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 QUIN ME
Points 72.6 66.2
Total Points   138.9
Points From 2-Pointers 41.7 36.5
Points From 3-Pointers 17.8 18.0
Points From Free Throws 13.1 11.7
Shooting QUIN ME
Field Goals Made 26.8 24.3
Field Goals Attempted 61.0 57.1
Field Goal % 43.9% 42.5%
2 Pointers Made 20.9 18.3
2 Pointers Attempted 42.5 37.5
2 Point Shooting % 49.1% 48.6%
3 Pointers Made 5.9 6.0
3 Pointers Attempted 18.4 19.5
3 Point Shooting % 32.1% 30.8%
Free Throws Made 13.1 11.7
Free Throws Attempted 17.2 16.4
Free Throw % 76.5% 71.4%
Ball Control QUIN ME
Rebounds 40.2 31.1
Rebounds - Defensive 28.2 24.1
Rebounds - Offensive 12.0 7.0
Turnovers 11.5 11.6
Blocked Shots 3.3 3.7
Steals 7.0 7.3
Fouls 14.0 12.9

Playing Style Advantage: Quinnipiac

Expected Effect: Less than 0.1 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 QUIN ME
Total Possessions 71.4
Effective Scoring Chances 71.9 66.8
% of Possessions with QUIN ME
2 Point Attempt 50.1% 47.1%
3 Point Attempt 21.7% 24.5%
Player Fouled 18.0% 19.6%
Turnover 16.2% 16.2%
Opponent Steal 10.2% 9.8%
Odds Per Shot Taken QUIN ME
Shot Blocked 6.7% 5.5%
Offensive Rebound 33.3% 19.9%