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 ALA VAN
Points 94.3 73.2
Total Points   167.5
Points From 2-Pointers 38.2 37.7
Points From 3-Pointers 40.8 18.3
Points From Free Throws 15.3 17.2
Shooting ALA VAN
Field Goals Made 32.7 25.0
Field Goals Attempted 64.7 62.2
Field Goal % 50.5% 40.1%
2 Pointers Made 19.1 18.9
2 Pointers Attempted 31.4 38.8
2 Point Shooting % 61.0% 48.6%
3 Pointers Made 13.6 6.1
3 Pointers Attempted 33.4 23.4
3 Point Shooting % 40.7% 26.0%
Free Throws Made 15.3 17.2
Free Throws Attempted 20.0 24.3
Free Throw % 76.4% 70.7%
Ball Control ALA VAN
Rebounds 42.6 33.0
Rebounds - Defensive 30.3 22.2
Rebounds - Offensive 12.3 10.7
Turnovers 10.0 8.9
Blocked Shots 3.8 3.4
Steals 4.8 6.2
Fouls 16.9 15.3

Playing Style Advantage: Vanderbilt

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 ALA VAN
Total Possessions 74.8
Effective Scoring Chances 77.1 76.6
% of Possessions with ALA VAN
2 Point Attempt 35.5% 44.6%
3 Point Attempt 37.7% 26.9%
Player Fouled 20.5% 22.6%
Turnover 13.3% 11.9%
Opponent Steal 8.3% 6.5%
Odds Per Shot Taken ALA VAN
Shot Blocked 5.6% 6.0%
Offensive Rebound 35.5% 26.1%