Who will win Columbia vs Bucknell?
The model gives Columbia a 73% chance to beat Bucknell, with a projected score of Columbia 78, Bucknell 71. The spread is Columbia −4.5, with an over/under of 145.5. The model makes it Columbia by 6.9, 2.4 points toward Columbia, and projects 150 total points.
Half of games like thisFour in five
Calls of 70–80% have been right 74.5% of the time in 14,414 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Columbia | |||||
| O'KeefeG · 24 min | 13.0 | 2.0 | 0.7 | 15+ 37% | |
| IgoeF · 26 min | 10.8 | 7.9 | 3.9 | 10+ 54% | |
| PrattG · 21 min | 8.7 | 2.0 | 1.4 | 10+ 39% | |
| RitterF · 25 min | 7.6 | 5.4 | 1.7 | 5+ 69% | |
 Bucknell | |||||
| PachuckiG · 32 min | 13.8 | 2.6 | 1.7 | 15+ 42% | |
| LamunoG · 27 min | 10.7 | 3.4 | 2.6 | 10+ 53% | |
| Soroa SchallerF · 30 min | 9.9 | 4.1 | 3.3 | 10+ 48% | |
| WilliamsG · 28 min | 7.0 | 2.3 | 2.6 | 5+ 64% | |
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 Connor Igoe: Columbia 70%Bucknell 30%
The white mark is the call with him: Columbia 73%.
| Player | Points a game he adds | Columbia without him | Change | Projected score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Columbia | ||||
| Connor Igoe | 1.1 | 70% | −3 | 78–72 |
Change is in Columbia's win chance, in points. Scores read Columbia, then Bucknell. 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 | Columbia −4.5 | 145.5 |
| Model | Columbia −6.9 | 149.8 |
| Gap | 2.4 toward Columbia | 4.3 higher |
A gap is a difference of opinion, not a tip. When the model and the line have been 2 or more points apart, the model's side has covered 51.6% of 3,317 games. 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
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
| Columbia | Bucknell | |
|---|---|---|
| Points scored per 100 possessions | 104.1 181st | 97.3 312th |
| Points allowed per 100 | 110.4 238th | 116.1 349th |
| Possessions a game | 70.2 245th | 70.3 238th |
| Shooting (effective field-goal %) | 49.1% 286th | 49.6% 249th |
| Opponents' shooting | 52.7% 319th | 53.2% 337th |
| Turnovers, share of possessions | 18.0% 180th | 18.1% 182nd |
| Offensive rebounds, share of misses | 34.0% 61st | 28.5% 339th |
| Free throws per shot | 0.23 319th | 0.26 208th |
The widest gap: Columbia's offense (181st) against Bucknell's defense (349th), of 365 teams.
First half
- Projected halftime score
- Columbia 37, Bucknell 33
- First-half margin
- Columbia by 3.8
- First-half points, both teams
- 70.3
- Projected second half
- Columbia 41, Bucknell 38
- Second-half points, both teams
- 79.5
- Tied at the half
- 4%
- Columbia, first halves so far
- Led 1 of 3 · 39.3 scored, 34.0 allowed
- Bucknell, first halves so far
- Led 0 of 3 · 28.7 scored, 41.0 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
Columbia
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Connor IgoeF | 26 | 10.8 | 7.9 | 3.9 | 0.5 |
| 10+ pts 54% · 8+ reb 51% · 4+ ast 52% | |||||
| Mason RitterF | 25 | 7.6 | 5.4 | 1.7 | 0.2 |
| 5+ pts 69% · 6+ reb 44% · 2+ ast 48% | |||||
| Gerard O'KeefeG | 24 | 13.0 | 2.0 | 0.7 | 1.4 |
| 15+ pts 37% · 2+ reb 53% · 2+ threes 38% | |||||
| Hampton SandersG | 23 | 7.6 | 3.0 | 3.8 | 1.2 |
| 5+ pts 69% · 3+ reb 53% · 4+ ast 50% | |||||
| Michael MaduemeG | 22 | 5.5 | 2.9 | 1.3 | 0.8 |
| 5+ pts 51% · 3+ reb 51% · 1+ threes 52% | |||||
| Josh PrattG | 21 | 8.7 | 2.0 | 1.4 | 1.2 |
| 10+ pts 39% · 2+ reb 55% · 2+ ast 39% | |||||
| Douglas LangfordF | 17 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 0.7 | 0.1 |
| 5+ pts 41% · 5+ reb 45% · 2+ ast 16% | |||||
| Gabe HornbergerG | 14 | 3.7 | 2.0 | 0.9 | 0.7 |
| 5+ pts 33% · 2+ reb 54% · 1+ threes 48% | |||||
Bucknell
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aleksander PachuckiG | 32 | 13.8 | 2.6 | 1.7 | 3.2 |
| 15+ pts 42% · 3+ reb 45% · 2+ ast 47% | |||||
| Luca Soroa SchallerF | 30 | 9.9 | 4.1 | 3.3 | 0.8 |
| 10+ pts 48% · 4+ reb 54% · 1+ threes 50% | |||||
| Jayden WilliamsG | 28 | 7.0 | 2.3 | 2.6 | 1.1 |
| 5+ pts 64% · 2+ reb 61% · 3+ ast 47% | |||||
| Rocco LamunoG | 27 | 10.7 | 3.4 | 2.6 | 1.2 |
| 10+ pts 53% · 4+ reb 42% · 3+ ast 46% | |||||
| Patrick O'BrienF | 22 | 6.7 | 3.1 | 1.4 | 0.9 |
| 5+ pts 62% · 3+ reb 56% · 1+ threes 56% | |||||
| Kyle MarshallG | 18 | 3.9 | 3.1 | 1.2 | 0.4 |
| 5+ pts 34% · 3+ reb 55% · 1+ threes 35% | |||||
| Luke SodenG | 14 | 5.1 | 1.6 | 0.7 | 0.9 |
| 5+ pts 47% · 2+ reb 43% · 1+ threes 55% | |||||
| Ethan Marten-ConeyF | 11 | 3.7 | 2.5 | 0.7 | 0.3 |
| 5+ pts 32% · 3+ reb 43% · 1+ threes 27% | |||||
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…