Stony Brook Arena · at Stony Brook
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | STBK | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 STBK 76–71 · win probability STBK 68%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 146.4
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: STBK has more of the edges
LIN 2, STBK 3 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Context
Schedule so far
LIN has played the 357th-hardest schedule, STBK the 204th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: LIN plays 73.0 a game (18th fastest), STBK 67.3 (269th). Faster games mean more points
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: LIN 33.3%, STBK 28.0%. Defensive: LIN 68.3%, STBK 67.7%
Free throws
Free throw rate: LIN 38.6, STBK 28.4. Allowed: LIN 37.4, STBK 35.4
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: LIN 0%, STBK 48%. Transfers in: LIN 0, STBK 5. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
LIN offense vs STBK defense
Offense 250th of 366 against a defense 164th, on the model’s ratings
Home court
STBK at home. This season: STBK 0-0 at home, LIN 0-0 away
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: LIN 18.7%, STBK 16.7%. Forced: LIN 18.4%, STBK 17.2%
Even
STBK offense vs LIN defense
Offense 235th of 366 against a defense 261st, on the model’s ratings
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: LIN 48.0 and allows 49.1; STBK 50.2 and allows 50.7
Even
Three-pointers
LIN hits 29.4% and allows 32.4%; STBK hits 34.8% and allows 35.7%. Threes are 30.7% and 45.8% of their shots
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 | — | STBK -5.5 | — |
| Total | — | 146.4 | — |
| Projected score | — | LIN 70.5 · STBK 76 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | STBK -3.1 | — |
| 1H total | 68.5 | — |
| 1H projected score | LIN 32.7 · STBK 35.8 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% | |
| 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% | 5-5 50% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Lindenwood Lions
30 games played
Straight up
15-15
50% wins
Against the spread
13-17
43% covers · avg −0.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
17-13
57% overs · avg −0.7 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 60-98 | +29.5 | L −8.5 | 146.5 | O 158 |
| Nov 10 | @ | L 66-109 | +24.5 | L −18.5 | 165.5 | O 175 |
| Nov 14 | vs | W 83-77 | -2.5 | W +3.5 | 155.5 | O 160 |
| Nov 16 | @ | L 65-74 | +3.5 | L −5.5 | 149.5 | U 139 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 53-73 | +32.5 | W +12.5 | 155.5 | U 126 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 80-67 | -4.5 | W +8.5 | 152.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 2 | @ | W 99-64 | +3.5 | W +38.5 | 147.5 | O 163 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 82-74 | -8.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 156 |
| Dec 18 | vs | W 92-76 | -12.5 | W +3.5 | 146.5 | O 168 |
| Dec 23 | @ | L 65-70 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 145.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 77-64 | -6.5 | W +6.5 | 147.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 83-80 | -9.5 | L −6.5 | 147.5 | O 163 |
| Jan 6 | @ | L 62-66 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 142.5 | U 128 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 74-82 | -6.5 | L −14.5 | 149.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 15 | @ | W 88-76 | +6.5 | W +18.5 | 154.5 | O 164 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 55-69 | +2.5 | L −11.5 | 147.5 | U 124 |
| Jan 22 | vs | W 89-68 | -8.5 | W +12.5 | 151.5 | O 157 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 86-96 | -4.5 | L −14.5 | 160.5 | O 182 |
| Jan 29 | @ | W 73-60 | -4.5 | W +8.5 | 150.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 79-78 | -1.5 | L −0.5 | 148.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 3 | vs | L 72-78 | -4.5 | L −10.5 | 140.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 5 | @ | W 79-74 | -1.5 | W +3.5 | 149.5 | O 153 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 75-74 | -1.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 149 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 61-73 | -1.5 | L −13.5 | 154.5 | U 134 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 80-89 | +3.5 | L −5.5 | 159.5 | O 169 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 57-72 | -1.5 | L −16.5 | 151.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 26 | vs | L 67-71 | -7.5 | L −11.5 | 144.5 | U 138 |
| Feb 28 | @ | W 91-69 | -11.5 | W +10.5 | 149.5 | O 160 |
| Mar 4 | vs | W 72-62 | -5.5 | W +4.5 | 148.5 | U 134 |
| Mar 5 | vs | L 66-68 | +3.5 | W +1.5 | 148.5 | U 134 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
4
@
TTU
L 60-98
−8.5
10
@
SLU
L 66-109
−18.5
14
vs
CHSO
W 83-77
+3.5
16
@
AAMU
L 65-74
−5.5
20
@
IU
L 53-73
+12.5
24
vs
KC
W 80-67
+8.5
2
@
NIU
W 99-64
+38.5
6
@
EIU
W 82-74
−0.5
18
vs
WIU
W 92-76
+3.5
23
@
MOST
L 65-70
−1.5
1
vs
MORE
W 77-64
+6.5
3
vs
USI
W 83-80
−6.5
6
@
SIUE
L 62-66
−2.5
10
vs
LR
L 74-82
−14.5
15
@
SEMO
W 88-76
+18.5
17
@
UTM
L 55-69
−11.5
22
vs
TNTC
W 89-68
+12.5
24
vs
TNST
L 86-96
−14.5
29
@
USI
W 73-60
+8.5
31
@
MORE
W 79-78
−0.5
3
vs
SIUE
L 72-78
−10.5
5
@
LR
W 79-74
+3.5
12
vs
UTM
W 75-74
−0.5
14
vs
SEMO
L 61-73
−13.5
19
@
TNST
L 80-89
−5.5
21
@
TNTC
L 57-72
−16.5
26
vs
EIU
L 67-71
−11.5
28
@
WIU
W 91-69
+10.5
4
vs
LR
W 72-62
+4.5
5
vs
SEMO
L 66-68
+1.5
covered 13didn’t cover 17avg −0.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
4
@
TTU
L 60-98
+11.5
10
@
SLU
L 66-109
+9.5
14
vs
CHSO
W 83-77
+4.5
16
@
AAMU
L 65-74
−10.5
20
@
IU
L 53-73
−29.5
24
vs
KC
W 80-67
−5.5
2
@
NIU
W 99-64
+15.5
6
@
EIU
W 82-74
+10.5
18
vs
WIU
W 92-76
+21.5
23
@
MOST
L 65-70
−10.5
1
vs
MORE
W 77-64
−6.5
3
vs
USI
W 83-80
+15.5
6
@
SIUE
L 62-66
−14.5
10
vs
LR
L 74-82
+6.5
15
@
SEMO
W 88-76
+9.5
17
@
UTM
L 55-69
−23.5
22
vs
TNTC
W 89-68
+5.5
24
vs
TNST
L 86-96
+21.5
29
@
USI
W 73-60
−17.5
31
@
MORE
W 79-78
+8.5
3
vs
SIUE
L 72-78
+9.5
5
@
LR
W 79-74
+3.5
12
vs
UTM
W 75-74
+3.5
14
vs
SEMO
L 61-73
−20.5
19
@
TNST
L 80-89
+9.5
21
@
TNTC
L 57-72
−22.5
26
vs
EIU
L 67-71
−6.5
28
@
WIU
W 91-69
+10.5
4
vs
LR
W 72-62
−14.5
5
vs
SEMO
L 66-68
−14.5
over 17under 13avg −0.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Stony Brook
30 games played
Straight up
15-15
50% wins
Against the spread
18-12
60% covers · avg +1.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-15
50% overs · avg +0.6 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 8 | vs | W 71-60 | -3.5 | W +7.5 | 131.5 | U 131 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 79-86 | +20.5 | W +13.5 | 150.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 20 | vs | W 80-70 | -3.5 | W +6.5 | 136.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 24 | vs | L 58-86 | +4.5 | L −23.5 | 145.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 25 | vs | W 61-54 | +4.5 | W +11.5 | 145.5 | U 115 |
| Nov 28 | @ | W 71-68 | +10.5 | W +13.5 | 138.5 | O 139 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 75-84 | +9.5 | W +0.5 | 150.5 | O 159 |
| Dec 9 | vs | W 77-73 | +4.5 | W +8.5 | 146.5 | O 150 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 78-55 | -7.5 | W +15.5 | 145.5 | U 133 |
| Dec 17 | vs | L 55-71 | -10.5 | L −26.5 | 146.5 | U 126 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 51-70 | +6.5 | L −12.5 | 137.5 | U 121 |
| Dec 29 | @ | L 59-62 | +2.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | U 121 |
| Dec 31 | @ | L 57-76 | +11.5 | L −7.5 | 159.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 81-80 | -4.5 | L −3.5 | 141.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 37-56 | +5.5 | L −13.5 | 132.5 | U 93 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 71-75 | +6.5 | W +2.5 | 133.5 | O 146 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 76-71 | +6.5 | W +11.5 | 136.5 | O 147 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 112-106 | +4.5 | W +10.5 | 142.5 | O 218 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 95-80 | +3.5 | W +18.5 | 148.5 | O 175 |
| Jan 29 | @ | W 81-69 | +4.5 | W +16.5 | 152.5 | U 150 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 72-68 | +4.5 | W +8.5 | 148.5 | U 140 |
| Feb 5 | vs | L 75-76 | -1.5 | L −2.5 | 137.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 69-55 | -3.5 | W +10.5 | 153.5 | U 124 |
| Feb 12 | @ | L 57-69 | +7.5 | L −4.5 | 135.5 | U 126 |
| Feb 16 | vs | W 72-69 | -2.5 | W +0.5 | 135.5 | O 141 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 79-72 | -5.5 | W +1.5 | 135.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 26 | @ | L 69-82 | +3.5 | L −9.5 | 145.5 | O 151 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 58-67 | +11.5 | W +2.5 | 140.5 | U 125 |
| Mar 3 | vs | L 57-69 | +1.5 | L −10.5 | 137.5 | U 126 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 89-96 | +2.5 | L −4.5 | 148.5 | O 185 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
8
vs
ME
W 71-60
+7.5
15
@
YALE
L 79-86
+13.5
20
vs
BRWN
W 80-70
+6.5
24
vs
PAC
L 58-86
−23.5
25
vs
BCU
W 61-54
+11.5
28
@
LMU
W 71-68
+13.5
6
@
DUQ
L 75-84
+0.5
9
vs
COLU
W 77-73
+8.5
13
vs
CMU
W 78-55
+15.5
17
vs
UALB
L 55-71
−26.5
21
@
MRST
L 51-70
−12.5
29
@
HAMP
L 59-62
−0.5
31
@
W&M
L 57-76
−7.5
3
vs
NCAT
W 81-80
−3.5
8
@
DREX
L 37-56
−13.5
10
vs
UNCW
L 71-75
+2.5
15
vs
HOF
W 76-71
+11.5
17
vs
COFC
W 112-106
+10.5
22
@
NE
W 95-80
+18.5
29
@
CAM
W 81-69
+16.5
31
@
ELON
W 72-68
+8.5
5
vs
MONM
L 75-76
−2.5
7
vs
NE
W 69-55
+10.5
12
@
TOW
L 57-69
−4.5
16
vs
DREX
W 72-69
+0.5
21
vs
HAMP
W 79-72
+1.5
26
@
MONM
L 69-82
−9.5
28
@
HOF
L 58-67
+2.5
3
vs
TOW
L 57-69
−10.5
7
vs
CAM
L 89-96
−4.5
covered 18didn’t cover 12avg +1.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
8
vs
ME
W 71-60
−0.5
15
@
YALE
L 79-86
+14.5
20
vs
BRWN
W 80-70
+13.5
24
vs
PAC
L 58-86
−1.5
25
vs
BCU
W 61-54
−30.5
28
@
LMU
W 71-68
+0.5
6
@
DUQ
L 75-84
+8.5
9
vs
COLU
W 77-73
+3.5
13
vs
CMU
W 78-55
−12.5
17
vs
UALB
L 55-71
−20.5
21
@
MRST
L 51-70
−16.5
29
@
HAMP
L 59-62
−19.5
31
@
W&M
L 57-76
−26.5
3
vs
NCAT
W 81-80
+19.5
8
@
DREX
L 37-56
−39.5
10
vs
UNCW
L 71-75
+12.5
15
vs
HOF
W 76-71
+10.5
17
vs
COFC
W 112-106
+75.5
22
@
NE
W 95-80
+26.5
29
@
CAM
W 81-69
−2.5
31
@
ELON
W 72-68
−8.5
5
vs
MONM
L 75-76
+13.5
7
vs
NE
W 69-55
−29.5
12
@
TOW
L 57-69
−9.5
16
vs
DREX
W 72-69
+5.5
21
vs
HAMP
W 79-72
+15.5
26
@
MONM
L 69-82
+5.5
28
@
HOF
L 58-67
−15.5
3
vs
TOW
L 57-69
−11.5
7
vs
CAM
L 89-96
+36.5
over 15under 15avg +0.6 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 74.4 #183 | Points per game | 70.7 #270 |
| 1.02 #307 | Points per possession | 1.05 #254 |
| 73.0 #18 | Pace (possessions) | 67.3 #269 |
| Shooting | ||
| 48.0 #313 | Effective FG% | 50.2 #227 |
| 29.4 #347 | 3-point % | 34.8 #128 |
| 30.7 #346 | 3-point attempt rate | 45.8 #50 |
| 38.6 #88 | Free throw rate | 28.4 #339 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.7 #307 | Turnover rate | 16.7 #181 |
| 33.3 #83 | Offensive rebound rate | 28.0 #267 |
| 13.0 #212 | Assists per game | 12.9 #216 |
| Defense | ||
| 75.0 #190 | Points allowed | 72.5 #118 |
| 1.03 #52 | Points allowed per possession | 1.08 #168 |
| 49.1 #72 | Opponent effective FG% | 50.7 #138 |
| 32.4 #84 | Opponent 3-point % | 35.7 #291 |
| 18.4 #78 | Turnovers forced | 17.2 #135 |
| 68.3 #244 | Defensive rebound rate | 67.7 #275 |
| 8.4 #24 | Steals per game | 6.3 #201 |
| 4.4 #46 | Blocks per game | 3.6 #122 |
Lindenwood Lions
15-15 in 2025-26 overall · 12-10 in conference · Ohio Valley Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs SE Missouri66–68
- Wvs Little Rock72–62
- W@ W Illinois91–69
- Lvs E Illinois67–71
- L@ Tennessee Tech57–72
A week or more of rest.
Stony Brook
15-15 in 2025-26 overall · 9-10 in conference · Coastal Athletic Association
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Campbell89–96
- Lvs Towson57–69
- L@ Hofstra58–67
- L@ Monmouth69–82
- Wvs Hampton79–72
A week or more of rest.