Thomas & Mack Center · at UNLV
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | UNLV | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 UNLV 83–71 · win probability UNLV 87%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 153.8
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
SAM 2, UNLV 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
SAM has played the 251st-hardest schedule, UNLV the 87th. A record against a soft schedule means less
UNLV offense vs SAM defense
Offense 90th of 366 against a defense 224th, on the model’s ratings
Free throws
Free throw rate: SAM 41.9, UNLV 40.6. Allowed: SAM 32.9, UNLV 44.9
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: SAM plays 69.3 a game (163rd fastest), UNLV 71.3 (57th). Faster games mean more points
Home court
UNLV at home. This season: UNLV 0-0 at home, SAM 0-0 away
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: SAM 25.3%, UNLV 30.2%. Defensive: SAM 74.3%, UNLV 68.0%
Even
SAM offense vs UNLV defense
Offense 147th of 366 against a defense 114th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Three-pointers
SAM hits 35.6% and allows 36.5%; UNLV hits 35.2% and allows 35.2%. Threes are 45.7% and 36.4% of their shots
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: SAM 13.4%, UNLV 17.1%. Forced: SAM 13.0%, UNLV 17.4%
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: SAM 41%, UNLV 43%. Transfers in: SAM 5, UNLV 7. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: SAM 53.1 and allows 51.9; UNLV 53.5 and allows 52.3
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 | — | UNLV -12.8 | — |
| Total | — | 153.8 | — |
| Projected score | — | SAM 70.5 · UNLV 83.3 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | UNLV -7.5 | — |
| 1H total | 71.9 | — |
| 1H projected score | SAM 32.2 · UNLV 39.7 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8-2 80% | 8-2 80% | 7-3 70% | |
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Samford
30 games played
Straight up
16-14
53% wins
Against the spread
18-12
60% covers · avg +0.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
19-11
63% overs · avg +2.5 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 | @ | L 72-85 | +7.5 | L −5.5 | 154.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 82-72 | -14.5 | L −4.5 | 154.5 | U 154 |
| Nov 12 | @ | W 93-90 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 153.5 | O 183 |
| Nov 14 | @ | L 75-79 | +24.5 | W +20.5 | 158.5 | U 154 |
| Nov 16 | @ | W 84-77 | -6.5 | W +0.5 | 151.5 | O 161 |
| Nov 19 | vs | L 62-77 | -5.5 | L −20.5 | 154.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 72-81 | +8.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 153 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 78-63 | -5.5 | W +9.5 | 146.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 26 | vs | L 45-89 | +7.5 | L −36.5 | 148.5 | U 134 |
| Dec 5 | @ | L 57-83 | +19.5 | L −6.5 | 154.5 | U 140 |
| Dec 7 | vs | W 93-90 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 166.5 | O 183 |
| Jan 1 | @ | W 78-58 | -6.5 | W +13.5 | 154.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 82-89 | -2.5 | L −9.5 | 151.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 7 | vs | W 82-77 | -4.5 | W +0.5 | 153.5 | O 159 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 79-88 | +1.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | O 167 |
| Jan 14 | vs | L 73-77 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 149.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 75-76 | +3.5 | W +2.5 | 148.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 21 | @ | L 78-88 | +3.5 | L −6.5 | 154.5 | O 166 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 75-64 | -4.5 | W +6.5 | 152.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 29 | @ | L 73-78 | +5.5 | W +0.5 | 149.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 1 | @ | W 88-74 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 154.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 78-64 | -13.5 | W +0.5 | 146.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 69-49 | +1.5 | W +21.5 | 160.5 | U 118 |
| Feb 11 | vs | W 97-80 | -6.5 | W +10.5 | 150.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 82-72 | +7.5 | W +17.5 | 145.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 19 | @ | W 78-75 | -10.5 | L −7.5 | 143.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 86-89 | +3.5 | W +0.5 | 156.5 | O 175 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 80-61 | -17.5 | W +1.5 | 155.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 87-78 | -8.5 | W +0.5 | 156.5 | O 165 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 81-86 | -1.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | O 167 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
TULN
L 72-85
−5.5
7
vs
SCST
W 82-72
−4.5
12
@
TXSO
W 93-90
+0.5
14
@
ARK
L 75-79
+20.5
16
@
CARK
W 84-77
+0.5
19
vs
FGCU
L 62-77
−20.5
21
@
NMSU
L 72-81
−0.5
25
vs
GAST
W 78-63
+9.5
26
vs
UVU
L 45-89
−36.5
5
@
VCU
L 57-83
−6.5
7
vs
COR
W 93-90
+0.5
1
@
VMI
W 78-58
+13.5
3
@
UNCG
L 82-89
−9.5
7
vs
WCU
W 82-77
+0.5
10
@
UTC
L 79-88
−7.5
14
vs
FUR
L 73-77
−2.5
17
vs
ETSU
L 75-76
+2.5
21
@
WOF
L 78-88
−6.5
24
vs
UTC
W 75-64
+6.5
29
@
FUR
L 73-78
+0.5
1
@
WCU
W 88-74
+12.5
5
vs
CIT
W 78-64
+0.5
7
vs
MER
W 69-49
+21.5
11
vs
WOF
W 97-80
+10.5
14
@
ETSU
W 82-72
+17.5
19
@
CIT
W 78-75
−7.5
21
@
MER
L 86-89
+0.5
26
vs
VMI
W 80-61
+1.5
28
vs
UNCG
W 87-78
+0.5
7
vs
FUR
L 81-86
−6.5
covered 18didn’t cover 12avg +0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
TULN
L 72-85
+2.5
7
vs
SCST
W 82-72
−0.5
12
@
TXSO
W 93-90
+29.5
14
@
ARK
L 75-79
−4.5
16
@
CARK
W 84-77
+9.5
19
vs
FGCU
L 62-77
−15.5
21
@
NMSU
L 72-81
+7.5
25
vs
GAST
W 78-63
−5.5
26
vs
UVU
L 45-89
−14.5
5
@
VCU
L 57-83
−14.5
7
vs
COR
W 93-90
+16.5
1
@
VMI
W 78-58
−18.5
3
@
UNCG
L 82-89
+19.5
7
vs
WCU
W 82-77
+5.5
10
@
UTC
L 79-88
+18.5
14
vs
FUR
L 73-77
+0.5
17
vs
ETSU
L 75-76
+2.5
21
@
WOF
L 78-88
+11.5
24
vs
UTC
W 75-64
−13.5
29
@
FUR
L 73-78
+1.5
1
@
WCU
W 88-74
+7.5
5
vs
CIT
W 78-64
−4.5
7
vs
MER
W 69-49
−42.5
11
vs
WOF
W 97-80
+26.5
14
@
ETSU
W 82-72
+8.5
19
@
CIT
W 78-75
+9.5
21
@
MER
L 86-89
+18.5
26
vs
VMI
W 80-61
−14.5
28
vs
UNCG
W 87-78
+8.5
7
vs
FUR
L 81-86
+19.5
over 19under 11avg +2.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
UNLV
34 games played
Straight up
17-17
50% wins
Against the spread
17-17
50% covers · avg −0.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
20-14
59% overs · avg +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 4 | vs | L 81-86 | -16.5 | L −21.5 | 146.5 | O 167 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 101-69 | -7.5 | W +24.5 | 155.5 | O 170 |
| Nov 11 | vs | L 93-102 | -10.5 | L −19.5 | 157.5 | O 195 |
| Nov 16 | @ | W 92-78 | +9.5 | W +23.5 | 163.5 | O 170 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 99-85 | -10.5 | W +3.5 | 161.5 | O 184 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 67-74 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 164.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 76-115 | +13.5 | L −25.5 | 181.5 | O 191 |
| Nov 27 | vs | L 65-80 | -4.5 | L −19.5 | 153.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 7 | @ | W 75-74 | +9.5 | W +10.5 | 164.5 | U 149 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 60-63 | -12.5 | L −15.5 | 161.5 | U 123 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 84-72 | -8.5 | W +3.5 | 159.5 | U 156 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 67-39 | -14.5 | W +13.5 | 142.5 | U 106 |
| Jan 6 | @ | L 66-98 | +4.5 | L −27.5 | 154.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 9 | @ | L 62-70 | +6.5 | L −1.5 | 151.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 13 | vs | W 89-85 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 150.5 | O 174 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 76-62 | -7.5 | W +6.5 | 146.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 20 | @ | W 86-76 | +15.5 | W +25.5 | 156.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 71-82 | +3.5 | L −7.5 | 149.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 27 | vs | L 61-89 | +3.5 | L −24.5 | 155.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 30 | @ | L 76-89 | +7.5 | L −5.5 | 147.5 | O 165 |
| Feb 3 | @ | L 96-98 | -1.5 | L −3.5 | 153.5 | O 194 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 80-78 | +2.5 | W +4.5 | 148.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 10 | vs | W 82-75 | -12.5 | L −5.5 | 149.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 13 | @ | W 86-83 | +10.5 | W +13.5 | 153.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 18 | vs | L 86-91 | -2.5 | L −7.5 | 147.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 21 | @ | W 91-66 | -16.5 | W +8.5 | 153.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 67-80 | +7.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | U 147 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 85-83 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 150.5 | O 168 |
| Mar 3 | vs | W 92-65 | +7.5 | W +34.5 | 156.5 | O 157 |
| Mar 6 | @ | L 86-89 | +9.5 | W +6.5 | 153.5 | O 175 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 73-70 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 153.5 | U 143 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 60-80 | +8.5 | L −11.5 | 156.5 | U 140 |
| Mar 17 | @ | W 75-72 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 153.5 | U 147 |
| Mar 22 | @ | L 66-77 | +4.5 | L −6.5 | 161.5 | U 143 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
vs
UTM
L 81-86
−21.5
8
vs
UTC
W 101-69
+24.5
11
vs
MONT
L 93-102
−19.5
16
@
MEM
W 92-78
+23.5
20
vs
JOES
W 99-85
+3.5
24
vs
MD
L 67-74
−4.5
25
vs
ALA
L 76-115
−25.5
27
vs
RUTG
L 65-80
−19.5
7
@
STAN
W 75-74
+10.5
13
vs
TNST
L 60-63
−15.5
20
vs
FRES
W 84-72
+3.5
3
vs
AF
W 67-39
+13.5
6
@
WYO
L 66-98
−27.5
9
@
CSU
L 62-70
−1.5
13
vs
BOIS
W 89-85
+5.5
17
@
SJSU
W 76-62
+6.5
20
@
USU
W 86-76
+25.5
24
vs
SDSU
L 71-82
−7.5
27
vs
UNM
L 61-89
−24.5
30
@
NEV
L 76-89
−5.5
3
@
FRES
L 96-98
−3.5
7
vs
GCU
W 80-78
+4.5
10
vs
SJSU
W 82-75
−5.5
13
@
BOIS
W 86-83
+13.5
18
vs
CSU
L 86-91
−7.5
21
@
AF
W 91-66
+8.5
25
@
GCU
L 67-80
−5.5
28
vs
NEV
W 85-83
+3.5
3
vs
USU
W 92-65
+34.5
6
@
SDSU
L 86-89
+6.5
11
vs
WYO
W 73-70
+0.5
12
vs
USU
L 60-80
−11.5
17
@
UCI
W 75-72
+1.5
22
@
TLSA
L 66-77
−6.5
covered 17didn’t cover 17avg −0.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
vs
UTM
L 81-86
+20.5
8
vs
UTC
W 101-69
+14.5
11
vs
MONT
L 93-102
+37.5
16
@
MEM
W 92-78
+6.5
20
vs
JOES
W 99-85
+22.5
24
vs
MD
L 67-74
−23.5
25
vs
ALA
L 76-115
+9.5
27
vs
RUTG
L 65-80
−8.5
7
@
STAN
W 75-74
−15.5
13
vs
TNST
L 60-63
−38.5
20
vs
FRES
W 84-72
−3.5
3
vs
AF
W 67-39
−36.5
6
@
WYO
L 66-98
+9.5
9
@
CSU
L 62-70
−19.5
13
vs
BOIS
W 89-85
+23.5
17
@
SJSU
W 76-62
−8.5
20
@
USU
W 86-76
+5.5
24
vs
SDSU
L 71-82
+3.5
27
vs
UNM
L 61-89
−5.5
30
@
NEV
L 76-89
+17.5
3
@
FRES
L 96-98
+40.5
7
vs
GCU
W 80-78
+9.5
10
vs
SJSU
W 82-75
+7.5
13
@
BOIS
W 86-83
+15.5
18
vs
CSU
L 86-91
+29.5
21
@
AF
W 91-66
+3.5
25
@
GCU
L 67-80
−3.5
28
vs
NEV
W 85-83
+17.5
3
vs
USU
W 92-65
+0.5
6
@
SDSU
L 86-89
+21.5
11
vs
WYO
W 73-70
−10.5
12
vs
USU
L 60-80
−16.5
17
@
UCI
W 75-72
−6.5
22
@
TLSA
L 66-77
−18.5
over 20under 14avg +3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
UNLV has the better starters
Position by position: Samford 1, UNLV 4, even 0
SamfordBetterUNLV
G N. George TR11.4 pts · 3.6 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 25
→UNLVBig
G D. Williams15.2 pts · 5.1 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 64
G C. Norris8.9 pts · 4.4 reb · 2 ast
Score 34
→UNLVBig
G A. Storr TR15.5 pts · 3.1 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 97
G C. Noard TR19 pts · 3.3 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 94
←SAMBig
G I. Williamson8.6 pts · 1.8 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 25
G I. Campbell-Finch7.5 pts · 1.6 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 13
→UNLVBig
F T. Jones11.8 pts · 5.1 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 91
G T. Davis TR1.2 pts · 1.6 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 22
→UNLVBig
F M. Thomas TR10.8 pts · 8 reb · 1.5 ast
Score 74
SamfordBetterUNLV
SAM offense147th of 366 · -4.5
=Even
UNLV defense114th of 366 · -1.5
SAM defense224th of 366 · -5.9
→UNLVBig
UNLV offense90th of 366 · -0.2
Backcourt-4.7 · 5 players
→UNLVBig
Backcourt+2.0 · 3 players
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
=No call
Frontcourt+4.3 · 2 players
Bench-3.6 · 5 players
→UNLVSmall
Bench-1.0 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestSAM betterUNLV betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
N. George35 min · TRC. Norris31 minC. Noard29 min · TRI. Campbell-Finch24 minT. Davis11 min · TRW. Miller9 min · TR
Forwards
J. Bjornstad8 minB. MacVicar7 min · TRC. Harrison3 minJ. HughesNewB. KempNew
Centers
W. Shaver9 minL. LeeNew
Guards
D. Williams33 minA. Storr26 min · TRI. Williamson23 minS. Mack16 min · TRC. Miles14 min · TRJ. Cunningham3 min
Forwards
T. Jones27 minM. Thomas27 min · TRT. Harris13 min · TRM. Loum11 min · TRJ. KissNew
Centers
J. Foumena10 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 77.8 #98 | Points per game | 78.6 #88 |
| 1.12 #99 | Points per possession | 1.10 #134 |
| 69.3 #163 | Pace (possessions) | 71.3 #57 |
| Shooting | ||
| 53.1 #101 | Effective FG% | 53.5 #81 |
| 35.6 #84 | 3-point % | 35.2 #102 |
| 45.7 #54 | 3-point attempt rate | 36.4 #243 |
| 41.9 #32 | Free throw rate | 40.6 #51 |
| Possessions | ||
| 13.4 #11 | Turnover rate | 17.1 #209 |
| 25.3 #333 | Offensive rebound rate | 30.2 #189 |
| 14.3 #128 | Assists per game | 14.1 #137 |
| Defense | ||
| 77.0 #240 | Points allowed | 79.3 #306 |
| 1.11 #251 | Points allowed per possession | 1.11 #250 |
| 51.9 #206 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.3 #231 |
| 36.5 #326 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.2 #259 |
| 13.0 #354 | Turnovers forced | 17.4 #127 |
| 74.3 #17 | Defensive rebound rate | 68.0 #256 |
| 4.4 #358 | Steals per game | 7.3 #102 |
| 2.7 #277 | Blocks per game | 4.7 #26 |
Samford
16-14 in 2025-26 overall · 11-8 in conference · Southern Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Furman81–86
- Wvs UNC Greensboro87–78
- Wvs VMI80–61
- L@ Mercer86–89
- W@ The Citadel78–75
A week or more of rest.
UNLV
17-17 in 2025-26 overall · 12-10 in conference · Mountain West Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Tulsa66–77
- W@ UC Irvine75–72
- Lvs Utah State60–80
- Wvs Wyoming73–70
- L@ San Diego St86–89
A week or more of rest.