Who will win Syracuse vs Harvard?
The model gives Harvard a 68% chance to beat Syracuse, with a projected score of Harvard 70, Syracuse 64.
Half of games like thisFour in five
Calls of 60–70% have been right 64.3% of the time in 7,507 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Harvard | |||||
| WhiteG · 29 min | 16.1 | 5.3 | 3.0 | 15+ 56% | |
| WrightF · 28 min | 15.3 | 6.2 | 1.9 | 15+ 51% | |
| JonesG · 32 min | 10.1 | 7.7 | 2.9 | 10+ 49% | |
| HollensteinerG · 23 min | 6.7 | 3.1 | 0.8 | 5+ 63% | |
 Syracuse | |||||
| IzojeC · 28 min | 16.1 | 8.8 | 1.1 | 15+ 56% | |
| SkinnerG · 21 min | 9.9 | 1.2 | 2.5 | 10+ 48% | |
| RodriguezG · 24 min | 8.9 | 3.4 | 1.6 | 10+ 40% | |
| RambusF · 21 min | 8.0 | 3.6 | 0.7 | 10+ 34% | |
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 Karlee White: Syracuse 46%Harvard 54%
The white mark is the call with her: Harvard 68%.
| Player | Points a game she adds | Harvard without her | Change | Projected score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harvard | ||||
| Karlee White | 4.6 | 54% | −14 | 66–68 |
| Olivia Jones | 3.6 | 58% | −10 | 66–68 |
| Abigail Wright | 3.5 | 58% | −10 | 66–68 |
| Mary Hollensteiner | 2.2 | 62% | −6 | 65–69 |
| Syracuse | ||||
| Uche Izoje | 5.1 | 82% | +14 | 62–73 |
| Emely Rodriguez | 2.7 | 76% | +8 | 63–71 |
| Sarah Rambus | 2.4 | 75% | +7 | 63–71 |
| Jaleesa Molina | 1.9 | 74% | +6 | 63–71 |
Change is in Harvard's win chance, in points. Scores read Syracuse, then Harvard. 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
Syracuse 3-0WWW
- Last 3
- 3–0, scoring 79.0 and allowing 51.3
Harvard 3-1LWWW
- Nov 11W 78-65vs UMass
- Nov 9W 63-42at Holy Cross
- Nov 5W 81-51vs Boston College
- Nov 2L 62-82at Minnesota
- Last 4
- 3–1, scoring 71.0 and allowing 60.0
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
| Syracuse | Harvard | |
|---|---|---|
| Points scored per 100 possessions | 101.8 62nd | 103.6 45th |
| Points allowed per 100 | 83.7 53rd | 83.7 52nd |
| Possessions a game | 73.1 92nd | 70.5 318th |
| Shooting (effective field-goal %) | 44.4% 252nd | 46.1% 135th |
| Opponents' shooting | 44.1% 98th | 43.2% 51st |
| Turnovers, share of possessions | 22.1% 68th | 22.0% 58th |
| Offensive rebounds, share of misses | 35.2% 73rd | 37.5% 25th |
| Free throws per shot | 0.17 346th | 0.22 123rd |
First half
- Projected halftime score
- Syracuse 30, Harvard 33
- First-half margin
- Harvard by 3.4
- First-half points, both teams
- 63.6
- Projected second half
- Syracuse 34, Harvard 37
- Second-half points, both teams
- 70.5
- Tied at the half
- 4%
- Syracuse, first halves so far
- Led 3 of 3 · 44.3 scored, 24.0 allowed
- Harvard, first halves so far
- Led 3 of 4 · 34.8 scored, 26.0 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
Syracuse
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uche IzojeC | 28 | 16.1 | 8.8 | 1.1 | 0.0 |
| 15+ pts 56% · 9+ reb 49% · 2+ ast 31% | |||||
| Emely RodriguezG | 24 | 8.9 | 3.4 | 1.6 | 1.1 |
| 10+ pts 40% · 4+ reb 42% · 2+ ast 44% | |||||
| Sarah RambusF | 21 | 8.0 | 3.6 | 0.7 | 0.1 |
| 10+ pts 34% · 4+ reb 46% · 2+ ast 16% | |||||
| Tyi SkinnerG | 21 | 9.9 | 1.2 | 2.5 | 1.2 |
| 10+ pts 48% · 3+ ast 45% · 1+ threes 64% | |||||
| Keira ScottF | 21 | 4.2 | 2.7 | 0.6 | 0.3 |
| 5+ pts 38% · 3+ reb 46% · 1+ threes 24% | |||||
| Jaleesa MolinaF | 18 | 5.3 | 4.1 | 1.0 | 0.2 |
| 5+ pts 50% · 4+ reb 55% · 2+ ast 27% | |||||
| Celaine RiccoF | 15 | 3.8 | 2.8 | 0.9 | 0.3 |
| 5+ pts 34% · 3+ reb 50% · 2+ ast 22% | |||||
| Angelica VelezG | 14 | 1.9 | 1.1 | 1.3 | 0.2 |
| 2+ reb 30% · 2+ ast 36% · 1+ threes 16% | |||||
Harvard
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lydia ChatiraG | 33 | 6.6 | 3.4 | 2.7 | 0.8 |
| 5+ pts 62% · 3+ ast 49% · 1+ threes 50% | |||||
| Olivia JonesG | 32 | 10.1 | 7.7 | 2.9 | 1.0 |
| 10+ pts 49% · 8+ reb 48% · 3+ ast 54% | |||||
| Karlee WhiteG | 29 | 16.1 | 5.3 | 3.0 | 1.7 |
| 15+ pts 56% · 3+ ast 54% · 2+ threes 46% | |||||
| Abigail WrightF | 28 | 15.3 | 6.2 | 1.9 | 0.1 |
| 15+ pts 51% · 6+ reb 55% · 2+ ast 55% | |||||
| Mary HollensteinerG | 23 | 6.7 | 3.1 | 0.8 | 1.1 |
| 5+ pts 63% · 3+ reb 56% · 1+ threes 61% | |||||
| Sam WillsF | 15 | 3.9 | 3.0 | 0.2 | 0.4 |
| 5+ pts 35% · 3+ reb 53% · 1+ threes 30% | |||||
| Alayna RoccoG | 13 | 2.9 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 0.7 |
| 5+ pts 24% · 2+ reb 29% · 1+ threes 48% | |||||
| Asani CeaserF | 11 | 2.4 | 2.8 | 0.8 | 0.0 |
| 5+ pts 18% · 3+ reb 50% · 2+ ast 19% | |||||
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…