
Miami (FL) vs Missouri prediction and matchup analysis
Miami (FL) vs Missouri is a Round of 64 game in the West Region of the 2026 NCAA Tournament. The current projected score is Miami (FL) 78, Missouri 74. Compare seed, NET rank, KenPom efficiency, injuries, player leaders, and notable wins to evaluate both teams.
Predictions
Review the projected final score, expected total, risk factors, and historical context for this NCAA Tournament matchup.
Explanation
- Miami owns the cleaner full-profile edge across the season profile and the web resume metrics: better NET, better KenPom, stronger result-based metrics, and better predictive metrics.
- The Hurricanes are the more balanced team on both ends. Their season profile is stronger offensively, but the bigger separator is defense: Miami has allowed materially fewer points per game than Missouri and grades much better in defensive efficiency.
- Miami has more dependable interior scoring and rebounding. Malik Reneau and Ernest Udeh Jr. give the Hurricanes a steadier paint foundation than Missouri has shown lately, especially with Jevon Porter still carrying lower-leg uncertainty.
- Tre Donaldson gives Miami the best table-setting guard in the matchup. His assist production and Miami's stronger team assist rate suggest a more repeatable half-court offense late in the game.
- Missouri's best path is a Mark Mitchell-driven shot-making game plus crowd energy in St. Louis, but Miami has been the more trustworthy away-from-home team and has more quality wins away from Coral Gables.
Risk factors
- St. Louis is an in-state site for Missouri, so this can play closer to a road game than a true neutral for Miami.
- Missouri's ceiling is high enough to beat this pick if Mark Mitchell, Jayden Stone, and the Tigers' perimeter scorers win the three-point variance battle.
- Miami's free-throw shooting is only average, so a close final four minutes could get uncomfortable even if the Hurricanes control most of the game.
Historical context
- No. 10 seeds have beaten No. 7 seeds often enough that this seed line is never safe; NCAA history has the 10-seed winning roughly 39% of those games since the field expanded in 1985.
- Miami already has recent program history on this exact seed line, winning as a 10-seed over a 7-seed in 2022.
- Missouri also has 10-over-7 history of its own, beating Clemson as a 10-seed in 2010, which fits the broader pattern that this matchup tends to be volatile.
Explanation
- A blended efficiency estimate from Miami's offense versus Missouri's defense and Missouri's offense versus Miami's defense lands this game in the low 150s.
- Both teams score efficiently enough to avoid a true grinder. Miami is around the low-80s in points per game, Missouri is around 80, and neither offense is dependent on one single high-usage scorer.
- Miami should be able to score inside and through ball movement, while Missouri has enough shot creation from Mitchell and its guards to keep pace into the 70s.
- The projection is tempered slightly by tournament possession drag. First-round games usually lose a few possessions relative to regular-season pace, especially when the matchup is expected to stay within one or two possessions late.
- A 78-74 style game fits both the efficiency data and the most likely script: competitive throughout, but not an all-out track meet.
Risk factors
- If Missouri turns the game into a crowd-fueled pace game and starts trading early threes, the total can move into the upper 150s quickly.
- If Miami's defense controls the paint and forces Missouri into long half-court possessions, the game can settle closer to the mid-140s.
- Late fouling is a real swing factor here because both teams project to be within reach in the final minute.
Historical context
- The 7-vs-10 line regularly produces close games, which tends to keep totals in the broad middle rather than at true extremes unless one team runs unusually hot.
- Recent NCAA tournament scoring has generally sat a bit below regular-season expectations once neutral-site pressure and shorter rotations kick in.
- The recent upset history on this seed line supports a competitive game script more than a blowout script, which is why this projection keeps both teams in the 70s.
Team Comparison
Compare seeds, NET rankings, KenPom profiles, records, and team production side by side.
Record Statistics
| Statistic | Miami (FL) | Missouri |
|---|---|---|
| Record | 25-8 | 20-12 |
| Conference | ACC | SEC |
| Road | 7-4 | 4-6 |
| Neutral | 3-1 | 2-2 |
| Home | 15-3 | 14-4 |
| Quad 1 | 6-6 | 5-7 |
| Quad 2 | 6-2 | 4-5 |
Team Statistics
| Statistic | Miami (FL) | Missouri |
|---|---|---|
| Team PPG | 81.9 | 79.7 |
| Team RPG | 37.3 | 35.6 |
| Team APG | 16.1 | 14.1 |
| Team SPG | 7.9 | 6.7 |
| Team BPG | 3.4 | 3.5 |
| FG% | 50.1% | 49.0% |
| 3P% | 34.7% | 35.0% |
| FT% | 68.5% | 68.6% |
Rankings
| Statistic | Miami (FL) | Missouri |
|---|---|---|
| Seed | #7 | #10 |
| NET Rank | #32 | #58 |
| KenPom Rank | #31 | #52 |
| KenPom Adj Off Rank | #33 | #50 |
| KenPom Adj Def Rank | #38 | #78 |
Notable matchups
Use quadrant results and marquee games to compare how each team performed against NCAA Tournament caliber competition.

Miami (FL)
Quad 1
- L68-8211/16/2025
- L62-7211/27/2025
- W
Wake Forest81-7701/07/2026 - L59-6901/17/2026
- W75-6602/10/2026
- W77-7602/14/2026
- L83-8602/21/2026
- W
Florida St.83-7302/24/2026 - W77-6903/04/2026
- L89-9203/07/2026
- W78-7303/12/2026
- L62-8403/13/2026
Quad 2
- W
Georgetown78-6511/28/2025 - W
Ole Miss75-6612/02/2025 - W
Notre Dame81-6901/13/2026 - L
Florida St.63-6501/20/2026 - W
Syracuse85-7601/24/2026 - W
Stanford79-7001/28/2026 - L
California85-8601/31/2026 - W
Virginia Tech67-6602/17/2026

Missouri
Quad 1
- L60-8012/07/2025
- L48-9112/22/2025
- W76-7401/03/2026
- W73-6801/07/2026
- L64-9001/27/2026
- W86-8502/11/2026
- W81-8002/18/2026
- L86-9402/21/2026
- W73-6902/24/2026
- L
Oklahoma64-8003/03/2026 - L84-88*03/07/2026
- L72-7803/12/2026
Quad 2
- L
Notre Dame71-7612/02/2025 - L
Ole Miss69-7601/10/2026 - W
Auburn84-7401/14/2026 - L
LSU70-7801/17/2026 - L72-7401/20/2026
- W
Oklahoma88-87*01/24/2026 - W
South Carolina78-5902/07/2026 - L68-8502/14/2026
- W
Mississippi St.88-6402/28/2026
Player Leaders
Review the scorers, rebounders, playmakers, and efficiency leaders most likely to shape this matchup.

Miami (FL)
- 1Malik ReneauF • GP 33 • MIN 28.5FG 54.9% • 3P 35.3% • FT 78.8%18.8PPG
- 2Tre DonaldsonG • GP 33 • MIN 33.9FG 45.8% • 3P 34.4% • FT 77.2%16.5PPG
- 3Shelton HendersonF • GP 33 • MIN 30.8FG 56.3% • 3P 27.1% • FT 58.8%13.7PPG
- 4Tru WashingtonG • GP 29 • MIN 27.6FG 45.2% • 3P 36.5% • FT 74.4%12.1PPG
- 5Ernest Udeh Jr.C • GP 31 • MIN 27.8FG 73.5% • 3P 0.0% • FT 51.2%6.9PPG
- 1Ernest Udeh Jr.C • GP 31 • MIN 27.8FG 73.5% • 3P 0.0% • FT 51.2%9.3RPG
- 2Malik ReneauF • GP 33 • MIN 28.5FG 54.9% • 3P 35.3% • FT 78.8%6.6RPG
- 3Shelton HendersonF • GP 33 • MIN 30.8FG 56.3% • 3P 27.1% • FT 58.8%4.8RPG
- 4Tru WashingtonG • GP 29 • MIN 27.6FG 45.2% • 3P 36.5% • FT 74.4%3.9RPG
- 5Tre DonaldsonG • GP 33 • MIN 33.9FG 45.8% • 3P 34.4% • FT 77.2%3.5RPG
- 1Tre DonaldsonG • GP 33 • MIN 33.9FG 45.8% • 3P 34.4% • FT 77.2%5.8APG
- 2Dante AllenG • GP 28 • MIN 23.8FG 43.1% • 3P 30.0% • FT 58.7%2.2APG
- 3Shelton HendersonF • GP 33 • MIN 30.8FG 56.3% • 3P 27.1% • FT 58.8%2.0APG
- 4Malik ReneauF • GP 33 • MIN 28.5FG 54.9% • 3P 35.3% • FT 78.8%2.0APG
- 5Tru WashingtonG • GP 29 • MIN 27.6FG 45.2% • 3P 36.5% • FT 74.4%1.7APG
- 1Tru WashingtonG • GP 29 • MIN 27.6FG 45.2% • 3P 36.5% • FT 74.4%1.9SPG
- 2Tre DonaldsonG • GP 33 • MIN 33.9FG 45.8% • 3P 34.4% • FT 77.2%1.3SPG
- 3Shelton HendersonF • GP 33 • MIN 30.8FG 56.3% • 3P 27.1% • FT 58.8%1.1SPG
- 4Ernest Udeh Jr.C • GP 31 • MIN 27.8FG 73.5% • 3P 0.0% • FT 51.2%1.0SPG
- 5Dante AllenG • GP 28 • MIN 23.8FG 43.1% • 3P 30.0% • FT 58.7%1.0SPG
- 1Ernest Udeh Jr.C • GP 31 • MIN 27.8FG 73.5% • 3P 0.0% • FT 51.2%1.5BPG
- 2Malik ReneauF • GP 33 • MIN 28.5FG 54.9% • 3P 35.3% • FT 78.8%0.8BPG
- 3Salih AltuntasF • GP 32 • MIN 7.8FG 65.7% • 3P 0.0% • FT 37.5%0.4BPG
- 4Shelton HendersonF • GP 33 • MIN 30.8FG 56.3% • 3P 27.1% • FT 58.8%0.4BPG
- 5Timotej MalovecF • GP 31 • MIN 15.7FG 35.0% • 3P 33.3% • FT 71.4%0.2BPG

Missouri
- 1Mark MitchellG • GP 32 • MIN 33.7FG 55.1% • 3P 35.6% • FT 66.4%18.3PPG
- 2Jayden StoneG • GP 25 • MIN 29.9FG 48.2% • 3P 38.2% • FT 80.2%13.2PPG
- 3Trent PierceG • GP 19 • MIN 28.5FG 49.3% • 3P 39.8% • FT 72.7%10.6PPG
- 4T.O. BarrettG • GP 32 • MIN 23.0FG 47.5% • 3P 21.4% • FT 79.1%8.9PPG
- 5Anthony Robinson IIG • GP 32 • MIN 27.0FG 40.4% • 3P 29.7% • FT 67.0%8.8PPG
- 1Mark MitchellG • GP 32 • MIN 33.7FG 55.1% • 3P 35.6% • FT 66.4%5.3RPG
- 2Shawn Phillips Jr.C • GP 30 • MIN 20.3FG 69.1% • 3P 0.0% • FT 52.8%5.1RPG
- 3Jayden StoneG • GP 25 • MIN 29.9FG 48.2% • 3P 38.2% • FT 80.2%5.0RPG
- 4Jevon PorterF • GP 12 • MIN 17.4FG 49.1% • 3P 25.0% • FT 64.7%4.0RPG
- 5Trent PierceG • GP 19 • MIN 28.5FG 49.3% • 3P 39.8% • FT 72.7%3.8RPG
- 1Mark MitchellG • GP 32 • MIN 33.7FG 55.1% • 3P 35.6% • FT 66.4%3.6APG
- 2T.O. BarrettG • GP 32 • MIN 23.0FG 47.5% • 3P 21.4% • FT 79.1%3.1APG
- 3Anthony Robinson IIG • GP 32 • MIN 27.0FG 40.4% • 3P 29.7% • FT 67.0%2.9APG
- 4Jayden StoneG • GP 25 • MIN 29.9FG 48.2% • 3P 38.2% • FT 80.2%1.9APG
- 5Jevon PorterF • GP 12 • MIN 17.4FG 49.1% • 3P 25.0% • FT 64.7%1.6APG
- 1Anthony Robinson IIG • GP 32 • MIN 27.0FG 40.4% • 3P 29.7% • FT 67.0%1.6SPG
- 2T.O. BarrettG • GP 32 • MIN 23.0FG 47.5% • 3P 21.4% • FT 79.1%1.2SPG
- 3Trent PierceG • GP 19 • MIN 28.5FG 49.3% • 3P 39.8% • FT 72.7%1.1SPG
- 4Jayden StoneG • GP 25 • MIN 29.9FG 48.2% • 3P 38.2% • FT 80.2%0.9SPG
- 5Sebastian MackG • GP 18 • MIN 16.3FG 40.7% • 3P 27.3% • FT 67.7%0.9SPG
- 1Shawn Phillips Jr.C • GP 30 • MIN 20.3FG 69.1% • 3P 0.0% • FT 52.8%1.5BPG
- 2Mark MitchellG • GP 32 • MIN 33.7FG 55.1% • 3P 35.6% • FT 66.4%0.4BPG
- 3Trent PierceG • GP 19 • MIN 28.5FG 49.3% • 3P 39.8% • FT 72.7%0.3BPG
- 4Anthony Robinson IIG • GP 32 • MIN 27.0FG 40.4% • 3P 29.7% • FT 67.0%0.3BPG
- 5Trent BurnsC • GP 21 • MIN 8.1FG 45.2% • 3P 7.7% • FT 50.0%0.3BPG
Injury Report
Check player availability and injury-related production impact before evaluating the final matchup edge.

Miami (FL)
No injuries listed for this team.

Missouri
- Jevon PorterFGame Time DecisionPlayer statsGP 12 • MIN 17.4PPG6.2#9RPG4.0#4APG1.6#5SPG0.8#6BPG0.2#11
- Annor BoatengGOut For SeasonPlayer statsGP 15 • MIN 11.5PPG2.7#11RPG1.8#11APG0.3#10SPG0.3#8BPG0.2#9