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 NO UTA
Points 121.6 112.3
Total Points   233.9
Points From 2-Pointers 62.2 53.8
Points From 3-Pointers 41.9 40.1
Points From Free Throws 17.5 18.4
Shooting NO UTA
Field Goals Made 45.1 40.3
Field Goals Attempted 89.9 86.5
Field Goal % 50.1% 46.5%
2 Pointers Made 31.1 26.9
2 Pointers Attempted 55.3 47.6
2 Point Shooting % 56.2% 56.5%
3 Pointers Made 14.0 13.4
3 Pointers Attempted 34.6 38.9
3 Point Shooting % 40.4% 34.4%
Free Throws Made 17.5 18.4
Free Throws Attempted 22.6 22.0
Free Throw % 77.6% 83.7%
Ball Control NO UTA
Rebounds 47.0 47.8
Rebounds - Defensive 35.1 35.3
Rebounds - Offensive 11.9 12.5
Turnovers 10.6 14.5
Blocked Shots 5.8 5.2
Steals 8.3 5.1
Fouls 16.8 16.1

Playing Style Advantage: New Orleans

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 NO UTA
Total Possessions 101.4
Effective Scoring Chances 102.7 99.4
% of Possessions with NO UTA
2 Point Attempt 48.0% 40.9%
3 Point Attempt 30.0% 33.5%
Player Fouled 15.8% 16.6%
Turnover 10.4% 14.3%
Opponent Steal 5.0% 8.2%
Odds Per Shot Taken NO UTA
Shot Blocked 6.1% 6.6%
Offensive Rebound 25.2% 26.2%