Grambling vs Pepperdine — College Basketball, Dec 7, 2024

Pepperdine beat Grambling 85–57 at home on Dec 7, 2024.

FinalSat, Dec 7

Grambling Tigers

9-22 · 5-14 on the road

57

Pepperdine Waves

12-22 · 6-10 at home

85

RecapPropsStatsHead to head

Line score◷History

Team	1st	2nd	Final
GRAM	24	33	57
PEPP	38	47	85

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

Grambling Tigers

• Antwan BurnettG

  15 pts · 1 reb · 2 ast
  5-11 FG

  1-4 3PT
• Mikale StevensonG

  14 pts · 5 reb · 3 ast
  4-10 FG

  0-2 3PT
• Cbo NewtonG

  11 pts · 1 reb · 1 ast
  4-4 FG

  3-3 3PT

Pepperdine Waves

• Stefan TodorovicF

  22 pts · 7 reb · 1 ast
  7-15 FG

  5-9 3PT
• Maurice OdumG

  16 pts · 4 reb · 9 ast
  7-13 FG

  2-4 3PT
• Dovydas ButkaF

  14 pts · 13 reb · 2 ast · Double-double
  7-9 FG

Box score◷History

every player+

GRAM	MIN	PTS	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	FG	3PT	FT	+/-
Antwan Burnett	37	15	1	2	0	0	1	5-11	1-4	4-6	—
Mikale Stevenson	33	14	5	3	1	0	2	4-10	0-2	6-8	—
Ernest Ross	19	4	0	0	0	1	2	2-2	0-0	0-0	—
Kintavious Dozier	18	2	6	1	1	0	1	1-9	0-2	0-0	—
PJ Eason	17	2	4	0	0	1	1	1-3	0-0	0-2	—
James Flippin	22	4	3	3	0	0	4	2-5	0-1	0-2	—
Cbo Newton	18	11	1	1	2	0	2	4-4	3-3	0-0	—
P.J. Edwards	16	3	4	0	0	0	0	1-7	1-3	0-0	—
Lou Hutchinson	12	2	0	0	0	1	0	1-3	0-2	0-0	—
Emeka Nnaji	5	0	1	0	0	0	0	0-0	0-0	0-0	—
Solomon Ray	3	0	2	0	1	1	1	0-1	0-0	0-0	—
Totals		57	27	10	5	4	14	21-55	5-17	10-18

PEPP	MIN	PTS	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	FG	3PT	FT	+/-
Maurice Odum	32	16	4	9	1	0	1	7-13	2-4	0-0	—
Stefan Todorovic	27	22	7	1	1	1	1	7-15	5-9	3-3	—
Zion Bethea	27	0	3	3	0	0	1	0-7	0-3	0-0	—
Dovydas Butka	26	14	13	2	0	0	1	7-9	0-0	0-0	—
Boubacar Coulibaly	25	6	4	1	0	3	0	3-6	0-0	0-0	—
Jaxon Olvera	17	7	2	0	2	0	0	2-4	0-0	3-4	—
Danilo Dožic	17	5	3	0	1	0	1	2-5	1-2	0-0	—
Taj Au-Duke	11	6	1	2	0	0	2	2-2	2-2	0-0	—
Alonso Faure	8	7	0	0	0	1	0	3-3	0-0	1-2	—
David Mager	6	2	1	0	0	1	1	1-5	0-3	0-0	—
Alex Leiba	4	0	1	0	1	1	0	0-0	0-0	0-0	—
Totals		85	39	18	6	7	8	34-69	10-23	7-9

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

GRAMPEPP

38.2%

Field goals?Made-attempted: away 21-55, home 34-69.

49.3%

29.4%

Three-pointers?Made-attempted: away 5-17, home 10-23.

43.5%

55.6%

Free throws?Made-attempted: away 10-18, home 7-9.

77.8%

33

Rebounds

42

8

Offensive rebounds

11

10

Assists

18

14

Turnovers?Fewer is better.

8

5

Steals

6

4

Blocks

7

26

Points in the paint

44

9

Fast-break points

12

12

Fouls?Fewer is better.

14

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 360 (#1 = best)

GRAM offensevsPEPP defense

GRAM offense ranks better in 0 of 4 matchups · PEPP defense in 4 (1 by a clear margin)

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

47.3%

#317

52.5%

slight#259

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

17.1%

#315

13.3%

slight#306

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

26.3%

#279

30.0%

Stronger#190

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

25.6%

#116

20.5%

slight#68

PEPP offensevsGRAM defense

PEPP offense ranks better in 1 of 4 matchups · GRAM defense in 3 (1 by a clear margin)

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

49.6%

#243

49.3%

Stronger#103

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

14.2%

#111

15.9%

slight#107

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

27.7%

#241slight

31.1%

#244

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

22.6%

#225

23.4%

slight#157

Season box-score numbers; ranks of 360 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

GRAMPEPP

−7.4 285thNet rating?Points scored minus points allowed per 100 possessions292nd −7.8

97.6 333rdOffensive rating?Points scored per 100 possessions239th 104.6

104.9 112thDefensive rating?Points allowed per 100 possessions (rank 1 = allows least)296th 112.5

66.0 271stPace?Possessions per game (rank 1 = fastest)135th 68.6

Expected pace: about 67 possessions a team (the two teams' average). Rank among 360 teams, 1st = best.

Where one side has the better of it

• 
  PEPP 3-point shooting

  PEPP offense 34.0% (170th) vs GRAM defense allowing 35.7% (294th)
  +124 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

GRAM

PEPP

10 days rest4th straight road game

TFSSMTWTFGame

PEPP

NMSU

WEB

GRAM

6 days rest

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

GRAM · last 10

9-22 · 10 days rest

• Nov 26 @ CPL 79–82
• Nov 24 @ USCL 69–80
• Nov 21 @ UNML 58–80
• Nov 11 @ FLAL 62–86
• Nov 8 @ MISSL 64–66
• Mar 22 @ PUR2023–24L 50–78
• Mar 20 @ MTST2023–24W 88–81
• Mar 16 vs TXSO2023–24W 75–66
• Mar 15 vs BCU2023–24W 65–53
• Mar 13 vs ALST2023–24W 56–50

4-6 in these

PEPP · last 10

12-22 · 6 days rest

• Nov 30 vs WEBL 53–68
• Nov 29 @ NMSUW 82–70
• Nov 26 vs CSUFL 63–72
• Nov 22 @ NUL 50–68
• Nov 20 @ UNLVL 59–80
• Nov 16 @ UCIL 62–80
• Nov 9 @ UCSDL 76–94
• Nov 6 vs WIUW 77–64
• Mar 8 @ USD2023–24L 52–57
• Mar 7 vs PAC2023–24W 102–43

3-7 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.