UNC Greensboro Spartans at Pepperdine Waves: Model Line and Edge

Mon, Nov 23, 12:00 AM ETFirestone Fieldhouse · at Pepperdine

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: UNC Greensboro and Pepperdine
UNCG	This season	PEPP
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 PEPP 81–72 · win probability PEPP 81%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 152.8

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: UNCG has more of the edges

UNCG 4, PEPP 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

PEPPBig

PEPP offense vs UNCG defense

Offense 139th of 366 against a defense 299th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Schedule so far

UNCG has played the 256th-hardest schedule, PEPP the 128th. A record against a soft schedule means less

UNCGSmall

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: UNCG 28.1%, PEPP 29.1%. Defensive: UNCG 71.0%, PEPP 66.0%

UNCGSmall

Three-pointers

UNCG hits 35.6% and allows 38.0%; PEPP hits 31.4% and allows 35.5%. Threes are 40.2% and 39.2% of their shots

UNCGSmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: UNCG 42.0, PEPP 33.9. Allowed: UNCG 30.6, PEPP 28.5

UNCGSmall

Shooting

Effective FG%: UNCG 52.0 and allows 56.2; PEPP 47.6 and allows 54.2

PEPPSmall

Home court

PEPP at home. This season: PEPP 0-0 at home, UNCG 0-0 away

PEPPSmall

UNCG offense vs PEPP defense

Offense 260th of 366 against a defense 216th, on the model’s ratings

Even

Turnovers

Turnover rate: UNCG 15.0%, PEPP 18.3%. Forced: UNCG 13.6%, PEPP 16.5%

Context

Tempo

About 70 possessions: UNCG plays 69.3 a game (157th fastest), PEPP 70.0 (117th). Faster games mean more points

Even

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: UNCG 5%, PEPP 5%. Transfers in: UNCG 6, PEPP 7. 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	—	PEPP -9.9	—
Total	—	152.8	—
Projected score	—	UNCG 71.5 · PEPP 81.4

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	PEPP -5.8	—
1H total	71.4	—
1H projected score	UNCG 32.8 · PEPP 38.6	—

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
UNCG WLWWL	13-19	41%	5-8	—
PEPP WLWWL	14-16	47%	6-9	—

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

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
UNCG OOUUO	22-10	69%	13-19
PEPP OOOOU	15-15	50%	7-23

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
UNCG	6-4 60%	6-4 60%	7-3 70%
PEPP	3-7 30%	5-5 50%	9-1 90%

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

UNC Greensboro

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 24	@ UCSB	No recent meeting
Dec 1	@ VMI	W84–70WU
Dec 5	vs FUR	L75–81LO

Pepperdine

Date	Game	Last meeting
Nov 25	vs CSUB	W70–62WU
Nov 28	vs LEH	No recent meeting
Dec 1	@ ACU	L63–71LU

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

ATS History · 2025-26

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

UNC Greensboro

32 games played

Straight up

13-19

41% wins

Against the spread

13-19

41% covers · avg −1.1 pts vs the line

Over / Under

22-10

69% overs · avg +8.1 pts vs the total

Straight up

13-1941%

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

2 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

13-1941%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

22-1069%

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

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 4	@KSU	L 64-93	+18.5	L −10.5	148.5	O 157
Nov 8	vsELON	L 90-92	-4.5	L −6.5	142.5	O 182
Nov 12	@NCSU	L 64-110	+30.5	L −15.5	153.5	O 174
Nov 15	vsAPSU	L 63-69	-1.5	L −7.5	145.5	U 132
Nov 20	@QUC	L 94-101	+7.5	W +0.5	150.5	O 195
Nov 23	vsYSU	W 68-62	+5.5	W +11.5	152.5	U 130
Nov 25	vsDEL	L 60-73	-1.5	L −14.5	142.5	U 133
Nov 26	vsM-OH	L 71-82	+10.5	L −0.5	150.5	O 153
Dec 2	vsUNCA	L 77-82	+4.5	L −0.5	143.5	O 159
Dec 6	@ECU	W 82-78	+7.5	W +11.5	139.5	O 160
Dec 16	vsNCAT	L 65-71	-6.5	L −12.5	147.5	U 136
Jan 1	vsUTC	W 77-72	+2.5	W +7.5	147.5	O 149
Jan 3	vsSAM	W 89-82	+2.5	W +9.5	151.5	O 171
Jan 7	@WOF	L 85-97	+7.5	L −4.5	153.5	O 182
Jan 10	@ETSU	L 60-86	+11.5	L −14.5	148.5	U 146
Jan 15	vsCIT	W 69-66	-9.5	L −6.5	148.5	U 135
Jan 17	vsMER	L 92-102	+5.5	L −4.5	155.5	O 194
Jan 21	@VMI	W 85-78	-2.5	W +4.5	151.5	O 163
Jan 23	vsFUR	L 66-89	+4.5	L −18.5	150.5	O 155
Jan 29	@MER	L 77-95	+10.5	L −7.5	158.5	O 172
Jan 31	@CIT	L 66-71	-2.5	L −7.5	147.5	U 137
Feb 4	vsWCU	W 81-78	+1.5	W +4.5	155.5	O 159
Feb 8	@FUR	W 67-64	+10.5	W +13.5	149.5	U 131
Feb 11	vsVMI	W 92-71	-8.5	W +12.5	150.5	O 163
Feb 14	vsWOF	W 99-89	+2.5	W +12.5	154.5	O 188
Feb 18	@WCU	L 77-91	+5.5	L −8.5	155.5	O 168
Feb 21	vsETSU	L 75-87	+6.5	L −5.5	148.5	O 162
Feb 26	@UTC	W 85-80	+4.5	W +9.5	157.5	O 165
Feb 28	@SAM	L 78-87	+8.5	L −0.5	156.5	O 165
Mar 6	vsVMI	W 84-70	-7.5	W +6.5	154.5	U 154
Mar 7	vsWOF	W 75-72	+4.5	W +7.5	155.5	U 147
Mar 8	vsFUR	L 75-81	+5.5	L −0.5	147.5	O 156

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

KSU

L 64-93

−10.5

ELON

L 90-92

−6.5

NCSU

L 64-110

−15.5

APSU

L 63-69

−7.5

QUC

L 94-101

+0.5

YSU

W 68-62

+11.5

DEL

L 60-73

−14.5

M-OH

L 71-82

−0.5

UNCA

L 77-82

−0.5

ECU

W 82-78

+11.5

NCAT

L 65-71

−12.5

UTC

W 77-72

+7.5

SAM

W 89-82

+9.5

WOF

L 85-97

−4.5

ETSU

L 60-86

−14.5

CIT

W 69-66

−6.5

MER

L 92-102

−4.5

VMI

W 85-78

+4.5

FUR

L 66-89

−18.5

MER

L 77-95

−7.5

CIT

L 66-71

−7.5

WCU

W 81-78

+4.5

FUR

W 67-64

+13.5

VMI

W 92-71

+12.5

WOF

W 99-89

+12.5

WCU

L 77-91

−8.5

ETSU

L 75-87

−5.5

UTC

W 85-80

+9.5

SAM

L 78-87

−0.5

VMI

W 84-70

+6.5

WOF

W 75-72

+7.5

FUR

L 75-81

−0.5

covered 13didn’t cover 19avg −1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

KSU

L 64-93

+8.5

ELON

L 90-92

+39.5

NCSU

L 64-110

+20.5

APSU

L 63-69

−13.5

QUC

L 94-101

+44.5

YSU

W 68-62

−22.5

DEL

L 60-73

−9.5

M-OH

L 71-82

+2.5

UNCA

L 77-82

+15.5

ECU

W 82-78

+20.5

NCAT

L 65-71

−11.5

UTC

W 77-72

+1.5

SAM

W 89-82

+19.5

WOF

L 85-97

+28.5

ETSU

L 60-86

−2.5

CIT

W 69-66

−13.5

MER

L 92-102

+38.5

VMI

W 85-78

+11.5

FUR

L 66-89

+4.5

MER

L 77-95

+13.5

CIT

L 66-71

−10.5

WCU

W 81-78

+3.5

FUR

W 67-64

−18.5

VMI

W 92-71

+12.5

WOF

W 99-89

+33.5

WCU

L 77-91

+12.5

ETSU

L 75-87

+13.5

UTC

W 85-80

+7.5

SAM

L 78-87

+8.5

VMI

W 84-70

−0.5

WOF

W 75-72

−8.5

FUR

L 75-81

+8.5

over 22under 10avg +8.1 ptslonger = bigger margin

Pepperdine

30 games played

Straight up

7-23

23% wins

Against the spread

14-16

47% covers · avg −0.5 pts vs the line

Over / Under

15-15

50% overs · avg +2.2 pts vs the total

Straight up

7-2323%

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

1 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

14-1647%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

15-1550%

U O O U U U U U U O O U U U O U U U U O O O O O O 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 7	@UCLA	L 63-74	+29.5	W +18.5	152.5	U 137
Nov 15	vsUNCO	L 81-88	+1.5	L −5.5	153.5	O 169
Nov 18	vsNOLA	W 90-79	-5.5	W +5.5	157.5	O 169
Nov 21	vsSFA	L 60-63	+1.5	L −1.5	148.5	U 123
Nov 26	vsFRES	L 53-76	+2.5	L −20.5	150.5	U 129
Nov 29	@CSUF	L 69-83	+1.5	L −12.5	161.5	U 152
Dec 2	vsACU	L 63-71	+1.5	L −6.5	137.5	U 134
Dec 6	vsUVM	L 56-65	+1.5	L −7.5	142.5	U 121
Dec 13	@CSUB	W 70-62	+1.5	W +9.5	147.5	U 132
Dec 18	@LBSU	L 78-81	+4.5	W +1.5	141.5	O 159
Dec 20	vsRICE	W 84-62	+1.5	W +23.5	140.5	O 146
Dec 28	vsGONZ	L 56-96	+29.5	L −10.5	152.5	U 152
Dec 30	vsSMC	L 45-72	+19.5	L −7.5	141.5	U 117
Jan 2	@SCU	L 63-82	+20.5	W +1.5	150.5	U 145
Jan 4	@PAC	L 69-74	+11.5	W +6.5	138.5	O 143
Jan 8	@USD	L 63-83	+4.5	L −15.5	149.5	U 146
Jan 10	vsSF	L 60-80	+7.5	L −12.5	140.5	U 140
Jan 14	vsPORT	W 67-63	+1.5	W +5.5	147.5	U 130
Jan 21	@GONZ	L 60-84	+28.5	W +4.5	150.5	U 144
Jan 24	@WSU	L 79-95	+11.5	L −4.5	146.5	O 174
Jan 28	vsUSD	L 88-92	+2.5	L −1.5	151.5	O 180
Feb 4	@SEA	L 81-83	+12.5	W +10.5	139.5	O 164
Feb 7	vsPAC	L 59-92	+7.5	L −25.5	142.5	O 151
Feb 11	@SMC	L 60-88	+24.5	L −3.5	144.5	O 148
Feb 14	vsLMU	W 90-89	+5.5	W +6.5	147.5	O 179
Feb 18	@PORT	W 95-87	+7.5	W +15.5	150.5	O 182
Feb 21	@ORST	L 73-83	+9.5	L −0.5	148.5	O 156
Feb 25	vsSEA	L 80-87	+7.5	W +0.5	145.5	O 167
Feb 28	vsWSU	W 88-79	+7.5	W +16.5	158.5	O 167
Mar 5	vsPORT	L 68-77	+3.5	L −5.5	154.5	U 145

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

UCLA

L 63-74

+18.5

UNCO

L 81-88

−5.5

NOLA

W 90-79

+5.5

SFA

L 60-63

−1.5

FRES

L 53-76

−20.5

CSUF

L 69-83

−12.5

ACU

L 63-71

−6.5

UVM

L 56-65

−7.5

CSUB

W 70-62

+9.5

LBSU

L 78-81

+1.5

RICE

W 84-62

+23.5

GONZ

L 56-96

−10.5

SMC

L 45-72

−7.5

SCU

L 63-82

+1.5

PAC

L 69-74

+6.5

USD

L 63-83

−15.5

L 60-80

−12.5

PORT

W 67-63

+5.5

GONZ

L 60-84

+4.5

WSU

L 79-95

−4.5

USD

L 88-92

−1.5

SEA

L 81-83

+10.5

PAC

L 59-92

−25.5

SMC

L 60-88

−3.5

LMU

W 90-89

+6.5

PORT

W 95-87

+15.5

ORST

L 73-83

−0.5

SEA

L 80-87

+0.5

WSU

W 88-79

+16.5

PORT

L 68-77

−5.5

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

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

UCLA

L 63-74

−15.5

UNCO

L 81-88

+15.5

NOLA

W 90-79

+11.5

SFA

L 60-63

−25.5

FRES

L 53-76

−21.5

CSUF

L 69-83

−9.5

ACU

L 63-71

−3.5

UVM

L 56-65

−21.5

CSUB

W 70-62

−15.5

LBSU

L 78-81

+17.5

RICE

W 84-62

+5.5

GONZ

L 56-96

−0.5

SMC

L 45-72

−24.5

SCU

L 63-82

−5.5

PAC

L 69-74

+4.5

USD

L 63-83

−3.5

L 60-80

−0.5

PORT

W 67-63

−17.5

GONZ

L 60-84

−6.5

WSU

L 79-95

+27.5

USD

L 88-92

+28.5

SEA

L 81-83

+24.5

PAC

L 59-92

+8.5

SMC

L 60-88

+3.5

LMU

W 90-89

+31.5

PORT

W 95-87

+31.5

ORST

L 73-83

+7.5

SEA

L 80-87

+21.5

WSU

W 88-79

+8.5

PORT

L 68-77

−9.5

over 15under 15avg +2.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

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

Pepperdine has the better starters

Position by position: UNC Greensboro 0, Pepperdine 1, even 4

UNC GreensboroBetterPepperdine

G B. Stacker TR11.9 pts · 3.5 reb · 1.3 ast Score 47

Even

G J. Williamson TR10.4 pts · 2 reb · 0.8 ast Score 58

G C. Grant TR2.2 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.4 ast Score 9

No call

G W. McClendon TR13.7 pts · 3 reb · 1.3 ast Not ranked

F Z. Fitch TR6.1 pts · 5.3 reb · 0.9 ast Score 31

PEPPBig

F P. Majstorovic TR14.4 pts · 6.3 reb · 1.8 ast Score 78

F V. Collins TR1 pts · 3 reb · 0.3 ast Not ranked

No call

F Y. Fritz TR9.8 pts · 5.4 reb · 1.5 ast Score 58

F A. Beljan TR2.2 pts · 0.8 reb · 0.2 ast Not ranked

No call

F E. Meuser TR6.1 pts · 5.2 reb · 1.3 ast Score 39

UNC GreensboroBetterPepperdine

UNCG offense260th of 366 · -8.0

Even

PEPP defense216th of 366 · -5.6

UNCG defense299th of 366 · -7.7

PEPPBig

PEPP offense139th of 366 · -4.2

Backcourt-2.1 · 2 players

PEPPBig

Backcourt+1.6 · 2 players

Frontcourt-1.9 · 3 players

PEPPBig

Frontcourt+1.2 · 3 players

Bench-0.5 · 3 players

UNCGSmall

Bench-1.6 · 3 players

Score, worst to bestUNCG betterPEPP 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

UNC Greensboro

Guards

B. Stacker29 min · TRC. Grant11 min · TRC. Bailey6 minR. Greer6 min · TRB. MishakNewJ. ManiNew

Forwards

Z. Fitch23 min · TRV. Collins7 min · TRA. Beljan7 min · TRC. Bynum4 minC. LaFrentzNew

Pepperdine

Guards

J. Williamson26 min · TRW. McClendon25 min · TRE. Haywood19 min · TRD. Mager10 minA. BalianNewC. ChouNew

Forwards

P. Majstorovic32 min · TRY. Fritz26 min · TRE. Meuser21 min · TRA. Robinson10 min · TRA. ConstanzaNewF. BiberovicNew

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

UNCG76.6 #128

PEPP70.4 #277

Points per possession

UNCG1.11 #125

PEPP1.00 #320

Pace (possessions)

UNCG69.3 #157

PEPP70.0 #117

Shooting

Effective FG%

UNCG52.0 #146

PEPP47.6 #323

3-point %

UNCG35.6 #80

PEPP31.4 #310

3-point attempt rate

UNCG40.2 #165

PEPP39.2 #187

Free throw rate

UNCG42.0 #31

PEPP33.9 #216

Possessions

Turnover rate

UNCG15.0 #63

PEPP18.3 #288

Offensive rebound rate

UNCG28.1 #259

PEPP29.1 #234

Assists per game

UNCG12.1 #283

PEPP13.6 #176

Defense

Points allowed

UNCG81.9 #341

PEPP79.7 #311

Points allowed per possession

UNCG1.18 #347

PEPP1.14 #303

Opponent effective FG%

UNCG56.2 #347

PEPP54.2 #306

Opponent 3-point %

UNCG38.0 #357

PEPP35.5 #276

Turnovers forced

UNCG13.6 #343

PEPP16.5 #184

Defensive rebound rate

UNCG71.0 #104

PEPP66.0 #318

Steals per game

UNCG5.5 #301

PEPP5.9 #246

Blocks per game

UNCG1.9 #350

PEPP2.8 #269

UNCG		PEPP
Scoring
76.6 #128	Points per game	70.4 #277
1.11 #125	Points per possession	1.00 #320
69.3 #157	Pace (possessions)	70.0 #117
Shooting
52.0 #146	Effective FG%	47.6 #323
35.6 #80	3-point %	31.4 #310
40.2 #165	3-point attempt rate	39.2 #187
42.0 #31	Free throw rate	33.9 #216
Possessions
15.0 #63	Turnover rate	18.3 #288
28.1 #259	Offensive rebound rate	29.1 #234
12.1 #283	Assists per game	13.6 #176
Defense
81.9 #341	Points allowed	79.7 #311
1.18 #347	Points allowed per possession	1.14 #303
56.2 #347	Opponent effective FG%	54.2 #306
38.0 #357	Opponent 3-point %	35.5 #276
13.6 #343	Turnovers forced	16.5 #184
71.0 #104	Defensive rebound rate	66.0 #318
5.5 #301	Steals per game	5.9 #246
1.9 #350	Blocks per game	2.8 #269

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.

UNC Greensboro

13-19 in 2025-26 overall · 11-10 in conference · Southern Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Furman75–81
Wvs Wofford75–72
Wvs VMI84–70
L@ Samford78–87
W@ Chattanooga85–80

A week or more of rest.

Pepperdine

7-23 in 2025-26 overall · 4-15 in conference · West Coast Conference

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Portland68–77
Wvs Washington St88–79
Lvs Seattle U80–87
L@ Oregon St73–83
W@ Portland95–87

A week or more of rest.

UNC Greensboro Spartans at Pepperdine Waves

What could decide it: UNCG has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

UNC Greensboro

Pepperdine

Pepperdine has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

UNC Greensboro

Pepperdine