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 CIT UNCA
Points 69.4 77.0
Total Points   146.5
Points From 2-Pointers 37.3 39.1
Points From 3-Pointers 18.5 25.1
Points From Free Throws 13.7 12.8
Shooting CIT UNCA
Field Goals Made 24.8 27.9
Field Goals Attempted 56.5 56.3
Field Goal % 43.9% 49.6%
2 Pointers Made 18.6 19.6
2 Pointers Attempted 37.4 34.2
2 Point Shooting % 49.8% 57.2%
3 Pointers Made 6.2 8.4
3 Pointers Attempted 19.1 22.1
3 Point Shooting % 32.3% 37.9%
Free Throws Made 13.7 12.8
Free Throws Attempted 19.1 17.0
Free Throw % 71.4% 75.0%
Ball Control CIT UNCA
Rebounds 32.9 32.2
Rebounds - Defensive 23.7 25.1
Rebounds - Offensive 9.2 7.0
Turnovers 11.2 10.1
Blocked Shots 2.6 5.2
Steals 5.1 5.6
Fouls 15.1 14.3

Playing Style Advantage: NC-Asheville

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 CIT UNCA
Total Possessions 69.7
Effective Scoring Chances 67.7 66.6
% of Possessions with CIT UNCA
2 Point Attempt 46.2% 44.0%
3 Point Attempt 23.6% 28.4%
Player Fouled 20.6% 21.7%
Turnover 16.1% 14.5%
Opponent Steal 8.0% 7.3%
Odds Per Shot Taken CIT UNCA
Shot Blocked 9.3% 4.6%
Offensive Rebound 26.8% 22.9%