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 CHA UTA
Points 115.2 118.5
Total Points   233.7
Points From 2-Pointers 57.1 59.6
Points From 3-Pointers 43.4 40.9
Points From Free Throws 14.7 18.0
Shooting CHA UTA
Field Goals Made 43.0 43.4
Field Goals Attempted 89.6 87.8
Field Goal % 48.0% 49.5%
2 Pointers Made 28.6 29.8
2 Pointers Attempted 52.4 50.4
2 Point Shooting % 54.5% 59.1%
3 Pointers Made 14.5 13.6
3 Pointers Attempted 37.2 37.4
3 Point Shooting % 38.8% 36.5%
Free Throws Made 14.7 18.0
Free Throws Attempted 18.7 21.5
Free Throw % 78.9% 83.7%
Ball Control CHA UTA
Rebounds 42.5 51.5
Rebounds - Defensive 32.4 38.2
Rebounds - Offensive 10.1 13.3
Turnovers 11.3 14.1
Blocked Shots 5.5 4.8
Steals 7.2 5.5
Fouls 16.0 15.5

Playing Style Advantage: Charlotte

Expected Effect: +0.3 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 CHA UTA
Total Possessions 101.3
Effective Scoring Chances 100.2 100.5
% of Possessions with CHA UTA
2 Point Attempt 46.2% 43.2%
3 Point Attempt 32.9% 32.0%
Player Fouled 15.3% 15.7%
Turnover 11.1% 13.9%
Opponent Steal 5.5% 7.1%
Odds Per Shot Taken CHA UTA
Shot Blocked 5.6% 6.2%
Offensive Rebound 20.9% 29.1%