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 ECU
Points 77.5 61.3
Total Points   138.8
Points From 2-Pointers 40.4 31.4
Points From 3-Pointers 25.6 17.7
Points From Free Throws 11.5 12.3
Shooting CIN ECU
Field Goals Made 28.7 21.6
Field Goals Attempted 60.9 58.2
Field Goal % 47.2% 37.1%
2 Pointers Made 20.2 15.7
2 Pointers Attempted 35.2 39.2
2 Point Shooting % 57.5% 40.1%
3 Pointers Made 8.5 5.9
3 Pointers Attempted 25.7 19.0
3 Point Shooting % 33.1% 30.9%
Free Throws Made 11.5 12.3
Free Throws Attempted 16.7 17.9
Free Throw % 68.9% 68.6%
Ball Control CIN ECU
Rebounds 43.6 30.7
Rebounds - Defensive 29.6 21.1
Rebounds - Offensive 14.0 9.6
Turnovers 10.6 9.9
Blocked Shots 5.0 2.4
Steals 5.4 6.6
Fouls 12.6 12.6

Playing Style Advantage: Cincinnati

Expected Effect: +0.2 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 ECU
Total Possessions 68.8
Effective Scoring Chances 72.2 68.5
% of Possessions with CIN ECU
2 Point Attempt 42.0% 48.7%
3 Point Attempt 30.7% 23.7%
Player Fouled 18.3% 18.3%
Turnover 15.4% 14.4%
Opponent Steal 9.6% 7.8%
Odds Per Shot Taken CIN ECU
Shot Blocked 4.3% 8.3%
Offensive Rebound 39.9% 24.5%