Presbyterian at Tennessee Tech
Saturday, November 21, 2026, 7:30 PM ET at Hooper Eblen Center. Presbyterian our rank 229 · 0-3; Tennessee Tech our rank 244 · 2-2.
Who will win Presbyterian vs Tennessee Tech?
The model gives Tennessee Tech a 55% chance to beat Presbyterian, with a projected score of Tennessee Tech 80, Presbyterian 79.
Half of games like thisFour in five
Calls of 50–60% have been right 55.4% of the time in 16,654 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tennessee Tech | |||||
| SandersF · 28 min | 15.0 | 6.4 | 2.0 | 15+ 49% | |
| NewtonG · 24 min | 13.0 | 3.3 | 1.7 | 15+ 37% | |
| GreenF · 20 min | 10.4 | 5.8 | 0.9 | 10+ 51% | |
| MosqueraG · 22 min | 10.2 | 3.7 | 1.4 | 10+ 49% | |
| Presbyterian | |||||
| WilsonG · 33 min | 16.8 | 4.9 | 4.9 | 15+ 59% | |
| PetersonF · 34 min | 14.4 | 7.3 | 1.2 | 15+ 45% | |
| ParrishG · 30 min | 11.7 | 2.3 | 1.7 | 10+ 60% | |
| SmithG · 17 min | 7.3 | 1.7 | 1.1 | 5+ 67% | |
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 Caleb Sanders: Presbyterian 47%Tennessee Tech 53%
The white mark is the call with him: Tennessee Tech 55%.
| Player | Points a game he adds | Tennessee Tech without him | Change | Projected score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tennessee Tech | ||||
| Caleb Sanders | 0.6 | 53% | −2 | 79–80 |
| Presbyterian | ||||
| Jaylen Peterson | 0.9 | 59% | +4 | 79–81 |
Change is in Tennessee Tech's win chance, in points. Scores read Presbyterian, then Tennessee Tech. 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
Presbyterian 0-3LLL
- Nov 10L 60-94at NC StateDidn't cover +18.5 · Over 149.5
- Nov 6L 77-91at GeorgiaCovered +24.5 · Over 157.5
- Nov 2L 78-87vs St Thomas
- Last 3
- 0–3, scoring 71.7 and allowing 90.7
- Against the spread, this season
- 1–1
- Totals, this season
- 2 over, 0 under
Tennessee Tech 2-2LWWL
- Nov 12L 66-90at IndianaCovered +25.5 · Under 167.5
- Nov 8W 97-94vs Western KYCovered +3.5 · Over 164.5
- Nov 4W 117-70vs Blue Mountain Christian
- Nov 2L 88-106at Mississippi St
- Last 4
- 2–2, scoring 92.0 and allowing 90.0
- Against the spread, this season
- 2–0
- 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
| Presbyterian | Tennessee Tech | |
|---|---|---|
| Points scored per 100 possessions | 105.9 144th | 103.8 186th |
| Points allowed per 100 | 114.0 323rd | 113.4 315th |
| Possessions a game | 69.5 307th | 72.4 39th |
| Shooting (effective field-goal %) | 50.3% 204th | 51.6% 100th |
| Opponents' shooting | 53.3% 338th | 53.4% 342nd |
| Turnovers, share of possessions | 17.8% 144th | 17.9% 159th |
| Offensive rebounds, share of misses | 31.6% 190th | 32.5% 141st |
| Free throws per shot | 0.30 36th | 0.27 126th |
The widest gap: Presbyterian's offense (144th) against Tennessee Tech's defense (315th), of 365 teams.
First half
- Projected halftime score
- Presbyterian 37, Tennessee Tech 38
- First-half margin
- Tennessee Tech by 0.8
- First-half points, both teams
- 74.8
- Projected second half
- Presbyterian 42, Tennessee Tech 43
- Second-half points, both teams
- 84.6
- Tied at the half
- 4%
- Presbyterian, first halves so far
- Led 0 of 3 · 30.3 scored, 43.3 allowed
- Tennessee Tech, first halves so far
- Led 2 of 4 · 47.8 scored, 41.5 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
Presbyterian
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jaylen PetersonF | 34 | 14.4 | 7.3 | 1.2 | 0.1 |
| 15+ pts 45% · 8+ reb 44% · 2+ ast 32% | |||||
| Triston WilsonG | 33 | 16.8 | 4.9 | 4.9 | 1.1 |
| 15+ pts 59% · 5+ reb 51% · 5+ ast 52% | |||||
| Carl ParrishG | 30 | 11.7 | 2.3 | 1.7 | 2.0 |
| 10+ pts 60% · 2+ ast 49% · 2+ threes 54% | |||||
| Erik TaylorG | 21 | 6.4 | 1.8 | 2.5 | 1.4 |
| 5+ pts 59% · 2+ reb 49% · 3+ ast 44% | |||||
| Chidi ChiakweluF | 19 | 6.4 | 4.8 | 0.2 | 0.0 |
| 5+ pts 59% · 5+ reb 50% | |||||
| EJ SmithG | 17 | 7.3 | 1.7 | 1.1 | 0.7 |
| 5+ pts 67% · 2+ reb 45% · 1+ threes 48% | |||||
| Iverson KingG | 15 | 3.8 | 2.1 | 0.7 | 0.6 |
| 5+ pts 33% · 2+ reb 57% · 1+ threes 44% | |||||
| Langston HackworthF | 14 | 5.8 | 3.4 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| 5+ pts 54% · 4+ reb 42% · 1+ threes 40% | |||||
Tennessee Tech
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caleb SandersF | 28 | 15.0 | 6.4 | 2.0 | 1.0 |
| 15+ pts 49% · 7+ reb 45% · 2+ ast 56% | |||||
| Cbo NewtonG | 24 | 13.0 | 3.3 | 1.7 | 2.1 |
| 15+ pts 37% · 2+ ast 49% · 2+ threes 56% | |||||
| Ty OwensG | 22 | 5.6 | 2.0 | 4.3 | 0.5 |
| 5+ pts 52% · 2+ reb 54% · 5+ ast 42% | |||||
| Trent MosqueraG | 22 | 10.2 | 3.7 | 1.4 | 2.6 |
| 10+ pts 49% · 4+ reb 47% · 3+ threes 44% | |||||
| Caleb HollenbeckG | 21 | 9.3 | 2.2 | 1.0 | 2.4 |
| 10+ pts 43% · 2+ reb 58% · 3+ threes 41% | |||||
| De'Ante GreenF | 20 | 10.4 | 5.8 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
| 10+ pts 51% · 6+ reb 50% · 1+ threes 51% | |||||
| Kamai SamuelsG | 19 | 8.6 | 2.5 | 2.0 | 1.1 |
| 10+ pts 38% · 3+ reb 42% · 2+ ast 57% | |||||
| Davante HackettG | 16 | 7.8 | 2.6 | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| 10+ pts 32% · 3+ reb 46% · 1+ threes 64% | |||||
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…