Who will win Murray St vs Purdue?
The model gives Murray State a 52% chance to beat Purdue, with a projected score of Murray St 76, Purdue 75.
Half of games like thisFour in five
Calls of 50–60% have been right 55.7% of the time in 7,540 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Murray St | |||||
| PoockG · 33 min | 22.1 | 1.9 | 3.8 | 20+ 60% | |
| Currie-JelksF · 29 min | 14.6 | 9.9 | 1.8 | 15+ 46% | |
| FordG · 31 min | 12.9 | 5.9 | 3.0 | 15+ 36% | |
| JohnsonG · 22 min | 7.6 | 2.2 | 1.4 | 5+ 70% | |
 Purdue | |||||
| WickstromG · 34 min | 21.3 | 7.2 | 3.1 | 20+ 56% | |
| HunterG · 33 min | 14.0 | 3.5 | 3.0 | 15+ 43% | |
| BulajicG · 30 min | 12.2 | 3.4 | 2.1 | 10+ 64% | |
| GordonC · 23 min | 9.9 | 5.9 | 0.7 | 10+ 48% | |
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 Sharnecce Currie-Jelks: Murray St 39%Purdue 61%
The white mark is the call with her: Murray St 52%.
| Player | Points a game she adds | Murray St without her | Change | Projected score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Murray St | ||||
| Sharnecce Currie-Jelks | 3.7 | 39% | −13 | 74–77 |
| Halli Poock | 2.9 | 42% | −10 | 74–77 |
| Haven Ford | 2.7 | 42% | −10 | 75–77 |
| Claire Johnson | 2.1 | 45% | −7 | 75–76 |
| Purdue | ||||
| Hannah Wickstrom | 3.6 | 65% | +13 | 78–73 |
| Avery Gordon | 2.0 | 60% | +8 | 77–74 |
| Averi Aaron | 1.2 | 57% | +5 | 76–75 |
| Jelena Bulajic | 0.9 | 56% | +4 | 76–75 |
Change is in Murray St's win chance, in points. Scores read Murray St, then Purdue. 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
Murray St 2-2WLLW
- Last 4
- 2–2, scoring 75.2 and allowing 71.0
Purdue 3-0WWW
- Nov 10W 73-50vs SE Missouri
- Nov 5W 83-73vs E Michigan
- Nov 2W 81-73vs IU Indy
- Last 3
- 3–0, scoring 79.0 and allowing 65.3
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
| Murray St | Purdue | |
|---|---|---|
| Points scored per 100 possessions | 103.3 47th | 94.6 120th |
| Points allowed per 100 | 95.8 213th | 93.2 153rd |
| Possessions a game | 74.3 29th | 72.9 103rd |
| Shooting (effective field-goal %) | 47.0% 96th | 46.3% 127th |
| Opponents' shooting | 45.8% 200th | 45.3% 166th |
| Turnovers, share of possessions | 22.9% 130th | 25.8% 317th |
| Offensive rebounds, share of misses | 33.0% 166th | 33.9% 124th |
| Free throws per shot | 0.24 41st | 0.28 3rd |
The widest gap: Murray St's offense (47th) against Purdue's defense (153rd), of 363 teams.
First half
- Projected halftime score
- Murray St 36, Purdue 36
- First-half margin
- Murray St by 0.4
- First-half points, both teams
- 71.7
- Projected second half
- Murray St 40, Purdue 40
- Second-half points, both teams
- 79.5
- Tied at the half
- 4%
- Murray St, first halves so far
- Led 3 of 4 · 34.8 scored, 30.8 allowed
- Purdue, first halves so far
- Led 1 of 3 · 33.0 scored, 32.3 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
Murray St
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Halli PoockG | 33 | 22.1 | 1.9 | 3.8 | 3.3 |
| 20+ pts 60% · 2+ reb 51% · 4+ ast 51% | |||||
| Haven FordG | 31 | 12.9 | 5.9 | 3.0 | 1.6 |
| 15+ pts 36% · 6+ reb 51% · 3+ ast 56% | |||||
| Sharnecce Currie-JelksF | 29 | 14.6 | 9.9 | 1.8 | 0.3 |
| 15+ pts 46% · 10+ reb 51% · 2+ ast 52% | |||||
| Keslyn SecristG | 26 | 6.8 | 4.0 | 1.3 | 0.7 |
| 5+ pts 63% · 4+ reb 53% · 1+ threes 47% | |||||
| Sydney HuberG | 24 | 4.8 | 2.5 | 1.1 | 1.5 |
| 5+ pts 44% · 3+ reb 44% · 2+ threes 41% | |||||
| Claire JohnsonG | 22 | 7.6 | 2.2 | 1.4 | 0.8 |
| 5+ pts 70% · 2+ reb 59% · 1+ threes 49% | |||||
| Katie ReedF | 18 | 6.9 | 3.7 | 0.7 | 0.7 |
| 5+ pts 64% · 4+ reb 48% · 1+ threes 46% | |||||
| Destiny ThomasG | 11 | 2.3 | 2.2 | 0.5 | 0.1 |
| 5+ pts 18% · 2+ reb 58% | |||||
Purdue
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hannah WickstromG | 34 | 21.3 | 7.2 | 3.1 | 1.4 |
| 20+ pts 56% · 7+ reb 54% · 3+ ast 57% | |||||
| Kyndall HunterG | 33 | 14.0 | 3.5 | 3.0 | 1.6 |
| 15+ pts 43% · 4+ reb 44% · 3+ ast 55% | |||||
| Jelena BulajicG | 30 | 12.2 | 3.4 | 2.1 | 1.4 |
| 10+ pts 64% · 4+ reb 42% · 2+ ast 58% | |||||
| Taylor HendersonG | 26 | 9.7 | 4.8 | 2.4 | 0.6 |
| 10+ pts 46% · 5+ reb 50% · 3+ ast 41% | |||||
| Averi AaronF | 24 | 6.1 | 5.6 | 1.9 | 0.3 |
| 5+ pts 57% · 6+ reb 47% · 2+ ast 54% | |||||
| Avery GordonC | 23 | 9.9 | 5.9 | 0.7 | 0.0 |
| 10+ pts 48% · 6+ reb 50% · 2+ ast 16% | |||||
| Maya ZilbershlagNA | 13 | 3.9 | 2.1 | 0.6 | 0.3 |
| 5+ pts 35% · 2+ reb 56% · 1+ threes 26% | |||||
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…