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 NEOM CSU
Points 60.8 78.0
Total Points   138.8
Points From 2-Pointers 30.8 40.1
Points From 3-Pointers 14.3 23.6
Points From Free Throws 15.7 14.4
Shooting NEOM CSU
Field Goals Made 20.2 27.9
Field Goals Attempted 53.3 53.5
Field Goal % 37.9% 52.1%
2 Pointers Made 15.4 20.0
2 Pointers Attempted 36.4 31.6
2 Point Shooting % 42.3% 63.5%
3 Pointers Made 4.8 7.9
3 Pointers Attempted 16.8 22.0
3 Point Shooting % 28.3% 35.8%
Free Throws Made 15.7 14.4
Free Throws Attempted 20.9 19.2
Free Throw % 75.0% 74.7%
Ball Control NEOM CSU
Rebounds 29.8 34.7
Rebounds - Defensive 21.9 28.1
Rebounds - Offensive 7.9 6.6
Turnovers 9.4 8.7
Blocked Shots 1.4 2.6
Steals 4.3 4.9
Fouls 16.3 16.1

Playing Style Advantage: Neb Omaha

Expected Effect: +0.3 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 NEOM CSU
Total Possessions 67.4
Effective Scoring Chances 65.9 65.3
% of Possessions with NEOM CSU
2 Point Attempt 47.8% 42.3%
3 Point Attempt 22.0% 29.4%
Player Fouled 23.8% 24.2%
Turnover 13.9% 12.9%
Opponent Steal 7.3% 6.3%
Odds Per Shot Taken NEOM CSU
Shot Blocked 4.9% 2.7%
Offensive Rebound 21.9% 23.1%