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 LAC UTA
Points 124.5 116.4
Total Points   240.9
Points From 2-Pointers 60.4 57.4
Points From 3-Pointers 45.2 40.4
Points From Free Throws 18.9 18.6
Shooting LAC UTA
Field Goals Made 45.3 42.2
Field Goals Attempted 88.7 90.0
Field Goal % 51.0% 46.9%
2 Pointers Made 30.2 28.7
2 Pointers Attempted 53.3 53.3
2 Point Shooting % 56.7% 53.9%
3 Pointers Made 15.1 13.5
3 Pointers Attempted 35.4 36.7
3 Point Shooting % 42.5% 36.6%
Free Throws Made 18.9 18.6
Free Throws Attempted 22.8 22.2
Free Throw % 82.9% 83.8%
Ball Control LAC UTA
Rebounds 45.6 48.7
Rebounds - Defensive 34.8 34.3
Rebounds - Offensive 10.8 14.3
Turnovers 10.6 12.8
Blocked Shots 6.1 5.0
Steals 7.6 5.6
Fouls 16.8 17.1

Playing Style Advantage: Utah

Expected Effect: +0.2 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 LAC UTA
Total Possessions 101.4
Effective Scoring Chances 101.7 102.9
% of Possessions with LAC UTA
2 Point Attempt 46.6% 45.1%
3 Point Attempt 31.0% 31.1%
Player Fouled 16.8% 16.6%
Turnover 10.4% 12.7%
Opponent Steal 5.5% 7.5%
Odds Per Shot Taken LAC UTA
Shot Blocked 5.6% 7.0%
Offensive Rebound 23.9% 29.2%