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 RICE UAB
Points 71.5 80.7
Total Points   152.2
Points From 2-Pointers 35.8 42.4
Points From 3-Pointers 23.8 22.8
Points From Free Throws 11.9 15.6
Shooting RICE UAB
Field Goals Made 25.8 28.8
Field Goals Attempted 59.8 61.5
Field Goal % 43.2% 46.8%
2 Pointers Made 17.9 21.2
2 Pointers Attempted 37.0 41.7
2 Point Shooting % 48.4% 50.8%
3 Pointers Made 7.9 7.6
3 Pointers Attempted 22.8 19.8
3 Point Shooting % 34.7% 38.4%
Free Throws Made 11.9 15.6
Free Throws Attempted 17.3 21.0
Free Throw % 69.2% 74.3%
Ball Control RICE UAB
Rebounds 33.0 38.9
Rebounds - Defensive 23.4 26.9
Rebounds - Offensive 9.6 12.0
Turnovers 10.5 8.7
Blocked Shots 4.1 4.8
Steals 5.1 6.6
Fouls 14.3 13.4

Playing Style Advantage: Rice

Expected Effect: +0.5 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 RICE UAB
Total Possessions 70.7
Effective Scoring Chances 69.8 74.0
% of Possessions with RICE UAB
2 Point Attempt 44.9% 49.4%
3 Point Attempt 27.7% 23.4%
Player Fouled 18.9% 20.3%
Turnover 14.8% 12.3%
Opponent Steal 9.4% 7.2%
Odds Per Shot Taken RICE UAB
Shot Blocked 8.0% 7.0%
Offensive Rebound 26.4% 34.0%