The Pit · at New Mexico
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | UNM | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 UNM 84–66 · win probability UNM 95%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 150.3
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: UNM has more of the edges
LR 0, UNM 9 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
LR has played the 347th-hardest schedule, UNM the 97th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Shooting
Effective FG%: LR 49.4 and allows 51.8; UNM 53.5 and allows 49.5
UNM offense vs LR defense
Offense 72nd of 366 against a defense 208th, on the model’s ratings
LR offense vs UNM defense
Offense 238th of 366 against a defense 103rd, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: LR 31.5%, UNM 30.6%. Defensive: LR 63.4%, UNM 72.3%
Turnovers
Turnover rate: LR 18.4%, UNM 14.9%. Forced: LR 18.6%, UNM 19.0%
Three-pointers
LR hits 35.3% and allows 34.4%; UNM hits 35.6% and allows 30.5%. Threes are 31.0% and 41.9% of their shots
Free throws
Free throw rate: LR 27.7, UNM 35.8. Allowed: LR 33.1, UNM 33.3
Context
Tempo
About 69 possessions: LR plays 67.6 a game (248th fastest), UNM 70.7 (87th). Faster games mean more points
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: LR 12%, UNM 42%. Transfers in: LR 8, UNM 3. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Home court
UNM at home. This season: UNM 0-0 at home, LR 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 | — | UNM -18.3 | — |
| Total | — | 150.3 | — |
| Projected score | — | LR 66 · UNM 84.3 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | UNM -10.8 | — |
| 1H total | 70.3 | — |
| 1H projected score | LR 29.7 · UNM 40.5 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% | 4-6 40% | |
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Little Rock
30 games played
Straight up
10-20
33% wins
Against the spread
12-18
40% covers · avg −1.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-15
50% overs · avg +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 10 | @ | L 72-92 | +3.5 | L −16.5 | 156.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 49-89 | +21.5 | L −18.5 | 155.5 | U 138 |
| Nov 15 | @ | W 68-62 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 146.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 68-89 | +13.5 | L −7.5 | 153.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 56-65 | +5.5 | L −3.5 | 131.5 | U 121 |
| Nov 29 | @ | L 65-74 | +13.5 | W +4.5 | 141.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 47-85 | +3.5 | L −34.5 | 138.5 | U 132 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 78-90 | +9.5 | L −2.5 | 147.5 | O 168 |
| Dec 9 | @ | L 58-90 | +27.5 | L −4.5 | 132.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 16 | @ | L 64-78 | +2.5 | L −11.5 | 136.5 | O 142 |
| Dec 18 | @ | W 77-62 | -2.5 | W +12.5 | 140.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 77-58 | -1.5 | W +17.5 | 144.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 79-84 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 144.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 8 | @ | W 73-70 | +3.5 | W +6.5 | 131.5 | O 143 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 82-74 | +6.5 | W +14.5 | 149.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 74-63 | -6.5 | W +4.5 | 133.5 | O 137 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 86-79 | -10.5 | L −3.5 | 135.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 65-70 | +5.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 63-70 | +4.5 | L −2.5 | 150.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 77-87 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 141.5 | O 164 |
| Feb 3 | @ | L 52-55 | +6.5 | W +3.5 | 139.5 | U 107 |
| Feb 5 | vs | L 74-79 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 149.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 61-71 | -1.5 | L −11.5 | 132.5 | U 132 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 77-58 | -7.5 | W +11.5 | 141.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 72-78 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 134.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 19 | vs | W 67-65 | +2.5 | W +4.5 | 136.5 | U 132 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 65-70 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 143.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 26 | vs | L 70-76 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 138.5 | O 146 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 89-70 | -5.5 | W +13.5 | 139.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 62-72 | +5.5 | L −4.5 | 148.5 | U 134 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
10
@
MILW
L 72-92
−16.5
12
@
MARQ
L 49-89
−18.5
15
@
BALL
W 68-62
+8.5
18
@
MUR
L 68-89
−7.5
21
@
TXST
L 56-65
−3.5
29
@
SIU
L 65-74
+4.5
3
@
CARK
L 47-85
−34.5
6
vs
ARST
L 78-90
−2.5
9
@
WVU
L 58-90
−4.5
16
@
MORE
L 64-78
−11.5
18
@
USI
W 77-62
+12.5
1
vs
TNTC
W 77-58
+17.5
3
vs
TNST
L 79-84
−3.5
8
@
SIUE
W 73-70
+6.5
10
@
LIN
W 82-74
+14.5
15
vs
EIU
W 74-63
+4.5
17
vs
WIU
W 86-79
−3.5
22
@
SEMO
L 65-70
+0.5
29
@
TNST
L 63-70
−2.5
31
@
TNTC
L 77-87
−11.5
3
@
UTM
L 52-55
+3.5
5
vs
LIN
L 74-79
−3.5
7
vs
SIUE
L 61-71
−11.5
12
@
WIU
W 77-58
+11.5
14
@
EIU
L 72-78
−8.5
19
vs
UTM
W 67-65
+4.5
21
vs
SEMO
L 65-70
−3.5
26
vs
MORE
L 70-76
−8.5
28
vs
USI
W 89-70
+13.5
4
vs
LIN
L 62-72
−4.5
covered 12didn’t cover 18avg −1.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
10
@
MILW
L 72-92
+7.5
12
@
MARQ
L 49-89
−17.5
15
@
BALL
W 68-62
−16.5
18
@
MUR
L 68-89
+3.5
21
@
TXST
L 56-65
−10.5
29
@
SIU
L 65-74
−2.5
3
@
CARK
L 47-85
−6.5
6
vs
ARST
L 78-90
+20.5
9
@
WVU
L 58-90
+15.5
16
@
MORE
L 64-78
+5.5
18
@
USI
W 77-62
−1.5
1
vs
TNTC
W 77-58
−9.5
3
vs
TNST
L 79-84
+18.5
8
@
SIUE
W 73-70
+11.5
10
@
LIN
W 82-74
+6.5
15
vs
EIU
W 74-63
+3.5
17
vs
WIU
W 86-79
+29.5
22
@
SEMO
L 65-70
−10.5
29
@
TNST
L 63-70
−17.5
31
@
TNTC
L 77-87
+22.5
3
@
UTM
L 52-55
−32.5
5
vs
LIN
L 74-79
+3.5
7
vs
SIUE
L 61-71
−0.5
12
@
WIU
W 77-58
−6.5
14
@
EIU
L 72-78
+15.5
19
vs
UTM
W 67-65
−4.5
21
vs
SEMO
L 65-70
−8.5
26
vs
MORE
L 70-76
+7.5
28
vs
USI
W 89-70
+19.5
4
vs
LIN
L 62-72
−14.5
over 15under 15avg +1 ptslonger = bigger margin
New Mexico
36 games played
Straight up
25-11
69% wins
Against the spread
20-16
56% covers · avg +2.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
23-13
64% overs · avg +1.3 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 5 | vs | W 76-54 | -22.5 | L −0.5 | 143.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 74-56 | -13.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | U 130 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 82-68 | -19.5 | L −5.5 | 141.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 68-76 | -3.5 | L −11.5 | 139.5 | O 144 |
| Nov 20 | vs | L 72-84 | +8.5 | L −3.5 | 151.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 80-78 | +6.5 | W +8.5 | 151.5 | O 158 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 93-87 | -19.5 | L −13.5 | 148.5 | O 180 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 98-71 | -1.5 | W +25.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Dec 10 | @ | W 81-78 | +8.5 | W +11.5 | 157.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 14 | vs | W 75-59 | -15.5 | W +0.5 | 159.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 88-65 | -16.5 | W +6.5 | 152.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 30 | @ | L 53-62 | +5.5 | L −3.5 | 146.5 | U 115 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 78-58 | -7.5 | W +12.5 | 151.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 6 | @ | W 80-70 | -1.5 | W +8.5 | 143.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 91-49 | -16.5 | W +25.5 | 138.5 | O 140 |
| Jan 13 | vs | W 87-64 | -6.5 | W +16.5 | 146.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 79-83 | +5.5 | W +1.5 | 148.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 83-74 | -15.5 | L −6.5 | 151.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 80-73 | -8.5 | L −1.5 | 150.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 27 | @ | W 89-61 | -3.5 | W +24.5 | 155.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 90-80 | -15.5 | L −5.5 | 148.5 | O 170 |
| Feb 4 | vs | L 66-86 | -1.5 | L −21.5 | 156.5 | U 152 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 90-91 | -4.5 | L −5.5 | 152.5 | O 181 |
| Feb 11 | @ | W 70-64 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 148.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 17 | vs | W 98-61 | -28.5 | W +8.5 | 148.5 | O 159 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 80-78 | -9.5 | L −7.5 | 156.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 24 | @ | L 60-67 | +1.5 | L −5.5 | 148.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 81-76 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 150.5 | O 157 |
| Mar 4 | vs | L 74-82 | -8.5 | L −16.5 | 150.5 | O 156 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 90-94 | +7.5 | W +3.5 | 155.5 | O 184 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 93-77 | -16.5 | L −0.5 | 154.5 | O 170 |
| Mar 13 | vs | L 62-64 | +2.5 | W +0.5 | 150.5 | U 126 |
| Mar 18 | vs | W 107-83 | -11.5 | W +12.5 | 162.5 | O 190 |
| Mar 22 | vs | W 86-61 | -6.5 | W +18.5 | 161.5 | U 147 |
| Mar 24 | vs | W 84-69 | -10.5 | W +4.5 | 155.5 | U 153 |
| Apr 2 | vs | L 69-74 | -2.5 | L −7.5 | 161.5 | U 143 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
5
vs
ETAM
W 76-54
−0.5
8
vs
UTA
W 74-56
+4.5
11
vs
UCR
W 82-68
−5.5
15
@
NMSU
L 68-76
−11.5
20
vs
NEB
L 72-84
−3.5
21
vs
MSST
W 80-78
+8.5
26
vs
ALST
W 93-87
−13.5
6
vs
SCU
W 98-71
+25.5
10
@
VCU
W 81-78
+11.5
14
vs
FGCU
W 75-59
+0.5
20
vs
SJSU
W 88-65
+6.5
30
@
BOIS
L 53-62
−3.5
3
vs
WYO
W 78-58
+12.5
6
@
CSU
W 80-70
+8.5
10
@
AF
W 91-49
+25.5
13
vs
GCU
W 87-64
+16.5
17
@
SDSU
L 79-83
+1.5
21
vs
FRES
W 83-74
−6.5
24
vs
NEV
W 80-73
−1.5
27
@
UNLV
W 89-61
+24.5
31
@
SJSU
W 90-80
−5.5
4
vs
USU
L 66-86
−21.5
7
vs
BOIS
L 90-91
−5.5
11
@
GCU
W 70-64
+7.5
17
vs
AF
W 98-61
+8.5
21
@
FRES
W 80-78
−7.5
24
@
NEV
L 60-67
−5.5
28
vs
SDSU
W 81-76
+3.5
4
vs
CSU
L 74-82
−16.5
7
@
USU
L 90-94
+3.5
12
vs
SJSU
W 93-77
−0.5
13
vs
SDSU
L 62-64
+0.5
18
vs
SHSU
W 107-83
+12.5
22
vs
GW
W 86-61
+18.5
24
vs
JOES
W 84-69
+4.5
2
vs
TLSA
L 69-74
−7.5
covered 20didn’t cover 16avg +2.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
5
vs
ETAM
W 76-54
−13.5
8
vs
UTA
W 74-56
−15.5
11
vs
UCR
W 82-68
+8.5
15
@
NMSU
L 68-76
+4.5
20
vs
NEB
L 72-84
+4.5
21
vs
MSST
W 80-78
+6.5
26
vs
ALST
W 93-87
+31.5
6
vs
SCU
W 98-71
+15.5
10
@
VCU
W 81-78
+1.5
14
vs
FGCU
W 75-59
−25.5
20
vs
SJSU
W 88-65
+0.5
30
@
BOIS
L 53-62
−31.5
3
vs
WYO
W 78-58
−15.5
6
@
CSU
W 80-70
+6.5
10
@
AF
W 91-49
+1.5
13
vs
GCU
W 87-64
+4.5
17
@
SDSU
L 79-83
+13.5
21
vs
FRES
W 83-74
+5.5
24
vs
NEV
W 80-73
+2.5
27
@
UNLV
W 89-61
−5.5
31
@
SJSU
W 90-80
+21.5
4
vs
USU
L 66-86
−4.5
7
vs
BOIS
L 90-91
+28.5
11
@
GCU
W 70-64
−14.5
17
vs
AF
W 98-61
+10.5
21
@
FRES
W 80-78
+1.5
24
@
NEV
L 60-67
−21.5
28
vs
SDSU
W 81-76
+6.5
4
vs
CSU
L 74-82
+5.5
7
@
USU
L 90-94
+28.5
12
vs
SJSU
W 93-77
+15.5
13
vs
SDSU
L 62-64
−24.5
18
vs
SHSU
W 107-83
+27.5
22
vs
GW
W 86-61
−14.5
24
vs
JOES
W 84-69
−2.5
2
vs
TLSA
L 69-74
−18.5
over 23under 13avg +1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
New Mexico has the better starters
Position by position: Little Rock 0, New Mexico 3, even 2
Little RockBetterNew Mexico
G A. Clark TR15.3 pts · 3.4 reb · 2.7 ast
Score 62
→UNMSmall
G J. Hall16.2 pts · 3.2 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 90
G J. King TR14 pts · 3 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 46
→UNMSmall
G U. Tenette10.6 pts · 2.8 reb · 2.9 ast
Score 73
G T. Walters TR8.3 pts · 5.4 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 37
→UNMSmall
G C. Howell6 pts · 3 reb · 3.5 ast
Score 54
F B. Hubbard TR16.1 pts · 4.6 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 80
=Even
G H. Mayes TR11.1 pts · 5.6 reb · 1.7 ast
Score 93
F T. Burgess7.4 pts · 3 reb · 1.2 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F T. Vahlberg Fasasi TR12.3 pts · 4.2 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 72
Little RockBetterNew Mexico
LR offense238th of 366 · -7.3
→UNMBig
UNM defense103rd of 366 · -0.9
LR defense208th of 366 · -5.2
→UNMBig
UNM offense72nd of 366 · +1.6
Backcourt-2.3 · 3 players
→UNMBig
Backcourt+5.6 · 4 players
Frontcourt+0.9 · 2 players
=Even
Frontcourt+1.0 · 1 player
Bench-2.3 · 4 players
→UNMBig
Bench+0.9 · 1 player
Score, worst to bestLR betterUNM betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
A. Clark33 min · TRJ. King32 min · TRT. Walters28 min · TRA. Economou6 min · TRT. LaceyNewJ. LynNew
Forwards
B. Hubbard29 min · TRT. Burgess24 minP. Amadou Kante14 min · TRA. Bamisile14 min · TRJ. Felt13 min · TRR. OselkaNew
Guards
J. Hall31 minU. Tenette28 minC. Howell25 minH. Mayes24 min · TRD. HallNew
Forwards
T. Vahlberg Fasasi27 min · TRR. Petraitis17 min · TRF. GraniNewI. SuljanovicNewN. MuriithiNewB. SchuchNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 68.9 #300 | Points per game | 80.8 #52 |
| 1.02 #306 | Points per possession | 1.14 #70 |
| 67.6 #248 | Pace (possessions) | 70.7 #87 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.4 #273 | Effective FG% | 53.5 #82 |
| 35.3 #96 | 3-point % | 35.6 #83 |
| 31.0 #339 | 3-point attempt rate | 41.9 #136 |
| 27.7 #345 | Free throw rate | 35.8 #160 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.4 #292 | Turnover rate | 14.9 #59 |
| 31.5 #143 | Offensive rebound rate | 30.6 #176 |
| 13.4 #183 | Assists per game | 14.8 #104 |
| Defense | ||
| 74.2 #160 | Points allowed | 71.6 #96 |
| 1.10 #217 | Points allowed per possession | 1.01 #36 |
| 51.8 #199 | Opponent effective FG% | 49.5 #84 |
| 34.4 #211 | Opponent 3-point % | 30.5 #20 |
| 18.6 #71 | Turnovers forced | 19.0 #50 |
| 63.4 #357 | Defensive rebound rate | 72.3 #57 |
| 7.5 #77 | Steals per game | 7.9 #43 |
| 4.4 #45 | Blocks per game | 2.7 #274 |
Little Rock
10-20 in 2025-26 overall · 9-12 in conference · United Athletic Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Lindenwood Lions62–72
- Wvs Southern Indiana Screaming Eagles89–70
- Lvs Morehead St70–76
- Lvs SE Missouri65–70
- Wvs UT Martin67–65
A week or more of rest.
New Mexico
25-11 in 2025-26 overall · 14-8 in conference · Mountain West Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Tulsa69–74
- Wvs Saint Joseph's84–69
- Wvs G Washington86–61
- Wvs Sam Houston107–83
- Lvs San Diego St62–64
A week or more of rest.