Who will win Columbia vs Stanford?
The model gives Columbia a 63% chance to beat Stanford, with a projected score of Columbia 72, Stanford 68.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Columbia | |||||
| WeissG · 35 min | 20.7 | 2.4 | 1.6 | 20+ 53% | |
| BroomG · 31 min | 11.5 | 4.3 | 3.7 | 10+ 59% | |
| Ashley StevensonF · 29 min | 10.8 | 5.8 | 1.4 | 10+ 54% | |
| HendersonG · 31 min | 7.8 | 8.7 | 4.3 | 10+ 32% | |
 Stanford | |||||
| SwainG · 37 min | 17.3 | 3.8 | 1.5 | 15+ 63% | |
| EschmeyerF · 28 min | 8.8 | 6.1 | 0.6 | 10+ 39% | |
| EzikeF · 23 min | 8.0 | 4.0 | 0.5 | 10+ 34% | |
| IjiwoyeG · 35 min | 7.7 | 3.4 | 2.9 | 10+ 31% | |
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 Riley Weiss: Columbia 47%Stanford 53%
The white mark is the call with her: Columbia 63%.
| Player | Points a game she adds | Columbia without her | Change | Projected score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Columbia | ||||
| Riley Weiss | 5.0 | 47% | −16 | 69–70 |
| Mia Broom | 3.5 | 52% | −11 | 70–70 |
| Fliss Henderson | 3.0 | 53% | −10 | 70–69 |
| Mary Ashley Stevenson | 2.6 | 54% | −9 | 71–69 |
| Stanford | ||||
| Alexandra Eschmeyer | 3.5 | 73% | +10 | 74–66 |
| Hailee Swain | 2.9 | 71% | +8 | 73–66 |
| Ines Sotelo Miguez | 2.9 | 71% | +8 | 73–66 |
| Shay Ijiwoye | 2.2 | 69% | +6 | 73–67 |
Change is in Columbia's win chance, in points. Scores read Columbia, then Stanford. 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
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
| Columbia | Stanford | |
|---|---|---|
| Points scored per 100 possessions | 104.8 40th | 99.2 79th |
| Points allowed per 100 | 86.6 63rd | 85.8 59th |
| Possessions a game | 72.2 156th | 73.0 96th |
| Shooting (effective field-goal %) | 47.2% 87th | 48.9% 25th |
| Opponents' shooting | 44.8% 140th | 47.1% 276th |
| Turnovers, share of possessions | 23.8% 210th | 26.9% 342nd |
| Offensive rebounds, share of misses | 35.5% 57th | 32.8% 176th |
| Free throws per shot | 0.20 252nd | 0.20 235th |
First half
- Projected halftime score
- Columbia 34, Stanford 32
- First-half margin
- Columbia by 2.3
- First-half points, both teams
- 66.3
- Projected second half
- Columbia 38, Stanford 36
- Second-half points, both teams
- 73.5
- Tied at the half
- 4%
- Columbia, first halves so far
- Led 3 of 4 · 33.5 scored, 30.5 allowed
- Stanford, first halves so far
- Led 2 of 3 · 36.0 scored, 33.3 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
Columbia
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Riley WeissG | 35 | 20.7 | 2.4 | 1.6 | 2.3 |
| 20+ pts 53% · 3+ reb 42% · 2+ ast 44% | |||||
| Fliss HendersonG | 31 | 7.8 | 8.7 | 4.3 | 0.3 |
| 10+ pts 32% · 9+ reb 48% · 5+ ast 42% | |||||
| Mia BroomG | 31 | 11.5 | 4.3 | 3.7 | 1.8 |
| 10+ pts 59% · 4+ ast 49% · 2+ threes 49% | |||||
| Mary Ashley StevensonF | 29 | 10.8 | 5.8 | 1.4 | 0.3 |
| 10+ pts 54% · 6+ reb 49% · 2+ ast 40% | |||||
| Hilke FeldrappeF | 27 | 7.1 | 5.1 | 1.5 | 0.7 |
| 5+ pts 66% · 5+ reb 53% · 1+ threes 46% | |||||
| Nasi SimmonsG | 16 | 3.5 | 2.3 | 0.7 | 0.2 |
| 5+ pts 30% · 2+ reb 60% · 1+ threes 21% | |||||
| Eirny ErinughaF | 11 | 1.3 | 2.3 | 0.5 | 0.0 |
| 2+ reb 61% | |||||
| Chloe DixG | 10 | 2.7 | 1.2 | 0.6 | 0.4 |
| 5+ pts 21% · 2+ reb 32% · 1+ threes 30% | |||||
Stanford
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | 3s |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hailee SwainG | 37 | 17.3 | 3.8 | 1.5 | 1.1 |
| 15+ pts 63% · 4+ reb 50% · 2+ ast 42% | |||||
| Shay IjiwoyeG | 35 | 7.7 | 3.4 | 2.9 | 0.8 |
| 10+ pts 31% · 3+ ast 53% · 1+ threes 50% | |||||
| Ines Sotelo MiguezF | 28 | 6.5 | 4.4 | 2.1 | 0.4 |
| 5+ pts 61% · 5+ reb 43% · 2+ ast 58% | |||||
| Alexandra EschmeyerF | 28 | 8.8 | 6.1 | 0.6 | 0.7 |
| 10+ pts 39% · 6+ reb 54% · 1+ threes 45% | |||||
| Nora EzikeF | 23 | 8.0 | 4.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| 10+ pts 34% · 4+ reb 52% · 1+ threes 35% | |||||
| Charlotte TuhyF | 22 | 7.7 | 7.3 | 0.8 | 0.7 |
| 10+ pts 32% · 7+ reb 55% · 1+ threes 48% | |||||
| Ilse de VriesF | 12 | 3.8 | 1.9 | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| 5+ pts 34% · 2+ reb 52% · 1+ threes 44% | |||||
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…