Mackey Arena · at Purdue
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | PUR | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 PUR 81–64 · win probability PUR 93%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 144.8
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: PUR has more of the edges
ILST 0, PUR 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
ILST has played the 135th-hardest schedule, PUR the 6th. A record against a soft schedule means less
ILST offense vs PUR defense
Offense 133rd of 366 against a defense 18th, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: ILST 28.0%, PUR 36.4%. Defensive: ILST 74.6%, PUR 72.9%
Turnovers
Turnover rate: ILST 16.8%, PUR 13.7%. Forced: ILST 16.0%, PUR 15.3%
PUR offense vs ILST defense
Offense 38th of 366 against a defense 102nd, on the model’s ratings
Home court
PUR at home. This season: PUR 0-0 at home, ILST 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 67 possessions: ILST plays 67.7 a game (241st fastest), PUR 65.4 (333rd). Faster games mean more points
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: ILST 53.6 and allows 49.8; PUR 57.6 and allows 52.4
Even
Three-pointers
ILST hits 34.9% and allows 33.0%; PUR hits 38.3% and allows 34.1%. Threes are 43.3% and 40.2% of their shots
Even
Free throws
Free throw rate: ILST 31.6, PUR 28.6. Allowed: ILST 32.3, PUR 25.5
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: ILST 37%, PUR 43%. Transfers in: ILST 5, PUR 0. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
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 | — | PUR -16.6 | — |
| Total | — | 144.8 | — |
| Projected score | — | ILST 64.1 · PUR 80.8 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | PUR -9.8 | — |
| 1H total | 67.8 | — |
| 1H projected score | ILST 29 · PUR 38.8 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% | |
| 8-2 80% | 4-6 40% | 6-4 60% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Illinois St
35 games played
Straight up
22-13
63% wins
Against the spread
19-16
54% covers · avg +1.9 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-20
43% overs · avg −3.4 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 | @ | L 68-72 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 161.5 | U 140 |
| Nov 9 | vs | W 76-65 | -6.5 | W +4.5 | 164.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 14 | vs | L 67-87 | +15.5 | L −4.5 | 155.5 | U 154 |
| Nov 16 | @ | W 82-80 | -8.5 | L −6.5 | 141.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 94-42 | -12.5 | W +39.5 | 146.5 | U 136 |
| Nov 27 | vs | W 79-69 | -5.5 | W +4.5 | 139.5 | O 148 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 72-65 | -3.5 | W +3.5 | 145.5 | U 137 |
| Dec 3 | vs | W 89-78 | -12.5 | L −1.5 | 154.5 | O 167 |
| Dec 6 | vs | W 95-53 | -20.5 | W +21.5 | 144.5 | O 148 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 78-83 | +8.5 | W +3.5 | 148.5 | O 161 |
| Dec 18 | @ | W 75-68 | +1.5 | W +8.5 | 153.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 21 | vs | W 85-65 | -13.5 | W +6.5 | 152.5 | U 150 |
| Dec 29 | @ | W 73-56 | -4.5 | W +12.5 | 145.5 | U 129 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 73-47 | -12.5 | W +13.5 | 144.5 | U 120 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 71-77 | -6.5 | L −12.5 | 138.5 | O 148 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 59-63 | -10.5 | L −14.5 | 141.5 | U 122 |
| Jan 14 | @ | L 89-94 | -6.5 | L −11.5 | 148.5 | O 183 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 88-62 | -5.5 | W +20.5 | 147.5 | O 150 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 59-54 | -6.5 | L −1.5 | 132.5 | U 113 |
| Jan 24 | @ | L 69-80 | +5.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | U 149 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 70-65 | +3.5 | W +8.5 | 159.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 3 | vs | L 50-54 | -8.5 | L −12.5 | 140.5 | U 104 |
| Feb 6 | vs | W 86-76 | -10.5 | L −0.5 | 144.5 | O 162 |
| Feb 9 | @ | L 80-88 | -10.5 | L −18.5 | 137.5 | O 168 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 86-64 | -8.5 | W +13.5 | 138.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 15 | @ | L 56-83 | -1.5 | L −28.5 | 140.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 78-61 | -2.5 | W +14.5 | 158.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 60-74 | +3.5 | L −10.5 | 145.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 25 | @ | W 71-69 | +4.5 | W +6.5 | 132.5 | O 140 |
| Mar 1 | vs | W 81-74 | +1.5 | W +8.5 | 150.5 | O 155 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 52-74 | +1.5 | L −20.5 | 130.5 | U 126 |
| Mar 18 | vs | W 79-58 | -4.5 | W +16.5 | 154.5 | U 137 |
| Mar 22 | @ | W 78-75 | +8.5 | W +11.5 | 152.5 | O 153 |
| Mar 25 | @ | W 61-55 | +7.5 | W +13.5 | 140.5 | U 116 |
| Apr 2 | vs | L 66-88 | +7.5 | L −14.5 | 149.5 | O 154 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
6
@
OHIO
L 68-72
−2.5
9
vs
COR
W 76-65
+4.5
14
vs
USC
L 67-87
−4.5
16
@
LBSU
W 82-80
−6.5
23
vs
CCU
W 94-42
+39.5
27
vs
CLT
W 79-69
+4.5
28
vs
FUR
W 72-65
+3.5
3
vs
EKU
W 89-78
−1.5
6
vs
CHST
W 95-53
+21.5
13
vs
USU
L 78-83
+3.5
18
@
SIU
W 75-68
+8.5
21
vs
INST
W 85-65
+6.5
29
@
DRKE
W 73-56
+12.5
1
vs
EVAN
W 73-47
+13.5
7
@
VAL
L 71-77
−12.5
10
vs
UIC
L 59-63
−14.5
14
@
INST
L 89-94
−11.5
17
vs
BRAD
W 88-62
+20.5
21
vs
UNI
W 59-54
−1.5
24
@
BEL
L 69-80
−5.5
28
@
MUR
W 70-65
+8.5
3
vs
SIU
L 50-54
−12.5
6
vs
DRKE
W 86-76
−0.5
9
@
EVAN
L 80-88
−18.5
12
vs
VAL
W 86-64
+13.5
15
@
UIC
L 56-83
−28.5
18
vs
MUR
W 78-61
+14.5
21
@
BRAD
L 60-74
−10.5
25
@
UNI
W 71-69
+6.5
1
vs
BEL
W 81-74
+8.5
6
vs
UNI
L 52-74
−20.5
18
vs
KENT
W 79-58
+16.5
22
@
WAKE
W 78-75
+11.5
25
@
DAY
W 61-55
+13.5
2
vs
AUB
L 66-88
−14.5
covered 19didn’t cover 16avg +1.9 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
6
@
OHIO
L 68-72
−21.5
9
vs
COR
W 76-65
−23.5
14
vs
USC
L 67-87
−1.5
16
@
LBSU
W 82-80
+20.5
23
vs
CCU
W 94-42
−10.5
27
vs
CLT
W 79-69
+8.5
28
vs
FUR
W 72-65
−8.5
3
vs
EKU
W 89-78
+12.5
6
vs
CHST
W 95-53
+3.5
13
vs
USU
L 78-83
+12.5
18
@
SIU
W 75-68
−10.5
21
vs
INST
W 85-65
−2.5
29
@
DRKE
W 73-56
−16.5
1
vs
EVAN
W 73-47
−24.5
7
@
VAL
L 71-77
+9.5
10
vs
UIC
L 59-63
−19.5
14
@
INST
L 89-94
+34.5
17
vs
BRAD
W 88-62
+2.5
21
vs
UNI
W 59-54
−19.5
24
@
BEL
L 69-80
−1.5
28
@
MUR
W 70-65
−24.5
3
vs
SIU
L 50-54
−36.5
6
vs
DRKE
W 86-76
+17.5
9
@
EVAN
L 80-88
+30.5
12
vs
VAL
W 86-64
+11.5
15
@
UIC
L 56-83
−1.5
18
vs
MUR
W 78-61
−19.5
21
@
BRAD
L 60-74
−11.5
25
@
UNI
W 71-69
+7.5
1
vs
BEL
W 81-74
+4.5
6
vs
UNI
L 52-74
−4.5
18
vs
KENT
W 79-58
−17.5
22
@
WAKE
W 78-75
+0.5
25
@
DAY
W 61-55
−24.5
2
vs
AUB
L 66-88
+4.5
over 15under 20avg −3.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Purdue
39 games played
Straight up
30-9
77% wins
Against the spread
17-22
44% covers · avg −0.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
20-19
51% overs · avg +1.4 pts vs the total
Against the spread
17-2244%
2 straight misses ATS2 of last 4 covered
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 | vs | W 82-51 | -33.5 | L −2.5 | 150.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 7 | vs | W 87-77 | -31.5 | L −21.5 | 158.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 13 | @ | W 87-80 | +3.5 | W +10.5 | 172.5 | U 167 |
| Nov 16 | vs | W 97-79 | -18.5 | L −0.5 | 163.5 | O 176 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 80-71 | -14.5 | L −5.5 | 156.5 | U 151 |
| Nov 21 | vs | W 86-56 | -3.5 | W +26.5 | 153.5 | U 142 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 109-62 | -40.5 | W +6.5 | 141.5 | O 171 |
| Dec 2 | @ | W 81-65 | -13.5 | W +2.5 | 146.5 | U 146 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 58-81 | -4.5 | L −27.5 | 154.5 | U 139 |
| Dec 10 | vs | W 85-57 | -19.5 | W +8.5 | 143.5 | U 142 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 79-59 | -16.5 | W +3.5 | 154.5 | U 138 |
| Dec 20 | vs | W 88-60 | -7.5 | W +20.5 | 152.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 29 | vs | W 101-60 | -24.5 | W +16.5 | 155.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 3 | @ | W 89-73 | -5.5 | W +10.5 | 153.5 | O 162 |
| Jan 7 | vs | W 81-73 | -16.5 | L −8.5 | 154.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 93-85 | -22.5 | L −14.5 | 152.5 | O 178 |
| Jan 14 | vs | W 79-72 | -10.5 | L −3.5 | 145.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 69-64 | -9.5 | L −4.5 | 155.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 20 | @ | L 67-69 | -5.5 | L −7.5 | 147.5 | U 136 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 82-88 | -5.5 | L −11.5 | 152.5 | O 170 |
| Jan 27 | @ | L 67-72 | -4.5 | L −9.5 | 150.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 1 | @ | W 93-63 | -15.5 | W +14.5 | 148.5 | O 156 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 68-64 | -19.5 | L −15.5 | 144.5 | U 132 |
| Feb 10 | @ | W 80-77 | +2.5 | W +5.5 | 146.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 78-57 | -2.5 | W +18.5 | 142.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 17 | vs | L 80-91 | +2.5 | L −8.5 | 156.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 20 | vs | W 93-64 | -11.5 | W +17.5 | 150.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 26 | vs | L 74-76 | -5.5 | L −7.5 | 143.5 | O 150 |
| Mar 1 | @ | L 74-82 | -6.5 | L −14.5 | 149.5 | O 156 |
| Mar 4 | @ | W 70-66 | -12.5 | L −8.5 | 145.5 | U 136 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 93-97 | -9.5 | L −13.5 | 154.5 | O 190 |
| Mar 12 | vs | W 81-68 | -13.5 | L −0.5 | 139.5 | O 149 |
| Mar 13 | vs | W 74-58 | -4.5 | W +11.5 | 145.5 | U 132 |
| Mar 14 | vs | W 73-66 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 143.5 | U 139 |
| Mar 15 | vs | W 80-72 | +4.5 | W +12.5 | 149.5 | O 152 |
| Mar 20 | vs | W 104-71 | -25.5 | W +7.5 | 159.5 | O 175 |
| Mar 22 | vs | W 79-69 | -8.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | O 148 |
| Mar 26 | vs | W 79-77 | -8.5 | L −6.5 | 146.5 | O 156 |
| Mar 28 | vs | L 64-79 | +5.5 | L −9.5 | 152.5 | U 143 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
vs
EVAN
W 82-51
−2.5
7
vs
OAK
W 87-77
−21.5
13
@
ALA
W 87-80
+10.5
16
vs
AKR
W 97-79
−0.5
20
vs
MEM
W 80-71
−5.5
21
vs
TTU
W 86-56
+26.5
28
vs
EIU
W 109-62
+6.5
2
@
RUTG
W 81-65
+2.5
6
vs
ISU
L 58-81
−27.5
10
vs
MINN
W 85-57
+8.5
13
vs
MARQ
W 79-59
+3.5
20
vs
AUB
W 88-60
+20.5
29
vs
KENT
W 101-60
+16.5
3
@
WIS
W 89-73
+10.5
7
vs
WASH
W 81-73
−8.5
10
vs
PSU
W 93-85
−14.5
14
vs
IOWA
W 79-72
−3.5
17
@
USC
W 69-64
−4.5
20
@
UCLA
L 67-69
−7.5
24
vs
ILL
L 82-88
−11.5
27
@
IU
L 67-72
−9.5
1
@
MD
W 93-63
+14.5
7
vs
ORE
W 68-64
−15.5
10
@
NEB
W 80-77
+5.5
14
@
IOWA
W 78-57
+18.5
17
vs
MICH
L 80-91
−8.5
20
vs
IU
W 93-64
+17.5
26
vs
MSU
L 74-76
−7.5
1
@
OSU
L 74-82
−14.5
4
@
NU
W 70-66
−8.5
7
vs
WIS
L 93-97
−13.5
12
vs
NU
W 81-68
−0.5
13
vs
NEB
W 74-58
+11.5
14
vs
UCLA
W 73-66
−0.5
15
vs
MICH
W 80-72
+12.5
20
vs
QUC
W 104-71
+7.5
22
vs
MIA
W 79-69
+1.5
26
vs
TEX
W 79-77
−6.5
28
vs
ARIZ
L 64-79
−9.5
covered 17didn’t cover 22avg −0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
vs
EVAN
W 82-51
−17.5
7
vs
OAK
W 87-77
+5.5
13
@
ALA
W 87-80
−5.5
16
vs
AKR
W 97-79
+12.5
20
vs
MEM
W 80-71
−5.5
21
vs
TTU
W 86-56
−11.5
28
vs
EIU
W 109-62
+29.5
2
@
RUTG
W 81-65
−0.5
6
vs
ISU
L 58-81
−15.5
10
vs
MINN
W 85-57
−1.5
13
vs
MARQ
W 79-59
−16.5
20
vs
AUB
W 88-60
−4.5
29
vs
KENT
W 101-60
+5.5
3
@
WIS
W 89-73
+8.5
7
vs
WASH
W 81-73
−0.5
10
vs
PSU
W 93-85
+25.5
14
vs
IOWA
W 79-72
+5.5
17
@
USC
W 69-64
−22.5
20
@
UCLA
L 67-69
−11.5
24
vs
ILL
L 82-88
+17.5
27
@
IU
L 67-72
−11.5
1
@
MD
W 93-63
+7.5
7
vs
ORE
W 68-64
−12.5
10
@
NEB
W 80-77
+10.5
14
@
IOWA
W 78-57
−7.5
17
vs
MICH
L 80-91
+14.5
20
vs
IU
W 93-64
+6.5
26
vs
MSU
L 74-76
+6.5
1
@
OSU
L 74-82
+6.5
4
@
NU
W 70-66
−9.5
7
vs
WIS
L 93-97
+35.5
12
vs
NU
W 81-68
+9.5
13
vs
NEB
W 74-58
−13.5
14
vs
UCLA
W 73-66
−4.5
15
vs
MICH
W 80-72
+2.5
20
vs
QUC
W 104-71
+15.5
22
vs
MIA
W 79-69
+1.5
26
vs
TEX
W 79-77
+9.5
28
vs
ARIZ
L 64-79
−9.5
over 20under 19avg +1.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Purdue has the better starters
Position by position: Illinois St 0, Purdue 5, even 0
Illinois StBetterPurdue
G M. Messina-Moore TR10.9 pts · 3 reb · 3.8 ast
Score 57
→PURSmall
G C. Cox8.5 pts · 2.8 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 82
G J. Kinziger11.6 pts · 2.5 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 51
→PURSmall
G G. Harris4.6 pts · 1.6 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 75
G D. Garang TR10.6 pts · 5.2 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 30
→PURBig
G J. Benter4.4 pts · 2.6 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 75
G Z. King TR7.1 pts · 1.8 reb · 1.7 ast
Score 24
→PURBig
G O. Mayer5.5 pts · 1.1 reb · 1.2 ast
Score 64
G D. Burch TR9 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 32
→PURBig
C D. Jacobsen5.5 pts · 3 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 88
Illinois StBetterPurdue
ILST offense133rd of 366 · -3.9
→PURSmall
PUR defense18th of 366 · +6.0
ILST defense102nd of 366 · -0.9
→PURSmall
PUR offense38th of 366 · +5.0
Backcourt-6.6 · 5 players
→PURBig
Backcourt+2.4 · 4 players
FrontcourtNo numbers yet
=No call
Frontcourt+1.8 · 1 player
Bench+3.4 · 4 players
←ILSTBig
Bench-0.0 · 2 players
Score, worst to bestILST betterPUR betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
M. Messina-Moore33 min · TRJ. Kinziger33 minD. Garang30 min · TRZ. King27 min · TRD. Burch23 min · TRM. Klabo16 min
Forwards
C. Walker23 minL. Semona6 min · TRN. ClevelandNewN. AllenNewL. WolfNewM. SzafoniNew
Guards
C. Cox24 minG. Harris16 minJ. Benter15 minO. Mayer14 minJ. Rayl2 minJ. Lusk2 min
Forwards
S. KingNewC. PierceNewE. ShahrvinNewR. BurgessNewR. KnightNew
Centers
D. Jacobsen13 minS. HuanNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 74.1 #191 | Points per game | 81.6 #35 |
| 1.09 #151 | Points per possession | 1.25 #2 |
| 67.7 #241 | Pace (possessions) | 65.4 #333 |
| Shooting | ||
| 53.6 #77 | Effective FG% | 57.6 #10 |
| 34.9 #126 | 3-point % | 38.3 #11 |
| 43.3 #106 | 3-point attempt rate | 40.2 #164 |
| 31.6 #266 | Free throw rate | 28.6 #336 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.8 #193 | Turnover rate | 13.7 #16 |
| 28.0 #268 | Offensive rebound rate | 36.4 #19 |
| 13.5 #179 | Assists per game | 19.6 #2 |
| Defense | ||
| 69.1 #49 | Points allowed | 70.5 #65 |
| 1.02 #48 | Points allowed per possession | 1.08 #162 |
| 49.8 #90 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.4 #232 |
| 33.0 #122 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.1 #192 |
| 16.0 #221 | Turnovers forced | 15.3 #263 |
| 74.6 #13 | Defensive rebound rate | 72.9 #39 |
| 5.5 #294 | Steals per game | 5.5 #297 |
| 2.3 #326 | Blocks per game | 2.8 #257 |
Illinois St
22-13 in 2025-26 overall · 12-9 in conference · Missouri Valley Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Auburn66–88
- W@ Dayton61–55
- W@ Wake Forest78–75
- Wvs Kent State79–58
- Lvs Northern Iowa52–74
A week or more of rest.
Purdue
30-9 in 2025-26 overall · 17-7 in conference · Big Ten Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Arizona64–79
- Wvs Texas79–77
- Wvs Miami79–69
- Wvs Queens University Royals104–71
- Wvs Michigan80–72
A week or more of rest.