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 MRST
Points 66.6 64.8
Total Points   131.4
Points From 2-Pointers 32.8 31.0
Points From 3-Pointers 19.7 22.2
Points From Free Throws 14.1 11.5
Shooting QUIN MRST
Field Goals Made 23.0 22.9
Field Goals Attempted 55.9 54.5
Field Goal % 41.1% 42.1%
2 Pointers Made 16.4 15.5
2 Pointers Attempted 35.7 33.7
2 Point Shooting % 46.0% 46.0%
3 Pointers Made 6.6 7.4
3 Pointers Attempted 20.2 20.7
3 Point Shooting % 32.6% 35.7%
Free Throws Made 14.1 11.5
Free Throws Attempted 18.4 15.8
Free Throw % 76.5% 72.8%
Ball Control QUIN MRST
Rebounds 36.7 32.2
Rebounds - Defensive 26.3 24.7
Rebounds - Offensive 10.4 7.4
Turnovers 11.5 11.8
Blocked Shots 2.9 3.1
Steals 7.2 5.8
Fouls 14.2 13.2

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 MRST
Total Possessions 68.6
Effective Scoring Chances 67.5 64.2
% of Possessions with QUIN MRST
2 Point Attempt 44.5% 43.7%
3 Point Attempt 25.2% 26.9%
Player Fouled 19.2% 20.7%
Turnover 16.7% 17.2%
Opponent Steal 8.5% 10.5%
Odds Per Shot Taken QUIN MRST
Shot Blocked 5.8% 5.3%
Offensive Rebound 29.6% 22.0%