Lehigh Mountain Hawks vs Pepperdine Waves: Model Line and Edge

Sat, Nov 28, 10:30 AM ETGilbert Arena · Neutral site

LineNo line yet

Total—

Season records: Lehigh and Pepperdine
LEH	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 77–72 · win probability PEPP 65%

Pick this game

Your picksMy picks ›

Winner

Line

—

no line yet

Total

—

model 148.5

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: LEH has more of the edges

LEH 3, PEPP 1 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games

LEHBig

Three-pointers

LEH hits 36.1% and allows 32.9%; PEPP hits 31.4% and allows 35.5%. Threes are 38.3% and 39.2% of their shots

LEHBig

Shooting

Effective FG%: LEH 52.9 and allows 50.6; PEPP 47.6 and allows 54.2

LEHBig

Who is back

Minutes back from last season: LEH 100%, PEPP 5%. Transfers in: LEH 0, PEPP 7. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price

Context

Schedule so far

LEH has played the 218th-hardest schedule, PEPP the 128th. A record against a soft schedule means less

PEPPSmall

Free throws

Free throw rate: LEH 31.8, PEPP 33.9. Allowed: LEH 32.5, PEPP 28.5

Even

LEH offense vs PEPP defense

Offense 257th of 366 against a defense 216th, on the model’s ratings

Context

Tempo

About 69 possessions: LEH plays 68.7 a game (197th fastest), PEPP 70.0 (117th). Faster games mean more points

Even

PEPP offense vs LEH defense

Offense 139th of 366 against a defense 179th, on the model’s ratings

Even

Rebounding

Offensive rebound rate: LEH 23.2%, PEPP 29.1%. Defensive: LEH 68.5%, PEPP 66.0%

Context

Neutral floor

No home court: the model takes it out of the line

Even

Turnovers

Turnover rate: LEH 17.7%, PEPP 18.3%. Forced: LEH 16.2%, PEPP 16.5%

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 -4.5	—
Total	—	148.5	—
Projected score	—	LEH 72 · PEPP 76.5

1st-half model

1st-half slate ›

	Model	Actual
1H spread	PEPP -2.5	—
1H total	69.4	—
1H projected score	LEH 33.4 · PEPP 36	—

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	Neutral	Role
LEH WLWWL	19-14	58%	2-1	—
PEPP WLWWL	14-16	47%	0-2	—

Venue/role: LEH neutral site; PEPP neutral site. Squares: last 5 games ATS (W covered, L didn’t), oldest first.

Totals

2025-26 season

	O-U	Over %	SU
LEH OUUUU	18-15	55%	16-17
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
LEH	8-2 80%	7-3 70%	4-6 40%
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

Lehigh

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 5	vs MONM	L62–76LU

Pepperdine

Date	Game	Last meeting
Dec 1	@ ACU	L63–71LU
Dec 5	vs FGCU	No recent meeting
Dec 9	vs PV	No recent meeting

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

Lehigh

33 games played

Straight up

16-17

48% wins

Against the spread

19-14

58% covers · avg +1.2 pts vs the line

Over / Under

18-15

55% overs · avg +4.6 pts vs the total

Straight up

16-1748%

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

3 of last 4 wonno streak

Against the spread

19-1458%

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

2 of last 4 coveredno streak

Over / Under

18-1555%

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

4 straight unders0 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	@HOU	L 57-75	+36.5	W +18.5	136.5	U 132
Nov 9	@WVU	L 47-69	+17.5	L −4.5	139.5	U 116
Nov 14	@RUTG	L 72-84	+18.5	W +6.5	136.5	O 156
Nov 18	vsSFPA	W 79-62	-10.5	W +6.5	151.5	U 141
Nov 21	vsCOLU	L 67-82	+2.5	L −12.5	143.5	O 149
Nov 25	@MRST	L 55-78	+7.5	L −15.5	132.5	O 133
Nov 28	vsUCSB	L 70-72	+10.5	W +8.5	146.5	U 142
Nov 29	vsTXST	W 78-74	+6.5	W +10.5	135.5	O 152
Dec 2	@BING	L 71-80	-3.5	L −12.5	139.5	O 151
Dec 6	vsLIU	L 82-87	+1.5	L −3.5	142.5	O 169
Dec 21	@MONM	L 62-76	+9.5	L −4.5	143.5	U 138
Dec 31	vsARMY	L 78-85	-5.5	L −12.5	146.5	O 163
Jan 3	@BUCK	L 65-72	+4.5	L −2.5	137.5	U 137
Jan 7	vsHC	W 66-58	-2.5	W +5.5	137.5	U 124
Jan 10	@COLG	W 78-77	+11.5	W +12.5	142.5	O 155
Jan 14	@BU	W 93-91	+4.5	W +6.5	144.5	O 184
Jan 17	vsNAVY	L 79-82	+3.5	W +0.5	137.5	O 161
Jan 19	vsL-MD	W 88-81	-3.5	W +3.5	149.5	O 169
Jan 24	vsLAF	W 64-59	-2.5	W +2.5	143.5	U 123
Jan 28	@ARMY	L 64-67	-1.5	L −4.5	147.5	U 131
Jan 31	vsCOLG	W 77-76	+3.5	W +4.5	146.5	O 153
Feb 4	@L-MD	L 84-89	+2.5	L −2.5	149.5	O 173
Feb 7	@HC	L 67-76	-1.5	L −10.5	137.5	O 143
Feb 11	vsAMER	W 90-82	+1.5	W +9.5	140.5	O 172
Feb 14	@LAF	W 78-69	+2.5	W +11.5	140.5	O 147
Feb 18	@NAVY	L 49-72	+9.5	L −13.5	139.5	U 121
Feb 22	vsBU	W 70-67	+2.5	W +5.5	141.5	U 137
Feb 25	@AMER	W 78-73	+7.5	W +12.5	140.5	O 151
Feb 28	vsBUCK	W 89-79	-5.5	W +4.5	138.5	O 168
Mar 5	vsHC	W 69-66	-5.5	L −2.5	142.5	U 135
Mar 8	vsCOLG	W 76-69	+2.5	W +9.5	146.5	U 145
Mar 11	vsBU	W 74-60	+2.5	W +16.5	138.5	U 134
Mar 18	vsPV	L 55-67	-3.5	L −15.5	140.5	U 122

Day

Opp

Result

MissedCovered

Margin

HOU

L 57-75

+18.5

WVU

L 47-69

−4.5

RUTG

L 72-84

+6.5

SFPA

W 79-62

+6.5

COLU

L 67-82

−12.5

MRST

L 55-78

−15.5

UCSB

L 70-72

+8.5

TXST

W 78-74

+10.5

BING

L 71-80

−12.5

LIU

L 82-87

−3.5

MONM

L 62-76

−4.5

ARMY

L 78-85

−12.5

BUCK

L 65-72

−2.5

W 66-58

+5.5

COLG

W 78-77

+12.5

W 93-91

+6.5

NAVY

L 79-82

+0.5

L-MD

W 88-81

+3.5

LAF

W 64-59

+2.5

ARMY

L 64-67

−4.5

COLG

W 77-76

+4.5

L-MD

L 84-89

−2.5

L 67-76

−10.5

AMER

W 90-82

+9.5

LAF

W 78-69

+11.5

NAVY

L 49-72

−13.5

W 70-67

+5.5

AMER

W 78-73

+12.5

BUCK

W 89-79

+4.5

W 69-66

−2.5

COLG

W 76-69

+9.5

W 74-60

+16.5

L 55-67

−15.5

covered 19didn’t cover 14avg +1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin

Day

Opp

Result

UnderOver

Margin

HOU

L 57-75

−4.5

WVU

L 47-69

−23.5

RUTG

L 72-84

+19.5

SFPA

W 79-62

−10.5

COLU

L 67-82

+5.5

MRST

L 55-78

+0.5

UCSB

L 70-72

−4.5

TXST

W 78-74

+16.5

BING

L 71-80

+11.5

LIU

L 82-87

+26.5

MONM

L 62-76

−5.5

ARMY

L 78-85

+16.5

BUCK

L 65-72

−0.5

W 66-58

−13.5

COLG

W 78-77

+12.5

W 93-91

+39.5

NAVY

L 79-82

+23.5

L-MD

W 88-81

+19.5

LAF

W 64-59

−20.5

ARMY

L 64-67

−16.5

COLG

W 77-76

+6.5

L-MD

L 84-89

+23.5

L 67-76

+5.5

AMER

W 90-82

+31.5

LAF

W 78-69

+6.5

NAVY

L 49-72

−18.5

W 70-67

−4.5

AMER

W 78-73

+10.5

BUCK

W 89-79

+29.5

W 69-66

−7.5

COLG

W 76-69

−1.5

W 74-60

−4.5

L 55-67

−18.5

over 18under 15avg +4.6 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: Lehigh 1, Pepperdine 2, even 2

LehighBetterPepperdine

G J. Ingram10.7 pts · 5.1 reb · 3.3 ast Score 54

Even

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

G C. Thomas5.3 pts · 1.3 reb · 1.8 ast Score 2

No call

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

G J. Vazquez4 pts · 2.6 reb · 2 ast Score 11

PEPPBig

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

F E. Benoit10.2 pts · 6 reb · 1.1 ast Score 24

PEPPSmall

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

C H. Alvey15.4 pts · 7 reb · 2.1 ast Score 86

LEHBig

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

LehighBetterPepperdine

LEH offense257th of 366 · -7.9

Even

PEPP defense216th of 366 · -5.6

LEH defense179th of 366 · -4.1

Even

PEPP offense139th of 366 · -4.2

Backcourt-6.9 · 3 players

PEPPBig

Backcourt+1.6 · 2 players

Frontcourt+2.3 · 2 players

LEHSmall

Frontcourt+1.2 · 3 players

Bench-7.6 · 4 players

PEPPBig

Bench-1.6 · 3 players

Score, worst to bestLEH 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

Lehigh

Guards

J. Ingram36 minC. Thomas23 minJ. Vazquez22 minP. Kramer19 minA. Urosevic19 minC. BurrowsNew

Forwards

E. Benoit29 minJ. Pike12 minA. Addesa8 minR. RudusansNewN. DjanoglyNew

Centers

H. Alvey31 minC. CohenNew

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

LEH71.8 #249

PEPP70.4 #277

Points per possession

LEH1.05 #257

PEPP1.00 #320

Pace (possessions)

LEH68.7 #197

PEPP70.0 #117

Shooting

Effective FG%

LEH52.9 #107

PEPP47.6 #323

3-point %

LEH36.1 #56

PEPP31.4 #310

3-point attempt rate

LEH38.3 #206

PEPP39.2 #187

Free throw rate

LEH31.8 #258

PEPP33.9 #216

Possessions

Turnover rate

LEH17.7 #250

PEPP18.3 #288

Offensive rebound rate

LEH23.2 #349

PEPP29.1 #234

Assists per game

LEH13.9 #153

PEPP13.6 #176

Defense

Points allowed

LEH74.4 #171

PEPP79.7 #311

Points allowed per possession

LEH1.08 #175

PEPP1.14 #303

Opponent effective FG%

LEH50.6 #133

PEPP54.2 #306

Opponent 3-point %

LEH32.9 #109

PEPP35.5 #276

Turnovers forced

LEH16.2 #212

PEPP16.5 #184

Defensive rebound rate

LEH68.5 #226

PEPP66.0 #318

Steals per game

LEH6.6 #163

PEPP5.9 #246

Blocks per game

LEH3.1 #209

PEPP2.8 #269

LEH		PEPP
Scoring
71.8 #249	Points per game	70.4 #277
1.05 #257	Points per possession	1.00 #320
68.7 #197	Pace (possessions)	70.0 #117
Shooting
52.9 #107	Effective FG%	47.6 #323
36.1 #56	3-point %	31.4 #310
38.3 #206	3-point attempt rate	39.2 #187
31.8 #258	Free throw rate	33.9 #216
Possessions
17.7 #250	Turnover rate	18.3 #288
23.2 #349	Offensive rebound rate	29.1 #234
13.9 #153	Assists per game	13.6 #176
Defense
74.4 #171	Points allowed	79.7 #311
1.08 #175	Points allowed per possession	1.14 #303
50.6 #133	Opponent effective FG%	54.2 #306
32.9 #109	Opponent 3-point %	35.5 #276
16.2 #212	Turnovers forced	16.5 #184
68.5 #226	Defensive rebound rate	66.0 #318
6.6 #163	Steals per game	5.9 #246
3.1 #209	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.

Lehigh

16-17 in 2025-26 overall · 14-7 in conference · Patriot League

Last five, 2025-26

Lvs Prairie View55–67
Wvs Boston U74–60
Wvs Colgate76–69
Wvs Holy Cross69–66
Wvs Bucknell89–79

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.

Lehigh Mountain Hawks vs Pepperdine Waves

What could decide it: LEH has more of the edges

Market

Model vs market

1st-half model

ATS

Totals

Last 10 games

Next 3 games

ATS History · 2025-26

Lehigh

Pepperdine

Pepperdine has the better starters

Depth chart

Matchup stats

Lehigh

Pepperdine