Ocean Center · Neutral site
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | DUQ | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 DUQ 79–71 · win probability DUQ 75%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 150.0
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: HOW has more of the edges
HOW 4, DUQ 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
HOW has played the 348th-hardest schedule, DUQ the 108th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Three-pointers
HOW hits 35.8% and allows 31.4%; DUQ hits 33.1% and allows 36.2%. Threes are 34.7% and 44.4% of their shots
DUQ offense vs HOW defense
Offense 107th of 366 against a defense 206th, on the model’s ratings
HOW offense vs DUQ defense
Offense 196th of 366 against a defense 118th, on the model’s ratings
Shooting
Effective FG%: HOW 50.9 and allows 48.7; DUQ 52.3 and allows 52.5
Free throws
Free throw rate: HOW 43.5, DUQ 38.3. Allowed: HOW 38.4, DUQ 39.9
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: HOW 76%, DUQ 49%. Transfers in: HOW 2, DUQ 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: HOW 35.8%, DUQ 30.4%. Defensive: HOW 68.6%, DUQ 70.4%
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: HOW plays 69.5 a game (144th fastest), DUQ 70.4 (99th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: HOW 19.3%, DUQ 17.6%. Forced: HOW 20.7%, DUQ 18.4%
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 | — | DUQ -7.7 | — |
| Total | — | 150.0 | — |
| Projected score | — | HOW 71.1 · DUQ 78.8 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | DUQ -4.4 | — |
| 1H total | 70.1 | — |
| 1H projected score | HOW 32.8 · DUQ 37.3 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 9-1 90% | 9-1 90% | 6-4 60% | |
| 5-5 50% | 4-6 40% | 3-7 30% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Howard
31 games played
Straight up
20-11
65% wins
Against the spread
22-9
71% covers · avg +5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-16
48% overs · avg +0 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 | L 67-88 | +20.5 | L −0.5 | 158.5 | U 155 |
| Nov 9 | vs | L 70-73 | -4.5 | L −7.5 | 152.5 | U 143 |
| Nov 13 | vs | W 72-64 | -6.5 | W +1.5 | 154.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 19 | @ | L 60-64 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 149.5 | U 124 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 80-70 | -4.5 | W +5.5 | 138.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 23 | @ | L 56-93 | +43.5 | W +6.5 | 154.5 | U 149 |
| Nov 29 | @ | L 75-79 | +2.5 | L −1.5 | 146.5 | O 154 |
| Dec 9 | vs | W 73-69 | +2.5 | W +6.5 | 149.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 61-57 | +2.5 | W +6.5 | 142.5 | U 118 |
| Dec 16 | @ | W 74-66 | +6.5 | W +14.5 | 138.5 | O 140 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 67-66 | +15.5 | W +16.5 | 141.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 30 | @ | L 60-80 | +19.5 | L −0.5 | 148.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 57-58 | -8.5 | L −9.5 | 144.5 | U 115 |
| Jan 10 | @ | L 57-69 | -2.5 | L −14.5 | 130.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 12 | vs | W 84-58 | -8.5 | W +17.5 | 129.5 | O 142 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 83-69 | -2.5 | W +11.5 | 141.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 77-78 | -14.5 | L −15.5 | 148.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 88-60 | -7.5 | W +20.5 | 146.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 2 | @ | W 72-53 | -14.5 | W +4.5 | 146.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 85-57 | -14.5 | W +13.5 | 141.5 | O 142 |
| Feb 9 | vs | L 81-87 | +6.5 | W +0.5 | 147.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 14 | vs | W 79-53 | -10.5 | W +15.5 | 132.5 | U 132 |
| Feb 16 | @ | W 91-59 | -11.5 | W +20.5 | 131.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 100-67 | -12.5 | W +20.5 | 143.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 84-59 | -8.5 | W +16.5 | 158.5 | U 143 |
| Mar 2 | vs | W 90-70 | -19.5 | W +0.5 | 140.5 | O 160 |
| Mar 5 | @ | W 84-76 | -6.5 | W +1.5 | 149.5 | O 160 |
| Mar 13 | vs | W 78-61 | -15.5 | W +1.5 | 145.5 | U 139 |
| Mar 14 | vs | W 70-63 | -11.5 | L −4.5 | 142.5 | U 133 |
| Mar 17 | vs | W 86-83 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 143.5 | O 169 |
| Mar 19 | vs | L 80-101 | +30.5 | W +9.5 | 151.5 | O 181 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
MIZ
L 67-88
−0.5
9
vs
GRAM
L 70-73
−7.5
13
vs
ALCN
W 72-64
+1.5
19
@
STET
L 60-64
−5.5
22
vs
NIA
W 80-70
+5.5
23
@
DUKE
L 56-93
+6.5
29
@
MSM
L 75-79
−1.5
9
vs
NCAT
W 73-69
+6.5
13
vs
HAMP
W 61-57
+6.5
16
@
DREX
W 74-66
+14.5
20
@
UNCW
W 67-66
+16.5
30
@
NU
L 60-80
−0.5
3
@
SCST
L 57-58
−9.5
10
@
UMES
L 57-69
−14.5
12
vs
DSU
W 84-58
+17.5
17
@
NCCU
W 83-69
+11.5
24
vs
MORG
L 77-78
−15.5
31
vs
NORF
W 88-60
+20.5
2
@
COPP
W 72-53
+4.5
7
vs
SCST
W 85-57
+13.5
9
vs
YALE
L 81-87
+0.5
14
vs
UMES
W 79-53
+15.5
16
@
DSU
W 91-59
+20.5
21
vs
NCCU
W 100-67
+20.5
28
@
MORG
W 84-59
+16.5
2
vs
COPP
W 90-70
+0.5
5
@
NORF
W 84-76
+1.5
13
vs
SCST
W 78-61
+1.5
14
vs
NCCU
W 70-63
−4.5
17
vs
UMBC
W 86-83
+1.5
19
vs
MICH
L 80-101
+9.5
covered 22didn’t cover 9avg +5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
MIZ
L 67-88
−3.5
9
vs
GRAM
L 70-73
−9.5
13
vs
ALCN
W 72-64
−18.5
19
@
STET
L 60-64
−25.5
22
vs
NIA
W 80-70
+11.5
23
@
DUKE
L 56-93
−5.5
29
@
MSM
L 75-79
+7.5
9
vs
NCAT
W 73-69
−7.5
13
vs
HAMP
W 61-57
−24.5
16
@
DREX
W 74-66
+1.5
20
@
UNCW
W 67-66
−8.5
30
@
NU
L 60-80
−8.5
3
@
SCST
L 57-58
−29.5
10
@
UMES
L 57-69
−4.5
12
vs
DSU
W 84-58
+12.5
17
@
NCCU
W 83-69
+10.5
24
vs
MORG
L 77-78
+6.5
31
vs
NORF
W 88-60
+1.5
2
@
COPP
W 72-53
−21.5
7
vs
SCST
W 85-57
+0.5
9
vs
YALE
L 81-87
+20.5
14
vs
UMES
W 79-53
−0.5
16
@
DSU
W 91-59
+18.5
21
vs
NCCU
W 100-67
+23.5
28
@
MORG
W 84-59
−15.5
2
vs
COPP
W 90-70
+19.5
5
@
NORF
W 84-76
+10.5
13
vs
SCST
W 78-61
−6.5
14
vs
NCCU
W 70-63
−9.5
17
vs
UMBC
W 86-83
+25.5
19
vs
MICH
L 80-101
+29.5
over 15under 16avg +0 ptslonger = bigger margin
Duquesne
31 games played
Straight up
16-15
52% wins
Against the spread
14-17
45% covers · avg −0.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-15
52% overs · avg +1.5 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 | vs | W 83-63 | -17.5 | W +2.5 | 139.5 | O 146 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 92-80 | -12.5 | L −0.5 | 157.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 11 | vs | W 87-81 | -12.5 | L −6.5 | 162.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 77-87 | +10.5 | W +0.5 | 151.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 19 | vs | W 92-78 | -14.5 | L −0.5 | 150.5 | O 170 |
| Nov 22 | vs | L 86-93 | -7.5 | L −14.5 | 147.5 | O 179 |
| Dec 2 | vs | L 79-83 | -5.5 | L −9.5 | 170.5 | U 162 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 84-75 | -9.5 | L −0.5 | 150.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 10 | @ | L 64-86 | +14.5 | L −7.5 | 150.5 | U 150 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 75-78 | +5.5 | W +2.5 | 151.5 | O 153 |
| Dec 22 | vs | W 103-59 | -19.5 | W +24.5 | 143.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 30 | @ | W 89-83 | +2.5 | W +8.5 | 150.5 | O 172 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 80-93 | +5.5 | L −7.5 | 165.5 | O 173 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 90-97 | -1.5 | L −8.5 | 149.5 | O 187 |
| Jan 13 | vs | L 65-71 | +2.5 | L −3.5 | 152.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 74-63 | -1.5 | W +9.5 | 145.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 20 | vs | L 77-81 | +8.5 | W +4.5 | 165.5 | U 158 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 71-59 | -5.5 | W +6.5 | 152.5 | U 130 |
| Jan 28 | vs | L 79-87 | -3.5 | L −11.5 | 150.5 | O 166 |
| Feb 1 | vs | W 76-61 | -2.5 | W +12.5 | 146.5 | U 137 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 71-65 | +8.5 | W +14.5 | 143.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 88-86 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 158.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 78-73 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 152.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 62-61 | -11.5 | L −10.5 | 145.5 | U 123 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 66-78 | +6.5 | L −5.5 | 148.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 25 | vs | L 56-67 | -3.5 | L −14.5 | 142.5 | U 123 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 76-91 | +13.5 | L −1.5 | 160.5 | O 167 |
| Mar 4 | @ | L 52-64 | +2.5 | L −9.5 | 143.5 | U 116 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 79-77 | -4.5 | L −2.5 | 147.5 | O 156 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 67-61 | -1.5 | W +4.5 | 138.5 | U 128 |
| Mar 13 | vs | L 66-71 | +6.5 | W +1.5 | 153.5 | U 137 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
NIA
W 83-63
+2.5
7
vs
SHU
W 92-80
−0.5
11
vs
QUC
W 87-81
−6.5
15
@
VILL
L 77-87
+0.5
19
vs
L-MD
W 92-78
−0.5
22
vs
NE
L 86-93
−14.5
2
vs
W&M
L 79-83
−9.5
6
vs
STBK
W 84-75
−0.5
10
@
BOIS
L 64-86
−7.5
13
@
NEV
L 75-78
+2.5
22
vs
CAN
W 103-59
+24.5
30
@
DAV
W 89-83
+8.5
3
vs
VCU
L 80-93
−7.5
7
@
JOES
L 90-97
−8.5
13
vs
DAY
L 65-71
−3.5
17
@
FOR
W 74-63
+9.5
20
vs
SLU
L 77-81
+4.5
24
@
LUC
W 71-59
+6.5
28
vs
SBU
L 79-87
−11.5
1
vs
URI
W 76-61
+12.5
4
@
GMU
W 71-65
+14.5
7
vs
GW
W 88-86
+3.5
14
@
SBU
W 78-73
+6.5
18
vs
LAS
W 62-61
−10.5
21
@
DAY
L 66-78
−5.5
25
vs
DAV
L 56-67
−14.5
28
@
SLU
L 76-91
−1.5
4
@
URI
L 52-64
−9.5
7
vs
RICH
W 79-77
−2.5
12
vs
URI
W 67-61
+4.5
13
vs
VCU
L 66-71
+1.5
covered 14didn’t cover 17avg −0.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
NIA
W 83-63
+6.5
7
vs
SHU
W 92-80
+14.5
11
vs
QUC
W 87-81
+5.5
15
@
VILL
L 77-87
+12.5
19
vs
L-MD
W 92-78
+19.5
22
vs
NE
L 86-93
+31.5
2
vs
W&M
L 79-83
−8.5
6
vs
STBK
W 84-75
+8.5
10
@
BOIS
L 64-86
−0.5
13
@
NEV
L 75-78
+1.5
22
vs
CAN
W 103-59
+18.5
30
@
DAV
W 89-83
+21.5
3
vs
VCU
L 80-93
+7.5
7
@
JOES
L 90-97
+37.5
13
vs
DAY
L 65-71
−16.5
17
@
FOR
W 74-63
−8.5
20
vs
SLU
L 77-81
−7.5
24
@
LUC
W 71-59
−22.5
28
vs
SBU
L 79-87
+15.5
1
vs
URI
W 76-61
−9.5
4
@
GMU
W 71-65
−7.5
7
vs
GW
W 88-86
+15.5
14
@
SBU
W 78-73
−1.5
18
vs
LAS
W 62-61
−22.5
21
@
DAY
L 66-78
−4.5
25
vs
DAV
L 56-67
−19.5
28
@
SLU
L 76-91
+6.5
4
@
URI
L 52-64
−27.5
7
vs
RICH
W 79-77
+8.5
12
vs
URI
W 67-61
−10.5
13
vs
VCU
L 66-71
−16.5
over 16under 15avg +1.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
The starting fives are even
Position by position: Howard 2, Duquesne 2, even 1
HowardBetterDuquesne
G C. Gillus10.8 pts · 4.4 reb · 4.7 ast
Score 52
→DUQBig
G T. Guinyard16.9 pts · 3.2 reb · 4.7 ast
Score 93
G C. Taylor17.2 pts · 6.4 reb · 3 ast
Score 89
←HOWSmall
G J. Smith TR15.9 pts · 1.9 reb · 2.1 ast
Score 63
G A. Cotton8.3 pts · 2.7 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 15
=Even
G B. Hall3.4 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 6
G O. Okojie10.3 pts · 4 reb · 1.6 ast
Score 61
←HOWSmall
G J. DiMichele3.5 pts · 1.1 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 31
C G. Kocevar TR3.2 pts · 2.2 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 31
→DUQSmall
F Y. Berman12.3 pts · 3.9 reb · 3.6 ast
Score 49
HowardBetterDuquesne
HOW offense196th of 366 · -6.1
→DUQSmall
DUQ defense118th of 366 · -1.8
HOW defense206th of 366 · -5.2
→DUQSmall
DUQ offense107th of 366 · -1.6
Backcourt-1.0 · 4 players
→DUQSmall
Backcourt+0.1 · 4 players
Frontcourt-0.5 · 1 player
=Even
Frontcourt-0.4 · 1 player
Bench-3.1 · 5 players
→DUQSmall
Bench-0.1 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestHOW betterDUQ betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
C. Gillus34 minC. Taylor32 minA. Cotton27 minO. Okojie26 minI. Brown10 minJ. Johnson6 min
Forwards
C. Robins6 minJ. Johnson3 minJ. LawsonNewD. HarrisNew
Centers
G. Kocevar13 min · TRJ. Brown6 min · TR
Guards
T. Guinyard34 minJ. Smith27 min · TRB. Hall19 minJ. DiMichele14 minI. Pasha8 min · TRE. Anish2 min
Forwards
Y. Berman29 minK. Konan8 min · TRS. Olowoniyi5 min · TRF. JellumNewZ. OwinjeNewC. GalbutNew
Centers
E. Demir9 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 75.5 #155 | Points per game | 76.9 #118 |
| 1.09 #162 | Points per possession | 1.09 #164 |
| 69.5 #144 | Pace (possessions) | 70.4 #99 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.9 #198 | Effective FG% | 52.3 #131 |
| 35.8 #68 | 3-point % | 33.1 #223 |
| 34.7 #283 | 3-point attempt rate | 44.4 #81 |
| 43.5 #17 | Free throw rate | 38.3 #94 |
| Possessions | ||
| 19.3 #331 | Turnover rate | 17.6 #243 |
| 35.8 #28 | Offensive rebound rate | 30.4 #184 |
| 15.2 #78 | Assists per game | 14.7 #107 |
| Defense | ||
| 69.3 #51 | Points allowed | 75.9 #214 |
| 1.00 #24 | Points allowed per possession | 1.08 #171 |
| 48.7 #53 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.5 #241 |
| 31.4 #41 | Opponent 3-point % | 36.2 #314 |
| 20.7 #13 | Turnovers forced | 18.4 #83 |
| 68.6 #223 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.4 #142 |
| 8.3 #29 | Steals per game | 7.6 #71 |
| 3.7 #113 | Blocks per game | 3.0 #214 |
Howard
20-11 in 2025-26 overall · 13-3 in conference · Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Michigan80–101
- Wvs UMBC86–83
- Wvs NC Central70–63
- Wvs SC State78–61
- W@ Norfolk St84–76
A week or more of rest.
Duquesne
16-15 in 2025-26 overall · 10-10 in conference · Atlantic 10 Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs VCU66–71
- Wvs Rhode Island67–61
- Wvs Richmond79–77
- L@ Rhode Island52–64
- L@ Saint Louis76–91
A week or more of rest.