Temple Owls at La Salle Explorers: Model Line and Edge

Sun, Nov 15, 12:00 AM ETJohn Glaser Arena · at La Salle

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Temple and La Salle
TEM	This season	LAS
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 LAS 72–72 · win probability LAS 52%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 143.8

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: TEM has more of the edges

TEM 4, LAS 1 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

TEMBig

Three-pointers

TEM hits 33.6% and allows 32.8%; LAS hits 30.0% and allows 36.5%. Threes are 35.7% and 31.5% of their shots

TEMBig

Shooting

Effective FG%: TEM 50.2 and allows 50.7; LAS 45.4 and allows 55.0

TEMSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: TEM 13.7%, LAS 18.2%. Forced: TEM 15.5%, LAS 17.2%

LASSmall

Home court

LAS at home. This season: LAS 0-0 at home, TEM 0-0 away

TEMSmall

LAS offense vs TEM defense

Offense 157th of 366 against a defense 108th, on the model’s ratings

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: TEM 38%, LAS 56%. Transfers in: TEM 6, LAS 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Even

Free throws

Free throw rate: TEM 40.6, LAS 37.5. Allowed: TEM 35.5, LAS 31.5

Even

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: TEM 29.8%, LAS 33.7%. Defensive: TEM 69.7%, LAS 67.7%

Context

Schedule so far

TEM has played the 110th-hardest schedule, LAS the 92nd. A record against a soft schedule means less

Context

Tempo

About 66 possessions: TEM plays 65.6 a game (325th fastest), LAS 66.4 (300th). Faster games mean more points

Even

TEM offense vs LAS defense

Offense 116th of 366 against a defense 111th, on the model’s ratings

Sorted by how lopsided each matchup is, from national ranks. Reasons to look, not picks: the market already knows most of this.

Model vs market

	Market	Model	Model edge
Spread	—	LAS -0.6	—
Total	—	143.8	—
Projected score	—	TEM 71.6 · LAS 72.2

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	LAS -0.2	—
1H total	67.3	—
1H projected score	TEM 33.5 · LAS 33.7	—

The 1st-half model is fitted from the full-game model and past halves. ESPN has no 1st-half lines for college games, so there is no market to compare it with.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

ATS

2025-26 season

	Season	Cover	Venue	Role
TEM WLWWL	14-17	45%	7-4	—
LAS LWWLL	14-17	45%	10-3	—

Venue/role: TEM away; LAS home. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
TEM OOOOU	17-14	55%	15-16
LAS OOOOO	14-17	45%	8-23

Squares: last 5 games (O over, U under), oldest first. Tap for the score and line.

Last 10 games

2025-26

	Straight up	Spread	Over / under
TEM	2-8 20%	4-6 40%	6-4 60%
LAS	2-8 20%	5-5 50%	5-5 50%

Wins-losses (pushes last). Spread and over / under skip games without a line.

Next 3 games

With how the last meeting with each opponent went

Temple

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 20	vs MTSU	No recent meeting
Dec 1	vs VILL	L56–74LU
Dec 12	vs SBU	No recent meeting

La Salle

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 18	vs COPP	W87–59WO
Nov 21	vs PENN	L71–73LU
Nov 27	vs BUCK	W69–57WU

Last meeting: result, against the spread, over / under. Hover a result for its date.

Recent meetings

Since 2021-22

TEM 4–1 LASTEM leads · 5 games since 2021-22 · TEM 4-1 ATS

Date	Result	Line	Covered
Nov 11, 2025-26	LAS 63 @ TEM 90	TEM -6.5	TEM W
Nov 30, 2024-25	TEM 75 @ LAS 83	LAS -0.5	LAS W
Nov 29, 2023-24	LAS 99 @ TEM 106	TEM -3.5	TEM W
Nov 30, 2022-23	TEM 67 vs LAS 51	LAS +4.5	TEM W
Dec 1, 2021-22	LAS 57 @ TEM 73	TEM -7	TEM W

ATS History · 2025-26

WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total

Temple

31 games played

Straight up

15-16

48% wins

Against the spread

14-17

45% covers · avg +0.1 pts vs the line

Over / Under

17-14

55% overs · avg −1 pts vs the total

Straight up

15-1648%

W W L W L W L L L W W W W W W L L W W L W W L L L L L L W L L

2 straight losses1 of last 4 won

Against the spread

14-1745%

W W L L L L L L L W W L W W W W L W L L W W L L L L W L W W L

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

17-1455%

U O O O O O O U U O U U O U U U O U U O O O U U O U O O O O U

3 of last 4 overno streak

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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	vsDSU	W 83-65	-16.5	W +1.5	154.5	U 148
Nov 11	vsLAS	W 90-63	-6.5	W +20.5	148.5	O 153
Nov 15	vsBC	L 71-76	-3.5	L −8.5	142.5	O 147
Nov 19	vsHOF	W 81-76	-5.5	L −0.5	145.5	O 157
Nov 24	vsUCSD	L 76-91	-1.5	L −16.5	148.5	O 167
Nov 25	vsPRIN	W 79-75	-8.5	L −4.5	145.5	O 154
Nov 26	vsURI	L 75-90	+3.5	L −11.5	149.5	O 165
Dec 1	@VILL	L 56-74	+14.5	L −3.5	146.5	U 130
Dec 6	vsJOES	L 69-70	-1.5	L −2.5	147.5	U 139
Dec 14	vsSFPA	W 95-67	-20.5	W +7.5	150.5	O 162
Dec 18	@DAV	W 68-63	+5.5	W +10.5	141.5	U 131
Dec 22	vsPRIN	W 65-61	-8.5	L −4.5	139.5	U 126
Dec 30	@CLT	W 76-73	+1.5	W +4.5	138.5	O 149
Jan 3	vsUTSA	W 76-57	-10.5	W +8.5	149.5	U 133
Jan 7	vsECU	W 75-67	-7.5	W +0.5	143.5	U 142
Jan 14	@MEM	L 53-55	+7.5	W +5.5	143.5	U 108
Jan 18	vsFAU	L 73-79	+2.5	L −3.5	148.5	O 152
Jan 21	@RICE	W 69-65	+1.5	W +5.5	142.5	U 134
Jan 24	@UTSA	W 70-64	-10.5	L −4.5	145.5	U 134
Jan 28	vsCLT	L 76-80	-4.5	L −8.5	139.5	O 156
Jan 31	vsUSF	W 79-78	+9.5	W +10.5	154.5	O 157
Feb 7	@ECU	W 81-73	-2.5	W +5.5	140.5	O 154
Feb 11	@TULN	L 66-77	+1.5	L −9.5	144.5	U 143
Feb 15	vsUNT	L 62-65	-2.5	L −5.5	135.5	U 127
Feb 18	vsUAB	L 71-76	-1.5	L −6.5	143.5	O 147
Feb 21	@WICH	L 57-69	+8.5	L −3.5	144.5	U 126
Feb 26	@FAU	L 73-77	+4.5	W +0.5	145.5	O 150
Mar 1	vsRICE	L 74-80	-6.5	L −12.5	142.5	O 154
Mar 5	vsTULN	W 89-60	-4.5	W +24.5	144.5	O 149
Mar 8	@TLSA	L 76-78	+11.5	W +9.5	149.5	O 154
Mar 11	vsFAU	L 59-63	-1.5	L −5.5	144.5	U 122

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

DSU

W 83-65

+1.5

LAS

W 90-63

+20.5

L 71-76

−8.5

HOF

W 81-76

−0.5

UCSD

L 76-91

−16.5

PRIN

W 79-75

−4.5

URI

L 75-90

−11.5

VILL

L 56-74

−3.5

JOES

L 69-70

−2.5

SFPA

W 95-67

+7.5

DAV

W 68-63

+10.5

PRIN

W 65-61

−4.5

CLT

W 76-73

+4.5

UTSA

W 76-57

+8.5

ECU

W 75-67

+0.5

MEM

L 53-55

+5.5

FAU

L 73-79

−3.5

RICE

W 69-65

+5.5

UTSA

W 70-64

−4.5

CLT

L 76-80

−8.5

USF

W 79-78

+10.5

ECU

W 81-73

+5.5

TULN

L 66-77

−9.5

UNT

L 62-65

−5.5

UAB

L 71-76

−6.5

WICH

L 57-69

−3.5

FAU

L 73-77

+0.5

RICE

L 74-80

−12.5

TULN

W 89-60

+24.5

TLSA

L 76-78

+9.5

FAU

L 59-63

−5.5

covered 14didn’t cover 17avg +0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

DSU

W 83-65

−6.5

LAS

W 90-63

+4.5

L 71-76

+4.5

HOF

W 81-76

+11.5

UCSD

L 76-91

+18.5

PRIN

W 79-75

+8.5

URI

L 75-90

+15.5

VILL

L 56-74

−16.5

JOES

L 69-70

−8.5

SFPA

W 95-67

+11.5

DAV

W 68-63

−10.5

PRIN

W 65-61

−13.5

CLT

W 76-73

+10.5

UTSA

W 76-57

−16.5

ECU

W 75-67

−1.5

MEM

L 53-55

−35.5

FAU

L 73-79

+3.5

RICE

W 69-65

−8.5

UTSA

W 70-64

−11.5

CLT

L 76-80

+16.5

USF

W 79-78

+2.5

ECU

W 81-73

+13.5

TULN

L 66-77

−1.5

UNT

L 62-65

−8.5

UAB

L 71-76

+3.5

WICH

L 57-69

−18.5

FAU

L 73-77

+4.5

RICE

L 74-80

+11.5

TULN

W 89-60

+4.5

TLSA

L 76-78

+4.5

FAU

L 59-63

−22.5

over 17under 14avg −1 ptslonger = bigger margin

La Salle

31 games played

Straight up

8-23

26% wins

Against the spread

14-17

45% covers · avg −0.2 pts vs the line

Over / Under

14-17

45% overs · avg −0.8 pts vs the total

Straight up

8-2326%

W W L L L L L L W L L L L L W L L W W L L L L L L W L L W L L

2 straight losses1 of last 4 won

Against the spread

14-1745%

W W L L L L L L W L W L W L W W L W W L L L L W W W L W W L L

2 straight misses ATS2 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

14-1745%

O U O O U U U U O U O U O U O O U O U U U U U U U U O O O O O

5 straight overs4 of last 4 over

Game by game: lines, results and totals

TableATSO/U

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	vsCOPP	W 87-59	-17.5	W +10.5	139.5	O 146
Nov 8	vsMONM	W 73-60	-4.5	W +8.5	143.5	U 133
Nov 11	@TEM	L 63-90	+6.5	L −20.5	148.5	O 153
Nov 15	vsPSU	L 69-83	+8.5	L −5.5	145.5	O 152
Nov 19	vsVILL	L 55-70	+12.5	L −2.5	144.5	U 125
Nov 28	vsHOF	L 58-63	+3.5	L −1.5	138.5	U 121
Nov 29	@PENN	L 71-73	+1.5	L −0.5	149.5	U 144
Nov 30	vsMRMK	L 60-66	-2.5	L −8.5	132.5	U 126
Dec 6	vsDREX	W 69-64	+1.5	W +6.5	129.5	O 133
Dec 13	@LIU	L 60-70	+2.5	L −7.5	143.5	U 130
Dec 19	@HPU	L 72-84	+13.5	W +1.5	149.5	O 156
Dec 21	@MICH	L 50-102	+40.5	L −11.5	155.5	U 152
Dec 31	vsGMU	L 75-80	+8.5	W +3.5	134.5	O 155
Jan 3	@GW	L 55-77	+16.5	L −5.5	150.5	U 132
Jan 7	@URI	W 79-72	+11.5	W +18.5	135.5	O 151
Jan 10	vsSLU	L 72-84	+17.5	W +5.5	152.5	O 156
Jan 14	@RICH	L 53-74	+8.5	L −12.5	147.5	U 127
Jan 17	vsSBU	W 78-74	+5.5	W +9.5	141.5	O 152
Jan 21	vsDAY	W 67-64	+9.5	W +12.5	137.5	U 131
Jan 28	@FOR	L 58-64	+5.5	L −0.5	136.5	U 122
Jan 31	vsJOES	L 58-67	+2.5	L −6.5	142.5	U 125
Feb 3	@LUC	L 61-71	+2.5	L −7.5	140.5	U 132
Feb 7	@SLU	L 58-82	+22.5	L −1.5	153.5	U 140
Feb 11	vsVCU	L 68-77	+12.5	W +3.5	147.5	U 145
Feb 18	@DUQ	L 61-62	+11.5	W +10.5	145.5	U 123
Feb 21	vsURI	W 59-46	+3.5	W +16.5	135.5	U 105
Feb 24	vsGW	L 77-104	+8.5	L −18.5	146.5	O 181
Mar 1	@DAV	L 64-71	+10.5	W +3.5	133.5	O 135
Mar 4	vsFOR	W 87-84	+3.5	W +6.5	131.5	O 171
Mar 7	@JOES	L 76-88	+11.5	L −0.5	142.5	O 164
Mar 11	vsSBU	L 80-99	+7.5	L −11.5	146.5	O 179

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

COPP

W 87-59

+10.5

MONM

W 73-60

+8.5

TEM

L 63-90

−20.5

PSU

L 69-83

−5.5

VILL

L 55-70

−2.5

HOF

L 58-63

−1.5

PENN

L 71-73

−0.5

MRMK

L 60-66

−8.5

DREX

W 69-64

+6.5

LIU

L 60-70

−7.5

HPU

L 72-84

+1.5

MICH

L 50-102

−11.5

GMU

L 75-80

+3.5

L 55-77

−5.5

URI

W 79-72

+18.5

SLU

L 72-84

+5.5

RICH

L 53-74

−12.5

SBU

W 78-74

+9.5

DAY

W 67-64

+12.5

FOR

L 58-64

−0.5

JOES

L 58-67

−6.5

LUC

L 61-71

−7.5

SLU

L 58-82

−1.5

VCU

L 68-77

+3.5

DUQ

L 61-62

+10.5

URI

W 59-46

+16.5

L 77-104

−18.5

DAV

L 64-71

+3.5

FOR

W 87-84

+6.5

JOES

L 76-88

−0.5

SBU

L 80-99

−11.5

covered 14didn’t cover 17avg −0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

COPP

W 87-59

+6.5

MONM

W 73-60

−10.5

TEM

L 63-90

+4.5

PSU

L 69-83

+6.5

VILL

L 55-70

−19.5

HOF

L 58-63

−17.5

PENN

L 71-73

−5.5

MRMK

L 60-66

−6.5

DREX

W 69-64

+3.5

LIU

L 60-70

−13.5

HPU

L 72-84

+6.5

MICH

L 50-102

−3.5

GMU

L 75-80

+20.5

L 55-77

−18.5

URI

W 79-72

+15.5

SLU

L 72-84

+3.5

RICH

L 53-74

−20.5

SBU

W 78-74

+10.5

DAY

W 67-64

−6.5

FOR

L 58-64

−14.5

JOES

L 58-67

−17.5

LUC

L 61-71

−8.5

SLU

L 58-82

−13.5

VCU

L 68-77

−2.5

DUQ

L 61-62

−22.5

URI

W 59-46

−30.5

L 77-104

+34.5

DAV

L 64-71

+1.5

FOR

W 87-84

+39.5

JOES

L 76-88

+21.5

SBU

L 80-99

+32.5

over 14under 17avg −0.8 ptslonger = bigger margin

Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.

Temple has the better starters

Position by position: Temple 2, La Salle 1, even 2

TempleBetterLa Salle

G D. Ford18.1 pts · 4.3 reb · 1.9 ast Score 86

TEMBig

G J. Johnson6.3 pts · 2.4 reb · 4.1 ast Score 29

G D. White TR9.7 pts · 2.7 reb · 2.1 ast Score 44

LASBig

G R. Dockery12.5 pts · 6.2 reb · 2.3 ast Score 91

G G. Griffiths10 pts · 4.9 reb · 1.3 ast Score 68

Even

F J. Brewer11.3 pts · 4.2 reb · 0.7 ast Score 75

F B. Njie TR9.6 pts · 5.4 reb · 1.3 ast Score 45

Even

F V. Zanki TR8.1 pts · 2.4 reb · 0.8 ast Score 46

F E. Suarez TR9.3 pts · 6.1 reb · 1.1 ast Score 54

TEMBig

F A. Finkley TR5.4 pts · 3.2 reb · 1.7 ast Score 19

TempleBetterLa Salle

TEM offense116th of 366 · -2.5

Even

LAS defense111th of 366 · -1.3

TEM defense108th of 366 · -1.1

Even

LAS offense157th of 366 · -4.7

Backcourt+1.9 · 3 players

TEMSmall

Backcourt+0.4 · 2 players

Frontcourt-0.6 · 2 players

Even

Frontcourt-0.6 · 3 players

Bench-1.1 · 5 players

TEMSmall

Bench-3.6 · 5 players

Score, worst to bestTEM betterLAS betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers

Projected starters: college teams publish no depth chart, so these come from minutes played, and a freshman or a new starter can change them. The score is the share of ranked players at the position that player is ahead of. Numbers are this season's once a player has 30 minutes, 2025-26's before that. Bench is the next five by minutes. Tap a player for the full numbers.

Depth chart

Projected rotation by position, starters outlined

Temple

Guards

D. Ford36 minD. White30 min · TRG. Griffiths29 minJ. Marsh18 min · TRC. Wallace6 minD. DrakeNew

Forwards

B. Njie26 min · TRE. Suarez22 min · TRS. Issac Herron13 min · TR

Centers

C. Beam16 min · TRM. Keita5 min

La Salle

Guards

J. Johnson30 minR. Dockery27 minK. Burton19 min · TRD. Booker8 min · TRA. Masharaliyev1 minT. MossNew

Forwards

J. Brewer27 minV. Zanki21 min · TRA. Finkley19 min · TRN. Collier14 minE. Rink12 min · TRB. Beatty10 min

In order of minutes, from rosters as of today. ESPN lists players only as guards, forwards or centers, and no injury report exists for college basketball, so a player who is out may still show here.

Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.

Matchup stats

2025-26 · rank among 365 teams

ChartTable

Scoring

Points per game

TEM73.0 #224

LAS66.8 #336

Points per possession

TEM1.11 #115

LAS1.00 #322

Pace (possessions)

TEM65.6 #325

LAS66.4 #300

Shooting

Effective FG%

TEM50.2 #229

LAS45.4 #357

3-point %

TEM33.6 #194

LAS30.0 #342

3-point attempt rate

TEM35.7 #255

LAS31.5 #333

Free throw rate

TEM40.6 #52

LAS37.5 #113

Possessions

Turnover rate

TEM13.7 #18

LAS18.2 #281

Offensive rebound rate

TEM29.8 #209

LAS33.7 #75

Assists per game

TEM11.9 #290

LAS12.9 #221

Defense

Points allowed

TEM71.2 #77

LAS75.0 #186

Points allowed per possession

TEM1.08 #177

LAS1.13 #293

Opponent effective FG%

TEM50.7 #137

LAS55.0 #329

Opponent 3-point %

TEM32.8 #107

LAS36.5 #324

Turnovers forced

TEM15.5 #245

LAS17.2 #136

Defensive rebound rate

TEM69.7 #177

LAS67.7 #274

Steals per game

TEM5.7 #279

LAS6.7 #155

Blocks per game

TEM4.0 #71

LAS2.6 #295

TEM		LAS
Scoring
73.0 #224	Points per game	66.8 #336
1.11 #115	Points per possession	1.00 #322
65.6 #325	Pace (possessions)	66.4 #300
Shooting
50.2 #229	Effective FG%	45.4 #357
33.6 #194	3-point %	30.0 #342
35.7 #255	3-point attempt rate	31.5 #333
40.6 #52	Free throw rate	37.5 #113
Possessions
13.7 #18	Turnover rate	18.2 #281
29.8 #209	Offensive rebound rate	33.7 #75
11.9 #290	Assists per game	12.9 #221
Defense
71.2 #77	Points allowed	75.0 #186
1.08 #177	Points allowed per possession	1.13 #293
50.7 #137	Opponent effective FG%	55.0 #329
32.8 #107	Opponent 3-point %	36.5 #324
15.5 #245	Turnovers forced	17.2 #136
69.7 #177	Defensive rebound rate	67.7 #274
5.7 #279	Steals per game	6.7 #155
4.0 #71	Blocks per game	2.6 #295

From the box scores. A longer bar is a better national rank, on every row; the better team's bar is solid. A green rank is near the top of Division I, a red one near the bottom. Pace and 3-point rate are styles, so they have no better side.

Temple

15-16 in 2025-26 overall · 8-11 in conference · American Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs FAU59–63
L@ Tulsa76–78
Wvs Tulane89–60
Lvs Rice74–80
L@ FAU73–77

A week or more of rest.

La Salle

8-23 in 2025-26 overall · 5-14 in conference · Atlantic 10 Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs St Bonaventure80–99
L@ Saint Joseph's76–88
Wvs Fordham87–84
L@ Davidson64–71
Lvs G Washington77–104

A week or more of rest.

Temple Owls at La Salle Explorers

What could decide it: TEM has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

Recent meetings

ATS History · 2025-26

Temple

La Salle

Temple has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Temple

La Salle