NOTE: This model has not been backtested for historical accuracy. We publish it in large part to give an idea of stylistic trends that can be expected (fast/slow, one team dominating the boards and the other shooting a lot of threes, etc).

Box Score Projection

Scoring CIN TLSA
Points 79.6 63.6
Total Points   143.2
Points From 2-Pointers 42.0 30.4
Points From 3-Pointers 24.0 18.0
Points From Free Throws 13.6 15.2
Shooting CIN TLSA
Field Goals Made 29.0 21.2
Field Goals Attempted 63.8 54.8
Field Goal % 45.5% 38.6%
2 Pointers Made 21.0 15.2
2 Pointers Attempted 39.5 34.8
2 Point Shooting % 53.2% 43.6%
3 Pointers Made 8.0 6.0
3 Pointers Attempted 24.3 20.0
3 Point Shooting % 32.9% 30.0%
Free Throws Made 13.6 15.2
Free Throws Attempted 19.7 20.6
Free Throw % 68.9% 73.6%
Ball Control CIN TLSA
Rebounds 44.6 30.1
Rebounds - Defensive 30.0 23.7
Rebounds - Offensive 14.6 6.4
Turnovers 10.6 12.3
Blocked Shots 3.6 2.3
Steals 6.5 6.4
Fouls 14.8 14.1

Playing Style Advantage: Tulsa

Expected Effect: +0.4 points
Our simulation model uses tempo-free statistics to project a detailed box score for this game. This analysis also indicates which team (if any) is expected to gain a relative advantage based on the specific matchup of paces and playing styles.

NOTE: Our simulation model assumes a neutral court setting.

Tempo-Free Projection

Possession Stats CIN TLSA
Total Possessions 72.9
Effective Scoring Chances 76.9 67.0
% of Possessions with CIN TLSA
2 Point Attempt 44.7% 43.1%
3 Point Attempt 27.5% 24.8%
Player Fouled 19.3% 20.4%
Turnover 14.6% 16.9%
Opponent Steal 8.7% 8.9%
Odds Per Shot Taken CIN TLSA
Shot Blocked 4.3% 5.7%
Offensive Rebound 38.1% 17.7%