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 CLEM RUTG
Points 72.1 60.0
Total Points   132.1
Points From 2-Pointers 32.9 29.4
Points From 3-Pointers 24.4 17.0
Points From Free Throws 14.8 13.6
Shooting CLEM RUTG
Field Goals Made 24.6 20.4
Field Goals Attempted 56.4 59.7
Field Goal % 43.6% 34.1%
2 Pointers Made 16.5 14.7
2 Pointers Attempted 33.0 38.1
2 Point Shooting % 49.9% 38.6%
3 Pointers Made 8.1 5.7
3 Pointers Attempted 23.4 21.6
3 Point Shooting % 34.8% 26.2%
Free Throws Made 14.8 13.6
Free Throws Attempted 19.1 20.1
Free Throw % 77.8% 67.7%
Ball Control CLEM RUTG
Rebounds 41.4 35.1
Rebounds - Defensive 32.2 24.7
Rebounds - Offensive 9.2 10.4
Turnovers 11.2 8.9
Blocked Shots 4.1 3.5
Steals 4.7 6.2
Fouls 14.2 13.9

Playing Style Advantage: Clemson

Expected Effect: +1.0 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 CLEM RUTG
Total Possessions 70.0
Effective Scoring Chances 68.0 71.5
% of Possessions with CLEM RUTG
2 Point Attempt 40.9% 46.4%
3 Point Attempt 29.0% 26.3%
Player Fouled 19.8% 20.4%
Turnover 16.0% 12.7%
Opponent Steal 8.9% 6.7%
Odds Per Shot Taken CLEM RUTG
Shot Blocked 6.0% 7.5%
Offensive Rebound 27.2% 24.5%