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 SIE QUIN
Points 62.6 77.2
Total Points   139.8
Points From 2-Pointers 32.7 42.1
Points From 3-Pointers 18.7 22.0
Points From Free Throws 11.2 13.1
Shooting SIE QUIN
Field Goals Made 22.6 28.4
Field Goals Attempted 56.9 63.8
Field Goal % 39.7% 44.4%
2 Pointers Made 16.4 21.0
2 Pointers Attempted 36.1 42.5
2 Point Shooting % 45.3% 49.5%
3 Pointers Made 6.2 7.3
3 Pointers Attempted 20.8 21.3
3 Point Shooting % 30.0% 34.4%
Free Throws Made 11.2 13.1
Free Throws Attempted 16.3 17.2
Free Throw % 68.7% 76.5%
Ball Control SIE QUIN
Rebounds 36.3 37.9
Rebounds - Defensive 24.8 25.4
Rebounds - Offensive 11.5 12.5
Turnovers 14.0 8.6
Blocked Shots 4.2 3.7
Steals 4.5 8.7
Fouls 12.4 13.5

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 SIE QUIN
Total Possessions 70.2
Effective Scoring Chances 67.7 74.1
% of Possessions with SIE QUIN
2 Point Attempt 43.4% 50.4%
3 Point Attempt 25.1% 25.3%
Player Fouled 19.2% 17.6%
Turnover 19.9% 12.2%
Opponent Steal 12.4% 6.4%
Odds Per Shot Taken SIE QUIN
Shot Blocked 5.9% 7.6%
Offensive Rebound 31.1% 33.5%