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 COLG UVM
Points 62.2 63.3
Total Points   125.5
Points From 2-Pointers 34.3 28.1
Points From 3-Pointers 18.8 25.2
Points From Free Throws 9.2 10.0
Shooting COLG UVM
Field Goals Made 23.4 22.5
Field Goals Attempted 56.2 56.0
Field Goal % 41.6% 40.1%
2 Pointers Made 17.1 14.1
2 Pointers Attempted 36.2 29.2
2 Point Shooting % 47.4% 48.2%
3 Pointers Made 6.3 8.4
3 Pointers Attempted 20.1 26.8
3 Point Shooting % 31.2% 31.4%
Free Throws Made 9.2 10.0
Free Throws Attempted 13.7 13.9
Free Throw % 66.6% 71.9%
Ball Control COLG UVM
Rebounds 36.3 34.2
Rebounds - Defensive 28.8 27.7
Rebounds - Offensive 7.4 6.5
Turnovers 8.5 8.0
Blocked Shots 3.6 3.3
Steals 4.9 4.8
Fouls 11.8 11.2

Playing Style Advantage: Colgate

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 COLG UVM
Total Possessions 65.3
Effective Scoring Chances 64.2 63.8
% of Possessions with COLG UVM
2 Point Attempt 48.8% 39.9%
3 Point Attempt 27.1% 36.6%
Player Fouled 17.2% 18.0%
Turnover 13.0% 12.2%
Opponent Steal 7.4% 7.5%
Odds Per Shot Taken COLG UVM
Shot Blocked 5.9% 6.5%
Offensive Rebound 21.1% 18.3%