Who will win Idaho St vs UC Irvine?
The model gives UC Irvine a 80% chance to beat Idaho State, with a projected score of UC Irvine 67, Idaho St 56.
Half of games like thisFour in five
Calls of 80–90% have been right 85.0% of the time in 7,719 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 UC Irvine | |||||
| YoungG · 28 min | 14.1 | 5.7 | 2.7 | 15+ 44% | |
| GallegosG · 31 min | 7.3 | 5.1 | 1.3 | 5+ 68% | |
| NahumPG · 22 min | 6.4 | 2.8 | 2.4 | 5+ 60% | |
| WhitePG · 18 min | 6.4 | 2.7 | 1.1 | 5+ 60% | |
 Idaho St | |||||
| CaldwellG · 30 min | 9.2 | 3.2 | 2.3 | 10+ 43% | |
| ValentineG · 28 min | 7.8 | 4.3 | 1.4 | 10+ 32% | |
| HutkaF · 24 min | 6.8 | 6.1 | 0.5 | 5+ 64% | |
| Wilkerson · 23 min | 6.0 | 3.0 | 0.9 | 5+ 56% | |
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 Lauryn Madsen: Idaho St 25%UC Irvine 75%
The white mark is the call with her: UC Irvine 80%.
| Player | Points a game she adds | UC Irvine without her | Change | Projected score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UC Irvine | ||||
| Lauryn Madsen | 2.3 | 75% | −5 | 57–66 |
| Ahrray Young | 1.8 | 76% | −4 | 57–66 |
| Summah Hanson | 1.7 | 76% | −4 | 57–66 |
| Shirel Nahum | 1.3 | 77% | −3 | 57–66 |
| Idaho St | ||||
| Maeva Gauffrenet | 1.1 | 83% | +3 | 56–67 |
| Asa Wolfram | 1.1 | 82% | +2 | 56–67 |
| Krystal Arnason | 0.9 | 82% | +2 | 56–67 |
| Clare Valentine | 0.8 | 82% | +2 | 56–67 |
Change is in UC Irvine's win chance, in points. Scores read Idaho St, then UC Irvine. 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
Idaho St 3-1LWWW
- Last 4
- 3–1, scoring 61.8 and allowing 47.2
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
| Idaho St | UC Irvine | |
|---|---|---|
| Points scored per 100 possessions | 86.3 243rd | 94.5 121st |
| Points allowed per 100 | 88.7 90th | 88.8 91st |
| Possessions a game | 71.5 225th | 71.6 219th |
| Shooting (effective field-goal %) | 46.9% 98th | 44.0% 275th |
| Opponents' shooting | 40.2% 7th | 45.8% 200th |
| Turnovers, share of possessions | 26.6% 333rd | 23.1% 149th |
| Offensive rebounds, share of misses | 32.8% 182nd | 32.4% 202nd |
| Free throws per shot | 0.23 60th | 0.22 97th |
The widest gap: UC Irvine's defense (91st) against Idaho St's offense (243rd), of 363 teams.
First half
- Projected halftime score
- Idaho St 26, UC Irvine 32
- First-half margin
- UC Irvine by 6.1
- First-half points, both teams
- 58.2
- Projected second half
- Idaho St 30, UC Irvine 35
- Second-half points, both teams
- 64.6
- Tied at the half
- 4%
- Idaho St, first halves so far
- Led 3 of 4 · 32.2 scored, 20.0 allowed
- UC Irvine, first halves so far
- Led 1 of 2 · 29.0 scored, 37.0 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
Idaho St
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aspen CaldwellG | 30 | 9.2 | 3.2 | 2.3 | 0.7 |
| 10+ pts 43% · 3+ reb 57% · 1+ threes 46% | |||||
| Clare ValentineG | 28 | 7.8 | 4.3 | 1.4 | 1.2 |
| 10+ pts 32% · 4+ reb 58% · 2+ ast 38% | |||||
| Bojana RadnjicG | 25 | 4.3 | 2.0 | 1.6 | 0.2 |
| 5+ pts 39% · 2+ reb 55% · 2+ ast 46% | |||||
| Maggie HutkaF | 24 | 6.8 | 6.1 | 0.5 | 0.2 |
| 5+ pts 64% · 6+ reb 53% · 1+ threes 17% | |||||
| Jazzy WilkersonNA | 23 | 6.0 | 3.0 | 0.9 | 1.1 |
| 5+ pts 56% · 3+ reb 54% · 1+ threes 60% | |||||
| Krystal ArnasonF | 21 | 5.7 | 4.9 | 0.8 | 0.2 |
| 5+ pts 54% · 5+ reb 51% · 2+ ast 20% | |||||
| Emma BryantG | 18 | 3.7 | 2.1 | 1.2 | 0.3 |
| 5+ pts 33% · 2+ reb 55% · 2+ ast 32% | |||||
| Asa WolframF | 13 | 4.3 | 2.3 | 0.5 | 0.1 |
| 5+ pts 39% · 2+ reb 61% | |||||
UC Irvine
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gracie GallegosG | 31 | 7.3 | 5.1 | 1.3 | 0.6 |
| 5+ pts 68% · 5+ reb 54% · 1+ threes 44% | |||||
| Lauryn MadsenG | 30 | 4.9 | 3.3 | 1.6 | 1.4 |
| 5+ pts 45% · 3+ reb 58% · 2+ ast 46% | |||||
| Ahrray YoungG | 28 | 14.1 | 5.7 | 2.7 | 1.1 |
| 15+ pts 44% · 6+ reb 49% · 3+ ast 48% | |||||
| Shirel NahumPG | 22 | 6.4 | 2.8 | 2.4 | 0.5 |
| 5+ pts 60% · 3+ reb 48% · 3+ ast 42% | |||||
| Delaney WhitePG | 18 | 6.4 | 2.7 | 1.1 | 0.9 |
| 5+ pts 60% · 3+ reb 47% · 1+ threes 53% | |||||
| Makiah AsidanyaG | 16 | 5.7 | 1.9 | 1.3 | 0.9 |
| 5+ pts 54% · 2+ reb 52% · 1+ threes 54% | |||||
| Summah HansonF | 16 | 4.4 | 4.1 | 0.4 | 0.6 |
| 5+ pts 40% · 4+ reb 53% · 1+ threes 42% | |||||
| Sarah MillerG | 14 | 3.1 | 1.8 | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| 5+ pts 26% · 2+ reb 49% · 1+ threes 43% | |||||
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…