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 SPU NIAG
Points 65.7 63.9
Total Points   129.6
Points From 2-Pointers 36.7 32.0
Points From 3-Pointers 13.3 14.4
Points From Free Throws 15.7 17.4
Shooting SPU NIAG
Field Goals Made 22.8 20.8
Field Goals Attempted 53.0 47.5
Field Goal % 43.0% 43.8%
2 Pointers Made 18.3 16.0
2 Pointers Attempted 40.5 32.8
2 Point Shooting % 45.3% 48.7%
3 Pointers Made 4.4 4.8
3 Pointers Attempted 12.5 14.7
3 Point Shooting % 35.6% 32.7%
Free Throws Made 15.7 17.4
Free Throws Attempted 22.1 23.5
Free Throw % 71.2% 74.1%
Ball Control SPU NIAG
Rebounds 33.1 30.6
Rebounds - Defensive 23.2 24.0
Rebounds - Offensive 9.9 6.7
Turnovers 10.1 12.4
Blocked Shots 4.6 2.2
Steals 6.5 4.6
Fouls 19.2 15.2

Playing Style Advantage: Niagara

Expected Effect: +0.4 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 SPU NIAG
Total Possessions 67.0
Effective Scoring Chances 66.9 61.3
% of Possessions with SPU NIAG
2 Point Attempt 52.1% 43.5%
3 Point Attempt 16.0% 19.5%
Player Fouled 22.7% 28.6%
Turnover 15.0% 18.5%
Opponent Steal 6.8% 9.6%
Odds Per Shot Taken SPU NIAG
Shot Blocked 4.7% 8.8%
Offensive Rebound 29.3% 22.3%