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 MILW CHAT
Points 78.3 83.2
Total Points   161.6
Points From 2-Pointers 36.8 33.2
Points From 3-Pointers 25.9 35.1
Points From Free Throws 15.6 14.9
Shooting MILW CHAT
Field Goals Made 27.0 28.3
Field Goals Attempted 65.6 62.3
Field Goal % 41.2% 45.4%
2 Pointers Made 18.4 16.6
2 Pointers Attempted 38.8 30.4
2 Point Shooting % 47.5% 54.7%
3 Pointers Made 8.6 11.7
3 Pointers Attempted 26.9 32.0
3 Point Shooting % 32.1% 36.6%
Free Throws Made 15.6 14.9
Free Throws Attempted 21.3 19.8
Free Throw % 73.5% 75.3%
Ball Control MILW CHAT
Rebounds 39.2 38.6
Rebounds - Defensive 25.7 27.9
Rebounds - Offensive 13.5 10.7
Turnovers 8.6 9.9
Blocked Shots 4.0 4.3
Steals 5.4 5.1
Fouls 14.9 15.3

Playing Style Advantage: Chattanooga

Expected Effect: +0.1 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 MILW CHAT
Total Possessions 73.4
Effective Scoring Chances 78.3 74.2
% of Possessions with MILW CHAT
2 Point Attempt 43.7% 35.5%
3 Point Attempt 30.3% 37.3%
Player Fouled 20.9% 20.4%
Turnover 11.7% 13.5%
Opponent Steal 6.9% 7.3%
Odds Per Shot Taken MILW CHAT
Shot Blocked 7.1% 6.2%
Offensive Rebound 32.6% 29.5%