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 UTM TENN
Points 64.2 90.5
Total Points   154.6
Points From 2-Pointers 24.6 40.1
Points From 3-Pointers 24.7 35.2
Points From Free Throws 14.9 15.2
Shooting UTM TENN
Field Goals Made 20.5 31.8
Field Goals Attempted 61.2 68.2
Field Goal % 33.5% 46.6%
2 Pointers Made 12.3 20.0
2 Pointers Attempted 35.1 35.3
2 Point Shooting % 35.0% 56.8%
3 Pointers Made 8.2 11.7
3 Pointers Attempted 26.1 32.9
3 Point Shooting % 31.6% 35.7%
Free Throws Made 14.9 15.2
Free Throws Attempted 19.7 20.1
Free Throw % 75.6% 75.4%
Ball Control UTM TENN
Rebounds 35.8 46.0
Rebounds - Defensive 27.0 33.6
Rebounds - Offensive 8.8 12.3
Turnovers 11.6 6.5
Blocked Shots 1.5 6.6
Steals 4.1 7.4
Fouls 14.6 14.4

Playing Style Advantage: TN Martin

Expected Effect: +1.1 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 UTM TENN
Total Possessions 74.9
Effective Scoring Chances 72.1 80.7
% of Possessions with UTM TENN
2 Point Attempt 40.7% 40.2%
3 Point Attempt 30.2% 37.4%
Player Fouled 19.2% 19.5%
Turnover 15.5% 8.7%
Opponent Steal 9.9% 5.4%
Odds Per Shot Taken UTM TENN
Shot Blocked 9.7% 2.4%
Offensive Rebound 20.7% 31.4%