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 HALL RUTG
Points 69.0 61.8
Total Points   130.8
Points From 2-Pointers 33.4 33.1
Points From 3-Pointers 19.9 17.8
Points From Free Throws 15.7 10.9
Shooting HALL RUTG
Field Goals Made 23.3 22.5
Field Goals Attempted 56.8 62.1
Field Goal % 41.1% 36.2%
2 Pointers Made 16.7 16.5
2 Pointers Attempted 36.8 40.2
2 Point Shooting % 45.4% 41.1%
3 Pointers Made 6.6 5.9
3 Pointers Attempted 20.0 21.9
3 Point Shooting % 33.2% 27.0%
Free Throws Made 15.7 10.9
Free Throws Attempted 19.4 16.2
Free Throw % 80.8% 67.7%
Ball Control HALL RUTG
Rebounds 42.4 34.1
Rebounds - Defensive 30.2 22.6
Rebounds - Offensive 12.2 11.6
Turnovers 14.2 10.8
Blocked Shots 5.8 6.5
Steals 7.0 8.0
Fouls 13.4 13.7

Playing Style Advantage: Seton Hall

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 HALL RUTG
Total Possessions 70.7
Effective Scoring Chances 68.7 71.5
% of Possessions with HALL RUTG
2 Point Attempt 43.0% 47.5%
3 Point Attempt 23.4% 25.9%
Player Fouled 19.3% 19.0%
Turnover 20.1% 15.2%
Opponent Steal 11.3% 9.9%
Odds Per Shot Taken HALL RUTG
Shot Blocked 10.8% 10.6%
Offensive Rebound 35.1% 27.7%