It’s a battle of elite backcourts as SMU’s Boopie Miller travels to Louisville to face Ryan Conwell and the Cardinals. This best bet analysis explores if the Mustangs’ high-octane offense can survive a hostile road environment in Louisville.
The Setup: SMU at Louisville
Louisville’s laying 9.5 at home against SMU, and this line feels about right when you cut through the noise. Both teams sitting pretty in ACC play with nearly identical records—Louisville at 8-1, SMU at 9-1—but the efficiency gap tells you everything you need to know about why the Cardinals are getting nearly double digits. According to collegebasketballdata.com, Louisville’s adjusted net efficiency of +23.9 ranks 9th nationally, while SMU checks in at +13.6 and 49th. That’s not a marginal difference. That’s a chasm. The Mustangs can score—89.8 per game ranks 20th nationally—but their defensive rating of 99.3 suggests they’re getting into track meets they can’t always control. Louisville, meanwhile, is humming at 93.8 points per game (10th) while holding opponents to just 67.6 (68th in opponent scoring). The Cardinals play faster, shoot better, and defend at an elite level. This number isn’t disrespecting SMU. It’s acknowledging reality.
Game Info & Betting Lines
Matchup: SMU @ Louisville
Date: January 31, 2026
Game Time: 2:00 PM ET
Venue: KFC Yum! Center, Louisville, KY
Point Spread: Louisville -9.5
Over/Under: 161.5
Louisville Moneyline: N/A
SMU Moneyline: N/A
Why This Number Makes Sense (or Doesn’t)
Let’s walk through the math here because it matters. Louisville’s adjusted offensive efficiency sits at 122.3 (14th nationally) while their adjusted defensive efficiency ranks 30th at 98.3. SMU counters with 114.2 on offense (71st) and 100.6 on defense (46th). When you’re giving up that much ground on both ends of the efficiency spectrum, 9.5 points at home isn’t some inflated number—it’s what the data projects. The tempo factor amplifies this. Louisville plays at a pace of 74.1 possessions per game (28th nationally), while SMU operates at 71.3 (95th). That three-possession difference might not sound like much, but in a game where Louisville controls pace and dictates terms, those extra possessions become scoring opportunities for the more efficient offense. The total of 161.5 feels low on paper when you’ve got two teams averaging 89.8 and 93.8 respectively, but Louisville’s defensive rating of 91.7 (19th) suggests they can turn this into a controlled environment. The market’s telling you Louisville wins comfortably and keeps SMU under their season average. I’m listening.
SMU Breakdown: The Analytical Edge
SMU’s offensive firepower is legitimate. Boopie Miller leads the charge at 20.6 points per game (24th nationally) while dishing 6.8 assists (6th), making him one of the most dynamic floor generals in the country. Jaron Pierre Jr. adds another 19.5 (46th), and when you factor in B.J. Edwards’ 5.6 assists per game (42nd), the Mustangs have multiple ball handlers who can create. The problem? They’re built to outscore you, not stop you. That defensive rating of 99.3 ranks 82nd, and while they force turnovers at a decent clip (8.8 steals per game, 60th), they don’t protect the rim consistently (3.8 blocks per game, 128th). Their effective field goal percentage of 53.8% ranks 117th, which tells you they’re not getting elite shots despite all that ball movement. The three-point shooting is concerning—32.7% ranks 217th nationally—and against Louisville’s perimeter defense that holds opponents to 29.7% from deep, SMU’s going to need to manufacture points in the paint. They’ve got the guards to push tempo, but can they sustain it for 40 minutes in a hostile environment?
Louisville Breakdown: The Counterpoint
Louisville’s profile screams complete team. Ryan Conwell paces them at 19.7 points per game (40th nationally), but the balance is what separates them. Mikel Brown Jr. contributes 16.7 (160th) and 5.3 assists (56th), Isaac McKneely provides perimeter shooting at 12.4 per game, and they rebound like a team possessed—43.6 boards per game ranks 10th nationally. That rebounding edge matters because SMU’s offensive rebound percentage of 30.0% ranks just 228th. Louisville’s going to end possessions. Defensively, the Cardinals hold opponents to 37.4% shooting (14th) and force enough mistakes to generate 167 points off turnovers. Their true shooting percentage of 61.6% ranks 24th, which means they’re not just taking good shots—they’re converting at an elite rate. The one blemish? That 52-83 beatdown at Duke in their last five games. But they responded by demolishing Pittsburgh 100-59 and handling Virginia Tech 85-71. This isn’t a team searching for identity. They know who they are, and at home, they’re dangerous.
The Matchup: Where This Gets Decided
This game comes down to whether SMU can force Louisville into a track meet and whether they can hit enough threes to keep pace. Louisville’s pace advantage (74.1 vs 71.3) suggests the Cardinals will dictate tempo, and when you combine that with their defensive rating advantage, SMU’s going to struggle to crack 80 points. The Mustangs average 89.8 per game, but that number’s inflated by softer competition—their opponent points per game allowed of 76.0 ranks 247th, which tells you they’ve been in shootouts. Louisville doesn’t do shootouts. They defend, they rebound, and they execute in the halfcourt. SMU’s turnover ratio of 0.1 (38th) matches Louisville’s 0.1 (17th), so we’re not looking at a possession battle. This is about efficiency and execution. Louisville shoots 36.0% from three (94th) compared to SMU’s 32.7% (217th), and in a game where both teams will attempt volume from deep, that percentage gap becomes points on the board. The paint battle favors Louisville too—they’ve scored 316 points in the paint compared to SMU’s 396, but Louisville’s done it more efficiently. When you’re getting better shots and converting at a higher rate, you win games by double digits.
Bash’s Best Bet
I’m laying the 9.5 with Louisville and feeling good about it. This isn’t a fade of SMU—Boopie Miller’s a stud, and they can score in bunches—but this is a recognition that Louisville’s playing at a different level right now. The adjusted efficiency gap is real, the home court matters, and SMU’s defensive limitations get exposed against complete teams. Louisville’s 122.3 adjusted offensive efficiency against SMU’s 100.6 adjusted defensive efficiency projects to a comfortable Cardinals victory. The Mustangs will make runs, but Louisville’s got too many weapons, too much balance, and too much defensive versatility. I see something in the 85-72 range, which covers the number and stays under the total. Give me Louisville -9.5. The data doesn’t lie, and when you’re getting the better team at home laying less than two possessions, you take it and don’t overthink it.
