Who will win Bryant vs Rutgers?
The model gives Rutgers a 98% chance to beat Bryant, with a projected score of Rutgers 83, Bryant 59. The spread is Rutgers −22.5, with an over/under of 150.5. The model makes it Rutgers by 23.9, 1.4 points toward Rutgers, and projects 142 total points.
Half of games like thisFour in five
Calls of 90–100% have been right 95.4% of the time in 11,767 past games, and the typical miss on the margin is 8.8 points. After the final, the result is pinned to this strip. As of 2:23 AM ET on November 13, 2026. Updated three times a day until tip-off.
Players to watch
| Player | Pts | Reb | Ast | Last games | Chance of |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Rutgers | |||||
| FrancisG · 25 min | 16.0 | 1.9 | 3.6 | 15+ 55% | |
| Smith Jr.G · 20 min | 12.1 | 4.0 | 0.9 | 10+ 63% | |
| MarkG · 20 min | 9.5 | 3.6 | 2.2 | 10+ 44% | |
| GurdakC · 19 min | 9.1 | 4.9 | 0.8 | 10+ 41% | |
 Bryant | |||||
| HarveyF · 30 min | 10.2 | 5.1 | 1.0 | 10+ 50% | |
| ThompsonF · 23 min | 8.1 | 3.9 | 0.5 | 10+ 34% | |
| PashaF · 29 min | 7.3 | 5.3 | 1.5 | 5+ 67% | |
| NnaniF · 26 min | 7.2 | 3.8 | 0.4 | 5+ 66% | |
Bars: points in the player's latest games this season. Blue line: tonight's projection. Every regular's line
The game without one player
Without Tariq Francis: Bryant 3%Rutgers 97%
The white mark is the call with him: Rutgers 98%.
| Player | Points a game he adds | Rutgers without him | Change | Projected score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rutgers | ||||
| Tariq Francis | 2.9 | 97% | −1 | 61–82 |
| Christian Gurdak | 2.0 | 97% | −1 | 60–82 |
| Darren Buchanan Jr. | 1.7 | 97% | −1 | 60–82 |
| Jamichael Davis | 1.7 | 97% | −1 | 60–82 |
Change is in Rutgers's win chance, in points. Scores read Bryant, then Rutgers. A player's value is what the team is better by with him than with a replacement, from the player ratings.
Model against the line
| Spread | Over/under | |
|---|---|---|
| Line | Rutgers −22.5 | 150.5 |
| Model | Rutgers −23.9 | 142.5 |
| Gap | 1.4 toward Rutgers | 8 lower |
A gap is a difference of opinion, not a tip. This season the model's side has covered 163 of 337 spreads (48%); over 11,507 games in the last two seasons it covered 50.6%. It takes about 52.4% to break even at standard odds. Scorecard
Your call
All of today's gamesPlay-by-play
Team numbers
Form
Bryant 1-3WLLL
- Nov 10L 55-78at ProvidenceCovered +30.5 · Under 149.5
- Nov 8L 59-68vs FairfieldDidn't cover +1.5 · Under 146.5
- Nov 5L 56-66at QuinnipiacDidn't cover +6.5 · Under 148.5
- Nov 2W 80-75vs Siena
- Last 4
- 1–3, scoring 62.5 and allowing 71.8
- Against the spread, this season
- 1–2
- Totals, this season
- 0 over, 3 under
The spread and the total are the lines logged with each prediction. Form is what happened; the ratings above already count recent games more.
Offense against defense
| Bryant | Rutgers | |
|---|---|---|
| Points scored per 100 possessions | 92.7 358th | 114.1 60th |
| Points allowed per 100 | 106.8 146th | 101.7 78th |
| Possessions a game | 70.2 245th | 71.0 157th |
| Shooting (effective field-goal %) | 47.8% 339th | 52.1% 79th |
| Opponents' shooting | 50.3% 168th | 49.5% 108th |
| Turnovers, share of possessions | 20.8% 358th | 17.4% 109th |
| Offensive rebounds, share of misses | 28.9% 326th | 31.3% 211th |
| Free throws per shot | 0.23 320th | 0.29 49th |
The widest gap: Rutgers's defense (78th) against Bryant's offense (358th), of 365 teams.
First half
- Projected halftime score
- Bryant 27, Rutgers 40
- First-half margin
- Rutgers by 13.1
- First-half points, both teams
- 66.9
- Projected second half
- Bryant 32, Rutgers 43
- Second-half points, both teams
- 75.6
- Tied at the half
- 4%
- Bryant, first halves so far
- Led 1 of 4 · 30.2 scored, 34.5 allowed
- Rutgers, first halves so far
- Led 2 of 2 · 42.5 scored, 24.5 allowed
Our own projection, not a sportsbook's first-half line. On 11,516 past games it had not seen, the halftime leader was right 67.2% of the time and the first-half total was off by 8.1 points on average. This season: 366 of 476 halftime leaders right. Scorecard
Player projections
Bryant
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Keegan HarveyF | 30 | 10.2 | 5.1 | 1.0 | 1.4 |
| 10+ pts 50% · 5+ reb 54% · 2+ threes 40% | |||||
| Andre PashaF | 29 | 7.3 | 5.3 | 1.5 | 1.0 |
| 5+ pts 67% · 5+ reb 57% · 2+ ast 42% | |||||
| Onyx NnaniF | 26 | 7.2 | 3.8 | 0.4 | 0.7 |
| 5+ pts 66% · 4+ reb 49% · 1+ threes 49% | |||||
| Duane ThompsonF | 23 | 8.1 | 3.9 | 0.5 | 0.9 |
| 10+ pts 34% · 4+ reb 51% · 1+ threes 54% | |||||
| Ty TabalesG | 23 | 5.7 | 2.0 | 2.5 | 1.2 |
| 5+ pts 53% · 2+ reb 54% · 3+ ast 44% | |||||
| Roi BeharF | 21 | 5.8 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 0.9 |
| 5+ pts 54% · 3+ reb 53% · 1+ threes 55% | |||||
| Elijah CrispinF | 20 | 5.9 | 2.5 | 1.2 | 1.3 |
| 5+ pts 55% · 3+ reb 43% · 2+ threes 35% | |||||
| Elijah HayeemsF | 14 | 3.1 | 2.4 | 0.5 | 0.3 |
| 5+ pts 26% · 3+ reb 41% · 1+ threes 24% | |||||
Rutgers
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tariq FrancisG | 25 | 16.0 | 1.9 | 3.6 | 1.6 |
| 15+ pts 55% · 2+ reb 51% · 4+ ast 47% | |||||
| Darren Buchanan Jr.G | 23 | 8.4 | 4.0 | 2.5 | 0.3 |
| 10+ pts 36% · 4+ reb 53% · 3+ ast 44% | |||||
| Lino MarkG | 20 | 9.5 | 3.6 | 2.2 | 0.7 |
| 10+ pts 44% · 4+ reb 46% · 1+ threes 49% | |||||
| Jamichael DavisG | 20 | 8.2 | 2.6 | 2.0 | 0.7 |
| 10+ pts 35% · 3+ reb 45% · 1+ threes 48% | |||||
| Darin Smith Jr.G | 20 | 12.1 | 4.0 | 0.9 | 1.5 |
| 10+ pts 63% · 4+ reb 53% · 2+ threes 40% | |||||
| Christian GurdakC | 19 | 9.1 | 4.9 | 0.8 | 0.0 |
| 10+ pts 41% · 5+ reb 51% · 2+ ast 20% | |||||
| Rasheed JonesG | 18 | 9.1 | 2.2 | 1.5 | 1.3 |
| 10+ pts 41% · 2+ reb 59% · 2+ ast 42% | |||||
| Diego GaravagliaG | 13 | 3.7 | 2.1 | 1.0 | 0.5 |
| 5+ pts 32% · 2+ reb 56% · 1+ threes 41% | |||||
Our own projections from each player's minutes and production, this opponent and the game's pace: not a sportsbook's lines. Under each name, the round numbers the player is about as likely as not to reach. How they have done
Win probability
Game chat
Loading the chat…