SRC Arena · at UC Riverside
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | UCR | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 UCR 74–72 · win probability UCR 55%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 146.3
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: PRST has more of the edges
PRST 4, UCR 1 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
PRST has played the 322nd-hardest schedule, UCR the 182nd. A record against a soft schedule means less
Turnovers
Turnover rate: PRST 16.9%, UCR 19.0%. Forced: PRST 18.0%, UCR 15.5%
Shooting
Effective FG%: PRST 50.5 and allows 48.8; UCR 48.9 and allows 52.7
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: PRST 30.0%, UCR 27.8%. Defensive: PRST 73.6%, UCR 70.0%
Three-pointers
PRST hits 32.6% and allows 32.3%; UCR hits 31.6% and allows 33.5%. Threes are 34.4% and 38.3% of their shots
Home court
UCR at home. This season: UCR 0-0 at home, PRST 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: PRST plays 69.6 a game (140th fastest), UCR 71.0 (74th). Faster games mean more points
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: PRST 6%, UCR 21%. Transfers in: PRST 4, UCR 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
UCR offense vs PRST defense
Offense 265th of 366 against a defense 244th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: PRST 37.1, UCR 35.0. Allowed: PRST 42.8, UCR 40.9
Even
PRST offense vs UCR defense
Offense 284th of 366 against a defense 296th, 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 | — | UCR -1.5 | — |
| Total | — | 146.3 | — |
| Projected score | — | PRST 72.4 · UCR 73.9 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | UCR -0.7 | — |
| 1H total | 68.4 | — |
| 1H projected score | PRST 33.8 · UCR 34.6 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5-5 50% | 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% | |
| 2-8 20% | 3-7 30% | 6-4 60% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Portland St
28 games played
Straight up
17-11
61% wins
Against the spread
19-9
68% covers · avg +1.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
12-16
43% 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 4 | @ | L 79-89 | +11.5 | W +1.5 | 144.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 12 | @ | L 70-80 | +13.5 | W +3.5 | 154.5 | U 150 |
| Nov 17 | vs | W 93-80 | -8.5 | W +4.5 | 141.5 | O 173 |
| Nov 25 | @ | W 68-63 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 146.5 | U 131 |
| Dec 3 | @ | W 77-71 | -2.5 | W +3.5 | 158.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 55-60 | -12.5 | L −17.5 | 144.5 | U 115 |
| Dec 17 | @ | L 73-84 | +16.5 | W +5.5 | 150.5 | O 157 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 61-63 | +2.5 | W +0.5 | 145.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 1 | @ | W 95-90 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 148.5 | O 185 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 93-87 | +3.5 | W +9.5 | 142.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 96-69 | -9.5 | W +17.5 | 160.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 76-73 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 155.5 | U 149 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 63-52 | -11.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | U 115 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 65-61 | -2.5 | W +1.5 | 150.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 69-66 | +1.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 29 | vs | L 60-64 | -4.5 | L −8.5 | 143.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 63-54 | -4.5 | W +4.5 | 138.5 | U 117 |
| Feb 2 | vs | W 88-65 | -7.5 | W +15.5 | 136.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 74-73 | -3.5 | L −2.5 | 150.5 | U 147 |
| Feb 12 | @ | W 77-68 | -6.5 | W +2.5 | 136.5 | O 145 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 65-77 | +3.5 | L −8.5 | 149.5 | U 142 |
| Feb 19 | vs | W 77-67 | -3.5 | W +6.5 | 145.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 55-67 | -6.5 | L −18.5 | 146.5 | U 122 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 69-84 | +2.5 | L −12.5 | 140.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 68-74 | +1.5 | L −4.5 | 141.5 | O 142 |
| Mar 2 | vs | W 84-60 | -4.5 | W +19.5 | 144.5 | U 144 |
| Mar 8 | vs | W 85-78 | -5.5 | W +1.5 | 141.5 | O 163 |
| Mar 10 | vs | L 72-75 | -3.5 | L −6.5 | 145.5 | O 147 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
@
STAN
L 79-89
+1.5
12
@
SF
L 70-80
+3.5
17
vs
CSUB
W 93-80
+4.5
25
@
UTU
W 68-63
+3.5
3
@
SDAK
W 77-71
+3.5
6
vs
OMA
L 55-60
−17.5
17
@
COLO
L 73-84
+5.5
20
@
TULN
L 61-63
+0.5
1
@
WEB
W 95-90
+3.5
3
@
IDST
W 93-87
+9.5
10
vs
SAC
W 96-69
+17.5
15
vs
UNCO
W 76-73
+0.5
17
vs
NAU
W 63-52
−0.5
22
@
EWU
W 65-61
+1.5
24
@
IDHO
W 69-66
+4.5
29
vs
MONT
L 60-64
−8.5
31
vs
MTST
W 63-54
+4.5
2
vs
IDST
W 88-65
+15.5
7
@
SAC
W 74-73
−2.5
12
@
NAU
W 77-68
+2.5
14
@
UNCO
L 65-77
−8.5
19
vs
IDHO
W 77-67
+6.5
21
vs
EWU
L 55-67
−18.5
26
@
MTST
L 69-84
−12.5
28
@
MONT
L 68-74
−4.5
2
vs
WEB
W 84-60
+19.5
8
vs
IDST
W 85-78
+1.5
10
vs
MONT
L 72-75
−6.5
covered 19didn’t cover 9avg +1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
@
STAN
L 79-89
+23.5
12
@
SF
L 70-80
−4.5
17
vs
CSUB
W 93-80
+31.5
25
@
UTU
W 68-63
−15.5
3
@
SDAK
W 77-71
−10.5
6
vs
OMA
L 55-60
−29.5
17
@
COLO
L 73-84
+6.5
20
@
TULN
L 61-63
−21.5
1
@
WEB
W 95-90
+36.5
3
@
IDST
W 93-87
+37.5
10
vs
SAC
W 96-69
+4.5
15
vs
UNCO
W 76-73
−6.5
17
vs
NAU
W 63-52
−25.5
22
@
EWU
W 65-61
−24.5
24
@
IDHO
W 69-66
−10.5
29
vs
MONT
L 60-64
−19.5
31
vs
MTST
W 63-54
−21.5
2
vs
IDST
W 88-65
+16.5
7
@
SAC
W 74-73
−3.5
12
@
NAU
W 77-68
+8.5
14
@
UNCO
L 65-77
−7.5
19
vs
IDHO
W 77-67
−1.5
21
vs
EWU
L 55-67
−24.5
26
@
MTST
L 69-84
+12.5
28
@
MONT
L 68-74
+0.5
2
vs
WEB
W 84-60
−0.5
8
vs
IDST
W 85-78
+21.5
10
vs
MONT
L 72-75
+1.5
over 12under 16avg −0.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
UC Riverside
30 games played
Straight up
8-22
27% wins
Against the spread
15-15
50% covers · avg +0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-14
53% overs · avg +1 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 6 | @ | W 74-70 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 146.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 68-82 | +19.5 | W +5.5 | 141.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 15 | vs | L 74-76 | -3.5 | L −5.5 | 148.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 57-80 | +12.5 | L −10.5 | 142.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 21 | @ | W 85-71 | +7.5 | W +21.5 | 152.5 | O 156 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 83-74 | -3.5 | W +5.5 | 144.5 | O 157 |
| Nov 29 | @ | L 69-77 | +5.5 | L −2.5 | 145.5 | O 146 |
| Dec 4 | @ | L 60-73 | +13.5 | W +0.5 | 142.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 88-84 | +5.5 | W +9.5 | 162.5 | O 172 |
| Dec 13 | @ | L 53-100 | +33.5 | L −13.5 | 155.5 | U 153 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 78-92 | +14.5 | W +0.5 | 152.5 | O 170 |
| Dec 23 | @ | L 65-97 | +24.5 | L −7.5 | 148.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 1 | vs | L 45-88 | +8.5 | L −34.5 | 149.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 66-67 | +3.5 | W +2.5 | 147.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 66-69 | +10.5 | W +7.5 | 149.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 15 | @ | L 73-88 | +5.5 | L −9.5 | 141.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 81-72 | +3.5 | W +12.5 | 157.5 | U 153 |
| Jan 22 | vs | L 66-80 | +8.5 | L −5.5 | 142.5 | O 146 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 66-74 | +9.5 | W +1.5 | 149.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 71-61 | +1.5 | W +11.5 | 144.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 87-94 | -1.5 | L −8.5 | 162.5 | O 181 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 72-78 | +5.5 | L −0.5 | 156.5 | U 150 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 74-88 | +10.5 | L −3.5 | 160.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 12 | vs | L 68-76 | +6.5 | L −1.5 | 145.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 66-72 | +11.5 | W +5.5 | 147.5 | U 138 |
| Feb 19 | vs | W 93-65 | -6.5 | W +21.5 | 150.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 21 | vs | L 73-78 | +2.5 | L −2.5 | 149.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 59-70 | +10.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 95-84 | +4.5 | W +15.5 | 158.5 | O 179 |
| Mar 5 | @ | L 74-93 | +12.5 | L −6.5 | 150.5 | O 167 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
6
@
UND
W 74-70
+5.5
11
@
UNM
L 68-82
+5.5
15
vs
UND
L 74-76
−5.5
18
@
CBU
L 57-80
−10.5
21
@
USD
W 85-71
+21.5
24
vs
GRAM
W 83-74
+5.5
29
@
UTU
L 69-77
−2.5
4
@
UCI
L 60-73
+0.5
6
@
CP
W 88-84
+9.5
13
@
BYU
L 53-100
−13.5
20
@
STMN
L 78-92
+0.5
23
@
UCLA
L 65-97
−7.5
1
vs
HAW
L 45-88
−34.5
8
@
CSUB
L 66-67
+2.5
10
vs
UCSD
L 66-69
+7.5
15
@
LBSU
L 73-88
−9.5
17
vs
CSUF
W 81-72
+12.5
22
vs
UCI
L 66-80
−5.5
24
@
UCD
L 66-74
+1.5
29
vs
LBSU
W 71-61
+11.5
31
vs
CP
L 87-94
−8.5
5
@
CSUF
L 72-78
−0.5
7
@
CSUN
L 74-88
−3.5
12
vs
UCSB
L 68-76
−1.5
14
@
UCSD
L 66-72
+5.5
19
vs
CSUB
W 93-65
+21.5
21
vs
UCD
L 73-78
−2.5
26
@
UCSB
L 59-70
−0.5
28
vs
CSUN
W 95-84
+15.5
5
@
HAW
L 74-93
−6.5
covered 15didn’t cover 15avg +0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
6
@
UND
W 74-70
−2.5
11
@
UNM
L 68-82
+8.5
15
vs
UND
L 74-76
+1.5
18
@
CBU
L 57-80
−5.5
21
@
USD
W 85-71
+3.5
24
vs
GRAM
W 83-74
+12.5
29
@
UTU
L 69-77
+0.5
4
@
UCI
L 60-73
−9.5
6
@
CP
W 88-84
+9.5
13
@
BYU
L 53-100
−2.5
20
@
STMN
L 78-92
+17.5
23
@
UCLA
L 65-97
+13.5
1
vs
HAW
L 45-88
−16.5
8
@
CSUB
L 66-67
−14.5
10
vs
UCSD
L 66-69
−14.5
15
@
LBSU
L 73-88
+19.5
17
vs
CSUF
W 81-72
−4.5
22
vs
UCI
L 66-80
+3.5
24
@
UCD
L 66-74
−9.5
29
vs
LBSU
W 71-61
−12.5
31
vs
CP
L 87-94
+18.5
5
@
CSUF
L 72-78
−6.5
7
@
CSUN
L 74-88
+1.5
12
vs
UCSB
L 68-76
−1.5
14
@
UCSD
L 66-72
−9.5
19
vs
CSUB
W 93-65
+7.5
21
vs
UCD
L 73-78
+1.5
26
@
UCSB
L 59-70
−16.5
28
vs
CSUN
W 95-84
+20.5
5
@
HAW
L 74-93
+16.5
over 16under 14avg +1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Portland St has the better starters
Position by position: Portland St 1, UC Riverside 0, even 4
Portland StBetterUC Riverside
G E. Skytt TR3.4 pts · 1.8 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 26
=Even
G D. Perteete6.2 pts · 3.2 reb · 2.4 ast
Score 31
G K. Johnson TR1.8 pts · 0.8 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 39
=Even
G J. Evans TR5.8 pts · 1.7 reb · 1.1 ast
Score 25
G C. Ness0.6 pts · 0.3 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G B. Waller4.6 pts · 2.5 reb · 0.6 ast
Score 37
F B. Barron0.7 pts · 1.1 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G D. Malcolm TR5.8 pts · 3.4 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 87
C K. Ibekwe TR3.5 pts · 1.6 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 34
←PRSTSmall
F D. Washington TR2.7 pts · 1.4 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 0
Portland StBetterUC Riverside
PRST offense284th of 366 · -8.8
=Even
UCR defense296th of 366 · -7.4
PRST defense244th of 366 · -6.4
=Even
UCR offense265th of 366 · -8.1
Backcourt-1.7 · 3 players
=Even
Backcourt-2.7 · 4 players
Frontcourt-0.6 · 2 players
←PRSTSmall
Frontcourt-2.0 · 1 player
Bench-0.3 · 2 players
=Even
Bench+0.3 · 2 players
Score, worst to bestPRST betterUCR betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
E. Skytt12 min · TRK. Johnson10 min · TRC. Ness4 minN. PollardNewT. FrankNewD. JohnsonNew
Forwards
B. Barron4 minC. Chukwu3 minL. Kearney3 min · TRJ. RandolphNewA. PusateriNewF. CoratoNew
Centers
K. Ibekwe9 min · TR
Guards
D. Perteete28 minJ. Evans15 min · TRB. Waller14 minD. Malcolm14 min · TRT. Duckett7 min · TRE. ReaganNew
Forwards
D. Washington11 min · TRT. Parrish-TillmanNewA. McKinneyNewJ. MajokNew
Centers
A. Oyeadier2 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 73.9 #199 | Points per game | 71.6 #258 |
| 1.06 #220 | Points per possession | 1.01 #317 |
| 69.6 #140 | Pace (possessions) | 71.0 #74 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.5 #211 | Effective FG% | 48.9 #291 |
| 32.6 #250 | 3-point % | 31.6 #301 |
| 34.4 #287 | 3-point attempt rate | 38.3 #203 |
| 37.1 #126 | Free throw rate | 35.0 #177 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.9 #200 | Turnover rate | 19.0 #321 |
| 30.0 #199 | Offensive rebound rate | 27.8 #275 |
| 13.4 #186 | Assists per game | 12.3 #262 |
| Defense | ||
| 71.2 #80 | Points allowed | 79.1 #303 |
| 1.02 #45 | Points allowed per possession | 1.11 #256 |
| 48.8 #56 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.7 #252 |
| 32.3 #77 | Opponent 3-point % | 33.5 #159 |
| 18.0 #94 | Turnovers forced | 15.5 #250 |
| 73.6 #23 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.0 #159 |
| 7.2 #104 | Steals per game | 5.1 #325 |
| 3.8 #108 | Blocks per game | 4.1 #67 |
Portland St
17-11 in 2025-26 overall · 14-6 in conference · Big Sky Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Montana72–75
- Wvs Idaho St85–78
- Wvs Weber St84–60
- L@ Montana68–74
- L@ Montana St69–84
A week or more of rest.
UC Riverside
8-22 in 2025-26 overall · 5-15 in conference · Big West Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ Hawai'i74–93
- Wvs CSU Northridge95–84
- L@ Santa Barbara59–70
- Lvs UC Davis73–78
- Wvs Bakersfield93–65
A week or more of rest.