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 MIN UTA
Points 121.7 107.4
Total Points   229.0
Points From 2-Pointers 59.0 52.1
Points From 3-Pointers 44.4 34.8
Points From Free Throws 18.3 20.5
Shooting MIN UTA
Field Goals Made 44.3 37.6
Field Goals Attempted 87.4 86.0
Field Goal % 50.7% 43.8%
2 Pointers Made 29.5 26.0
2 Pointers Attempted 52.3 53.1
2 Point Shooting % 56.4% 49.0%
3 Pointers Made 14.8 11.6
3 Pointers Attempted 35.1 32.9
3 Point Shooting % 42.1% 35.2%
Free Throws Made 18.3 20.5
Free Throws Attempted 23.6 24.5
Free Throw % 77.6% 83.7%
Ball Control MIN UTA
Rebounds 47.8 47.6
Rebounds - Defensive 36.5 34.5
Rebounds - Offensive 11.3 13.1
Turnovers 11.5 14.6
Blocked Shots 7.6 4.4
Steals 8.0 6.0
Fouls 17.5 18.0

Playing Style Advantage: Utah

Expected Effect: +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 MIN UTA
Total Possessions 101.4
Effective Scoring Chances 101.2 99.9
% of Possessions with MIN UTA
2 Point Attempt 45.7% 45.2%
3 Point Attempt 30.7% 28.0%
Player Fouled 17.7% 17.3%
Turnover 11.3% 14.4%
Opponent Steal 5.9% 7.9%
Odds Per Shot Taken MIN UTA
Shot Blocked 5.3% 8.8%
Offensive Rebound 24.6% 26.3%