Resch Center · at Green Bay
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | GB | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 GB 80–70 · win probability GB 82%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 149.4
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: GB has more of the edges
UND 1, GB 6 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UND 14.1%, GB 15.9%. Forced: UND 19.3%, GB 13.2%
Shooting
Effective FG%: UND 49.5 and allows 56.5; GB 54.9 and allows 53.6
GB offense vs UND defense
Offense 219th of 366 against a defense 353rd, on the model’s ratings
Three-pointers
UND hits 32.7% and allows 37.1%; GB hits 36.4% and allows 36.3%. Threes are 40.6% and 37.3% of their shots
Context
Tempo
About 67 possessions: UND plays 69.7 a game (133rd fastest), GB 65.2 (339th). Faster games mean more points
Free throws
Free throw rate: UND 37.9, GB 41.6. Allowed: UND 43.8, GB 37.4
UND offense vs GB defense
Offense 304th of 366 against a defense 227th, on the model’s ratings
Home court
GB at home. This season: GB 0-0 at home, UND 0-0 away
Even
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UND 27.4%, GB 25.1%. Defensive: UND 67.6%, GB 70.4%
Context
Schedule so far
UND has played the 293rd-hardest schedule, GB the 255th. A record against a soft schedule means less
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UND 24%, GB 40%. Transfers in: UND 2, GB 3. 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 | — | GB -10.5 | — |
| Total | — | 149.4 | — |
| Projected score | — | UND 69.5 · GB 79.9 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | GB -6.1 | — |
| 1H total | 69.9 | — |
| 1H projected score | UND 31.9 · GB 38 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5-5 50% | 7-3 70% | 4-6 40% | |
| 6-4 60% | 6-4 60% | 5-5 50% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
North Dakota
32 games played
Straight up
15-17
47% wins
Against the spread
21-11
66% covers · avg +1.7 pts vs the line
Over / Under
15-17
47% overs · avg +1.1 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 | @ | L 62-91 | +36.5 | W +7.5 | 170.5 | U 153 |
| Nov 6 | vs | L 70-74 | -1.5 | L −5.5 | 146.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 9 | vs | L 85-93 | +6.5 | L −1.5 | 158.5 | O 178 |
| Nov 15 | @ | W 76-74 | +3.5 | W +5.5 | 148.5 | O 150 |
| Nov 19 | @ | L 60-75 | +29.5 | W +14.5 | 155.5 | U 135 |
| Nov 22 | vs | L 58-75 | +3.5 | L −13.5 | 147.5 | U 133 |
| Nov 23 | @ | W 78-69 | -2.5 | W +6.5 | 146.5 | O 147 |
| Nov 28 | @ | L 55-92 | +18.5 | L −18.5 | 149.5 | U 147 |
| Dec 3 | @ | L 58-90 | +11.5 | L −20.5 | 151.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 6 | vs | L 75-79 | +5.5 | W +1.5 | 154.5 | U 154 |
| Dec 13 | vs | L 66-69 | -7.5 | L −10.5 | 145.5 | U 135 |
| Dec 18 | vs | W 90-88 | +12.5 | W +14.5 | 157.5 | O 178 |
| Dec 21 | @ | L 55-78 | +29.5 | W +6.5 | 151.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 1 | vs | W 72-61 | -1.5 | W +9.5 | 148.5 | U 133 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 90-87 | +7.5 | W +10.5 | 152.5 | O 177 |
| Jan 8 | @ | L 79-90 | +5.5 | L −5.5 | 146.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 81-79 | +1.5 | W +3.5 | 146.5 | O 160 |
| Jan 15 | vs | L 80-91 | +10.5 | L −0.5 | 151.5 | O 171 |
| Jan 17 | vs | W 96-80 | -1.5 | W +14.5 | 160.5 | O 176 |
| Jan 22 | @ | W 79-62 | +1.5 | W +18.5 | 149.5 | U 141 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 93-86 | +5.5 | W +12.5 | 162.5 | O 179 |
| Jan 29 | @ | W 81-80 | +11.5 | W +12.5 | 152.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 5 | vs | W 76-73 | -1.5 | W +1.5 | 150.5 | U 149 |
| Feb 7 | vs | L 79-98 | -3.5 | L −22.5 | 161.5 | O 177 |
| Feb 11 | @ | W 72-71 | +2.5 | W +3.5 | 156.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 14 | vs | L 66-83 | +5.5 | L −11.5 | 149.5 | U 149 |
| Feb 19 | vs | W 85-70 | -9.5 | W +5.5 | 150.5 | O 155 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 83-91 | +9.5 | W +1.5 | 151.5 | O 174 |
| Feb 28 | @ | L 63-96 | +11.5 | L −21.5 | 152.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 6 | vs | W 83-67 | +2.5 | W +18.5 | 160.5 | U 150 |
| Mar 7 | vs | W 67-66 | +11.5 | W +12.5 | 153.5 | U 133 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 62-70 | +11.5 | W +3.5 | 147.5 | U 132 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
ALA
L 62-91
+7.5
6
vs
UCR
L 70-74
−5.5
9
vs
CSUN
L 85-93
−1.5
15
@
UCR
W 76-74
+5.5
19
@
CREI
L 60-75
+14.5
22
vs
CCU
L 58-75
−13.5
23
@
WIU
W 78-69
+6.5
28
@
HAW
L 55-92
−18.5
3
@
IDHO
L 58-90
−20.5
6
vs
MONT
L 75-79
+1.5
13
vs
WIU
L 66-69
−10.5
18
vs
WIN
W 90-88
+14.5
21
@
NEB
L 55-78
+6.5
1
vs
ORU
W 72-61
+9.5
3
vs
SDST
W 90-87
+10.5
8
@
OMA
L 79-90
−5.5
10
@
KC
W 81-79
+3.5
15
vs
STMN
L 80-91
−0.5
17
vs
SDAK
W 96-80
+14.5
22
@
ORU
W 79-62
+18.5
24
@
DEN
W 93-86
+12.5
29
@
STMN
W 81-80
+12.5
5
vs
OMA
W 76-73
+1.5
7
vs
DEN
L 79-98
−22.5
11
@
SDAK
W 72-71
+3.5
14
vs
NDSU
L 66-83
−11.5
19
vs
KC
W 85-70
+5.5
21
@
SDST
L 83-91
+1.5
28
@
NDSU
L 63-96
−21.5
6
vs
DEN
W 83-67
+18.5
7
vs
STMN
W 67-66
+12.5
8
vs
NDSU
L 62-70
+3.5
covered 21didn’t cover 11avg +1.7 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
ALA
L 62-91
−17.5
6
vs
UCR
L 70-74
−2.5
9
vs
CSUN
L 85-93
+19.5
15
@
UCR
W 76-74
+1.5
19
@
CREI
L 60-75
−20.5
22
vs
CCU
L 58-75
−14.5
23
@
WIU
W 78-69
+0.5
28
@
HAW
L 55-92
−2.5
3
@
IDHO
L 58-90
−3.5
6
vs
MONT
L 75-79
−0.5
13
vs
WIU
L 66-69
−10.5
18
vs
WIN
W 90-88
+20.5
21
@
NEB
L 55-78
−18.5
1
vs
ORU
W 72-61
−15.5
3
vs
SDST
W 90-87
+24.5
8
@
OMA
L 79-90
+22.5
10
@
KC
W 81-79
+13.5
15
vs
STMN
L 80-91
+19.5
17
vs
SDAK
W 96-80
+15.5
22
@
ORU
W 79-62
−8.5
24
@
DEN
W 93-86
+16.5
29
@
STMN
W 81-80
+8.5
5
vs
OMA
W 76-73
−1.5
7
vs
DEN
L 79-98
+15.5
11
@
SDAK
W 72-71
−13.5
14
vs
NDSU
L 66-83
−0.5
19
vs
KC
W 85-70
+4.5
21
@
SDST
L 83-91
+22.5
28
@
NDSU
L 63-96
+6.5
6
vs
DEN
W 83-67
−10.5
7
vs
STMN
W 67-66
−20.5
8
vs
NDSU
L 62-70
−15.5
over 15under 17avg +1.1 ptslonger = bigger margin
Green Bay
31 games played
Straight up
16-15
52% wins
Against the spread
19-12
61% covers · avg +3.2 pts vs the line
Over / Under
16-15
52% overs · avg +2.3 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 | @ | L 51-94 | +30.5 | L −12.5 | 152.5 | U 145 |
| Nov 7 | @ | L 76-83 | +3.5 | L −3.5 | 147.5 | O 159 |
| Nov 13 | @ | L 61-80 | +13.5 | L −5.5 | 150.5 | U 141 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 65-72 | +25.5 | W +18.5 | 146.5 | U 137 |
| Nov 21 | vs | L 67-73 | +17.5 | W +11.5 | 148.5 | U 140 |
| Nov 22 | vs | W 79-75 | +5.5 | W +9.5 | 146.5 | O 154 |
| Nov 24 | vs | W 80-75 | +5.5 | W +10.5 | 150.5 | O 155 |
| Dec 4 | vs | L 78-80 | +1.5 | L −0.5 | 140.5 | O 158 |
| Dec 7 | @ | L 58-86 | +6.5 | L −21.5 | 142.5 | O 144 |
| Dec 11 | @ | W 85-75 | +3.5 | W +13.5 | 165.5 | U 160 |
| Dec 17 | vs | W 67-64 | +7.5 | W +10.5 | 140.5 | U 131 |
| Dec 23 | @ | L 79-102 | +5.5 | L −17.5 | 145.5 | O 181 |
| Jan 1 | @ | W 72-54 | +8.5 | W +26.5 | 145.5 | U 126 |
| Jan 5 | vs | W 79-76 | +3.5 | W +6.5 | 144.5 | O 155 |
| Jan 9 | vs | W 75-59 | -6.5 | W +9.5 | 156.5 | U 134 |
| Jan 11 | vs | W 80-78 | +4.5 | W +6.5 | 144.5 | O 158 |
| Jan 15 | @ | W 88-73 | -3.5 | W +11.5 | 150.5 | O 161 |
| Jan 18 | vs | L 63-88 | +4.5 | L −20.5 | 153.5 | U 151 |
| Jan 22 | @ | L 81-88 | +7.5 | W +0.5 | 139.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 71-67 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 142.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 30 | vs | L 82-89 | -7.5 | L −14.5 | 150.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 1 | vs | L 75-83 | +3.5 | L −4.5 | 144.5 | O 158 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 87-84 | +7.5 | W +10.5 | 149.5 | O 171 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 76-63 | -3.5 | W +9.5 | 149.5 | U 139 |
| Feb 12 | vs | W 76-59 | +1.5 | W +18.5 | 144.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 15 | @ | L 72-75 | +2.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 147 |
| Feb 20 | @ | W 73-68 | +6.5 | W +11.5 | 153.5 | U 141 |
| Feb 22 | @ | L 70-74 | +1.5 | L −2.5 | 147.5 | U 144 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 85-63 | -1.5 | W +20.5 | 141.5 | O 148 |
| Mar 3 | vs | W 64-56 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 145.5 | U 120 |
| Mar 8 | vs | L 76-96 | +3.5 | L −16.5 | 146.5 | O 172 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
KU
L 51-94
−12.5
7
@
BUF
L 76-83
−3.5
13
@
STMN
L 61-80
−5.5
15
@
MINN
L 65-72
+18.5
21
vs
YALE
L 67-73
+11.5
22
vs
MASS
W 79-75
+9.5
24
vs
IONA
W 80-75
+10.5
4
vs
RMU
L 78-80
−0.5
7
@
WRST
L 58-86
−21.5
11
@
IUIN
W 85-75
+13.5
17
vs
UCSB
W 67-64
+10.5
23
@
CAM
L 79-102
−17.5
1
@
PFW
W 72-54
+26.5
5
vs
MILW
W 79-76
+6.5
9
vs
IUIN
W 75-59
+9.5
11
vs
NKU
W 80-78
+6.5
15
@
CLE
W 88-73
+11.5
18
vs
OAK
L 63-88
−20.5
22
@
YSU
L 81-88
+0.5
24
@
RMU
W 71-67
+10.5
30
vs
CLE
L 82-89
−14.5
1
vs
WRST
L 75-83
−4.5
4
@
NKU
W 87-84
+10.5
7
vs
DETM
W 76-63
+9.5
12
vs
PFW
W 76-59
+18.5
15
@
MILW
L 72-75
−0.5
20
@
OAK
W 73-68
+11.5
22
@
DETM
L 70-74
−2.5
28
vs
YSU
W 85-63
+20.5
3
vs
PFW
W 64-56
+4.5
8
vs
NKU
L 76-96
−16.5
covered 19didn’t cover 12avg +3.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
KU
L 51-94
−7.5
7
@
BUF
L 76-83
+11.5
13
@
STMN
L 61-80
−9.5
15
@
MINN
L 65-72
−9.5
21
vs
YALE
L 67-73
−8.5
22
vs
MASS
W 79-75
+7.5
24
vs
IONA
W 80-75
+4.5
4
vs
RMU
L 78-80
+17.5
7
@
WRST
L 58-86
+1.5
11
@
IUIN
W 85-75
−5.5
17
vs
UCSB
W 67-64
−9.5
23
@
CAM
L 79-102
+35.5
1
@
PFW
W 72-54
−19.5
5
vs
MILW
W 79-76
+10.5
9
vs
IUIN
W 75-59
−22.5
11
vs
NKU
W 80-78
+13.5
15
@
CLE
W 88-73
+10.5
18
vs
OAK
L 63-88
−2.5
22
@
YSU
L 81-88
+29.5
24
@
RMU
W 71-67
−4.5
30
vs
CLE
L 82-89
+20.5
1
vs
WRST
L 75-83
+13.5
4
@
NKU
W 87-84
+21.5
7
vs
DETM
W 76-63
−10.5
12
vs
PFW
W 76-59
−9.5
15
@
MILW
L 72-75
+1.5
20
@
OAK
W 73-68
−12.5
22
@
DETM
L 70-74
−3.5
28
vs
YSU
W 85-63
+6.5
3
vs
PFW
W 64-56
−25.5
8
vs
NKU
L 76-96
+25.5
over 16under 15avg +2.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
Green Bay has the better starters
Position by position: North Dakota 0, Green Bay 3, even 2
North DakotaBetterGreen Bay
G Z. Kraft7.7 pts · 2 reb · 0.5 ast
Score 23
→GBBig
G O. Lovejoy TR16 pts · 3.6 reb · 3.7 ast
Score 85
G S. Hincapie TR4.9 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 11
→GBSmall
G L. Thomas4.2 pts · 2 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 31
G T. Wagner TR1.7 pts · 1.2 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G M. Wrecke2.8 pts · 1.3 reb · 0.2 ast
Score 8
F K. Ouse0.5 pts · 0.4 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F M. Hall13.7 pts · 5 reb · 2.5 ast
Score 49
C J. Jones2.7 pts · 3.3 reb · 1 ast
Score 1
→GBBig
F A. Hadaway TR14.5 pts · 7.6 reb · 1.9 ast
Score 71
North DakotaBetterGreen Bay
UND offense304th of 366 · -9.5
→GBSmall
GB defense227th of 366 · -6.0
UND defense353rd of 366 · -9.9
→GBBig
GB offense219th of 366 · -6.7
Backcourt-4.8 · 3 players
→GBBig
Backcourt-0.1 · 3 players
Frontcourt-4.5 · 2 players
→GBBig
Frontcourt+0.7 · 2 players
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
Bench-3.9 · 4 players
Score, worst to bestUND betterGB betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
Z. Kraft25 minS. Hincapie16 min · TRT. Wagner7 min · TRL. WinkelNewZ. ParksNewJ. MooreNew
Forwards
K. Ouse6 minA. RadojevicNewJ. ThomasNewD. ElyNew
Centers
J. Jones19 min
Guards
O. Lovejoy31 min · TRL. Thomas12 minM. Wrecke11 minK. Van Kauwenberg10 minB. Fitzgerald1 minS. ErhartNew
Forwards
M. Hall35 minA. Hadaway33 min · TRI. Sutherland10 min · TRH. GruetzmacherNewT. ColnaricNew
Centers
M. Cicic11 min
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 74.2 #187 | Points per game | 73.9 #201 |
| 1.07 #214 | Points per possession | 1.13 #83 |
| 69.7 #133 | Pace (possessions) | 65.2 #339 |
| Shooting | ||
| 49.5 #272 | Effective FG% | 54.9 #41 |
| 32.7 #246 | 3-point % | 36.4 #42 |
| 40.6 #155 | 3-point attempt rate | 37.3 #224 |
| 37.9 #106 | Free throw rate | 41.6 #36 |
| Possessions | ||
| 14.1 #27 | Turnover rate | 15.9 #133 |
| 27.4 #284 | Offensive rebound rate | 25.1 #339 |
| 10.8 #343 | Assists per game | 13.7 #172 |
| Defense | ||
| 79.6 #310 | Points allowed | 75.9 #215 |
| 1.14 #306 | Points allowed per possession | 1.17 #338 |
| 56.5 #353 | Opponent effective FG% | 53.6 #287 |
| 37.1 #345 | Opponent 3-point % | 36.3 #316 |
| 19.3 #36 | Turnovers forced | 13.2 #350 |
| 67.6 #276 | Defensive rebound rate | 70.4 #140 |
| 7.9 #49 | Steals per game | 4.2 #361 |
| 2.5 #307 | Blocks per game | 2.7 #282 |
North Dakota
15-17 in 2025-26 overall · 12-7 in conference · Summit League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs N Dakota St62–70
- Wvs St Thomas67–66
- Wvs Denver83–67
- L@ N Dakota St63–96
- L@ S Dakota St83–91
A week or more of rest.
Green Bay
16-15 in 2025-26 overall · 13-9 in conference · Horizon League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs N Kentucky76–96
- Wvs Purdue FW64–56
- Wvs Youngstown St85–63
- L@ Detroit Mercy70–74
- W@ Oakland73–68
A week or more of rest.