The Reef · Neutral site
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | LAM | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 RMU 74–68 · win probability RMU 72%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 142.2
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: RMU has more of the edges
RMU 4, LAM 1 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Three-pointers
RMU hits 38.0% and allows 33.2%; LAM hits 32.9% and allows 35.3%. Threes are 40.7% and 33.9% of their shots
Shooting
Effective FG%: RMU 54.9 and allows 50.0; LAM 47.8 and allows 50.9
LAM offense vs RMU defense
Offense 334th of 366 against a defense 183rd, on the model’s ratings
Turnovers
Turnover rate: RMU 18.6%, LAM 18.1%. Forced: RMU 15.8%, LAM 17.3%
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: RMU 32%, LAM 0%. Transfers in: RMU 4, LAM 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Context
Schedule so far
RMU has played the 280th-hardest schedule, LAM the 328th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
RMU offense vs LAM defense
Offense 179th of 366 against a defense 213th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 67 possessions: RMU plays 67.5 a game (256th fastest), LAM 66.1 (311th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: RMU 37.5%, LAM 35.7%. Defensive: RMU 71.2%, LAM 70.6%
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: RMU 28.0, LAM 27.9. Allowed: RMU 40.1, LAM 44.4
Context
Neutral floor
No home court: the model takes it out of the line
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 | — | RMU -6.6 | — |
| Total | — | 142.2 | — |
| Projected score | — | RMU 74.4 · LAM 67.8 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | RMU -4.1 | — |
| 1H total | 66.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | RMU 35.3 · LAM 31.2 | — |
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% | 3-7 30% | |
| 1-9 10% | 3-7 30% | 4-6 40% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Robert Morris
31 games played
Straight up
20-11
65% wins
Against the spread
20-11
65% covers · avg +2.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-15
52% overs · avg +0.7 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 | @ | L 69-101 | +22.5 | L −9.5 | 136.5 | O 170 |
| Nov 6 | @ | W 81-79 | +7.5 | W +9.5 | 151.5 | O 160 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 61-75 | +11.5 | L −2.5 | 146.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 23 | @ | L 70-71 | +2.5 | W +1.5 | 148.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 88-74 | +1.5 | W +15.5 | 151.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 61-54 | -8.5 | L −1.5 | 152.5 | U 115 |
| Nov 30 | vs | W 80-62 | -11.5 | W +6.5 | 142.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 4 | @ | W 80-78 | -1.5 | W +0.5 | 140.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 72-74 | +4.5 | W +2.5 | 153.5 | U 146 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 75-70 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 154.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 80-77 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 140.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 79-70 | -13.5 | L −4.5 | 145.5 | O 149 |
| Dec 29 | vs | L 77-79 | +1.5 | L −0.5 | 149.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 2 | @ | W 85-77 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 148.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 73-96 | +1.5 | L −21.5 | 161.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 11 | vs | L 74-79 | -4.5 | L −9.5 | 146.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 15 | @ | L 93-96 | -5.5 | L −8.5 | 160.5 | O 189 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 92-89 | +7.5 | W +10.5 | 153.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 88-76 | -4.5 | W +7.5 | 152.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 67-71 | -6.5 | L −10.5 | 142.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 74-58 | -8.5 | W +7.5 | 162.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 31 | @ | L 71-83 | +2.5 | L −9.5 | 145.5 | O 154 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 72-66 | +1.5 | W +7.5 | 147.5 | U 138 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 72-66 | +3.5 | W +9.5 | 143.5 | U 138 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 85-68 | -3.5 | W +13.5 | 154.5 | U 153 |
| Feb 15 | vs | W 93-69 | -1.5 | W +22.5 | 156.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 22 | @ | W 81-68 | +4.5 | W +17.5 | 146.5 | O 149 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 73-62 | -8.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 83-64 | -12.5 | W +6.5 | 157.5 | U 147 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 68-53 | -3.5 | W +11.5 | 143.5 | U 121 |
| Mar 9 | vs | L 64-70 | -4.5 | L −10.5 | 146.5 | U 134 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
@
IOWA
L 69-101
−9.5
6
@
DRKE
W 81-79
+9.5
20
@
SBU
L 61-75
−2.5
23
@
MONM
L 70-71
+1.5
26
vs
UIC
W 88-74
+15.5
28
vs
SUU
W 61-54
−1.5
30
vs
STET
W 80-62
+6.5
4
@
GB
W 80-78
+0.5
6
@
MILW
L 72-74
+2.5
13
vs
TOL
W 75-70
+6.5
17
vs
YSU
W 80-77
+0.5
20
@
SFPA
W 79-70
−4.5
29
vs
NKU
L 77-79
−0.5
2
@
DETM
W 85-77
+4.5
4
@
OAK
L 73-96
−21.5
11
vs
PFW
L 74-79
−9.5
15
@
IUIN
L 93-96
−8.5
17
@
NKU
W 92-89
+10.5
22
vs
MILW
W 88-76
+7.5
24
vs
GB
L 67-71
−10.5
28
vs
IUIN
W 74-58
+7.5
31
@
PFW
L 71-83
−9.5
4
vs
WRST
W 72-66
+7.5
7
@
YSU
W 72-66
+9.5
12
@
CLE
W 85-68
+13.5
15
vs
OAK
W 93-69
+22.5
22
@
WRST
W 81-68
+17.5
25
vs
DETM
W 73-62
+2.5
28
vs
CLE
W 83-64
+6.5
4
vs
YSU
W 68-53
+11.5
9
vs
DETM
L 64-70
−10.5
covered 20didn’t cover 11avg +2.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
@
IOWA
L 69-101
+33.5
6
@
DRKE
W 81-79
+8.5
20
@
SBU
L 61-75
−10.5
23
@
MONM
L 70-71
−7.5
26
vs
UIC
W 88-74
+10.5
28
vs
SUU
W 61-54
−37.5
30
vs
STET
W 80-62
−0.5
4
@
GB
W 80-78
+17.5
6
@
MILW
L 72-74
−7.5
13
vs
TOL
W 75-70
−9.5
17
vs
YSU
W 80-77
+16.5
20
@
SFPA
W 79-70
+3.5
29
vs
NKU
L 77-79
+6.5
2
@
DETM
W 85-77
+13.5
4
@
OAK
L 73-96
+7.5
11
vs
PFW
L 74-79
+6.5
15
@
IUIN
L 93-96
+28.5
17
@
NKU
W 92-89
+27.5
22
vs
MILW
W 88-76
+11.5
24
vs
GB
L 67-71
−4.5
28
vs
IUIN
W 74-58
−30.5
31
@
PFW
L 71-83
+8.5
4
vs
WRST
W 72-66
−9.5
7
@
YSU
W 72-66
−5.5
12
@
CLE
W 85-68
−1.5
15
vs
OAK
W 93-69
+5.5
22
@
WRST
W 81-68
+2.5
25
vs
DETM
W 73-62
−15.5
28
vs
CLE
W 83-64
−10.5
4
vs
YSU
W 68-53
−22.5
9
vs
DETM
L 64-70
−12.5
over 16under 15avg +0.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Lamar
29 games played
Straight up
10-19
34% wins
Against the spread
12-17
41% covers · avg −1.6 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-15
48% overs · avg −0.9 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 65-78 | +18.5 | W +5.5 | 147.5 | U 143 |
| Nov 17 | @ | W 79-66 | -11.5 | W +1.5 | 140.5 | O 145 |
| Nov 23 | @ | W 68-63 | +4.5 | W +9.5 | 148.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 68-83 | +3.5 | L −11.5 | 148.5 | O 151 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 65-55 | -10.5 | L −0.5 | 129.5 | U 120 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 49-57 | -3.5 | L −11.5 | 136.5 | U 106 |
| Dec 10 | @ | L 71-89 | +17.5 | L −0.5 | 135.5 | O 160 |
| Dec 16 | vs | L 72-83 | -3.5 | L −14.5 | 139.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 20 | vs | L 82-85 | -5.5 | L −8.5 | 141.5 | O 167 |
| Dec 29 | @ | W 76-61 | -3.5 | W +11.5 | 138.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 31 | @ | W 69-62 | -5.5 | W +1.5 | 143.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 2 | @ | L 70-82 | +16.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 5 | @ | L 52-60 | -1.5 | L −9.5 | 135.5 | U 112 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 63-51 | -1.5 | W +10.5 | 140.5 | U 114 |
| Jan 12 | vs | W 64-56 | -8.5 | L −0.5 | 134.5 | U 120 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 90-80 | +3.5 | W +13.5 | 139.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 19 | @ | L 76-89 | -1.5 | L −14.5 | 144.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 81-88 | +4.5 | L −2.5 | 136.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 27 | vs | W 82-61 | -6.5 | W +14.5 | 140.5 | O 143 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 63-64 | +10.5 | W +9.5 | 144.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 2 | vs | W 73-54 | -5.5 | W +13.5 | 132.5 | U 127 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 74-84 | +8.5 | L −1.5 | 138.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 9 | vs | L 68-70 | -6.5 | L −8.5 | 135.5 | O 138 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 63-76 | +2.5 | L −10.5 | 135.5 | O 139 |
| Feb 16 | @ | L 65-70 | +6.5 | W +1.5 | 141.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 71-77 | -4.5 | L −10.5 | 146.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 23 | vs | L 52-53 | -3.5 | L −4.5 | 143.5 | U 105 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 60-72 | +1.5 | L −10.5 | 138.5 | U 132 |
| Mar 2 | @ | L 53-75 | -2.5 | L −24.5 | 132.5 | U 128 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
10
@
TCU
L 65-78
+5.5
17
@
ULM
W 79-66
+1.5
23
@
MONT
W 68-63
+9.5
24
vs
OAK
L 68-83
−11.5
3
vs
UL
W 65-55
−0.5
6
vs
AMCC
L 49-57
−11.5
10
@
SDSU
L 71-89
−0.5
16
vs
RGV
L 72-83
−14.5
20
vs
OMA
L 82-85
−8.5
29
@
NWST
W 76-61
+11.5
31
@
ETAM
W 69-62
+1.5
2
@
MCN
L 70-82
+4.5
5
@
SELA
L 52-60
−9.5
10
vs
UIW
W 63-51
+10.5
12
vs
HCU
W 64-56
−0.5
17
@
NICH
W 90-80
+13.5
19
@
NOLA
L 76-89
−14.5
24
vs
SFA
L 81-88
−2.5
27
vs
ETAM
W 82-61
+14.5
31
vs
MCN
L 63-64
+9.5
2
vs
SELA
W 73-54
+13.5
7
@
SFA
L 74-84
−1.5
9
vs
NWST
L 68-70
−8.5
14
@
AMCC
L 63-76
−10.5
16
@
RGV
L 65-70
+1.5
21
vs
NOLA
L 71-77
−10.5
23
vs
NICH
L 52-53
−4.5
28
@
UIW
L 60-72
−10.5
2
@
HCU
L 53-75
−24.5
covered 12didn’t cover 17avg −1.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
10
@
TCU
L 65-78
−4.5
17
@
ULM
W 79-66
+4.5
23
@
MONT
W 68-63
−17.5
24
vs
OAK
L 68-83
+2.5
3
vs
UL
W 65-55
−9.5
6
vs
AMCC
L 49-57
−30.5
10
@
SDSU
L 71-89
+24.5
16
vs
RGV
L 72-83
+15.5
20
vs
OMA
L 82-85
+25.5
29
@
NWST
W 76-61
−1.5
31
@
ETAM
W 69-62
−12.5
2
@
MCN
L 70-82
+6.5
5
@
SELA
L 52-60
−23.5
10
vs
UIW
W 63-51
−26.5
12
vs
HCU
W 64-56
−14.5
17
@
NICH
W 90-80
+30.5
19
@
NOLA
L 76-89
+20.5
24
vs
SFA
L 81-88
+32.5
27
vs
ETAM
W 82-61
+2.5
31
vs
MCN
L 63-64
−17.5
2
vs
SELA
W 73-54
−5.5
7
@
SFA
L 74-84
+19.5
9
vs
NWST
L 68-70
+2.5
14
@
AMCC
L 63-76
+3.5
16
@
RGV
L 65-70
−6.5
21
vs
NOLA
L 71-77
+1.5
23
vs
NICH
L 52-53
−38.5
28
@
UIW
L 60-72
−6.5
2
@
HCU
L 53-75
−4.5
over 14under 15avg −0.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Robert Morris has the better starters
Position by position: Robert Morris 3, Lamar 1, even 1
Robert MorrisBetterLamar
G A. Valentine TR12 pts · 4 reb · 3.8 ast
Score 71
←RMUSmall
G F. Radakovic TR9.7 pts · 4.1 reb · 2.5 ast
Score 38
G D. Livingston9.6 pts · 2 reb · 2.9 ast
Score 23
=Even
G N. Moretti TR5.9 pts · 2 reb · 3.2 ast
Score 24
G T. Smith6.7 pts · 2.2 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 30
→LAMSmall
G Q. Berry TR6.1 pts · 2.5 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 61
F J. Dunkley TR12.4 pts · 6.7 reb · 1 ast
Score 74
←RMUBig
G M. Collins TR1.4 pts · 0.7 reb · 1 ast
Score 12
F K. Ugwuakazi TR5.2 pts · 5.1 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 63
←RMUBig
F M. Ljubicic TR5.5 pts · 3.5 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 7
Robert MorrisBetterLamar
RMU offense179th of 366 · -5.5
=Even
LAM defense213th of 366 · -5.4
RMU defense183rd of 366 · -4.2
←RMUBig
LAM offense334th of 366 · -10.9
Backcourt-2.8 · 3 players
←RMUSmall
Backcourt-4.6 · 4 players
Frontcourt+1.5 · 2 players
←RMUBig
Frontcourt-2.4 · 1 player
Bench-0.3 · 3 players
=Even
Bench-0.8 · 1 player
Score, worst to bestRMU betterLAM betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
A. Valentine33 min · TRD. Livingston26 minT. Smith19 minK. Garris16 min · TRE. Cooke9 minL. SloaneNew
Forwards
J. Dunkley29 min · TRK. Ugwuakazi19 min · TRS. Obenjo9 minD. StolbetskiyNewB. OderinloNew
Guards
F. Radakovic27 min · TRN. Moretti27 min · TRQ. Berry18 min · TRM. Collins9 min · TRJ. JonesNewS. LynchNew
Forwards
M. Ljubicic20 min · TRM. Reed7 min · TRC. HinkerNewA. AgotNewD. EasonNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 76.8 #122 | Points per game | 68.4 #308 |
| 1.14 #67 | Points per possession | 1.04 #279 |
| 67.5 #256 | Pace (possessions) | 66.1 #311 |
| Shooting | ||
| 54.9 #39 | Effective FG% | 47.8 #318 |
| 38.0 #18 | 3-point % | 32.9 #238 |
| 40.7 #154 | 3-point attempt rate | 33.9 #297 |
| 28.0 #343 | Free throw rate | 27.9 #344 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.6 #305 | Turnover rate | 18.1 #273 |
| 37.5 #11 | Offensive rebound rate | 35.7 #31 |
| 17.6 #13 | Assists per game | 13.9 #157 |
| Defense | ||
| 73.4 #139 | Points allowed | 70.5 #64 |
| 1.08 #174 | Points allowed per possession | 1.07 #122 |
| 50.0 #100 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.9 #153 |
| 33.2 #135 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.3 #266 |
| 15.8 #230 | Turnovers forced | 17.3 #130 |
| 71.2 #98 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.6 #130 |
| 5.5 #292 | Steals per game | 6.1 #227 |
| 2.5 #308 | Blocks per game | 4.2 #54 |
Robert Morris
20-11 in 2025-26 overall · 14-8 in conference · Horizon League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Detroit Mercy64–70
- Wvs Youngstown St68–53
- Wvs Cleveland St83–64
- Wvs Detroit Mercy73–62
- W@ Wright St81–68
A week or more of rest.
Lamar
10-19 in 2025-26 overall · 7-15 in conference · Southland Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Hou Christian53–75
- L@ Incarnate Word60–72
- Lvs Nicholls52–53
- Lvs LSU N Orleans71–77
- L@ UT Rio Grande65–70
A week or more of rest.