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 NIAG QUIN
Points 71.0 77.1
Total Points   148.2
Points From 2-Pointers 37.6 46.8
Points From 3-Pointers 19.4 16.9
Points From Free Throws 14.0 13.4
Shooting NIAG QUIN
Field Goals Made 25.3 29.1
Field Goals Attempted 55.0 59.5
Field Goal % 46.0% 48.8%
2 Pointers Made 18.8 23.4
2 Pointers Attempted 36.6 43.8
2 Point Shooting % 51.4% 53.5%
3 Pointers Made 6.5 5.6
3 Pointers Attempted 18.4 15.7
3 Point Shooting % 35.2% 36.0%
Free Throws Made 14.0 13.4
Free Throws Attempted 18.9 17.5
Free Throw % 74.1% 76.5%
Ball Control NIAG QUIN
Rebounds 30.4 34.6
Rebounds - Defensive 23.2 25.1
Rebounds - Offensive 7.2 9.5
Turnovers 11.7 9.9
Blocked Shots 2.3 3.3
Steals 5.0 7.2
Fouls 12.3 15.9

Playing Style Advantage: Niagara

Expected Effect: Less than 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 NIAG QUIN
Total Possessions 70.8
Effective Scoring Chances 66.3 70.4
% of Possessions with NIAG QUIN
2 Point Attempt 46.2% 53.9%
3 Point Attempt 23.2% 19.3%
Player Fouled 22.5% 17.4%
Turnover 16.5% 13.9%
Opponent Steal 10.2% 7.1%
Odds Per Shot Taken NIAG QUIN
Shot Blocked 5.6% 4.3%
Offensive Rebound 22.2% 29.0%