DePaul Blue Demons vs Creighton Bluejays Odds, Picks & Predictions — Thursday, February 26, 2026

DePaul already proved it once — now you’re paying a “revenge tax”

If you’re shopping the DePaul Blue Demons vs Creighton Bluejays odds tonight, the first thing you should know is this isn’t a theoretical upset script. DePaul already walked into this matchup two weeks ago and beat Creighton 72-71 (Feb 12). That matters because the rematch price is basically asking you to believe the earlier result was a fluke… while giving you a pretty chunky cushion on the spread.

The narrative everyone will sell you is simple: “Creighton at home, revenge spot, better brand, bounce-back.” And sure, the Bluejays still carry the reputation. But the timing is messy. Creighton’s last two games were an emotional road win at UConn (91-84) and then a faceplant at St. John’s (52-81). That’s not just a normal L—getting drilled by 29 can mess with rotations, confidence, and pace control in the next one.

Meanwhile DePaul’s been volatile too (2-3 last five), but the shape of their losses is different: they’ve been competitive more often than not, and they’ve already shown they can play this opponent to the final possession. If you’re here for “DePaul Blue Demons vs Creighton Bluejays picks predictions,” the angle isn’t picking a winner—it’s figuring out whether the market is overcorrecting to the logo on the jersey.

Matchup breakdown: Creighton’s offense is fine… it’s the defense that’s leaking

Start with the macro numbers. Creighton’s averaging 76.0 scored and 76.8 allowed, which is a pretty loud signal that their current profile is closer to “track meet” than “control game.” DePaul sits at 68.8 scored and 70.0 allowed—more modest, but also not the kind of team you can assume will get buried every time they go on the road.

ELO-wise, this is tighter than the public treats it: Creighton at 1509 and DePaul at 1494. That’s not “big gap, mismatch.” That’s “one or two possessions on a neutral,” and now you layer in home court and situational stuff.

Form is where it gets weird. Creighton is 3-7 over their last 10, and that includes a home loss to Villanova and the road loss to DePaul. Yes, they also have that UConn win, which will anchor perception, but one spike game doesn’t erase a month of uneven defense. DePaul’s 4-6 last 10—also not great—but less of a collapse profile.

The specific matchup note I keep coming back to is DePaul’s interior production lately. N.J. Benson has been on a heater: 21.0 points and 9.3 rebounds on 86.2% shooting over the last three. That’s not “nice stretch,” that’s “you have to change what you’re doing defensively.” If Creighton’s frontcourt is thin or forced into foul trouble, that’s where spreads like +5.5 start to matter because it keeps DePaul from needing to be perfect everywhere else.

Tempo-wise, the total sitting around the low 140s tells you the books expect a fairly normal Big East game, not a crawl. And if the game gets looser—more transition, more early-clock shots—variance rises, which is generally friendlier to the underdog covering numbers in the +4.5 to +5.5 range.

Betting market analysis: pricing, splits, and what the movement is really saying

Let’s talk current Creighton vs DePaul spread and moneyline pricing, because this is where the story gets interesting.

• Moneyline: Creighton is as short as {odds:1.40} (FanDuel/BetRivers) and as high as {odds:1.46} (DraftKings). DePaul is sitting in the {odds:2.80} to {odds:3.02} range across major books.
• Spread: You’ll see Creighton -4.5 at {odds:1.87} (DraftKings) and -4.5 at {odds:1.85} (BetMGM), but also -5.5 at {odds:1.92} (BetRivers) and -5.5 at {odds:1.95} (FanDuel). Pinnacle is hanging -5 at {odds:1.88}.
• Total: 142.5 is common (with prices like {odds:1.93} at DraftKings and {odds:1.88} at BetRivers/Pinnacle), with FanDuel showing 141.5 at {odds:1.95}.

The first thing you should notice: the market can’t decide if the right number is -4.5 or -5.5. That’s not rare, but when you couple it with the fact DePaul just won the head-to-head, it tells you the books are balancing two competing forces: power-rating respect for Creighton at home versus recency evidence that DePaul can play them straight up.

Now the movement. ThunderBet’s Odds Drop Detector has tracked DePaul drifting in a few places—especially on the spread price—like BetMGM moving DePaul spread from 1.85 to 1.98 (+7.0%), and similar drift at other books. That’s important because drift doesn’t always mean “smart money hates DePaul.” Sometimes it’s just the market leaning into public home-team demand and forcing you to pay more to back the dog.

On the exchange side, ThunderCloud (our exchange consensus aggregator) is calling for the home as the consensus moneyline winner with medium confidence, with implied win probabilities Home 67.3% / Away 32.7%. The consensus spread is -5.2 and the consensus total is 142.5 with a lean over. But here’s the tension: our model’s predicted spread is -2.5 and predicted total is 144.3. That gap between “exchange consensus spread” and “model spread” is where bettors actually make money—when you can identify whether the market is efficiently pricing the matchup or leaning too heavily on narrative.

As for traps: the Trap Detector is basically shrugging here. It flagged low-grade split-line traps on Under 141.0 and DePaul +5.0, but the action recommendation is “Pass” (scores in the 20s-30s out of 100). Translation: you’re not staring at a screaming sharp/soft divergence; you’re staring at a market that’s relatively coherent, with the edge more likely coming from timing and price-shopping than from “the books are asleep.”

Value angles: where ThunderBet’s numbers disagree with the screen price

This is the part most “DePaul vs Creighton picks predictions” pages skip: you don’t need to know who wins—you need to know when the price is wrong.

ThunderCloud’s exchange consensus says Creighton wins about 67.3% of the time. That’s a real datapoint, because exchanges are often sharper than the average public book. But our internal modeling is less convinced by the gap between these teams, and the AI layer is leaning away with a 78/100 confidence and a Strong value rating. When your model spread is -2.5 and you’re being offered +5.5 in parts of the market, that’s the kind of discrepancy you at least owe yourself to quantify.

And here’s the cleaner “math” hook: our EV Finder is flagging a +14.1% EV opportunity on DePaul’s moneyline at Kalshi. You’re also seeing a second DePaul ML flag at +7.9% EV, plus a smaller +5.5% EV flag on Creighton ML at Kalshi. That mix tells you something subtle: the exchange pricing at a specific venue is out of sync with broader consensus, and you can sometimes capture that inefficiency on either side depending on what the rest of the market is doing.

If you’re the type who only bets at one book, you’ll miss that. If you’re shopping 82+ books and exchanges the way ThunderBet does, you can treat the moneyline like a commodities market—buy the best number, not the best narrative. That’s why I always tell people to check the EV screen first and then decide whether they want exposure via spread or ML.

One caution: Pinnacle++ Convergence is 23/100 signal strength here, with an “away” signal but no clean AI + Pinnacle convergence trigger. In plain English: the “sharpest book plus our AI” aren’t marching in lockstep. That doesn’t kill the play, but it should change your sizing mindset. When convergence is weak, you’re relying more on price and less on confirmation.

If you want the full picture—how the ensemble scoring, exchange consensus, and book-by-book deltas line up—you’ll get it inside the dashboard when you Subscribe to ThunderBet. That’s where you can see whether the edge is stable across the market or just a single-book blip.

Key factors to watch live (and before you click “confirm”)

1) The “sandwich spot” and emotional hangover factor. Creighton’s last two were extreme: a big road upset at UConn, then a 29-point loss to St. John’s. That’s the kind of sequence that creates two very different game scripts: either a focused response at home, or a team that presses early and takes bad shots when things don’t immediately go right. If Creighton comes out tight and DePaul hangs around through the first media timeout, the spread becomes more valuable than it looks pregame.

2) Benson’s early usage and Creighton’s foul situation. If DePaul is feeding Benson and he’s getting clean looks (or drawing contact), it forces Creighton to either double (opening threes and cuts) or play softer at the rim. Either way, it’s a leverage point that can swing both the side and the total. If he’s quiet because Creighton bodies him without whistles, you’re looking at a very different DePaul ceiling.

3) Total at 141.5 vs 142.5 and the “over lean.” Exchange consensus leans over, and our model total is 144.3, so the number matters. FanDuel’s 141.5 at {odds:1.95} is a materially different bet than 142.5 at {odds:1.95}. In college hoops, one point is not a rounding error. If you’re playing totals, shop like it matters—because it does.

4) Public bias toward the home “revenge” story. ThunderBet’s read has public bias at 6/10 toward Creighton. That’s not an avalanche, but it’s enough that you can see it in the way some books are comfortable hanging -5.5 while others sit -4.5 with different juice. If casual money keeps coming in on the favorite, you may get a better dog number closer to tip—something you can monitor in real time with the Odds Drop Detector.

5) Decide whether you’re betting “team strength” or “price error.” Exchange consensus says home is more likely. Our AI leans away. The right approach for you depends on whether you’re trying to be “right” or trying to be “paid.” If you’re building a portfolio of small edges, you care more about EV and price. If you’re betting a single game for entertainment, you might care more about narrative comfort. Neither is immoral—just don’t confuse them.

If you want to sanity-check your angle—spread vs ML, total timing, or whether the market is moving because of real money or noise—ask the AI Betting Assistant for a personalized breakdown using your book, your stake sizing, and the exact lines you’re staring at.

Quick shopping notes for DePaul vs Creighton betting odds today

If you’re placing a bet tonight, don’t be lazy with the screen you happen to open first:

• Moneyline shopping matters: Creighton ML ranges from {odds:1.40} to {odds:1.46}. DePaul ranges from {odds:2.80} to {odds:3.02}. That’s a big difference in long-run ROI if you bet dogs regularly.
• Spread shopping matters even more: -4.5 and -5.5 are not the same wager. If you like DePaul, grabbing +5.5 at {odds:1.87} (FanDuel) versus +4.5 at {odds:1.95} (DraftKings) is a classic “points vs price” decision.
• Use the market, don’t fight it: When the Trap Detector isn’t screaming, your edge comes from finding the best number and understanding why the market is shaded—not from trying to outsmart ghosts.

To see the full book grid, exchange overlays, and the specific books where the model disagrees most with the price, you’ll want the full dashboard—Subscribe to ThunderBet and you’ll stop betting into bad numbers by accident.

As always, bet within your means.