Who will win Bucknell vs UAlbany?
The model gives UAlbany a 72% chance to beat Bucknell, with a projected score of UAlbany 65, Bucknell 58.
Half of games like thisFour in five
Calls of 70–80% have been right 74.9% of the time in 7,564 past games, and the typical miss on the margin is 9.5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 UAlbany | |||||
| BujoldG · 31 min | 11.5 | 4.9 | 1.9 | 10+ 59% | |
| RomanF · 26 min | 10.4 | 8.9 | 2.2 | 10+ 51% | |
| ShishkinaG · 27 min | 9.8 | 4.7 | 1.5 | 10+ 47% | |
| LangermannG · 32 min | 8.2 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 10+ 35% | |
 Bucknell | |||||
| WeismanG · 33 min | 13.2 | 4.6 | 3.1 | 15+ 38% | |
| ZemitisG · 31 min | 9.8 | 3.9 | 1.1 | 10+ 47% | |
| LiggioG · 28 min | 7.6 | 3.1 | 2.6 | 5+ 70% | |
| CaseyG · 24 min | 7.0 | 2.5 | 1.0 | 5+ 65% | |
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 Madison Roman: Bucknell 33%UAlbany 67%
The white mark is the call with her: UAlbany 72%.
| Player | Points a game she adds | UAlbany without her | Change | Projected score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UAlbany | ||||
| Madison Roman | 1.8 | 67% | −5 | 59–65 |
Change is in UAlbany's win chance, in points. Scores read Bucknell, then UAlbany. A player's value is what the team is better by with her than with a replacement, from the player ratings.
Model against the line
Your call
All of today's gamesPlay-by-play
Team numbers
Form
Bucknell 0-3LLL
- Last 3
- 0–3, scoring 64.0 and allowing 78.0
UAlbany 3-1WWWL
- Nov 11L 41-95at Ole MissDidn't cover +30.5 · Over 128.5
- Nov 8W 77-57at Mount St Marys
- Nov 5W 62-61vs Manhattan
- Nov 2W 65-61at Northeastern
- Last 4
- 3–1, scoring 61.2 and allowing 68.5
- Against the spread, this season
- 0–1
- Totals, this season
- 1 over, 0 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
| Bucknell | UAlbany | |
|---|---|---|
| Points scored per 100 possessions | 89.7 182nd | 85.1 260th |
| Points allowed per 100 | 101.7 320th | 92.7 145th |
| Possessions a game | 69.1 359th | 70.3 327th |
| Shooting (effective field-goal %) | 46.3% 129th | 45.8% 153rd |
| Opponents' shooting | 49.1% 346th | 43.5% 65th |
| Turnovers, share of possessions | 21.6% 41st | 26.0% 322nd |
| Offensive rebounds, share of misses | 31.0% 282nd | 32.1% 213th |
| Free throws per shot | 0.19 301st | 0.22 149th |
The widest gap: UAlbany's offense (260th) against Bucknell's defense (320th), of 363 teams.
First half
- Projected halftime score
- Bucknell 27, UAlbany 31
- First-half margin
- UAlbany by 4.1
- First-half points, both teams
- 58.7
- Projected second half
- Bucknell 31, UAlbany 34
- Second-half points, both teams
- 65.1
- Tied at the half
- 4%
- Bucknell, first halves so far
- Led 0 of 3 · 30.3 scored, 41.0 allowed
- UAlbany, first halves so far
- Led 2 of 4 · 28.5 scored, 32.0 allowed
Our own projection, not a sportsbook's first-half line. On 10,911 past games it had not seen, the halftime leader was right 73.0% of the time and the first-half total was off by 8.0 points on average. This season: 404 of 492 halftime leaders right. Scorecard
Player projections
Bucknell
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elana WeismanG | 33 | 13.2 | 4.6 | 3.1 | 1.0 |
| 15+ pts 38% · 5+ reb 46% · 3+ ast 57% | |||||
| Reese ZemitisG | 31 | 9.8 | 3.9 | 1.1 | 1.9 |
| 10+ pts 47% · 4+ reb 51% · 2+ threes 50% | |||||
| Tessa LiggioG | 28 | 7.6 | 3.1 | 2.6 | 1.1 |
| 5+ pts 70% · 3+ reb 54% · 3+ ast 45% | |||||
| Isabella CaseyG | 24 | 7.0 | 2.5 | 1.0 | 0.7 |
| 5+ pts 65% · 3+ reb 43% · 1+ threes 45% | |||||
| Ella KreuzerG | 23 | 5.2 | 1.7 | 1.4 | 1.0 |
| 5+ pts 48% · 2+ reb 47% · 1+ threes 57% | |||||
| Anna KunzwilerG | 23 | 3.5 | 2.7 | 1.3 | 0.3 |
| 5+ pts 31% · 3+ reb 47% · 2+ ast 35% | |||||
| Kaila RichardsG | 16 | 3.6 | 1.7 | 0.7 | 0.2 |
| 5+ pts 31% · 2+ reb 46% · 1+ threes 21% | |||||
| Mariah HardyF | 15 | 4.9 | 2.9 | 1.0 | 0.1 |
| 5+ pts 45% · 3+ reb 51% · 2+ ast 25% | |||||
UAlbany
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lara LangermannG | 32 | 8.2 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 2.0 |
| 10+ pts 35% · 4+ reb 44% · 2+ threes 52% | |||||
| Alexia BujoldG | 31 | 11.5 | 4.9 | 1.9 | 0.6 |
| 10+ pts 59% · 5+ reb 51% · 2+ ast 55% | |||||
| Shyla MontgomeryG | 27 | 6.2 | 3.9 | 2.3 | 0.6 |
| 5+ pts 58% · 4+ reb 51% · 1+ threes 41% | |||||
| Daria ShishkinaG | 27 | 9.8 | 4.7 | 1.5 | 1.1 |
| 10+ pts 47% · 5+ reb 47% · 2+ ast 42% | |||||
| Madison RomanF | 26 | 10.4 | 8.9 | 2.2 | 0.2 |
| 10+ pts 51% · 9+ reb 50% · 2+ ast 61% | |||||
| Cadence JohnsonF | 17 | 3.1 | 2.4 | 0.5 | 0.2 |
| 5+ pts 26% · 3+ reb 40% · 1+ threes 21% | |||||
| Noa López TallónG | 16 | 5.4 | 1.9 | 1.4 | 0.9 |
| 5+ pts 50% · 2+ reb 51% · 1+ threes 54% | |||||
| Emma ZucconF | 16 | 4.9 | 3.4 | 0.6 | 0.2 |
| 5+ pts 45% · 4+ reb 42% | |||||
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…