East Texas A&M logo

East Texas A&M

11-21
GAME THAT MATTERSAT
3.4%East Texas A&M
96.6%Kentucky
MMH WIN PROBABILITY
MODEL SPREADKentucky -21.7
PROJECTED TOTAL151.6
MODEL MONEYLINEKentucky -2841
Kentucky logo

Kentucky

22-14
MMH MODEL PROJECTION
Projected ScoreEast Texas A&M 65
Projected Total151.6
Projected ScoreKentucky 87

Team Comparison

38.4MMH Power Index63.9
101.2Offensive Efficiency115.2
107.5Defensive Efficiency106.3
-6.3Net Efficiency8.9
-1.5Strength of Schedule8.7
-9.1Last 10 Net Efficiency-1.0
69.3Tempo69.9
50.7%Effective FG%53.2%
18.7%Turnover Rate15.4%
26.3%Offensive Rebound %33.2%
31.9%Free Throw Rate38.0%
-4.3Average Margin6.2
MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE
MODEL READ

Kentucky HAS THE EDGE

WIN PROBABILITY96.6%
STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE
11–0
MMH comparison metrics
WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMKentucky holds the advantage in MMH Power Index (63.9–38.4), offensive efficiency (115.2–101.2), defensive efficiency (106.3–107.5), net efficiency (8.9–-6.3).
Final
East Texas A&M logo
East Texas A&M
61—81
Kentucky logo
Kentucky
Kentucky by 20 • 66.5 estimated possessions

Team Stats

East Texas A&MTEAM STATKentucky
23-56FG32-67
41.1%FG%47.8%
10-273PT8-23
37.0%3PT%34.8%
5-11FT9-10
45.5%FT%90.0%
33Rebounds36
8Offensive Rebounds9
12Assists12
14Turnovers3
1Steals8
2Blocks3
12Fouls10

Player Box Score

East Texas A&M
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
Kalen WilliamsGuard348-141-42-244000019
Tommie LewisGuard276-115-81-241100018
Jerome Brewer Jr.F334-63-41-242000012
Alonzo DoddG242-50-01-57200005
Zondrick GarrettForward192-80-20-05001004
Evan PhelpsG171-51-40-03100003
Khaliq Abdul-MateenGuard200-30-30-02000000
James WeathersG190-40-20-00201000
KC UgwuakaziF70-00-00-00000000
Kentucky
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
Antonio ReevesGuard298-145-80-062000021
Tre MitchellCenter328-111-21-181310018
Justin EdwardsForward336-100-34-471000016
Rob DillinghamGuard304-131-63-454100012
DJ WagnerG325-130-11-103100011
Reed SheppardGuard291-51-30-03132003
Jordan BurksF150-10-00-05000000

Advanced Game Stats

66.5Possessions66.5
91.7Offensive Efficiency121.8
121.8Defensive Efficiency91.7
-30.1Net Efficiency30.1
50.0%Effective FG%53.7%
49.8%True Shooting %56.4%
20.8%Turnover Rate4.6%
19.6%Free Throw Rate14.9%
48.2%3-Point Rate34.3%
0.86Assist / Turnover4.00
Game Summary
Kentucky won by 20 points. The game played at approximately 66.5 possessions. The largest advanced-stat separations came in Net Efficiency, Offensive Efficiency, Defensive Efficiency.

Advanced game metrics are calculated by Mid-Major Hoops from team box-score totals. Possessions are estimated. Highlighted advanced values indicate the stronger result for that metric; lower is better for defensive efficiency and turnover rate.