Baxter Arena · at Omaha
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | OMA | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SHSU 78–75 · win probability SHSU 60%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 152.7
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: SHSU has more of the edges
SHSU 4, OMA 2 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
SHSU offense vs OMA defense
Offense 154th of 366 against a defense 306th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Schedule so far
SHSU has played the 138th-hardest schedule, OMA the 287th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: SHSU 35.9%, OMA 25.5%. Defensive: SHSU 69.9%, OMA 71.3%
Three-pointers
SHSU hits 37.2% and allows 32.5%; OMA hits 34.0% and allows 32.9%. Threes are 35.8% and 40.9% of their shots
Home court
OMA at home. This season: OMA 0-0 at home, SHSU 0-0 away
Context
Tempo
About 70 possessions: SHSU plays 70.7 a game (88th fastest), OMA 68.9 (184th). Faster games mean more points
Free throws
Free throw rate: SHSU 34.4, OMA 34.5. Allowed: SHSU 36.7, OMA 33.6
Shooting
Effective FG%: SHSU 52.5 and allows 51.4; OMA 52.2 and allows 52.7
Even
Turnovers
Turnover rate: SHSU 16.8%, OMA 16.1%. Forced: SHSU 16.1%, OMA 14.1%
Even
OMA offense vs SHSU defense
Offense 247th of 366 against a defense 228th, on the model’s ratings
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: SHSU 29%, OMA 23%. Transfers in: SHSU 2, OMA 4. 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 | — | SHSU -2.8 | — |
| Total | — | 152.7 | — |
| Projected score | — | SHSU 77.7 · OMA 74.9 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SHSU -1.8 | — |
| 1H total | 71.4 | — |
| 1H projected score | SHSU 36.6 · OMA 34.8 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% | 5-5 50% | |
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 4-6 40% |
Next 3 games
With how the last meeting with each opponent went
No more games listed yet.
No more games listed yet.
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
Sam Houston
31 games played
Straight up
19-12
61% wins
Against the spread
20-11
65% covers · avg +3.4 pts vs the line
Over / Under
18-13
58% overs · avg +2 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 7 | @ | L 77-98 | +31.5 | W +10.5 | 156.5 | O 175 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 79-85 | +12.5 | W +6.5 | 159.5 | O 164 |
| Nov 19 | vs | W 78-70 | -1.5 | W +6.5 | 156.5 | U 148 |
| Nov 26 | vs | W 84-81 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 142.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 28 | vs | W 94-68 | +1.5 | W +27.5 | 154.5 | O 162 |
| Dec 2 | @ | L 83-93 | +13.5 | W +3.5 | 169.5 | O 176 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 82-70 | -7.5 | W +4.5 | 158.5 | U 152 |
| Dec 17 | @ | W 85-75 | +3.5 | W +13.5 | 153.5 | O 160 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 78-87 | +5.5 | L −3.5 | 153.5 | O 165 |
| Jan 2 | @ | L 91-102 | +5.5 | L −5.5 | 168.5 | O 193 |
| Jan 4 | @ | L 67-68 | +4.5 | W +3.5 | 156.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 72-60 | -11.5 | W +0.5 | 144.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 74-82 | +1.5 | L −6.5 | 154.5 | O 156 |
| Jan 14 | @ | W 77-62 | +1.5 | W +16.5 | 150.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 76-63 | +2.5 | W +15.5 | 168.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 21 | vs | W 93-87 | -5.5 | W +0.5 | 167.5 | O 180 |
| Jan 24 | vs | W 73-58 | -5.5 | W +9.5 | 156.5 | U 131 |
| Jan 28 | @ | W 80-71 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 148.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 31 | vs | W 83-67 | -7.5 | W +8.5 | 141.5 | O 150 |
| Feb 4 | vs | W 70-66 | -10.5 | L −6.5 | 145.5 | U 136 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 78-87 | -3.5 | L −12.5 | 143.5 | O 165 |
| Feb 14 | @ | W 83-79 | +1.5 | W +5.5 | 162.5 | U 162 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 78-70 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 151.5 | U 148 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 82-78 | -6.5 | L −2.5 | 147.5 | O 160 |
| Feb 26 | vs | W 100-67 | -6.5 | W +26.5 | 161.5 | O 167 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 86-81 | -6.5 | L −1.5 | 152.5 | O 167 |
| Mar 5 | @ | L 80-83 | -7.5 | L −10.5 | 147.5 | O 163 |
| Mar 7 | @ | L 72-79 | +4.5 | L −2.5 | 152.5 | U 151 |
| Mar 11 | vs | W 69-61 | -4.5 | W +3.5 | 154.5 | U 130 |
| Mar 13 | vs | L 73-79 | -2.5 | L −8.5 | 159.5 | U 152 |
| Mar 18 | @ | L 83-107 | +11.5 | L −12.5 | 162.5 | O 190 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
7
@
TTU
L 77-98
+10.5
15
@
UTAH
L 79-85
+6.5
19
vs
WYO
W 78-70
+6.5
26
vs
IDST
W 84-81
+1.5
28
vs
IDHO
W 94-68
+27.5
2
@
OKST
L 83-93
+3.5
6
@
TXSO
W 82-70
+4.5
17
@
ORST
W 85-75
+13.5
21
@
NMSU
L 78-87
−3.5
2
@
WKU
L 91-102
−5.5
4
@
MTSU
L 67-68
+3.5
8
vs
DEL
W 72-60
+0.5
10
vs
LIB
L 74-82
−6.5
14
@
JXST
W 77-62
+16.5
17
@
FIU
W 76-63
+15.5
21
vs
KENN
W 93-87
+0.5
24
vs
WKU
W 73-58
+9.5
28
@
MOST
W 80-71
+10.5
31
vs
LT
W 83-67
+8.5
4
vs
UTEP
W 70-66
−6.5
7
@
LT
L 78-87
−12.5
14
@
KENN
W 83-79
+5.5
18
vs
MTSU
W 78-70
+4.5
21
vs
JXST
W 82-78
−2.5
26
vs
FIU
W 100-67
+26.5
28
vs
MOST
W 86-81
−1.5
5
@
DEL
L 80-83
−10.5
7
@
LIB
L 72-79
−2.5
11
vs
NMSU
W 69-61
+3.5
13
vs
KENN
L 73-79
−8.5
18
@
UNM
L 83-107
−12.5
covered 20didn’t cover 11avg +3.4 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
7
@
TTU
L 77-98
+18.5
15
@
UTAH
L 79-85
+4.5
19
vs
WYO
W 78-70
−8.5
26
vs
IDST
W 84-81
+22.5
28
vs
IDHO
W 94-68
+7.5
2
@
OKST
L 83-93
+6.5
6
@
TXSO
W 82-70
−6.5
17
@
ORST
W 85-75
+6.5
21
@
NMSU
L 78-87
+11.5
2
@
WKU
L 91-102
+24.5
4
@
MTSU
L 67-68
−21.5
8
vs
DEL
W 72-60
−12.5
10
vs
LIB
L 74-82
+1.5
14
@
JXST
W 77-62
−11.5
17
@
FIU
W 76-63
−29.5
21
vs
KENN
W 93-87
+12.5
24
vs
WKU
W 73-58
−25.5
28
@
MOST
W 80-71
+2.5
31
vs
LT
W 83-67
+8.5
4
vs
UTEP
W 70-66
−9.5
7
@
LT
L 78-87
+21.5
14
@
KENN
W 83-79
−0.5
18
vs
MTSU
W 78-70
−3.5
21
vs
JXST
W 82-78
+12.5
26
vs
FIU
W 100-67
+5.5
28
vs
MOST
W 86-81
+14.5
5
@
DEL
L 80-83
+15.5
7
@
LIB
L 72-79
−1.5
11
vs
NMSU
W 69-61
−24.5
13
vs
KENN
L 73-79
−7.5
18
@
UNM
L 83-107
+27.5
over 18under 13avg +2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Omaha
29 games played
Straight up
12-17
41% wins
Against the spread
14-15
48% covers · avg −0.1 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-15
48% 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 3 | vs | L 77-85 | +5.5 | L −2.5 | 153.5 | O 162 |
| Nov 6 | @ | L 71-73 | +4.5 | W +2.5 | 150.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 9 | @ | L 74-97 | +14.5 | L −8.5 | 153.5 | O 171 |
| Nov 15 | vs | W 90-85 | -8.5 | L −3.5 | 153.5 | O 175 |
| Nov 21 | @ | L 73-99 | +20.5 | L −5.5 | 163.5 | O 172 |
| Nov 25 | vs | L 77-88 | +1.5 | L −9.5 | 152.5 | O 165 |
| Nov 26 | @ | L 61-74 | +4.5 | L −8.5 | 157.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 70-75 | +3.5 | L −1.5 | 157.5 | U 145 |
| Dec 6 | @ | W 60-55 | +12.5 | W +17.5 | 144.5 | U 115 |
| Dec 20 | @ | W 85-82 | +5.5 | W +8.5 | 141.5 | O 167 |
| Dec 28 | @ | L 57-80 | +21.5 | L −1.5 | 151.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 1 | @ | L 69-84 | +9.5 | L −5.5 | 152.5 | O 153 |
| Jan 3 | vs | L 66-73 | -8.5 | L −15.5 | 148.5 | U 139 |
| Jan 8 | vs | W 90-79 | -5.5 | W +5.5 | 146.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 10 | vs | L 76-78 | +5.5 | W +3.5 | 147.5 | O 154 |
| Jan 17 | @ | W 73-62 | +1.5 | W +12.5 | 149.5 | U 135 |
| Jan 21 | vs | L 64-68 | -6.5 | L −10.5 | 160.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 77-60 | -4.5 | W +12.5 | 148.5 | U 137 |
| Jan 28 | vs | W 80-71 | +1.5 | W +10.5 | 150.5 | O 151 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 84-82 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 158.5 | O 166 |
| Feb 5 | @ | L 73-76 | +1.5 | L −1.5 | 150.5 | U 149 |
| Feb 7 | @ | L 84-92 | +9.5 | W +1.5 | 146.5 | O 176 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 98-94 | +4.5 | W +8.5 | 156.5 | O 192 |
| Feb 15 | vs | W 83-76 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 160.5 | U 159 |
| Feb 18 | vs | W 80-71 | -6.5 | W +2.5 | 151.5 | U 151 |
| Feb 25 | @ | L 72-89 | +1.5 | L −15.5 | 152.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 53-68 | +11.5 | L −3.5 | 158.5 | U 121 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 76-62 | -1.5 | W +12.5 | 150.5 | U 138 |
| Mar 7 | vs | L 50-74 | +8.5 | L −15.5 | 146.5 | U 124 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
MUR
L 77-85
−2.5
6
@
ACU
L 71-73
+2.5
9
@
CSU
L 74-97
−8.5
15
vs
SUU
W 90-85
−3.5
21
@
LSU
L 73-99
−5.5
25
vs
JMU
L 77-88
−9.5
26
@
FIU
L 61-74
−8.5
3
vs
UNCO
L 70-75
−1.5
6
@
PRST
W 60-55
+17.5
20
@
LAM
W 85-82
+8.5
28
@
ORE
L 57-80
−1.5
1
@
SDST
L 69-84
−5.5
3
vs
KC
L 66-73
−15.5
8
vs
UND
W 90-79
+5.5
10
vs
NDSU
L 76-78
+3.5
17
@
ORU
W 73-62
+12.5
21
vs
SDAK
L 64-68
−10.5
24
@
KC
W 77-60
+12.5
28
vs
SDST
W 80-71
+10.5
31
@
DEN
W 84-82
+3.5
5
@
UND
L 73-76
−1.5
7
@
NDSU
L 84-92
+1.5
12
vs
STMN
W 98-94
+8.5
15
vs
DEN
W 83-76
+4.5
18
vs
ORU
W 80-71
+2.5
25
@
SDAK
L 72-89
−15.5
28
@
STMN
L 53-68
−3.5
6
vs
SDAK
W 76-62
+12.5
7
vs
NDSU
L 50-74
−15.5
covered 14didn’t cover 15avg −0.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
MUR
L 77-85
+8.5
6
@
ACU
L 71-73
−6.5
9
@
CSU
L 74-97
+17.5
15
vs
SUU
W 90-85
+21.5
21
@
LSU
L 73-99
+8.5
25
vs
JMU
L 77-88
+12.5
26
@
FIU
L 61-74
−22.5
3
vs
UNCO
L 70-75
−12.5
6
@
PRST
W 60-55
−29.5
20
@
LAM
W 85-82
+25.5
28
@
ORE
L 57-80
−14.5
1
@
SDST
L 69-84
+0.5
3
vs
KC
L 66-73
−9.5
8
vs
UND
W 90-79
+22.5
10
vs
NDSU
L 76-78
+6.5
17
@
ORU
W 73-62
−14.5
21
vs
SDAK
L 64-68
−28.5
24
@
KC
W 77-60
−11.5
28
vs
SDST
W 80-71
+0.5
31
@
DEN
W 84-82
+7.5
5
@
UND
L 73-76
−1.5
7
@
NDSU
L 84-92
+29.5
12
vs
STMN
W 98-94
+35.5
15
vs
DEN
W 83-76
−1.5
18
vs
ORU
W 80-71
−0.5
25
@
SDAK
L 72-89
+8.5
28
@
STMN
L 53-68
−37.5
6
vs
SDAK
W 76-62
−12.5
7
vs
NDSU
L 50-74
−22.5
over 14under 15avg −0.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Sam Houston has the better starters
Position by position: Sam Houston 2, Omaha 1, even 2
Sam HoustonBetterOmaha
G J. Begg10 pts · 2.6 reb · 3.5 ast
Score 17
→OMABig
G G. Stubblefield9.3 pts · 3.1 reb · 3.3 ast
Score 64
G J. Coleman8.3 pts · 2.4 reb · 1.3 ast
Score 41
←SHSUSmall
G C. Crosby TR2.5 pts · 0.9 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 24
F E. St. Bernard TR5.6 pts · 5.3 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 78
=No call
G A. Skradis0.4 pts · 0.3 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
F M. Dann2.8 pts · 2 reb · 0.4 ast
Score 58
←SHSUSmall
F C. Dockery TR7.3 pts · 5.7 reb · 0.8 ast
Score 41
F R. Greppi TR0 pts · 0.4 reb · 0.1 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F B. Scholl3.7 pts · 3.2 reb · 0.3 ast
Score 26
Sam HoustonBetterOmaha
SHSU offense154th of 366 · -4.7
←SHSUBig
OMA defense306th of 366 · -7.8
SHSU defense228th of 366 · -6.1
=Even
OMA offense247th of 366 · -7.5
Backcourt-3.6 · 2 players
→OMASmall
Backcourt-0.7 · 3 players
Frontcourt+1.0 · 3 players
←SHSUSmall
Frontcourt-1.6 · 2 players
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
Bench-0.0 · 2 players
Score, worst to bestSHSU betterOMA betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Begg27 minJ. Coleman22 minZ. PipkinNewA. McDowellNewN. NguyenNewK. PartainNew
Forwards
E. St. Bernard18 min · TRM. Dann9 minR. Greppi1 min · TRC. Sadibou NdiayeNewY. OkeNewA. LoustauNew
Guards
G. Stubblefield29 minC. Crosby9 min · TRA. Skradis2 minD. Thompson1 min · TRB. OrgilboldNewC. CurtisNew
Forwards
C. Dockery22 min · TRB. Scholl14 minJ. Bolis2 min · TRD. PleasantNewE. SheatsNewG. BakerNew
Centers
I. OndekaneNewH. BukingaNew
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 80.0 #67 | Points per game | 73.9 #202 |
| 1.13 #78 | Points per possession | 1.07 #201 |
| 70.7 #88 | Pace (possessions) | 68.9 #184 |
| Shooting | ||
| 52.5 #128 | Effective FG% | 52.2 #139 |
| 37.2 #24 | 3-point % | 34.0 #169 |
| 35.8 #253 | 3-point attempt rate | 40.9 #150 |
| 34.4 #199 | Free throw rate | 34.5 #196 |
| Possessions | ||
| 16.8 #186 | Turnover rate | 16.1 #146 |
| 35.9 #25 | Offensive rebound rate | 25.5 #331 |
| 14.9 #95 | Assists per game | 12.1 #276 |
| Defense | ||
| 76.9 #237 | Points allowed | 77.7 #259 |
| 1.09 #191 | Points allowed per possession | 1.13 #278 |
| 51.4 #180 | Opponent effective FG% | 52.7 #258 |
| 32.5 #89 | Opponent 3-point % | 32.9 #114 |
| 16.1 #220 | Turnovers forced | 14.1 #333 |
| 69.9 #168 | Defensive rebound rate | 71.3 #90 |
| 7.0 #128 | Steals per game | 5.7 #277 |
| 2.6 #288 | Blocks per game | 3.0 #234 |
Sam Houston
19-12 in 2025-26 overall · 14-8 in conference · Conference USA
Last five, 2025-26
- L@ New Mexico83–107
- Lvs Kennesaw St73–79
- Wvs New Mexico St69–61
- L@ Liberty72–79
- L@ Delaware80–83
A week or more of rest.
Omaha
12-17 in 2025-26 overall · 9-9 in conference · Summit League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs N Dakota St50–74
- Wvs South Dakota76–62
- L@ St Thomas53–68
- L@ South Dakota72–89
- Wvs Oral Roberts80–71
A week or more of rest.