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 UTA ULM
Points 82.3 67.6
Total Points   149.8
Points From 2-Pointers 29.0 34.4
Points From 3-Pointers 34.0 14.8
Points From Free Throws 19.3 18.3
Shooting UTA ULM
Field Goals Made 25.8 22.1
Field Goals Attempted 53.3 55.7
Field Goal % 48.4% 39.8%
2 Pointers Made 14.5 17.2
2 Pointers Attempted 24.0 39.9
2 Point Shooting % 60.4% 43.1%
3 Pointers Made 11.3 4.9
3 Pointers Attempted 29.3 15.8
3 Point Shooting % 38.6% 31.4%
Free Throws Made 19.3 18.3
Free Throws Attempted 26.2 27.5
Free Throw % 73.6% 66.8%
Ball Control UTA ULM
Rebounds 37.1 33.2
Rebounds - Defensive 27.2 21.7
Rebounds - Offensive 10.0 11.5
Turnovers 13.1 12.0
Blocked Shots 3.6 1.8
Steals 6.1 6.4
Fouls 19.6 19.3

Playing Style Advantage: UL Monroe

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 UTA ULM
Total Possessions 73.2
Effective Scoring Chances 70.1 72.7
% of Possessions with UTA ULM
2 Point Attempt 28.6% 46.3%
3 Point Attempt 35.0% 18.3%
Player Fouled 26.3% 26.8%
Turnover 17.8% 16.4%
Opponent Steal 8.7% 8.3%
Odds Per Shot Taken UTA ULM
Shot Blocked 3.3% 6.9%
Offensive Rebound 31.4% 29.8%