
L 72-75
−2.5
4
@
RID
W 74-65
+3.5
9
vs
MRMK
L 59-63
−10.5
11
@
MSM
W 67-50
−22.5
14
vs
SHU
L 80-86
+26.5
17
@
MAN
W 74-59
−11.5
19
vs
FAIR
W 85-77
+19.5
22
vs
MRST
W 69-50
−14.5
30
@
NIA
W 82-79
+32.5
1
@
CAN
W 78-63
+5.5
5
vs
IONA
W 79-72
+10.5
7
@
SPU
L 65-70
−0.5
13
vs
QUIN
L 62-74
−8.5
15
@
MRST
W 67-63
−3.5
20
@
MRMK
L 72-79
+17.5
22
vs
SPU
W 72-63
−0.5
27
@
FAIR
L 58-72
−12.5
1
vs
RID
W 76-61
−0.5
7
vs
MSM
W 63-58
−14.5
8
vs
FAIR
W 76-61
−1.5
10
vs
MRMK
W 64-54
−10.5
19
vs
DUKE
L 65-71
−1.5
over 11under 24avg −1.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Merrimack has the better starters
Position by position: Merrimack 1, Siena 0, even 4
MerrimackBetterSiena
G T. Dorset11.7 pts · 3.1 reb · 2.2 ast
Score 45
←MRMKSmall
G T. Yildizoglu TR10.4 pts · 3.6 reb · 4.4 ast
Score 30
G D. Anglin TR9.3 pts · 2.1 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 19
=Even
G B. Coyle8.7 pts · 4.6 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 17
G A. Vladimir Soqui Urbano TR2 pts · 0.5 reb · 0.2 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G I. Henderson3.8 pts · 0.8 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 12
F T. Brogna6.1 pts · 4.7 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 16
=No call
G O. Schlager2.8 pts · 1.2 reb · 0.6 ast
Not ranked
F E. Wilborn TR2.3 pts · 3 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 30
=No call
G C. Torres0.5 pts · 0 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
MerrimackBetterSiena
MRMK offense316th of 366 · -10.3
→SIESmall
SIE defense194th of 366 · -4.7
MRMK defense139th of 366 · -2.9
←MRMKBig
SIE offense309th of 366 · -9.6
Backcourt-5.1 · 3 players
←MRMKSmall
Backcourt-7.7 · 5 players
Frontcourt-3.0 · 2 players
=No call
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
Bench-0.6 · 1 player
=No call
BenchNo numbers yet
Score, worst to bestMRMK betterSIE betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
T. Dorset36 minD. Anglin28 min · TRA. Vladimir Soqui Urbano10 min · TRA. LesburtNewJ. AndersonNewQ. KwasniakNew
Forwards
T. Brogna29 minE. Wilborn9 min · TRD. Veillette8 minJ. MooreNewD. MunroNewJ. SkoricNew
Guards
T. Yildizoglu32 min · TRB. Coyle31 minI. Henderson14 minO. Schlager10 minC. Torres3 minR. DucharmeNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 68.5 #304 | Points per game | 70.4 #276 |
| 1.06 #221 | Points per possession | 1.09 #154 |
| 64.4 #357 | Pace (possessions) | 64.4 #354 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.1 #288 | Effective FG% | 50.4 #222 |
| 32.7 #243 | 3-point % | 30.6 #330 |
| 46.1 #46 | 3-point attempt rate | 32.2 #327 |
| 38.2 #99 | Free throw rate | 33.4 #226 |
| Possessions | ||
| 14.8 #55 | Turnover rate | 15.8 #126 |
| 24.8 #343 | Offensive rebound rate | 31.8 #133 |
| 12.4 #257 | Assists per game | 13.5 #182 |
| Defense | ||
| 66.5 #19 | Points allowed | 65.8 #12 |
| 1.03 #62 | Points allowed per possession | 1.02 #44 |
| 46.7 #17 | Opponent effective FG% | 48.5 #48 |
| 30.3 #12 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.4 #82 |
| 20.4 #16 | Turnovers forced | 17.0 #154 |
| 60.1 #365 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.5 #133 |
| 8.2 #32 | Steals per game | 5.8 #262 |
| 5.2 #13 | Blocks per game | 3.1 #205 |
Merrimack
23-11 in 2025-26 overall · 19-4 in conference · Metro Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Siena54–64
- Wvs Marist58–57
- Wvs Sacred Heart70–48
- W@ Niagara73–66
- L@ Canisius62–67
A week or more of rest.
Siena
23-12 in 2025-26 overall · 16-7 in conference · Metro Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Duke65–71
- Wvs Merrimack64–54
- Wvs Fairfield76–61
- Wvs Mount St Marys63–58
- Wvs Rider76–61
A week or more of rest.