THE PLAY: Total Under 152.5 (-110)

Get Tokyo Brandon's. 5% MAX play tomorrow! He is a scorching 13-3 in 5% plays since September!

Follow
X @Tokyo Brandon
TikTok @tokyobrandonofficial
Instagram @tokyobrandon

_________

Gonzaga Bulldogs vs Portland Pilots

take under 151 or higher.

Team comparison table (since conference play)

Score prediction + betting value (factoring competition)

Projection: Gonzaga 88, Portland 63 (Total 151)

Total (152.5): lean UNDER

• Portland’s offense since 1/1 has been stuck in the mud (68.8 PPG) while allowing 80.7 PPG, which often creates “blowout math” where the favorite can clear its number but the dog doesn’t cooperate.

• Gonzaga is also missing Braden Huff (17.8 PPG), which slightly trims their ceiling unless they go turbo from three.
  Confidence: 3/5

Trends & patterns

• Gonzaga pace/production: 8 games since 1/1 with an average game total around 155.8 (so the raw Gonzaga environment has been a little above 152.5).

• Portland environment: 9 games since 1/1 averaging about 149.1 total points (below 152.5), consistent with their offensive struggles.

• “Would it have covered -21.5?” sanity check: Gonzaga won by 22+ in 4 of their 8 games since 1/1 (not ATS, just margin vs today’s spread).

• Home/away note: Portland has played much better at home than on the road in general, but Gonzaga has been trucking everyone in conference play (including Saint Mary’s).

Player matchup breakdowns

Graham Ike vs Portland’s front line (Cameron Williams / James O’Donnell rotation). Ike is the fulcrum: Gonzaga’s cleanest “press button → points happen” option, and he’s also their best rebounder (8.5 RPG). Portland’s best counter is to show bodies early and hope for foul luck, because straight-up single coverage is asking for 2s that eventually turn into 3s when help comes.

Point guard table-setting: Jalen Warley vs Joel Foxwell. Warley’s value is orchestration (6.2 APG) more than scoring, while Foxwell is Portland’s whole motherboard (7.2 APG and 14.6 PPG). If Gonzaga can force Foxwell into “score-first hero ball” and away from playmaking, Portland’s offense tends to devolve into late-clock jumpers.

The “missing usage” problem for both teams. Gonzaga losing Braden Huff (17.8 PPG) matters, but they have more redundancy—multiple ball-handlers and finishers. Portland losing Timo George (12.5 PPG) matters more because it removes a major scoring pillar and a top rebounder, increasing the risk of long empty stretches. That dynamic generally favors spread more than over.

Why I am betting the under:

• Portland’s offense has been a drag since 1/1 (about 69 ppg in that span), and “unders” love one simple thing: one team not showing up offensively. If Portland lands in the low 60s (very plausible), Gonzaga basically has to score mid-90s to beat 152.5.

• Portland’s scoring depth is thinner than usual. Timo George (their #2 scorer) is out for the season, and they’ve had additional questionable bodies — that increases the odds of long dead stretches where possessions end in forced jumpers.

• Blowout math favors the under more than people think. Big favorites often go into “run clock / empty the bench / don’t get hurt” mode once the margin is safe. That can turn a game that could have been 156 into 148 without anything dramatic happening.

• Gonzaga is missing a major scorer too. Braden Huff being out removes a chunk of efficient scoring and a go-to option that helps keep Gonzaga’s possession-to-points rate high. That trims the ceiling a bit.

• The most recent head-to-head wasn’t a Portland shootout. Gonzaga beat Portland 86–71 (157 total), but note what drove it: Gonzaga offense + decent Portland night. If Portland scores even ~5 fewer points today (injury/depth), you’re immediately hovering around the number.

• The market number assumes Portland contributes. 152.5 is basically pricing something like 88–65 or 90–63. If Portland’s realistic range is more like 58–66, you’ve got under paths even if Gonzaga plays well.

• Game script sensitivity: the under only really dies if (a) Portland hits a weirdly hot 3-point night or (b) Gonzaga turns it into a layup line via turnovers → transition. If Portland plays even remotely careful, under stays alive deep into the second half.

THE PLAY: Total Under 155.5 (-110)

Get Tokyo Brandon's. 5% MAX play tomorrow! He is a scorching 13-3 in 5% plays since September!

Follow
X @Tokyo Brandon
TikTok @tokyobrandonofficial
Instagram @tokyobrandon

_________

Since conference play

Level of competition check

Notre Dame’s January slate includes road games at ranked UNC and games vs ranked Virginia, plus multiple road ACC spots.
Louisville’s January includes Duke twice (home vs #6, road vs #4) and a game vs ranked Virginia.

Projection

My projected score: Louisville 82 – Notre Dame 71
Projected total: 153

Trends & patterns

Notre Dame (since 1/1):

• Average game total: 155.3 (73.4 scored + 81.9 allowed)

• Road defense: 84.3 allowed (that’s the scary part vs a deep Louisville offense)

• Margin trend: -8.5 avg → today’s +14.5 gives them a lot of “getting blown out but still covering” room

Louisville (since 1/1):

• Average game total: 151.4

• Home margin: +7.8 avg (solid, not demolition)

• Recent ATS/total snippet: Louisville 2–3 ATS last 5 and Over in 1 of last 5 (not a full Jan-only dataset, but it matches the “don’t overpay the spread” vibe)

Player matchup breakdowns

Haralson vs Conwell (primary wing scoring): Haralson is the most stable shot-creator Notre Dame has available right now, and Notre Dame’s offense gets a lot shakier when he’s pushed off his driving angles. Conwell is Louisville’s volume engine—if Conwell’s jumper is falling early, this can snowball into a rout; if he’s just “fine,” Louisville can still win but covering -14.5 becomes less automatic.

Backcourt pressure (Shrewsberry/Certa vs Brown Jr./McKneely): With Burton sidelined, Notre Dame’s on-ball creation and passing juice takes a hit, which makes ball security and half-court execution a bigger problem against Louisville’s athletes. Brown Jr.’s return from his earlier injury stretch matters here because Louisville’s offense is much cleaner when he’s organizing and getting downhill; McKneely adds another spacer Notre Dame has to chase.

Interior (Towt vs Fru): Towt is a monster rebounder, and Notre Dame needs him to generate extra possessions to survive the talent gap. Fru gives Louisville rim protection and efficient finishing; the foul/board battle here is one of the few levers that can swing “Louisville wins by 10–12” into “Louisville wins by 18+.”

Why I am betting the under:

• Notre Dame plays sloooow (and that travels). Notre Dame at about 65 possessions/game and a tempo rank ~300 — that’s the profile of a team that can drag a game into mud even if they’re losing.

• Louisville is efficient, but not a full-court track meet. Louisville’s tempo is about 70 possessions/game (rank ~51) — quicker than Notre Dame, but not “turbo.” In games where Louisville is clearly superior, they often don’t need to press pace for 40 minutes.

• Injuries push Notre Dame toward uglier offense. The ACC injury report angle: Markus Burton has been out (broken ankle) and Notre Dame has other rotation health issues noted in the pregame report. Missing your best creator tends to mean: longer possessions, more stalled half-court sets, and fewer easy points.

• 155.5 is a “must-hit” total: you generally need both teams contributing cleanly. A common Under script here is: Louisville controls the game + Notre Dame struggles to score efficiently without Burton → you get a Louisville win that still lands in the low 150s.

• Recent totals lean Under for Louisville. Louisville totals are going Over in only 1 of their last 5 (so 4 Unders in 5). That doesn’t “prove” tonight, but it supports the idea that Louisville games haven’t been consistently sprinting into the 160s lately.

• 155.5 is being priced as the “public fun number,” but serious models shade lower. VSiN’s handicap for this matchup put the total around 151.5 while recommending Under 155.5. You don’t have to worship any one tout/model, but it’s a legit sign the math-y view sees a cushion below 155.5.

Reason: the pace + Notre Dame injury/creation issues are real edges, but Louisville’s efficiency (and free throws in a foul-heavy second half) is the main way this total can still sneak over.

If this turns into “Louisville up 18 at half,” the Under is often in a good place—unless Notre Dame starts trading threes (high variance) or the final 6 minutes becomes a whistle festival.

THE PLAY: Total Under 170.5 (-110)

Get Tokyo Brandon's. 5% MAX play! He is a scorching 13-3 on 5% plays since September!

Follow
X @Tokyo Brandon
TikTok @tokyobrandonofficial
Instagram @tokyobrandon

_________

Butler Bulldogs @ Providence Friars

Comparison chart

Score prediction + betting breakdown

Projected score: Providence 84, Butler 81

Total (170.5):

• Butler’s games since 1/1 have been consistently lower total profiles (7 straight below 170.5 based on their January Big East results).

• Providence’s since-1/1 scoring environment looks inflated by two OT games (UConn, Marquette) that spike totals; in regulation-ish terms they’re closer to “high 160s / low 170s” than the raw average implies.

Trends & patterns

• Butler since 1/1: ~76.1 scored / 81.7 allowed → net -5.6; totals cluster in the 150s–160s.

• Providence since 1/1: ~85.6 scored / 89.7 allowed → net -4.1; volatility is high (OT games + track meets).

• Venue splits (context): season-long, Butler has struggled away; Providence has been better at home than away. (Useful backdrop, but I weighted the since-1/1 slice more heavily.)

• Head-to-head this season: Butler won 113–110 (OT) on Dec 13, 2025; the OT note matters because it can psychologically anchor people to “auto-over” even when the current form says “maybe not.”

Player matchup breakdowns

Finley Bizjack vs Jaylin Sellers (shot-making on the wing): Bizjack is Butler’s steadier volume option, and Butler’s best path is letting him hunt clean catch-and-shoots and attack closeouts without turning it into a sprint meet. Sellers is the counterpunch for Providence—if he wins the “tough shot” battle early, Providence can justify playing faster, which nudges this toward the over.

Michael Ajayi vs Wesley Cardet / Oswin Erhunmwunse (paint + glass): Ajayi’s rebounding is the most reliable thing Butler brings every night. Providence has to keep him off second chances because their defense (since 1/1) already allows too many high-scoring scripts. If Ajayi controls the glass, Butler can survive cold stretches and keep the game in one-possession territory late.

Stefan Vaaks / guard table-setting vs Butler’s ball pressure: Providence’s cleaner possessions tend to come when Vaaks is turning the corner and forcing rotations. Butler’s defensive issue has been containing dribble penetration without over-helping. If Butler can stay attached to shooters and make Providence finish over size (instead of kicking to rhythm threes), the under gets healthier fast.

“Missing creator” effect (Providence): If Jason Edwards is still out/limited, Providence’s offense can get “one-pass-and-a-prayer” late in possessions. That usually reduces efficiency and slows pace—both point under—unless it turns into live-ball turnovers and runouts (the one way it can flip to over quickly).

• 170 is a monster number for a Big East game. You basically need both teams living in the mid-80s with decent efficiency (or some OT chaos) to get there.

• Butler’s recent scoring environment has been way lower than 170.

  • vs Georgetown: 77–64 = 141

  • at St. John’s: 92–70 = 162

  • (Oddsshark game log also shows several Jan totals sitting in the 140s–160s range.)

• Providence’s last two marquee games still didn’t reach 170.

  • vs Villanova: 87–73 = 160

  • vs UConn: 87–81 = 168

• Providence’s leading scorer (Jason Edwards) has missed the last six games (foot). Missing a primary creator usually means: fewer easy points, more empty possessions, and longer late-clock possessions — all friendly to an under.

• Butler’s starting PG Jalen Jackson is out for the season (ankle). Even if Butler can still score, losing a table-setter often reduces pace/organization and raises turnover risk—both can suppress totals unless it turns into nonstop transition (which Butler generally doesn’t want on the road).

• The “BUT–PROV went nuclear once” angle is OT-inflated. Their Dec 13 meeting went 113–110 (OT) — a great reminder that OT is the under’s meteor strike, not the baseline expectation.

• Butler just had a brutal shooting collapse (missed last 14 shots vs Georgetown). If they bring even a slice of that cold streak into a road game, 170 gets harder to reach fast.

Net: you’re basically betting that 170 is priced like a track meet, while both teams’ most recent “real-life” scoring conditions look more like high 150s / mid 160s unless overtime shows up to ruin everyone’s evening.

THE PLAY: South East Melbourne -7.5 (-115)

Get Tokyo Brandon's. 5% MAX play tomorrow! He is a scorching 13-3 in 5% plays since September!

Follow
X @Tokyo Brandon
TikTok @tokyobrandonofficial
Instagram @tokyobrandon

_________

South East Melbourne Phoenix at New Zealand Breakers — spread: Phoenix -7.5

Quick snapshot

• Phoenix: scoring 100.4 / allowing 91.9 (big +margin), 20–9 overall; road 9–5.

• Breakers: scoring 90.7 / allowing 92.2, 11–18 overall; home 5–8.

• Injuries: Breakers have Izayah Le'Afa / Rob Baker II / Samuel Mennenga listed out (season); Phoenix: no injuries listed.

Last 10 games (most recent first)

Phoenix last 10 (7–3)

• @ Adelaide W 97–77

• @ Perth L 93–101

• vs Cairns W 118–91

• vs Breakers W 123–116

• @ Adelaide W 108–89

• vs Perth L 97–107

• vs Illawarra W 124–113

• @ Sydney W 124–117

• @ Cairns W 111–96

• @ Tasmania L 84–87

Trend note: Phoenix have been fine away from home lately (6 of those 10 were road games).

Breakers last 10 (4–6)

• @ Tasmania L 89–91

• vs Melbourne W 97–95

• vs Brisbane L 104–80

• vs Adelaide L 110–112 (OT)

• @ Phoenix L 116–123

• @ Cairns W 104–86

• @ Illawarra W 101–96

• vs Sydney L 62–103

• vs Perth L 91–99

• @ Tasmania W 81–80 (OT)

Trend note: That 62–103 home loss is the kind of “variance grenade” that shows how quickly their offense can go missing.

Player vs player matchups (what decides the cover)

1) Lead guards: Nathan Sobey vs Parker Jackson-Cartwright

• Sobey is the higher-volume engine (22.2 PPG) and Phoenix’s main closer.

• PJC is the Breakers’ whole steering wheel (17.2 PPG, 7.5 APG). If Phoenix can make him work for touch time and keep him off the line, Breakers’ offense often stalls.

2) “Second dagger” scoring: Ian Clark & Owen Foxwell vs Breakers’ help defense

• Phoenix have multiple perimeter creators: Clark 12.4 PPG (in his games), Foxwell 11.9 PPG, plus extra playmaking. That’s how favorites separate late.

• Breakers’ defense isn’t awful, but they’ve struggled to keep good offenses under control across 40 minutes (season profile).

3) Wings: Izaiah Brockington & Karim Lopez vs Phoenix’s perimeter length

• Brockington (15.4 PPG) is the cleanest “get-a-bucket” wing they’ve got.

• Lopez (11.8 PPG, 6.1 RPG, 1.1 BPG) brings rim pressure + defensive events, but he’s also young enough to get baited into foul/turnover trouble vs a disciplined attack.

• Phoenix have multiple capable matchups on them (Sobey/Clark/Foxwell/longer wings), so NZ’s wing scoring usually has to be efficient to keep pace.

4) The big swing: Phoenix rebounding vs Breakers’ thin frontcourt

• Phoenix: John Brown is a chaos merchant on the glass (6.4 RPG, 3.7 ORB), plus Jordan Hunter (12.2 PPG, 6.1 RPG).

• Breakers: their top rebound/points bigs (Mennenga, Baker) are listed out, which makes protecting the defensive glass and the rim a lot harder.
  Translation: Phoenix are more likely to win the “extra possessions” battle (OREB + second-chance points), which is exactly what you want when laying points.

5) Head-to-head confidence: Phoenix have already solved this matchup

• Phoenix are 3–0 vs Breakers this season and have scored ~100.7 PPG across those games.

• Breakers vs Phoenix: ~92.3 PPG in the season series.

Why I am betting Phoenix -7.5

1. Massive season scoring margin gap: Phoenix +8.5-ish by points-for/against vs Breakers negative margin.

2. Recent form: Phoenix 7–3 last 10 with several double-digit wins; Breakers 4–6 with at least one severe offensive collapse.

3. Health + depth advantage: Breakers’ listed outs hit ball-handling depth and (especially) frontcourt structure; Phoenix show clean availability.

4. Rebounding/second-chance edge: Brown/Hunter vs a shortened NZ front line is a classic “favorite extends lead with extra shots” script.

5. Matchup proof: Phoenix already beat them in New Zealand earlier (and have swept the season series).

6. Breakers’ home trend isn’t scary: 5–8 at home overall—so you’re not fading some fortress arena situation.