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 RID QUIN
Points 71.8 75.5
Total Points   147.3
Points From 2-Pointers 38.7 37.3
Points From 3-Pointers 18.6 22.7
Points From Free Throws 14.5 15.4
Shooting RID QUIN
Field Goals Made 25.5 26.2
Field Goals Attempted 59.6 62.3
Field Goal % 42.8% 42.1%
2 Pointers Made 19.3 18.7
2 Pointers Attempted 42.1 40.3
2 Point Shooting % 46.0% 46.3%
3 Pointers Made 6.2 7.6
3 Pointers Attempted 17.5 22.0
3 Point Shooting % 35.3% 34.5%
Free Throws Made 14.5 15.4
Free Throws Attempted 19.0 20.2
Free Throw % 76.3% 76.5%
Ball Control RID QUIN
Rebounds 36.6 38.1
Rebounds - Defensive 26.0 25.8
Rebounds - Offensive 10.5 12.2
Turnovers 11.1 9.7
Blocked Shots 4.4 3.6
Steals 5.6 7.1
Fouls 13.6 14.5

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 RID QUIN
Total Possessions 71.9
Effective Scoring Chances 71.4 74.4
% of Possessions with RID QUIN
2 Point Attempt 50.2% 46.9%
3 Point Attempt 20.9% 25.6%
Player Fouled 20.2% 18.9%
Turnover 15.4% 13.5%
Opponent Steal 9.9% 7.8%
Odds Per Shot Taken RID QUIN
Shot Blocked 5.8% 7.5%
Offensive Rebound 28.9% 32.0%