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 CHAT
Points 69.7 79.4
Total Points   149.1
Points From 2-Pointers 35.3 35.3
Points From 3-Pointers 22.0 33.8
Points From Free Throws 12.4 10.3
Shooting CIT CHAT
Field Goals Made 25.0 28.9
Field Goals Attempted 58.9 57.9
Field Goal % 42.4% 50.0%
2 Pointers Made 17.6 17.7
2 Pointers Attempted 36.9 27.8
2 Point Shooting % 47.8% 63.6%
3 Pointers Made 7.3 11.3
3 Pointers Attempted 22.0 30.1
3 Point Shooting % 33.4% 37.4%
Free Throws Made 12.4 10.3
Free Throws Attempted 17.4 13.7
Free Throw % 71.4% 75.3%
Ball Control CIT CHAT
Rebounds 31.9 35.2
Rebounds - Defensive 23.1 27.5
Rebounds - Offensive 8.8 7.6
Turnovers 8.9 10.3
Blocked Shots 2.2 4.2
Steals 5.3 5.7
Fouls 12.4 14.4

Playing Style Advantage: Citadel

Expected Effect: +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 CHAT
Total Possessions 69.1
Effective Scoring Chances 68.9 66.4
% of Possessions with CIT CHAT
2 Point Attempt 46.4% 35.8%
3 Point Attempt 27.6% 38.8%
Player Fouled 20.8% 17.9%
Turnover 12.9% 14.9%
Opponent Steal 8.2% 7.7%
Odds Per Shot Taken CIT CHAT
Shot Blocked 7.3% 3.9%
Offensive Rebound 24.1% 24.8%