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 UTA MIN
Points 107.8 120.8
Total Points   228.7
Points From 2-Pointers 52.7 58.5
Points From 3-Pointers 34.9 44.2
Points From Free Throws 20.3 18.1
Shooting UTA MIN
Field Goals Made 38.0 44.0
Field Goals Attempted 86.9 87.7
Field Goal % 43.7% 50.2%
2 Pointers Made 26.4 29.3
2 Pointers Attempted 53.7 52.5
2 Point Shooting % 49.1% 55.8%
3 Pointers Made 11.6 14.7
3 Pointers Attempted 33.1 35.2
3 Point Shooting % 35.1% 41.8%
Free Throws Made 20.3 18.1
Free Throws Attempted 24.2 23.5
Free Throw % 83.7% 77.2%
Ball Control UTA MIN
Rebounds 48.7 47.7
Rebounds - Defensive 35.3 36.6
Rebounds - Offensive 13.5 11.1
Turnovers 14.6 11.5
Blocked Shots 4.6 7.6
Steals 5.9 8.1
Fouls 18.0 17.2

Playing Style Advantage: Utah

Expected Effect: Less than 0.1 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 UTA MIN
Total Possessions 101.7
Effective Scoring Chances 100.6 101.3
% of Possessions with UTA MIN
2 Point Attempt 45.4% 45.8%
3 Point Attempt 28.0% 30.7%
Player Fouled 16.9% 17.7%
Turnover 14.3% 11.3%
Opponent Steal 8.0% 5.8%
Odds Per Shot Taken UTA MIN
Shot Blocked 8.8% 5.4%
Offensive Rebound 26.9% 23.9%