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 MRST QUIN
Points 64.8 66.6
Total Points   131.4
Points From 2-Pointers 31.0 32.8
Points From 3-Pointers 22.2 19.7
Points From Free Throws 11.5 14.1
Shooting MRST QUIN
Field Goals Made 22.9 23.0
Field Goals Attempted 54.5 55.9
Field Goal % 42.1% 41.1%
2 Pointers Made 15.5 16.4
2 Pointers Attempted 33.7 35.7
2 Point Shooting % 46.0% 46.0%
3 Pointers Made 7.4 6.6
3 Pointers Attempted 20.7 20.2
3 Point Shooting % 35.7% 32.6%
Free Throws Made 11.5 14.1
Free Throws Attempted 15.9 18.4
Free Throw % 72.8% 76.5%
Ball Control MRST QUIN
Rebounds 32.2 36.7
Rebounds - Defensive 24.7 26.3
Rebounds - Offensive 7.4 10.4
Turnovers 11.8 11.5
Blocked Shots 3.1 2.9
Steals 5.8 7.2
Fouls 13.2 14.2

Playing Style Advantage: Quinnipiac

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 MRST QUIN
Total Possessions 68.6
Effective Scoring Chances 64.2 67.5
% of Possessions with MRST QUIN
2 Point Attempt 43.7% 44.5%
3 Point Attempt 26.9% 25.2%
Player Fouled 20.7% 19.2%
Turnover 17.2% 16.7%
Opponent Steal 10.5% 8.5%
Odds Per Shot Taken MRST QUIN
Shot Blocked 5.3% 5.8%
Offensive Rebound 22.0% 29.6%