Loyola Maryland vs Stonehill — College Basketball, Nov 15, 2025

Loyola Maryland beat Stonehill 74–63 at a neutral site on Nov 15, 2025.

FinalSat, Nov 15Neutral site

Loyola Maryland Greyhounds

10-20 · 4-13 on the road

74

Stonehill Skyhawks

9-20 · 5-6 at home

63

RecapPropsStatsHead to head

Line score◷History

Team	1st	2nd	Final
L-MD	37	37	74
STO	38	25	63

Top performersiEach team's three leading scorers in this game, with rebounds and assists. The full box score is below.◷History

Loyola Maryland Greyhounds

• Jacob TheodosiouG

  21 pts · 6 reb · 3 ast · 5 stl
  10-18 FG

  1-4 3PT
• Braeden SpeedG

  21 pts · 1 reb · 1 ast
  9-14 FG

  3-5 3PT
• Sam SpringerF

  10 pts · 4 reb · 1 ast
  4-7 FG

  1-3 3PT

Stonehill Skyhawks

• Hermann KoffiG

  21 pts · 4 reb
  9-21 FG

  3-11 3PT
• Raymond Espinal-GuzmanF

  10 pts · 7 reb · 2 ast
  5-10 FG

  0-3 3PT
• Rex SunderlandG

  8 pts · 4 reb · 4 ast
  3-7 FG

  2-5 3PT

Box score◷History

every player+

L-MD	MIN	PTS	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	FG	3PT	FT	+/-
Jacob Theodosiou	33	21	6	3	5	0	3	10-18	1-4	0-0	—
Braeden Speed	30	21	1	1	0	1	2	9-14	3-5	0-0	—
Jordan Stiemke	28	6	3	2	1	0	0	2-8	2-3	0-0	—
Sam Springer	21	10	4	1	0	0	0	4-7	1-3	1-2	—
Everett Barnes	14	0	3	0	0	0	0	0-0	0-0	0-0	—
Jonas Sirtautas	24	4	2	0	1	1	1	1-4	0-3	2-6	—
Tyson Commander	21	2	2	1	2	0	1	1-3	0-1	0-0	—
Troy Cicero Jr.	17	10	2	3	0	1	0	4-7	2-5	0-0	—
Sebastien Emenalo	12	0	2	0	0	0	0	0-0	0-0	0-0	—
Totals		74	25	11	9	3	7	31-61	9-24	3-8

STO	MIN	PTS	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	FG	3PT	FT	+/-
Hermann Koffi	39	21	4	0	1	0	2	9-21	3-11	0-0	—
Rex Sunderland	31	8	4	4	0	0	3	3-7	2-5	0-0	—
Raymond Espinal-Guzman	30	10	7	2	0	0	3	5-10	0-3	0-0	—
Chas Stinson	25	6	3	2	0	1	4	3-8	0-1	0-0	—
Ridvan Tutic	15	5	7	1	0	0	0	2-2	0-0	1-2	—
Davante Hackett	25	7	3	1	2	0	1	3-6	1-3	0-0	—
Anthony Holden	18	0	4	2	0	0	0	0-1	0-1	0-0	—
Pearse McGuinn	12	6	2	0	0	1	1	2-2	0-0	2-2	—
Cory Lovell	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0-1	0-0	0-0	—
Trenton Ruth	2	0	0	0	0	0	2	0-0	0-0	0-0	—
Totals		63	34	12	3	2	16	27-58	6-24	3-4

Starters first, then by minutes. +/- is the team's point margin while he was on the floor.

Team statsiTeam stats: green marks the better side; a longer bar is a bigger number, not always a better one.◷History

L-MDSTO

50.8%

Field goals?Made-attempted: away 31-61, home 27-58.

46.6%

37.5%

Three-pointers?Made-attempted: away 9-24, home 6-24.

25.0%

37.5%

Free throws?Made-attempted: away 3-8, home 3-4.

75.0%

29

Rebounds

36

7

Offensive rebounds

10

11

Assists

12

7

Turnovers?Fewer is better.

17

9

Steals

3

3

Blocks

2

38

Points in the paint

36

12

Fast-break points

5

7

Fouls?Fewer is better.

11

This game's box score totals; green marks the better side (fewer turnovers and fouls are better).

See the model’s call (graded) →

Going into the game · matchup numbers, form, rest+

Offense vs defense: the four factorsiEach offense's league rank against the defense it faces in shooting, turnovers, rebounding and free throws; longer = better.◷History

ranks betterranks worseStronger72+ places apartleague middleLonger bar = better rank of 361 (#1 = best)

L-MD offensevsSTO defense

L-MD offense ranks better in 1 of 4 matchups (1 by a clear margin) · STO defense in 3 (3 by a clear margin)

Shooting · effective FG%?Field-goal percentage with threes counted at 1.5; the defense's number is what it allows.

50.4%

#221

48.0%

Stronger#40

Turnovers · per 100 plays?Turnovers the offense commits (fewer is better) and the turnovers the defense forces.

13.6%

#101Stronger

11.8%

#343

Offensive rebounding %?Share of its own misses the offense rebounds; the defense's number is what it allows.

27.6%

#277

27.2%

Stronger#44

Free throw rate?Free throws made per field-goal attempt; the defense's number is what it allows.

21.3%

#307

20.4%

Stronger#37

STO offensevsL-MD defense

STO offense ranks better in 0 of 4 matchups · L-MD defense in 4 (3 by a clear margin)

Shooting · effective FG%?Field-goal percentage with threes counted at 1.5; the defense's number is what it allows.

46.0%

#347

54.7%

slight#319

Turnovers · per 100 plays?Turnovers the offense commits (fewer is better) and the turnovers the defense forces.

16.9%

#326

13.6%

Stronger#247

Offensive rebounding %?Share of its own misses the offense rebounds; the defense's number is what it allows.

27.3%

#282

29.0%

Stronger#107

Free throw rate?Free throws made per field-goal attempt; the defense's number is what it allows.

18.2%

#357

23.9%

Stronger#127

Season box-score numbers; ranks of 361 teams. A defense ranks well for allowing less and forcing more turnovers.

Key numbers and mismatchesiHeadline ratings, then the biggest mismatches between one team's offense and the other's defense.◷History

L-MDSTO

−7.0 271stNet rating?Points scored minus points allowed per 100 possessions302nd −9.7

107.4 223rdOffensive rating?Points scored per 100 possessions355th 94.2

114.4 291stDefensive rating?Points allowed per 100 possessions (rank 1 = allows least)59th 103.9

68.6 155thPace?Possessions per game (rank 1 = fastest)243rd 66.9

Expected pace: about 68 possessions a team (the two teams' average). Rank among 361 teams, 1st = best.

Where one side has the better of it

• 
  L-MD turnovers

  L-MD offense 13.6% (101st) vs STO defense allowing 11.8% (343rd)
  +242 spots

ContextiEach team's last ten days going into this game (filled = home, outline = road; travel distance is not tracked)◷History

last 10 days

TFSSMTWTFGame

L-MD

NJIT

STO

3 days rest

TFSSMTWTFGame

STO

DEP

URI

FAIR

L-MD

Back-to-back: 2nd night

homeroadday offthis gameFrom the schedule; travel distance is not tracked.

L-MD · last 10

10-20 · 3 days rest

• Nov 11 vs NJITL 64–66
• Nov 3 vs TOWL 56–67
• Mar 6 @ BUCK2024–25L 72–76
• Mar 4 vs LEH2024–25W 77–73
• Mar 1 @ NAVY2024–25L 68–81
• Feb 26 vs BUCK2024–25L 67–70
• Feb 23 vs COLG2024–25W 84–65
• Feb 19 @ BU2024–25L 66–68
• Feb 15 @ AMER2024–25L 51–72
• Feb 12 vs ARMY2024–25L 60–64

2-8 in these

STO · last 10

9-20 · back-to-back

• Nov 14 @ FAIRL 71–73
• Nov 11 @ URIL 57–80
• Nov 7 @ DEPL 64–72
• Mar 5 @ FDU2024–25L 56–71
• Mar 1 vs LEM2024–25W 85–79
• Feb 27 @ FDU2024–25L 69–82
• Feb 22 @ CCSU2024–25L 41–67
• Feb 20 @ WAG2024–25L 57–63
• Feb 15 vs MERC2024–25W 85–73
• Feb 8 @ LIU2024–25L 59–62

2-8 in these

From box scores. Ratings are per 100 possessions (possessions estimated from box scores). Prop lines from DraftKings, FanDuel, BetMGM and Caesars; hit rates are past games against a number, not a forecast or a pick. For information only, not betting advice. 21+ only. Gambling problem? Call or text 1-800-GAMBLER.