Sanford Coyote Sports Center · at South Dakota
LineNo line yet
Total—
| This season | SDAK | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 SDAK 84–73 · win probability SDAK 83%
Pick this game
Your picksMy picks ›
Winner
Line
—
no line yet
Total
—
model 156.9
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: SDAK has more of the edges
UAPB 1, SDAK 5 · 2025-26 numbers until both teams have played three games
Free throws
Free throw rate: UAPB 38.4, SDAK 45.2. Allowed: UAPB 43.6, SDAK 31.0
SDAK offense vs UAPB defense
Offense 197th of 366 against a defense 365th, on the model’s ratings
Rebounding
Offensive rebound rate: UAPB 27.9%, SDAK 28.7%. Defensive: UAPB 65.8%, SDAK 69.7%
Three-pointers
UAPB hits 33.6% and allows 33.2%; SDAK hits 32.4% and allows 34.5%. Threes are 37.1% and 35.9% of their shots
Turnovers
Turnover rate: UAPB 18.7%, SDAK 16.5%. Forced: UAPB 16.4%, SDAK 15.9%
Home court
SDAK at home. This season: SDAK 0-0 at home, UAPB 0-0 away
Even
Shooting
Effective FG%: UAPB 50.0 and allows 52.6; SDAK 49.9 and allows 54.5
Even
Who is back
Minutes back from last season: UAPB 8%, SDAK 26%. Transfers in: UAPB 3, SDAK 6. Early in a season, turnover makes teams harder to price
Even
UAPB offense vs SDAK defense
Offense 337th of 366 against a defense 355th, on the model’s ratings
Context
Tempo
About 72 possessions: UAPB plays 71.5 a game (53rd fastest), SDAK 72.6 (23rd). Faster games mean more points
Context
Schedule so far
UAPB has played the 300th-hardest schedule, SDAK the 305th. A record against a soft schedule means less
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 | — | SDAK -10.9 | — |
| Total | — | 156.9 | — |
| Projected score | — | UAPB 73 · SDAK 83.9 |
1st-half model
| Model | Actual | |
|---|---|---|
| 1H spread | SDAK -6.3 | — |
| 1H total | 73.3 | — |
| 1H projected score | UAPB 33.5 · SDAK 39.8 | — |
Showing 2025-26 until both teams have played this season.
Last 10 games
2025-26
| Straight up | Spread | Over / under | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4-6 40% | 3-7 30% | 5-5 50% | |
| 5-5 50% | 6-4 60% | 3-7 30% |
ATS History · 2025-26
WwinLloss·Wats winLats lossPpush·Owent over the totalUwent under the total
AR-Pine Bluff
30 games played
Straight up
11-19
37% wins
Against the spread
13-17
43% covers · avg +1.3 pts vs the line
Over / Under
14-16
47% overs · avg −0.2 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 3 | @ | L 50-94 | +34.5 | L −9.5 | 160.5 | U 144 |
| Nov 6 | @ | L 74-83 | +12.5 | W +3.5 | 164.5 | U 157 |
| Nov 8 | @ | L 72-94 | +19.5 | L −2.5 | 157.5 | O 166 |
| Nov 11 | @ | L 69-95 | +36.5 | W +10.5 | 168.5 | U 164 |
| Nov 15 | @ | L 75-104 | +41.5 | W +12.5 | 172.5 | O 179 |
| Nov 18 | @ | L 60-106 | +35.5 | L −10.5 | 168.5 | U 166 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 70-98 | +20.5 | L −7.5 | 164.5 | O 168 |
| Nov 23 | @ | L 84-111 | +21.5 | L −5.5 | 160.5 | O 195 |
| Dec 3 | @ | W 63-62 | +16.5 | W +17.5 | 163.5 | U 125 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 72-76 | +23.5 | W +19.5 | 156.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 10 | @ | L 84-117 | +25.5 | L −7.5 | 155.5 | O 201 |
| Jan 3 | vs | W 95-83 | +1.5 | W +13.5 | 149.5 | O 178 |
| Jan 5 | vs | W 90-79 | +1.5 | W +12.5 | 159.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 10 | @ | W 74-66 | +1.5 | W +9.5 | 162.5 | U 140 |
| Jan 12 | @ | L 61-73 | +3.5 | L −8.5 | 164.5 | U 134 |
| Jan 17 | vs | L 67-71 | -2.5 | L −6.5 | 149.5 | U 138 |
| Jan 19 | vs | L 82-87 | +2.5 | L −2.5 | 155.5 | O 169 |
| Jan 24 | @ | W 75-74 | +9.5 | W +10.5 | 154.5 | U 149 |
| Jan 31 | @ | W 78-70 | -10.5 | L −2.5 | 143.5 | O 148 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 67-64 | +6.5 | W +9.5 | 145.5 | U 131 |
| Feb 7 | vs | W 84-77 | -7.5 | L −0.5 | 145.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 9 | vs | W 84-63 | -7.5 | W +13.5 | 155.5 | U 147 |
| Feb 14 | @ | L 61-79 | +3.5 | L −14.5 | 149.5 | U 140 |
| Feb 16 | @ | L 70-82 | +3.5 | L −8.5 | 144.5 | O 152 |
| Feb 19 | vs | L 64-83 | -1.5 | L −20.5 | 152.5 | U 147 |
| Feb 21 | vs | W 84-82 | -3.5 | L −1.5 | 159.5 | O 166 |
| Feb 28 | vs | L 69-70 | -14.5 | L −15.5 | 147.5 | U 139 |
| Mar 3 | @ | L 78-81 | -1.5 | L −4.5 | 153.5 | O 159 |
| Mar 5 | @ | W 83-48 | -1.5 | W +33.5 | 145.5 | U 131 |
| Mar 12 | vs | L 81-84 | +4.5 | W +1.5 | 151.5 | O 165 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
@
WASH
L 50-94
−9.5
6
@
PORT
L 74-83
+3.5
8
@
LMU
L 72-94
−2.5
11
@
OU
L 69-95
+10.5
15
@
VAN
L 75-104
+12.5
18
@
SMU
L 60-106
−10.5
20
@
MRSH
L 70-98
−7.5
23
@
M-OH
L 84-111
−5.5
3
@
UIC
W 63-62
+17.5
6
@
DEP
L 72-76
+19.5
10
@
TLSA
L 84-117
−7.5
3
vs
AAMU
W 95-83
+13.5
5
vs
ALST
W 90-79
+12.5
10
@
TXSO
W 74-66
+9.5
12
@
PV
L 61-73
−8.5
17
vs
FAMU
L 67-71
−6.5
19
vs
BCU
L 82-87
−2.5
24
@
SOU
W 75-74
+10.5
31
@
MVSU
W 78-70
−2.5
4
@
GRAM
W 67-64
+9.5
7
vs
ALCN
W 84-77
−0.5
9
vs
JKST
W 84-63
+13.5
14
@
ALST
L 61-79
−14.5
16
@
AAMU
L 70-82
−8.5
19
vs
TXSO
L 64-83
−20.5
21
vs
PV
W 84-82
−1.5
28
vs
MVSU
L 69-70
−15.5
3
@
JKST
L 78-81
−4.5
5
@
ALCN
W 83-48
+33.5
12
vs
SOU
L 81-84
+1.5
covered 13didn’t cover 17avg +1.3 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
@
WASH
L 50-94
−16.5
6
@
PORT
L 74-83
−7.5
8
@
LMU
L 72-94
+8.5
11
@
OU
L 69-95
−4.5
15
@
VAN
L 75-104
+6.5
18
@
SMU
L 60-106
−2.5
20
@
MRSH
L 70-98
+3.5
23
@
M-OH
L 84-111
+34.5
3
@
UIC
W 63-62
−38.5
6
@
DEP
L 72-76
−8.5
10
@
TLSA
L 84-117
+45.5
3
vs
AAMU
W 95-83
+28.5
5
vs
ALST
W 90-79
+9.5
10
@
TXSO
W 74-66
−22.5
12
@
PV
L 61-73
−30.5
17
vs
FAMU
L 67-71
−11.5
19
vs
BCU
L 82-87
+13.5
24
@
SOU
W 75-74
−5.5
31
@
MVSU
W 78-70
+4.5
4
@
GRAM
W 67-64
−14.5
7
vs
ALCN
W 84-77
+15.5
9
vs
JKST
W 84-63
−8.5
14
@
ALST
L 61-79
−9.5
16
@
AAMU
L 70-82
+7.5
19
vs
TXSO
L 64-83
−5.5
21
vs
PV
W 84-82
+6.5
28
vs
MVSU
L 69-70
−8.5
3
@
JKST
L 78-81
+5.5
5
@
ALCN
W 83-48
−14.5
12
vs
SOU
L 81-84
+13.5
over 14under 16avg −0.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
South Dakota
29 games played
Straight up
13-16
45% wins
Against the spread
16-13
55% covers · avg +0.5 pts vs the line
Over / Under
12-17
41% overs · avg −1.2 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 3 | vs | L 79-81 | -1.5 | L −3.5 | 164.5 | U 160 |
| Nov 5 | @ | L 76-92 | +29.5 | W +13.5 | 169.5 | U 168 |
| Nov 12 | vs | W 89-74 | -7.5 | W +7.5 | 164.5 | U 163 |
| Nov 16 | vs | W 83-78 | -3.5 | W +1.5 | 172.5 | U 161 |
| Nov 20 | @ | L 68-102 | +24.5 | L −9.5 | 171.5 | U 170 |
| Nov 23 | vs | W 82-81 | -15.5 | L −14.5 | 160.5 | O 163 |
| Nov 29 | vs | W 80-63 | -3.5 | W +13.5 | 147.5 | U 143 |
| Dec 3 | vs | L 71-77 | +2.5 | L −3.5 | 158.5 | U 148 |
| Dec 6 | @ | L 87-89 | +8.5 | W +6.5 | 162.5 | O 176 |
| Dec 9 | @ | L 79-106 | +14.5 | L −12.5 | 161.5 | O 185 |
| Dec 13 | vs | W 97-85 | -6.5 | W +5.5 | 168.5 | O 182 |
| Dec 20 | @ | L 76-106 | +21.5 | L −8.5 | 176.5 | O 182 |
| Dec 31 | @ | L 61-84 | +11.5 | L −11.5 | 164.5 | U 145 |
| Jan 7 | @ | L 86-99 | +14.5 | W +1.5 | 162.5 | O 185 |
| Jan 10 | vs | W 82-72 | +1.5 | W +11.5 | 169.5 | U 154 |
| Jan 15 | vs | W 99-83 | -7.5 | W +8.5 | 156.5 | O 182 |
| Jan 17 | @ | L 80-96 | +1.5 | L −14.5 | 160.5 | O 176 |
| Jan 21 | @ | W 68-64 | +6.5 | W +10.5 | 160.5 | U 132 |
| Jan 24 | vs | L 78-90 | +10.5 | L −1.5 | 161.5 | O 168 |
| Jan 29 | vs | W 77-69 | -3.5 | W +4.5 | 154.5 | U 146 |
| Jan 31 | vs | L 84-89 | +8.5 | W +3.5 | 154.5 | O 173 |
| Feb 4 | @ | W 82-75 | -2.5 | W +4.5 | 156.5 | O 157 |
| Feb 7 | @ | W 68-67 | +11.5 | W +12.5 | 159.5 | U 135 |
| Feb 11 | vs | L 71-72 | -2.5 | L −3.5 | 156.5 | U 143 |
| Feb 19 | @ | L 70-90 | +5.5 | L −14.5 | 163.5 | U 160 |
| Feb 21 | @ | L 62-67 | +1.5 | L −3.5 | 151.5 | U 129 |
| Feb 25 | vs | W 89-72 | -1.5 | W +15.5 | 152.5 | O 161 |
| Feb 28 | vs | W 75-70 | +3.5 | W +8.5 | 151.5 | U 145 |
| Mar 6 | vs | L 62-76 | +1.5 | L −12.5 | 150.5 | U 138 |
Day
Opp
Result
MissedCovered
Margin
3
vs
UTU
L 79-81
−3.5
5
@
CREI
L 76-92
+13.5
12
vs
USI
W 89-74
+7.5
16
vs
WMU
W 83-78
+1.5
20
@
MIZ
L 68-102
−9.5
23
vs
SCST
W 82-81
−14.5
29
vs
AF
W 80-63
+13.5
3
vs
PRST
L 71-77
−3.5
6
@
UNCO
L 87-89
+6.5
9
@
WYO
L 79-106
−12.5
13
vs
PV
W 97-85
+5.5
20
@
KSU
L 76-106
−8.5
31
@
NDSU
L 61-84
−11.5
7
@
STMN
L 86-99
+1.5
10
vs
DEN
W 82-72
+11.5
15
vs
KC
W 99-83
+8.5
17
@
UND
L 80-96
−14.5
21
@
OMA
W 68-64
+10.5
24
vs
STMN
L 78-90
−1.5
29
vs
ORU
W 77-69
+4.5
31
vs
NDSU
L 84-89
+3.5
4
@
KC
W 82-75
+4.5
7
@
SDST
W 68-67
+12.5
11
vs
UND
L 71-72
−3.5
19
@
DEN
L 70-90
−14.5
21
@
ORU
L 62-67
−3.5
25
vs
OMA
W 89-72
+15.5
28
vs
SDST
W 75-70
+8.5
6
vs
OMA
L 62-76
−12.5
covered 16didn’t cover 13avg +0.5 ptslonger = bigger margin
Day
Opp
Result
UnderOver
Margin
3
vs
UTU
L 79-81
−4.5
5
@
CREI
L 76-92
−1.5
12
vs
USI
W 89-74
−1.5
16
vs
WMU
W 83-78
−11.5
20
@
MIZ
L 68-102
−1.5
23
vs
SCST
W 82-81
+2.5
29
vs
AF
W 80-63
−4.5
3
vs
PRST
L 71-77
−10.5
6
@
UNCO
L 87-89
+13.5
9
@
WYO
L 79-106
+23.5
13
vs
PV
W 97-85
+13.5
20
@
KSU
L 76-106
+5.5
31
@
NDSU
L 61-84
−19.5
7
@
STMN
L 86-99
+22.5
10
vs
DEN
W 82-72
−15.5
15
vs
KC
W 99-83
+25.5
17
@
UND
L 80-96
+15.5
21
@
OMA
W 68-64
−28.5
24
vs
STMN
L 78-90
+6.5
29
vs
ORU
W 77-69
−8.5
31
vs
NDSU
L 84-89
+18.5
4
@
KC
W 82-75
+0.5
7
@
SDST
W 68-67
−24.5
11
vs
UND
L 71-72
−13.5
19
@
DEN
L 70-90
−3.5
21
@
ORU
L 62-67
−22.5
25
vs
OMA
W 89-72
+8.5
28
vs
SDST
W 75-70
−6.5
6
vs
OMA
L 62-76
−12.5
over 12under 17avg −1.2 ptslonger = bigger margin
Line = the team’s closing spread (negative = favored). ATS number = points beyond the line; total number = combined points.
The starting fives are even
Position by position: AR-Pine Bluff 0, South Dakota 0, even 5
AR-Pine BluffBetterSouth Dakota
G J. Tatum TR7.7 pts · 2.6 reb · 1.8 ast
Score 25
=Even
G J. Summers TR9.8 pts · 2.4 reb · 0.9 ast
Score 22
G J. Hayes4.9 pts · 0.9 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G M. Sanchez TR9.7 pts · 2.1 reb · 0.7 ast
Score 34
G D. Giddens TR3 pts · 0.8 reb · 0.3 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G V. Buzelis7.1 pts · 4.4 reb · 1.4 ast
Score 27
G H. Pickett0 pts · 0 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
=No call
G K. Kublickas TR5.5 pts · 2.4 reb · 2.7 ast
Score 19
F C. Smith TR0.6 pts · 1 reb · 0 ast
Not ranked
=No call
F E. Kizer4 pts · 1.5 reb · 0.2 ast
Score 5
AR-Pine BluffBetterSouth Dakota
UAPB offense337th of 366 · -11.1
=Even
SDAK defense355th of 366 · -10.1
UAPB defense365th of 366 · -12.7
→SDAKBig
SDAK offense197th of 366 · -6.1
Backcourt-5.1 · 4 players
←UAPBSmall
Backcourt-7.3 · 4 players
Frontcourt-0.7 · 1 player
←UAPBSmall
Frontcourt-2.0 · 1 player
BenchNo numbers yet
=No call
Bench-1.8 · 4 players
Score, worst to bestUAPB betterSDAK betterTR transfer · NEW no Division I numbers
Depth chart
Projected rotation by position, starters outlined
Guards
J. Tatum27 min · TRJ. Hayes15 minD. Giddens9 min · TRH. Pickett1 minD. CapriottiNewE. HernandezNew
Forwards
C. Smith7 min · TRC. WilliamsonNewM. WilliamsNewJ. NyakundiNew
Guards
J. Summers27 min · TRM. Sanchez25 min · TRV. Buzelis24 minK. Kublickas20 min · TRC. Kelderman4 min · TRE. WarrenNew
Forwards
E. Kizer15 minJ. Brack14 minJ. Townley-Thomas5 min · TRT. NetolickyNewB. DomschNew
Centers
S. van Bussel5 min · TR
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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 74.0 #195 | Points per game | 78.0 #94 |
| 1.04 #277 | Points per possession | 1.07 #207 |
| 71.5 #53 | Pace (possessions) | 72.6 #23 |
| Shooting | ||
| 50.0 #233 | Effective FG% | 49.9 #239 |
| 33.6 #190 | 3-point % | 32.4 #264 |
| 37.1 #227 | 3-point attempt rate | 35.9 #251 |
| 38.4 #91 | Free throw rate | 45.2 #4 |
| Possessions | ||
| 18.7 #310 | Turnover rate | 16.5 #168 |
| 27.9 #271 | Offensive rebound rate | 28.7 #242 |
| 14.1 #136 | Assists per game | 11.9 #295 |
| Defense | ||
| 81.9 #340 | Points allowed | 81.7 #337 |
| 1.14 #309 | Points allowed per possession | 1.13 #284 |
| 52.6 #249 | Opponent effective FG% | 54.5 #318 |
| 33.2 #136 | Opponent 3-point % | 34.5 #219 |
| 16.4 #192 | Turnovers forced | 15.9 #225 |
| 65.8 #321 | Defensive rebound rate | 69.7 #172 |
| 6.8 #142 | Steals per game | 6.1 #223 |
| 2.9 #244 | Blocks per game | 2.6 #293 |
AR-Pine Bluff
11-19 in 2025-26 overall · 10-9 in conference · Southwestern Athletic Conference
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Southern81–84
- W@ Alcorn St83–48
- L@ Jackson St78–81
- Lvs Miss Valley St69–70
- Wvs Prairie View84–82
A week or more of rest.
South Dakota
13-16 in 2025-26 overall · 8-9 in conference · Summit League
Last five, 2025-26
- Lvs Omaha62–76
- Wvs S Dakota St75–70
- Wvs Omaha89–72
- L@ Oral Roberts62–67
- L@ Denver70–90
A week or more of rest.