Pittsburgh Panthers vs Butler Bulldogs basketball final score

Fri, Nov 13 · 6:30 PM ET · Hinkle Fieldhouse, Indianapolis, IN

Non-conferencePeacockHinkle Fieldhouse, Indianapolis, IN
Pitt
3-0 · 0-0 conf
Efficiency #85
@
Butler
2-1 · 0-0 conf
Efficiency #78
Final
7664
Final score
Projected 74.9 – 78.8
PITT win 37%BTLR win 63%
MarketClose
Spread
BTLR −3.0
open BTLR −3.0
Total
157.5
open 155.5
Our line
BTLR −3.9
Our total
153.7
as of Fri, Nov 13 · 6:21 PM ET

Our play

How our line is built

each step, from an even game to our line
Spread
Even game
0.0
Butlerrated 9.3 above average
+9.3
Pittrated 8.8 above average
−8.8
Home court
+3.4
Our line
BTLR −3.9
◂ Pitt sideButler side ▸
Total
Average D-I game
151.3
Butlerhigher-scoring games
+5.2
Pittlower-scoring games
−2.9
Our line
153.7
Axis starts at 148 pointsPoints added or removed at each step

Steps are rounded to one decimal, so they can differ from the line by 0.1. The spread is seen from the home side: a plus moves it toward Butler.

Pace & total

possessions per 40 minutes
Tempo, possessions per 40 minutes

Projected possessions: 74.7, from each team's opponent-adjusted tempo. On raw season pace, Butler is the faster team (76.8, #35 of 365) and Pitt the slower (72.5, #114). When tempos clash, the slower team usually pulls the pace harder (weights 0.80 vs 0.66).

Projected possessions
74.7
per team, 40 min
Market total
157.5
Market close · open 155.5
Adjusted tempo, vs an average opponent
70.7#176
Pitt
74.5#26
Butler

How this game plays

points this game from the four factors, vs an average D-I matchup
Our line
BTLR −3.8
Four factors −6.0 · not in these stats +9.8
From the four factors
Butler has the ball−1.5
Pitt has the ball+4.5
Butler has the ball
✗Coughs it upTO% 20.0% #261 · PITT forces 23.0% #48 · ~17 turnovers−3.7
✓Wins second chancesOR% 41.1% #26 · PITT allows 25.0% #52+1.6
✓Gets to the lineFTR 23.6% #334 · PITT allows 49.4% #311 · FT 77.6% #52+0.5
✓Shoots it welleFG% 57.2% #64 · PITT allows 42.7% #42+0.1
Pitt has the ball
✓Takes care of the ballTO% 13.8% #48 · BTLR forces 14.8% #295 · ~10 turnovers+4.3
✓Wins second chancesOR% 36.0% #94 · BTLR allows 26.0% #70+0.2
✗Few trips to the lineFTR 52.2% #36 · BTLR allows 22.1% #21 · FT 70.5% #171−0.1
✓Shoots it welleFG% 52.2% #150 · BTLR allows 48.5% #136+0.1

Shot diet

Where each offense shoots from and where each defense lets teams shoot
Pittoffense vsButlerdefense
Share of shots by zone
Pitt shoots
Butler allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim59.7%#15557.1%#16358.1%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)56.3%#5845.0%#23437.9%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)16.7%#31725.0%#6536.0%
Three35.8%#10732.5%#18932.4%
Butleroffense vsPittdefense
Share of shots by zone
Butler shoots
Pitt allows
D-I average
FG% by zone
ZoneD-I avg
Rim63.6%#10247.6%#4458.1%
Short 2 (≤9 ft)33.3%#18840.0%#18737.9%
Mid 2 (10 ft+)100.0%#133.3%#14336.0%
Three35.8%#10929.6%#11832.4%
RimShort 2 (≤9 ft)Mid 2 (10 ft+)Three

Zones from play-by-play shot descriptions; garbage time removed. Bars show the share of field-goal attempts in each zone; where a slice is too thin for its number, the shares are listed under the bar. FG% ranks: #1 = best for that side (most accurate shooting, stingiest defense).

Shot volume

Extra scoring chances from rebounds, turnovers and the foul line
Pitt
+11.2extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#37 of 365
Off reb %
36.0%
#94
Def reb %
75.0%
#52
Turnover %
13.8%
#48
Forced TO %
23.0%
#48
FT rate
52.2%
#36
FT allowed
49.4%
#311
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+1.5
Defensive rebounding+2.3
Ball security+3.1
Forcing turnovers+3.5
Foul shots drawn+3.9
Foul shots allowed−3.1
Butler
+2.0extra scoring chances per game vs a D-I average team#148 of 365
Off reb %
41.1%
#26
Def reb %
74.0%
#70
Turnover %
20.0%
#261
Forced TO %
14.8%
#295
FT rate
23.6%
#334
FT allowed
22.1%
#21
Where the chances come from (per game)
Offensive rebounding+3.2
Defensive rebounding+1.9
Ball security−1.3
Forcing turnovers−2.3
Foul shots drawn−3.6
Foul shots allowed+4.0

Pitt has more extra scoring chances per game: +11.2 (#37 of 365) to Butler’s +2.0 (#148).

Grade = extra shots and foul-line trips per game compared with a D-I average team, built from six season rates. Cell shading is the national rank for each rate (greener = better for that team).

Rotation

Who has been playing, and who has not
Pitt2026-27 numbers · last game: Penn State, Nov 8
#PlayerPosClHtGP-GSMPGMin/40, last 8Last 3 vs beforeStatusPPGRPGAPGTOVeFG%3P%3PA/gFT%Usage
0GJr6'6"3-335.740—Started last12.33.71.31.754.5%40.0%8.320.0%21.0%
3GSr6'4"3-333.739—Started last14.32.34.02.756.5%45.5%3.788.9%23.8%
7FFr6'9"3-028.727—Bench16.37.00.01.053.3%33.3%4.077.3%28.0%
2GSr6'4"3-326.718—Started last10.31.36.01.745.8%50.0%2.775.0%24.1%
11FSr6'9"3-326.330—Started last16.011.71.71.355.2%0.0%0.766.7%31.3%
1GJr6'5"3-018.019—Bench6.31.31.70.328.6%0.0%2.791.7%21.2%
4FSr6'11"3-313.013—Started last4.04.00.00.755.6%—0.033.3%19.6%
26CSr6'10"3-08.710—Bench2.72.00.00.075.0%—0.050.0%12.5%
21GSo6'3"2-04.04—Bench0.01.50.00.50.0%—0.0—20.4%
25FJr6'7"1-07.00—Missed last 25.02.00.00.066.7%—0.0100.0%26.7%
33FJr6'9"1-05.00—Missed last 23.02.00.00.0150.0%100.0%1.0—10.8%
23GJr6'3"1-04.0——Missed last0.00.02.00.00.0%—0.0—13.4%
13GFr6'4"1-04.0——Missed last2.00.00.01.0100.0%—0.0—26.9%
35FSr6'4"1-01.0——Missed last0.00.00.00.0——0.0—0.0%

Competitive minutes leave out garbage time (provisional rule: a second-half lead of 25+ inside 15:00, 20+ inside 10:00, 15+ inside 5:00 or 10+ inside 2:00, held to the end) and are shown per 40 minutes. Status says only whether a player appeared; the reason is not published.

Team comparison

national rank toned left for away, right for home
PittButler
Efficiency
108.9
112.5
101.5
103.6
70.7
74.5
-8.0
-5.3
Shooting
52.2%
57.2%
51.3%
62.4%
35.8%
35.8%
70.5%
77.6%
52.2%
23.6%
Ball control & glass
13.8%
20.0%
23.0%
14.8%
36.0%
41.1%
25.0%
26.0%
7.8%
12.2%
3.5%
9.4%
Style
36.8%
59.1%
41.2%
37.0%
19.8%
17.4%
55.4%
74.2%
32.4%
38.3%
Roster
3.23
2.54
6'6.6"
6'6.2"
1.9%
11.8%

Offseason

roster movement into this season — descriptive, not a model input
Pitt
Returning minutes: 1.9%Returning production: 1.9%
Lost
  • Cameron Corhen 33.8 mpg, 13.6 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Damarco Minor 32.1 mpg, 8.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Barry Dunning Jr. 31.8 mpg, 12.5 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Omari Witherspoon 27.8 mpg, 7.5 ppg · transferred to G Washington
  • Roman Siulepa 26.7 mpg, 10.0 ppg · transferred to Ole Miss
  • Nojus Indrusaitis 23.6 mpg, 9.1 ppg · transferred to California
Added
  • Naithan George from Syracuse · 32.2 mpg, 10.9 ppg last season
  • Timofei Rudovskii from Bryant · 31.5 mpg, 12.9 ppg last season
  • Armani Mighty from Mercer · 31.1 mpg, 13.2 ppg last season
  • Kraig Gilbert new to D1 · 31.0 mpg, 6.0 ppg last season
  • A'lahn Sumler from Charleston So · 26.6 mpg, 16.6 ppg last season
  • Colin Hawkins from Gardner-Webb · 25.5 mpg, 7.7 ppg last season

Returns 2% of last season's minutes; lost 5 of its top 5 (2 transferred). Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).

Butler
Returning minutes: 11.8%Returning production: 14.4%
Lost
  • Michael Ajayi 33.6 mpg, 16.4 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Finley Bizjack 33.0 mpg, 16.6 ppg · transferred to West Virginia
  • Jamie Kaiser Jr. 27.2 mpg, 8.9 ppg · transferred to Richmond
  • Yohan Traore 19.6 mpg, 8.3 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
  • Evan Haywood 17.6 mpg, 6.5 ppg · transferred to Pepperdine
  • Yame Butler 13.2 mpg, 4.0 ppg · not on a D1 roster yet
Added
  • Jordan Ellerbee from FGCU · 27.0 mpg, 13.1 ppg last season
  • Christian Moore from The Citadel · 23.5 mpg, 10.5 ppg last season
  • Treyson Anderson from N Dakota St · 18.3 mpg, 10.4 ppg last season
  • Eduardo Klafke from Ole Miss · 14.6 mpg, 4.5 ppg last season
  • Samis Calderon from Kansas · 1.9 mpg, 0.2 ppg last season
  • Bryson Cardinal no D1 minutes last season

Returns 12% of last season's minutes; lost 4 of its top 5 (2 transferred). Teams returning under 40% of last season's minutes have historically fallen about 0.8 points of AdjEM (n=716 team-seasons, 2022-2026).

Line history

Market line, home spread or game total

Lines by book

BookSpread (home) open → nowTotal open → nowML homeML away
DraftKings-3.5-105157.5o-112 u-108-162+136
FanDuel-2.5-118155.5→157.5o-115 u-105-160+132
BetMGM-3.5-105157.5o-110 u-110-160+135
BetRivers-2.5→-4.5-118156.5→157.5o-117 u-107-230+180
Caesars-3.5-110156.5→157.5o-110 u-110-165+140
Fanatics-3→-3.5-105155.5→157.5o-110 u-110-165+135
BetOnline-3-116158o-105 u-115-155+135
Bovada-3.5-105159.5→158o-105 u-115-165+140
theScore Bet-3.5-110155.5→157.5o+100 u-120-165+140
Hard Rock-2.5→-4.5-115156.5→157.5o-115 u-105-220+180
Kalshi-3.5+100155.5→157.5o+100 u-104-150+144
Polymarket-2.5-122157.5o-104 u+100-156+144
Novig-3.5+100157.5o+100 u-104-153+147
open = first-sighted line for this event · now = latest capture

Head-to-head

this season and last
No meetings the last two seasons.

More games on Fri, Nov 13

← Thu, Nov 12 · Sat, Nov 14 → · Full season schedule

The CBB Matchups tab lays out the day's Division I slate: matchup, tip time, records and rank, and — once posted — the market spread and total (the median across books when no market line is up). Three views switch the table between projected scores, pace and totals, and each team's offensive and defensive tendencies. Each game opens into opponent-adjusted possessions, efficiency and four-factor tendencies for both teams, plus recent form, rotation and head-to-head history. Every game also carries our projected score, spread and total, from our line: the same view our bets are made from.

What these numbers mean: line shopping.