Chicago St at UIC
Wednesday, November 18, 2026, 7:00 PM ET at Credit Union 1 Arena. Chicago St our rank 349 · 2-2; UIC our rank 97 · 3-0.
Who will win Chicago St vs UIC?
The model gives UIC a 98% chance to beat Chicago State, with a projected score of UIC 83, Chicago St 61.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UIC | |||||
| Washington Jr.G · 27 min | 14.1 | 6.3 | 1.8 | 15+ 43% | |
| Henderson IIG · 24 min | 12.9 | 1.6 | 2.3 | 15+ 36% | |
| LoweryG · 27 min | 10.0 | 6.3 | 3.6 | 10+ 48% | |
| GealerG · 25 min | 9.5 | 1.8 | 2.7 | 10+ 44% | |
| Chicago St | |||||
| PriceG · 26 min | 15.6 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 15+ 53% | |
| Lovings-WattsG · 26 min | 8.1 | 3.5 | 0.7 | 10+ 34% | |
| SheriffF · 18 min | 6.6 | 3.3 | 0.4 | 5+ 61% | |
| CarrawayG · 16 min | 5.8 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 5+ 54% | |
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 Benny Gealer: Chicago St 4%UIC 96%
The white mark is the call with him: UIC 98%.
| Player | Points a game he adds | UIC without him | Change | Projected score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UIC | ||||
| Benny Gealer | 1.9 | 96% | −2 | 62–82 |
| Rashund Washington Jr. | 1.9 | 97% | −1 | 62–82 |
| Mekhi Lowery | 1.8 | 97% | −1 | 62–82 |
| Ahmad Henderson II | 1.5 | 97% | −1 | 61–82 |
Change is in UIC's win chance, in points. Scores read Chicago St, then UIC. 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
Your call
All of today's gamesPlay-by-play
Team numbers
Form
Chicago St 2-2LWLW
- Nov 11W 81-62at CA BaptistCovered +11.5 · Over 138.5
- Nov 9L 67-82vs SC StateDidn't cover −2.5 · Over 144.5
- Nov 5W 66-54at Incarnate WordCovered +8.5 · Under 142.5
- Nov 2L 59-109at Texas
- Last 4
- 2–2, scoring 68.2 and allowing 76.8
- Against the spread, this season
- 2–1
- Totals, this season
- 2 over, 1 under
UIC 3-0WWW
- Nov 9W 82-72vs UNC GreensboroDidn't cover −19.5 · Over 148.5
- Nov 6W 79-56vs Robert MorrisCovered −10.5 · Under 143.5
- Nov 2W 96-47vs St. Francis (IL)
- Last 3
- 3–0, scoring 85.7 and allowing 58.3
- Against the spread, this season
- 1–1
- Totals, this season
- 1 over, 1 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
| Chicago St | UIC | |
|---|---|---|
| Points scored per 100 possessions | 94.9 338th | 109.3 97th |
| Points allowed per 100 | 114.4 329th | 103.1 97th |
| Possessions a game | 69.7 292nd | 70.0 266th |
| Shooting (effective field-goal %) | 49.6% 250th | 50.4% 192nd |
| Opponents' shooting | 51.6% 263rd | 51.2% 239th |
| Turnovers, share of possessions | 19.8% 333rd | 17.1% 79th |
| Offensive rebounds, share of misses | 34.4% 43rd | 32.3% 149th |
| Free throws per shot | 0.29 65th | 0.27 129th |
The widest gap: UIC's defense (97th) against Chicago St's offense (338th), of 365 teams.
First half
- Projected halftime score
- Chicago St 28, UIC 40
- First-half margin
- UIC by 12.3
- First-half points, both teams
- 67.5
- Projected second half
- Chicago St 33, UIC 43
- Second-half points, both teams
- 76.4
- Tied at the half
- 4%
- Chicago St, first halves so far
- Led 2 of 4 · 34.0 scored, 39.2 allowed
- UIC, first halves so far
- Led 2 of 3 · 38.0 scored, 31.7 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
Chicago St
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mike PriceG | 26 | 15.6 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 2.2 |
| 15+ pts 53% · 2+ ast 40% · 2+ threes 59% | |||||
| Will Lovings-WattsG | 26 | 8.1 | 3.5 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| 10+ pts 34% · 4+ reb 44% · 1+ threes 53% | |||||
| Kameron FomanF | 24 | 3.3 | 5.1 | 0.6 | 0.1 |
| 5+ pts 28% · 5+ reb 53% | |||||
| Malik OlafioyeG | 22 | 5.1 | 2.5 | 1.8 | 0.2 |
| 5+ pts 47% · 3+ reb 42% · 2+ ast 50% | |||||
| Malek RobinsonG | 22 | 3.5 | 1.7 | 1.4 | 0.3 |
| 5+ pts 30% · 2+ reb 47% · 2+ ast 38% | |||||
| Foday SheriffF | 18 | 6.6 | 3.3 | 0.4 | 0.4 |
| 5+ pts 61% · 3+ reb 59% · 1+ threes 32% | |||||
| Ben KalonjiC | 16 | 3.2 | 3.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 |
| 5+ pts 27% · 3+ reb 54% | |||||
| Armari CarrawayG | 16 | 5.8 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 1.3 |
| 5+ pts 54% · 2+ reb 29% · 2+ threes 37% | |||||
UIC
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mekhi LoweryG | 27 | 10.0 | 6.3 | 3.6 | 0.0 |
| 10+ pts 48% · 6+ reb 56% · 4+ ast 47% | |||||
| Rashund Washington Jr.G | 27 | 14.1 | 6.3 | 1.8 | 0.9 |
| 15+ pts 43% · 6+ reb 56% · 2+ ast 52% | |||||
| Jayce NathanielF | 25 | 8.4 | 5.1 | 1.2 | 0.7 |
| 10+ pts 37% · 5+ reb 54% · 1+ threes 48% | |||||
| Benny GealerG | 25 | 9.5 | 1.8 | 2.7 | 2.1 |
| 10+ pts 44% · 2+ reb 50% · 3+ ast 48% | |||||
| Gabe CuppsG | 25 | 7.2 | 2.8 | 3.1 | 0.8 |
| 5+ pts 66% · 3+ reb 49% · 1+ threes 52% | |||||
| Ahmad Henderson IIG | 24 | 12.9 | 1.6 | 2.3 | 1.8 |
| 15+ pts 36% · 2+ reb 43% · 2+ threes 48% | |||||
| Lucas ScrogginsF | 18 | 7.7 | 4.8 | 0.4 | 0.0 |
| 10+ pts 31% · 5+ reb 49% | |||||
| Elijah GarrettG | 15 | 3.6 | 1.8 | 1.0 | 0.5 |
| 5+ pts 31% · 2+ reb 49% · 1+ threes 40% | |||||
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…