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 FUR ALA
Points 76.8 98.6
Total Points   175.4
Points From 2-Pointers 33.5 49.3
Points From 3-Pointers 27.3 32.2
Points From Free Throws 16.0 17.0
Shooting FUR ALA
Field Goals Made 25.8 35.4
Field Goals Attempted 64.5 64.2
Field Goal % 40.1% 55.2%
2 Pointers Made 16.7 24.7
2 Pointers Attempted 33.7 36.2
2 Point Shooting % 49.7% 68.1%
3 Pointers Made 9.1 10.7
3 Pointers Attempted 30.8 27.9
3 Point Shooting % 29.5% 38.5%
Free Throws Made 16.0 17.0
Free Throws Attempted 22.0 22.3
Free Throw % 72.6% 76.4%
Ball Control FUR ALA
Rebounds 31.6 41.6
Rebounds - Defensive 21.0 30.9
Rebounds - Offensive 10.6 10.8
Turnovers 10.3 9.6
Blocked Shots 2.5 5.7
Steals 6.2 6.5
Fouls 17.4 15.5

Playing Style Advantage: Alabama

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 FUR ALA
Total Possessions 76.8
Effective Scoring Chances 77.1 77.9
% of Possessions with FUR ALA
2 Point Attempt 37.6% 40.9%
3 Point Attempt 34.4% 31.5%
Player Fouled 20.1% 22.6%
Turnover 13.4% 12.6%
Opponent Steal 8.4% 8.1%
Odds Per Shot Taken FUR ALA
Shot Blocked 9.0% 4.1%
Offensive Rebound 25.5% 33.9%