Purdue Fort Wayne Mastodons at Southeast Missouri State Redhawks: Model Line and Edge

Tue, Nov 24, 7:30 PM ETShow Me Center · at SE Missouri

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Purdue FW and SE Missouri
PFW	This season	SEMO
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 SEMO 74–73 · win probability SEMO 54%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 147.6

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

PFW 3, SEMO 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

SEMOBig

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: PFW 22.9%, SEMO 29.6%. Defensive: PFW 65.5%, SEMO 71.8%

Context

Schedule so far

PFW has played the 209th-hardest schedule, SEMO the 351st. A record against a soft schedule means less

PFWSmall

Turnovers

Turnover rate: PFW 14.5%, SEMO 16.8%. Forced: PFW 19.1%, SEMO 18.1%

SEMOSmall

Shooting

Effective FG%: PFW 52.6 and allows 56.1; SEMO 49.8 and allows 48.8

PFWSmall

PFW offense vs SEMO defense

Offense 218th of 366 against a defense 284th, on the model’s ratings

PFWSmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: PFW 30.6, SEMO 38.8. Allowed: PFW 28.6, SEMO 48.0

SEMOSmall

Home court

SEMO at home. This season: SEMO 0-0 at home, PFW 0-0 away

Context

Tempo

About 70 possessions: PFW plays 69.0 a game (179th fastest), SEMO 70.2 (109th). Faster games mean more points

Even

Three-pointers

PFW hits 34.2% and allows 37.9%; SEMO hits 30.9% and allows 33.1%. Threes are 45.4% and 36.0% of their shots

Even

SEMO offense vs PFW defense

Offense 312th of 366 against a defense 291st, on the model’s ratings

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: PFW 29%, SEMO 26%. Transfers in: PFW 2, SEMO 1. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

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	—	SEMO -1.2	—
Total	—	147.6	—
Projected score	—	PFW 73.2 · SEMO 74.4

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	SEMO -0.6	—
1H total	69.0	—
1H projected score	PFW 34.2 · SEMO 34.8	—

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
PFW LWLWL	13-16	45%	8-9	—
SEMO WLWLL	14-16	47%	5-7	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
PFW OOUOU	16-13	55%	14-15
SEMO UUOUU	13-17	43%	17-13

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
PFW	4-6 40%	4-6 40%	6-4 60%
SEMO	7-3 70%	6-4 60%	3-7 30%

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

Purdue FW

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 28	vs WOF	No recent meeting
Dec 2	vs DETM	W83–76WO
Dec 5	vs CLE	W92–86WO

SE Missouri

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 28	@ KC	W80–59WO
Nov 30	@ WICH	No recent meeting
Dec 6	@ SLU	L67–92LO

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

Recent meetings

Since 2021-22

PFW 3–0 SEMOPFW leads · 3 games since 2021-22 · PFW has won the last 3 meetings · PFW 2-1 ATS

Date	Result	Line	Covered
Dec 9, 2023-24	SEMO 80 @ PFW 89	PFW -14.5	SEMO W
Dec 7, 2022-23	PFW 89 @ SEMO 68	SEMO +1.5	PFW W
Dec 11, 2021-22	SEMO 65 @ PFW 78	PFW -5	PFW W

ATS History · 2025-26

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

Purdue FW

29 games played

Straight up

14-15

48% wins

Against the spread

13-16

45% covers · avg −3.1 pts vs the line

Over / Under

16-13

55% overs · avg −1 pts vs the total

Straight up

14-1548%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

13-1645%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

16-1355%

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

2 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 3	@GCU	L 71-90	+14.5	L −4.5	155.5	O 161
Nov 7	@OSU	L 68-94	+24.5	L −1.5	159.5	O 162
Nov 12	@WMU	L 71-83	-3.5	L −15.5	161.5	U 154
Nov 18	@UTAH	L 77-85	+13.5	W +5.5	161.5	O 162
Nov 21	@SLU	L 60-91	+19.5	L −11.5	166.5	U 151
Nov 25	vsCHST	W 90-77	-12.5	W +0.5	149.5	O 167
Dec 3	@OAK	L 92-101	+4.5	L −4.5	162.5	O 193
Dec 6	vsNKU	W 79-77	-1.5	W +0.5	153.5	O 156
Dec 10	vsEMU	W 80-65	-3.5	W +11.5	147.5	U 145
Dec 14	vsDETM	W 81-77	-9.5	L −5.5	153.5	O 158
Dec 21	@ND	W 72-69	+11.5	W +14.5	149.5	U 141
Dec 29	@MILW	L 55-77	+3.5	L −18.5	156.5	U 132
Jan 1	vsGB	L 54-72	-8.5	L −26.5	145.5	U 126
Jan 4	vsCLE	W 74-71	-11.5	L −8.5	159.5	U 145
Jan 7	@YSU	W 71-69	+4.5	W +6.5	145.5	U 140
Jan 11	@RMU	W 79-74	+4.5	W +9.5	146.5	O 153
Jan 18	vsMILW	W 100-82	-3.5	W +14.5	148.5	O 182
Jan 21	@DETM	W 83-76	-2.5	W +4.5	155.5	O 159
Jan 28	vsOAK	L 65-74	+1.5	L −7.5	162.5	U 139
Jan 31	vsRMU	W 83-71	-2.5	W +9.5	145.5	O 154
Feb 4	vsYSU	L 61-90	-2.5	L −31.5	147.5	O 151
Feb 7	@WRST	L 68-73	+6.5	W +1.5	150.5	U 141
Feb 12	@GB	L 59-76	-1.5	L −18.5	144.5	U 135
Feb 15	vsIUIN	W 83-78	-7.5	L −2.5	159.5	O 161
Feb 18	@NKU	L 71-87	+5.5	L −10.5	153.5	O 158
Feb 22	@CLE	W 92-86	-3.5	W +2.5	163.5	O 178
Feb 25	vsWRST	L 70-74	+1.5	L −2.5	150.5	U 144
Feb 28	@IUIN	W 87-81	-1.5	W +4.5	163.5	O 168
Mar 3	@GB	L 56-64	+3.5	L −4.5	145.5	U 120

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

GCU

L 71-90

−4.5

OSU

L 68-94

−1.5

WMU

L 71-83

−15.5

UTAH

L 77-85

+5.5

SLU

L 60-91

−11.5

CHST

W 90-77

+0.5

OAK

L 92-101

−4.5

NKU

W 79-77

+0.5

EMU

W 80-65

+11.5

DETM

W 81-77

−5.5

W 72-69

+14.5

MILW

L 55-77

−18.5

L 54-72

−26.5

CLE

W 74-71

−8.5

YSU

W 71-69

+6.5

RMU

W 79-74

+9.5

MILW

W 100-82

+14.5

DETM

W 83-76

+4.5

OAK

L 65-74

−7.5

RMU

W 83-71

+9.5

YSU

L 61-90

−31.5

WRST

L 68-73

+1.5

L 59-76

−18.5

IUIN

W 83-78

−2.5

NKU

L 71-87

−10.5

CLE

W 92-86

+2.5

WRST

L 70-74

−2.5

IUIN

W 87-81

+4.5

L 56-64

−4.5

covered 13didn’t cover 16avg −3.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

GCU

L 71-90

+5.5

OSU

L 68-94

+2.5

WMU

L 71-83

−7.5

UTAH

L 77-85

+0.5

SLU

L 60-91

−15.5

CHST

W 90-77

+17.5

OAK

L 92-101

+30.5

NKU

W 79-77

+2.5

EMU

W 80-65

−2.5

DETM

W 81-77

+4.5

W 72-69

−8.5

MILW

L 55-77

−24.5

L 54-72

−19.5

CLE

W 74-71

−14.5

YSU

W 71-69

−5.5

RMU

W 79-74

+6.5

MILW

W 100-82

+33.5

DETM

W 83-76

+3.5

OAK

L 65-74

−23.5

RMU

W 83-71

+8.5

YSU

L 61-90

+3.5

WRST

L 68-73

−9.5

L 59-76

−9.5

IUIN

W 83-78

+1.5

NKU

L 71-87

+4.5

CLE

W 92-86

+14.5

WRST

L 70-74

−6.5

IUIN

W 87-81

+4.5

L 56-64

−25.5

over 16under 13avg −1 ptslonger = bigger margin

SE Missouri

30 games played

Straight up

17-13

57% wins

Against the spread

14-16

47% covers · avg −0.5 pts vs the line

Over / Under

13-17

43% overs · avg −2.2 pts vs the total

Straight up

17-1357%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

14-1647%

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

2 straight misses ATS1 of last 4 covered

Over / Under

13-1743%

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

2 straight unders1 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 3	@SLU	L 67-92	+19.5	L −5.5	153.5	O 159
Nov 7	@MIZ	L 84-89	+25.5	W +20.5	157.5	O 173
Nov 15	vsSTMN	L 72-84	+2.5	L −9.5	152.5	O 156
Nov 18	@IOWA	L 70-99	+23.5	L −5.5	147.5	O 169
Nov 25	vsCP	W 84-68	-1.5	W +14.5	170.5	U 152
Nov 26	@NAU	L 72-79	+2.5	L −4.5	153.5	U 151
Nov 29	vsLIP	L 77-88	-3.5	L −14.5	153.5	O 165
Dec 6	@UTC	W 74-70	+3.5	W +7.5	149.5	U 144
Dec 18	@TNTC	L 74-85	-2.5	L −13.5	155.5	O 159
Dec 20	@TNST	W 91-82	-1.5	W +7.5	151.5	O 173
Jan 1	vsEIU	W 68-59	-12.5	L −3.5	146.5	U 127
Jan 3	vsWIU	W 73-50	-13.5	W +9.5	147.5	U 123
Jan 8	@USI	W 84-76	-7.5	W +0.5	146.5	O 160
Jan 10	@MORE	L 69-71	-5.5	L −7.5	144.5	U 140
Jan 15	vsLIN	L 76-88	-6.5	L −18.5	154.5	O 164
Jan 17	vsSIUE	L 55-68	-9.5	L −22.5	139.5	U 123
Jan 20	vsUTM	W 66-50	-2.5	W +13.5	140.5	U 116
Jan 22	vsLR	W 70-65	-5.5	L −0.5	145.5	U 135
Jan 29	@WIU	W 78-74	-10.5	L −6.5	142.5	O 152
Jan 31	@EIU	W 77-59	-4.5	W +13.5	138.5	U 136
Feb 5	vsMORE	W 82-70	-7.5	W +4.5	144.5	O 152
Feb 7	vsUSI	W 90-65	-11.5	W +13.5	141.5	O 155
Feb 12	@SIUE	L 56-74	-1.5	L −19.5	137.5	U 130
Feb 14	@LIN	W 73-61	+1.5	W +13.5	154.5	U 134
Feb 17	@UTM	W 56-53	+2.5	W +5.5	138.5	U 109
Feb 21	@LR	W 70-65	-1.5	W +3.5	143.5	U 135
Feb 26	vsTNST	L 71-79	-2.5	L −10.5	151.5	U 150
Feb 28	vsTNTC	W 89-73	-7.5	W +8.5	141.5	O 162
Mar 5	vsLIN	W 68-66	-3.5	L −1.5	148.5	U 134
Mar 6	vsMORE	L 61-66	-3.5	L −8.5	139.5	U 127

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

SLU

L 67-92

−5.5

MIZ

L 84-89

+20.5

STMN

L 72-84

−9.5

IOWA

L 70-99

−5.5

W 84-68

+14.5

NAU

L 72-79

−4.5

LIP

L 77-88

−14.5

UTC

W 74-70

+7.5

TNTC

L 74-85

−13.5

TNST

W 91-82

+7.5

EIU

W 68-59

−3.5

WIU

W 73-50

+9.5

USI

W 84-76

+0.5

L 69-71

−7.5

LIN

L 76-88

−18.5

SIUE

L 55-68

−22.5

UTM

W 66-50

+13.5

W 70-65

−0.5

WIU

W 78-74

−6.5

EIU

W 77-59

+13.5

W 82-70

+4.5

USI

W 90-65

+13.5

SIUE

L 56-74

−19.5

LIN

W 73-61

+13.5

UTM

W 56-53

+5.5

W 70-65

+3.5

TNST

L 71-79

−10.5

TNTC

W 89-73

+8.5

LIN

W 68-66

−1.5

L 61-66

−8.5

covered 14didn’t cover 16avg −0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

SLU

L 67-92

+5.5

MIZ

L 84-89

+15.5

STMN

L 72-84

+3.5

IOWA

L 70-99

+21.5

W 84-68

−18.5

NAU

L 72-79

−2.5

LIP

L 77-88

+11.5

UTC

W 74-70

−5.5

TNTC

L 74-85

+3.5

TNST

W 91-82

+21.5

EIU

W 68-59

−19.5

WIU

W 73-50

−24.5

USI

W 84-76

+13.5

L 69-71

−4.5

LIN

L 76-88

+9.5

SIUE

L 55-68

−16.5

UTM

W 66-50

−24.5

W 70-65

−10.5

WIU

W 78-74

+9.5

EIU

W 77-59

−2.5

W 82-70

+7.5

USI

W 90-65

+13.5

SIUE

L 56-74

−7.5

LIN

W 73-61

−20.5

UTM

W 56-53

−29.5

W 70-65

−8.5

TNST

L 71-79

−1.5

TNTC

W 89-73

+20.5

LIN

W 68-66

−14.5

L 61-66

−12.5

over 13under 17avg −2.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

SE Missouri has the better starters

Position by position: Purdue FW 0, SE Missouri 2, even 3

Purdue FWBetterSE Missouri

G D. Craig13.7 pts · 3.2 reb · 2.7 ast Score 68

Even

G M. Bell8.6 pts · 5 reb · 1.7 ast Score 69

G A. Williamson TR7.3 pts · 2.3 reb · 2.1 ast Score 16

SEMOSmall

G L. Blocker4.8 pts · 3.6 reb · 0.5 ast Score 33

G C. Morgan2.3 pts · 1 reb · 0.9 ast Score 2

Even

G P. Farmer1.6 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.8 ast Score 11

G E. Mosley2.8 pts · 1 reb · 0.6 ast Score 9

SEMOBig

F D. Sutton TR3.8 pts · 3.9 reb · 0.7 ast Score 63

F A. Isaac TR9.5 pts · 7.3 reb · 0.9 ast Score 63

No call

F T. Sadler0.2 pts · 0.1 reb · 0 ast Not ranked

Purdue FWBetterSE Missouri

PFW offense218th of 366 · -6.7

PFWSmall

SEMO defense284th of 366 · -7.1

PFW defense291st of 366 · -7.3

Even

SEMO offense312th of 366 · -10.0

Backcourt-5.6 · 4 players

SEMOBig

Backcourt-1.7 · 3 players

Frontcourt+0.4 · 1 player

Even

Frontcourt+0.0 · 2 players

Bench-0.2 · 1 player

No call

BenchNo numbers yet

Score, worst to bestPFW betterSEMO 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

Purdue FW

Guards

D. Craig30 minA. Williamson23 min · TRC. Morgan14 minE. Mosley12 minM. Shrout3 minD. LewisNew

Forwards

A. Isaac24 min · TRE. OrtizNewQ. MorganNewA. WalkerNew

SE Missouri

Guards

M. Bell22 minL. Blocker18 minP. Farmer9 minK. PruettNewF. WilliamsNewM. EavesNew

Forwards

D. Sutton13 min · TRT. Sadler3 minC. JewellNewD. CooperNewA. PerryNew

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

PFW74.2 #189

SEMO73.2 #217

Points per possession

PFW1.07 #204

SEMO1.04 #267

Pace (possessions)

PFW69.0 #179

SEMO70.2 #109

Shooting

Effective FG%

PFW52.6 #125

SEMO49.8 #244

3-point %

PFW34.2 #163

SEMO30.9 #324

3-point attempt rate

PFW45.4 #60

SEMO36.0 #250

Free throw rate

PFW30.6 #292

SEMO38.8 #84

Possessions

Turnover rate

PFW14.5 #43

SEMO16.8 #192

Offensive rebound rate

PFW22.9 #351

SEMO29.6 #218

Assists per game

PFW13.1 #207

SEMO11.7 #306

Defense

Points allowed

PFW78.8 #286

SEMO72.3 #112

Points allowed per possession

PFW1.14 #311

SEMO1.03 #58

Opponent effective FG%

PFW56.1 #345

SEMO48.8 #57

Opponent 3-point %

PFW37.9 #355

SEMO33.1 #130

Turnovers forced

PFW19.1 #44

SEMO18.1 #91

Defensive rebound rate

PFW65.5 #327

SEMO71.8 #76

Steals per game

PFW7.9 #42

SEMO6.4 #190

Blocks per game

PFW3.0 #224

SEMO3.6 #121

PFW		SEMO
Scoring
74.2 #189	Points per game	73.2 #217
1.07 #204	Points per possession	1.04 #267
69.0 #179	Pace (possessions)	70.2 #109
Shooting
52.6 #125	Effective FG%	49.8 #244
34.2 #163	3-point %	30.9 #324
45.4 #60	3-point attempt rate	36.0 #250
30.6 #292	Free throw rate	38.8 #84
Possessions
14.5 #43	Turnover rate	16.8 #192
22.9 #351	Offensive rebound rate	29.6 #218
13.1 #207	Assists per game	11.7 #306
Defense
78.8 #286	Points allowed	72.3 #112
1.14 #311	Points allowed per possession	1.03 #58
56.1 #345	Opponent effective FG%	48.8 #57
37.9 #355	Opponent 3-point %	33.1 #130
19.1 #44	Turnovers forced	18.1 #91
65.5 #327	Defensive rebound rate	71.8 #76
7.9 #42	Steals per game	6.4 #190
3.0 #224	Blocks per game	3.6 #121

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.

Purdue FW

14-15 in 2025-26 overall · 11-10 in conference · Horizon League

Last five, 2025-26

L@ Green Bay56–64
W@ IU Indy87–81
Lvs Wright St70–74
W@ Cleveland St92–86
L@ N Kentucky71–87

A week or more of rest.

SE Missouri

17-13 in 2025-26 overall · 15-7 in conference · Ohio Valley Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Morehead St61–66
Wvs Lindenwood Lions68–66
Wvs Tennessee Tech89–73
Lvs Tennessee St71–79
W@ Little Rock70–65

A week or more of rest.

Purdue Fort Wayne Mastodons at Southeast Missouri State Redhawks

What could decide it

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

Recent meetings

ATS History · 2025-26

Purdue FW

SE Missouri

SE Missouri has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Purdue FW

SE Missouri