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 SPU
Points 63.9 65.7
Total Points   129.6
Points From 2-Pointers 32.0 36.7
Points From 3-Pointers 14.4 13.4
Points From Free Throws 17.4 15.7
Shooting NIAG SPU
Field Goals Made 20.8 22.8
Field Goals Attempted 47.5 53.0
Field Goal % 43.8% 43.0%
2 Pointers Made 16.0 18.3
2 Pointers Attempted 32.8 40.5
2 Point Shooting % 48.8% 45.3%
3 Pointers Made 4.8 4.5
3 Pointers Attempted 14.7 12.5
3 Point Shooting % 32.7% 35.6%
Free Throws Made 17.4 15.7
Free Throws Attempted 23.5 22.1
Free Throw % 74.1% 71.2%
Ball Control NIAG SPU
Rebounds 30.6 33.1
Rebounds - Defensive 23.9 23.2
Rebounds - Offensive 6.7 9.9
Turnovers 12.4 10.1
Blocked Shots 2.2 4.6
Steals 4.6 6.5
Fouls 15.2 19.1

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 NIAG SPU
Total Possessions 67.0
Effective Scoring Chances 61.3 66.9
% of Possessions with NIAG SPU
2 Point Attempt 43.5% 52.0%
3 Point Attempt 19.5% 16.1%
Player Fouled 28.6% 22.7%
Turnover 18.5% 15.0%
Opponent Steal 9.7% 6.8%
Odds Per Shot Taken NIAG SPU
Shot Blocked 8.8% 4.7%
Offensive Rebound 22.3% 29.3%