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 NE COFC
Points 70.2 79.0
Total Points   149.2
Points From 2-Pointers 40.4 34.3
Points From 3-Pointers 18.5 32.8
Points From Free Throws 11.3 11.8
Shooting NE COFC
Field Goals Made 26.4 28.1
Field Goals Attempted 56.8 60.8
Field Goal % 46.5% 46.2%
2 Pointers Made 20.2 17.2
2 Pointers Attempted 37.5 32.6
2 Point Shooting % 53.9% 52.7%
3 Pointers Made 6.2 10.9
3 Pointers Attempted 19.3 28.2
3 Point Shooting % 32.0% 38.8%
Free Throws Made 11.3 11.8
Free Throws Attempted 15.3 16.3
Free Throw % 73.5% 72.3%
Ball Control NE COFC
Rebounds 32.9 34.6
Rebounds - Defensive 24.5 24.1
Rebounds - Offensive 8.4 10.5
Turnovers 11.3 9.0
Blocked Shots 3.3 2.7
Steals 5.6 6.0
Fouls 13.4 13.0

Playing Style Advantage: Col Charlestn

Expected Effect: +0.2 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 NE COFC
Total Possessions 69.3
Effective Scoring Chances 66.3 70.7
% of Possessions with NE COFC
2 Point Attempt 47.6% 40.2%
3 Point Attempt 24.5% 34.8%
Player Fouled 18.8% 19.4%
Turnover 16.4% 13.1%
Opponent Steal 8.6% 8.1%
Odds Per Shot Taken NE COFC
Shot Blocked 4.6% 5.8%
Offensive Rebound 25.8% 29.9%