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 122.1 112.6
Total Points   234.7
Points From 2-Pointers 61.6 53.7
Points From 3-Pointers 42.6 40.4
Points From Free Throws 17.9 18.5
Shooting NO UTA
Field Goals Made 45.0 40.3
Field Goals Attempted 89.8 86.6
Field Goal % 50.1% 46.6%
2 Pointers Made 30.8 26.8
2 Pointers Attempted 55.0 47.4
2 Point Shooting % 56.1% 56.6%
3 Pointers Made 14.2 13.5
3 Pointers Attempted 34.9 39.2
3 Point Shooting % 40.7% 34.4%
Free Throws Made 17.9 18.5
Free Throws Attempted 23.1 22.1
Free Throw % 77.4% 83.7%
Ball Control NO UTA
Rebounds 47.0 47.9
Rebounds - Defensive 35.2 35.5
Rebounds - Offensive 11.8 12.4
Turnovers 10.5 14.5
Blocked Shots 5.7 5.3
Steals 8.4 5.1
Fouls 16.8 16.2

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 101.6
Effective Scoring Chances 102.9 99.5
% of Possessions with NO UTA
2 Point Attempt 47.6% 40.7%
3 Point Attempt 30.2% 33.7%
Player Fouled 16.0% 16.5%
Turnover 10.3% 14.3%
Opponent Steal 5.0% 8.2%
Odds Per Shot Taken NO UTA
Shot Blocked 6.2% 6.5%
Offensive Rebound 25.0% 26.1%