Stony Brook Arena · at Stony Brook
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | STBK | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 72–70 · win probability LAS 55%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 141.8
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: STBK has more of the edges
LAS 3, STBK 4 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Shooting
Effective FG%: LAS 45.4 and allows 55.0; STBK 50.2 and allows 50.7
Free throws
Free throw rate: LAS 37.5, STBK 28.4. Allowed: LAS 31.5, STBK 35.4
STBK offense vs LAS defense
Offense 235th of 366 against a defense 111th, on the model’s ratings
Three-pointers
LAS hits 30.0% and allows 36.5%; STBK hits 34.8% and allows 35.7%. Threes are 31.5% and 45.8% of their shots
Context
Schedule so far
LAS has played the 92nd-hardest schedule, STBK the 204th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: LAS 33.7%, STBK 28.0%. Defensive: LAS 67.7%, STBK 67.7%
Home court
STBK at home. This season: STBK 0-0 at home, LAS 0-0 away
Turnovers
Turnover rate: LAS 18.2%, STBK 16.7%. Forced: LAS 17.2%, STBK 17.2%
Context
Tempo
About 67 possessions: LAS plays 66.4 a game (300th fastest), STBK 67.3 (269th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: LAS 56%, STBK 48%. Transfers in: LAS 5, STBK 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
LAS offense vs STBK defense
Offense 157th of 366 against a defense 164th, on the model’s ratings
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 | — | LAS -1.4 | — |
| Total | — | 141.8 | — |
| Projected score | — | LAS 71.6 · STBK 70.2 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | LAS -1.0 | — |
| 1H total | 66.4 | — |
| 1H projected score | LAS 33.7 · STBK 32.7 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2-8 20% | 5-5 50% | 5-5 50% | |
| 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% | 5-5 50% |
Next 3 games
With how the last meeting with each opponent went
No more games listed yet.
| Date | Game | Last meeting |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 15 | @ OSU | No recent meeting |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
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
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 87-59 | -17.5 | W +10.5 | 139.5 | O 146 |
| Nov 8 | vs | W 73-60 | -4.5 | W +8.5 | 143.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 63-90 | +6.5 | L −20.5 | 148.5 | O 153 |
| Nov 15 | vs | L 69-83 | +8.5 | L −5.5 | 145.5 | O 152 |
| Nov 19 | vs | L 55-70 | +12.5 | L −2.5 | 144.5 | U 125 |
| Nov 28 | vs | L 58-63 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 138.5 | U 121 |
| Nov 29 | @ | L 71-73 | +1.5 | L −0.5 | 149.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 30 | vs | L 60-66 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 132.5 | U 126 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 69-64 | +1.5 | W +6.5 | 129.5 | O 133 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 60-70 | +2.5 | L −7.5 | 143.5 | U 130 |
| Dec 19 | @ | L 72-84 | +13.5 | W +1.5 | 149.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 50-102 | +40.5 | L −11.5 | 155.5 | U 152 |
| Dec 31 | vs | L 75-80 | +8.5 | W +3.5 | 134.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 3 | @ | L 55-77 | +16.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 7 | @ | W 79-72 | +11.5 | W +18.5 | 135.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 72-84 | +17.5 | W +5.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 53-74 | +8.5 | L −12.5 | 147.5 | U 127 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 78-74 | +5.5 | W +9.5 | 141.5 | O 152 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 67-64 | +9.5 | W +12.5 | 137.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 28 | @ | L 58-64 | +5.5 | L −0.5 | 136.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 58-67 | +2.5 | L −6.5 | 142.5 | U 125 |
| Feb 3 | @ | L 61-71 | +2.5 | L −7.5 | 140.5 | U 132 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 58-82 | +22.5 | L −1.5 | 153.5 | U 140 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 68-77 | +12.5 | W +3.5 | 147.5 | U 145 |
| Feb 18 | @ | L 61-62 | +11.5 | W +10.5 | 145.5 | U 123 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 59-46 | +3.5 | W +16.5 | 135.5 | U 105 |
| Feb 24 | vs | L 77-104 | +8.5 | L −18.5 | 146.5 | O 181 |
| Mar 1 | @ | L 64-71 | +10.5 | W +3.5 | 133.5 | O 135 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 87-84 | +3.5 | W +6.5 | 131.5 | O 171 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 76-88 | +11.5 | L −0.5 | 142.5 | O 164 |
| Mar 11 | vs | L 80-99 | +7.5 | L −11.5 | 146.5 | O 179 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
5
vs
COPP
W 87-59
+10.5
8
vs
MONM
W 73-60
+8.5
11
@
TEM
L 63-90
−20.5
15
vs
PSU
L 69-83
−5.5
19
vs
VILL
L 55-70
−2.5
28
vs
HOF
L 58-63
−1.5
29
@
PENN
L 71-73
−0.5
30
vs
MRMK
L 60-66
−8.5
6
vs
DREX
W 69-64
+6.5
13
@
LIU
L 60-70
−7.5
19
@
HPU
L 72-84
+1.5
21
@
MICH
L 50-102
−11.5
31
vs
GMU
L 75-80
+3.5
3
@
GW
L 55-77
−5.5
7
@
URI
W 79-72
+18.5
10
vs
SLU
L 72-84
+5.5
14
@
RICH
L 53-74
−12.5
17
vs
SBU
W 78-74
+9.5
21
vs
DAY
W 67-64
+12.5
28
@
FOR
L 58-64
−0.5
31
vs
JOES
L 58-67
−6.5
3
@
LUC
L 61-71
−7.5
7
@
SLU
L 58-82
−1.5
11
vs
VCU
L 68-77
+3.5
18
@
DUQ
L 61-62
+10.5
21
vs
URI
W 59-46
+16.5
24
vs
GW
L 77-104
−18.5
1
@
DAV
L 64-71
+3.5
4
vs
FOR
W 87-84
+6.5
7
@
JOES
L 76-88
−0.5
11
vs
SBU
L 80-99
−11.5
covered 14didn’t cover 17avg −0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
5
vs
COPP
W 87-59
+6.5
8
vs
MONM
W 73-60
−10.5
11
@
TEM
L 63-90
+4.5
15
vs
PSU
L 69-83
+6.5
19
vs
VILL
L 55-70
−19.5
28
vs
HOF
L 58-63
−17.5
29
@
PENN
L 71-73
−5.5
30
vs
MRMK
L 60-66
−6.5
6
vs
DREX
W 69-64
+3.5
13
@
LIU
L 60-70
−13.5
19
@
HPU
L 72-84
+6.5
21
@
MICH
L 50-102
−3.5
31
vs
GMU
L 75-80
+20.5
3
@
GW
L 55-77
−18.5
7
@
URI
W 79-72
+15.5
10
vs
SLU
L 72-84
+3.5
14
@
RICH
L 53-74
−20.5
17
vs
SBU
W 78-74
+10.5
21
vs
DAY
W 67-64
−6.5
28
@
FOR
L 58-64
−14.5
31
vs
JOES
L 58-67
−17.5
3
@
LUC
L 61-71
−8.5
7
@
SLU
L 58-82
−13.5
11
vs
VCU
L 68-77
−2.5
18
@
DUQ
L 61-62
−22.5
21
vs
URI
W 59-46
−30.5
24
vs
GW
L 77-104
+34.5
1
@
DAV
L 64-71
+1.5
4
vs
FOR
W 87-84
+39.5
7
@
JOES
L 76-88
+21.5
11
vs
SBU
L 80-99
+32.5
over 14under 17avg −0.8 ptslonger = bigger margin
Stony Brook
30 games played
Straight up
15-15
50% wins
Against the spread
18-12
60% covers · avg +1.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-15
50% overs · avg +0.6 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 8 | vs | W 71-60 | -3.5 | W +7.5 | 131.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 79-86 | +20.5 | W +13.5 | 150.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 80-70 | -3.5 | W +6.5 | 136.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 58-86 | +4.5 | L −23.5 | 145.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 61-54 | +4.5 | W +11.5 | 145.5 | U 115 |
| Nov 28 | @ | W 71-68 | +10.5 | W +13.5 | 138.5 | O 139 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 75-84 | +9.5 | W +0.5 | 150.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 9 | vs | W 77-73 | +4.5 | W +8.5 | 146.5 | O 150 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 78-55 | -7.5 | W +15.5 | 145.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 17 | vs | L 55-71 | -10.5 | L −26.5 | 146.5 | U 126 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 51-70 | +6.5 | L −12.5 | 137.5 | U 121 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 59-62 | +2.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | U 121 |
| Dec 31 | @ | L 57-76 | +11.5 | L −7.5 | 159.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 81-80 | -4.5 | L −3.5 | 141.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 37-56 | +5.5 | L −13.5 | 132.5 | U 93 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 71-75 | +6.5 | W +2.5 | 133.5 | O 146 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 76-71 | +6.5 | W +11.5 | 136.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 112-106 | +4.5 | W +10.5 | 142.5 | O 218 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 95-80 | +3.5 | W +18.5 | 148.5 | O 175 |
| Jan 29 | @ | W 81-69 | +4.5 | W +16.5 | 152.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 72-68 | +4.5 | W +8.5 | 148.5 | U 140 |
| Feb 5 | vs | L 75-76 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 137.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 69-55 | -3.5 | W +10.5 | 153.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 12 | @ | L 57-69 | +7.5 | L −4.5 | 135.5 | U 126 |
| Feb 16 | vs | W 72-69 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 135.5 | O 141 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 79-72 | -5.5 | W +1.5 | 135.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 69-82 | +3.5 | L −9.5 | 145.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 58-67 | +11.5 | W +2.5 | 140.5 | U 125 |
| Mar 3 | vs | L 57-69 | +1.5 | L −10.5 | 137.5 | U 126 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 89-96 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 148.5 | O 185 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
vs
ME
W 71-60
+7.5
15
@
YALE
L 79-86
+13.5
20
vs
BRWN
W 80-70
+6.5
24
vs
PAC
L 58-86
−23.5
25
vs
BCU
W 61-54
+11.5
28
@
LMU
W 71-68
+13.5
6
@
DUQ
L 75-84
+0.5
9
vs
COLU
W 77-73
+8.5
13
vs
CMU
W 78-55
+15.5
17
vs
UALB
L 55-71
−26.5
21
@
MRST
L 51-70
−12.5
29
@
HAMP
L 59-62
−0.5
31
@
W&M
L 57-76
−7.5
3
vs
NCAT
W 81-80
−3.5
8
@
DREX
L 37-56
−13.5
10
vs
UNCW
L 71-75
+2.5
15
vs
HOF
W 76-71
+11.5
17
vs
COFC
W 112-106
+10.5
22
@
NE
W 95-80
+18.5
29
@
CAM
W 81-69
+16.5
31
@
ELON
W 72-68
+8.5
5
vs
MONM
L 75-76
−2.5
7
vs
NE
W 69-55
+10.5
12
@
TOW
L 57-69
−4.5
16
vs
DREX
W 72-69
+0.5
21
vs
HAMP
W 79-72
+1.5
26
@
MONM
L 69-82
−9.5
28
@
HOF
L 58-67
+2.5
3
vs
TOW
L 57-69
−10.5
7
vs
CAM
L 89-96
−4.5
covered 18didn’t cover 12avg +1.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
vs
ME
W 71-60
−0.5
15
@
YALE
L 79-86
+14.5
20
vs
BRWN
W 80-70
+13.5
24
vs
PAC
L 58-86
−1.5
25
vs
BCU
W 61-54
−30.5
28
@
LMU
W 71-68
+0.5
6
@
DUQ
L 75-84
+8.5
9
vs
COLU
W 77-73
+3.5
13
vs
CMU
W 78-55
−12.5
17
vs
UALB
L 55-71
−20.5
21
@
MRST
L 51-70
−16.5
29
@
HAMP
L 59-62
−19.5
31
@
W&M
L 57-76
−26.5
3
vs
NCAT
W 81-80
+19.5
8
@
DREX
L 37-56
−39.5
10
vs
UNCW
L 71-75
+12.5
15
vs
HOF
W 76-71
+10.5
17
vs
COFC
W 112-106
+75.5
22
@
NE
W 95-80
+26.5
29
@
CAM
W 81-69
−2.5
31
@
ELON
W 72-68
−8.5
5
vs
MONM
L 75-76
+13.5
7
vs
NE
W 69-55
−29.5
12
@
TOW
L 57-69
−9.5
16
vs
DREX
W 72-69
+5.5
21
vs
HAMP
W 79-72
+15.5
26
@
MONM
L 69-82
+5.5
28
@
HOF
L 58-67
−15.5
3
vs
TOW
L 57-69
−11.5
7
vs
CAM
L 89-96
+36.5
over 15under 15avg +0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
La Salle has the better starters
Position by position: La Salle 3, Stony Brook 0, even 2
La SalleBetterStony Brook
G J. Johnson6.3 pts · 2.4 reb · 4.1 ast
Score 29
=No call
G C. O'Connor8.3 pts · 2.3 reb · 1.8 ast
Not ranked
G R. Dockery12.5 pts · 6.2 reb · 2.3 ast
Score 91
←LASBig
G E. Simmon6 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 46
F J. Brewer11.3 pts · 4.2 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 75
←LASSmall
F B. Ndjonga TR13.8 pts · 5.7 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 45
F V. Zanki TR8.1 pts · 2.4 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 46
←LASSmall
F T. Valentiny4.6 pts · 3.3 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 18
F A. Finkley TR5.4 pts · 3.2 reb · 1.7 ast
Score 19
=Even
F Q. Gorman3.9 pts · 3.4 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 25
La SalleBetterStony Brook
LAS offense157th of 366 · -4.7
=Even
STBK defense164th of 366 · -3.7
LAS defense111th of 366 · -1.3
←LASSmall
STBK offense235th of 366 · -7.2
Backcourt+0.4 · 2 players
←LASSmall
Backcourt-1.0 · 2 players
Frontcourt-0.6 · 3 players
←LASSmall
Frontcourt-3.4 · 3 players
Bench-3.6 · 5 players
→STBKBig
Bench-0.4 · 5 players
Score, worst to bestLAS betterSTBK betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
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
Guards
C. O'Connor27 minE. Simmon17 minJ. Butler13 minM. Ugusuk11 min · TRK. Price7 min · TRL. Dagostino2 min
Forwards
B. Ndjonga33 min · TRT. Valentiny19 minQ. Gorman19 minJ. Daughtry16 min · TRE. Vatan3 min · TR
Centers
L. Van ElswykNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 66.8 #336 | Points per game | 70.7 #270 |
| 1.00 #322 | Points per possession | 1.05 #254 |
| 66.4 #300 | Pace (possessions) | 67.3 #269 |
| Shooting | ||
| 45.4 #357 | Effective FG% | 50.2 #227 |
| 30.0 #342 | 3-point % | 34.8 #128 |
| 31.5 #333 | 3-point attempt rate | 45.8 #50 |
| 37.5 #113 | Free throw rate | 28.4 #339 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.2 #281 | Turnover rate | 16.7 #181 |
| 33.7 #75 | Offensive rebound rate | 28.0 #267 |
| 12.9 #221 | Assists per game | 12.9 #216 |
| Defense | ||
| 75.0 #186 | Points allowed | 72.5 #118 |
| 1.13 #293 | Points allowed per possession | 1.08 #168 |
| 55.0 #329 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.7 #138 |
| 36.5 #324 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.7 #291 |
| 17.2 #136 | Turnovers forced | 17.2 #135 |
| 67.7 #274 | Defensive rebound rate | 67.7 #275 |
| 6.7 #155 | Steals per game | 6.3 #201 |
| 2.6 #295 | Blocks per game | 3.6 #122 |
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.
Stony Brook
15-15 in 2025-26 overall · 9-10 in conference · Coastal Athletic Association
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Campbell89–96
- Lvs Towson57–69
- L@ Hofstra58–67
- L@ Monmouth69–82
- Wvs Hampton79–72
A week or more of rest.