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 RUTG MINN
Points 64.4 68.2
Total Points   132.6
Points From 2-Pointers 35.8 30.8
Points From 3-Pointers 15.9 23.9
Points From Free Throws 12.7 13.6
Shooting RUTG MINN
Field Goals Made 23.2 23.3
Field Goals Attempted 60.5 54.6
Field Goal % 38.4% 42.8%
2 Pointers Made 17.9 15.4
2 Pointers Attempted 43.6 31.9
2 Point Shooting % 41.1% 48.3%
3 Pointers Made 5.3 8.0
3 Pointers Attempted 16.9 22.7
3 Point Shooting % 31.4% 35.0%
Free Throws Made 12.7 13.6
Free Throws Attempted 18.7 20.0
Free Throw % 67.7% 67.9%
Ball Control RUTG MINN
Rebounds 35.9 38.8
Rebounds - Defensive 24.5 28.8
Rebounds - Offensive 11.4 10.0
Turnovers 9.8 13.3
Blocked Shots 5.3 4.9
Steals 7.7 6.2
Fouls 13.9 13.6

Playing Style Advantage: Minnesota

Expected Effect: +0.5 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 RUTG MINN
Total Possessions 70.0
Effective Scoring Chances 71.6 66.7
% of Possessions with RUTG MINN
2 Point Attempt 52.3% 38.8%
3 Point Attempt 20.3% 27.7%
Player Fouled 19.5% 19.9%
Turnover 14.1% 19.0%
Opponent Steal 8.8% 11.0%
Odds Per Shot Taken RUTG MINN
Shot Blocked 9.3% 8.9%
Offensive Rebound 28.5% 29.0%