
Queens University
21-14GAME THAT MATTERSAT
31.5%Queens University
68.5%Mercer
MMH WIN PROBABILITY
MODEL SPREADMercer -7.5
PROJECTED TOTAL168.3
MODEL MONEYLINEMercer -217

Mercer
19-13MMH MODEL PROJECTION
Projected ScoreQueens University 80
Projected Total168.3
Projected ScoreMercer 88
Team Comparison
51.7MMH Power Index54.1
118.4Offensive Efficiency116.6
117.0Defensive Efficiency106.5
1.4Net Efficiency10.1
0.1Strength of Schedule-4.4
1.5Last 10 Net Efficiency1.2
71.4Tempo70.9
56.6%Effective FG%53.8%
14.8%Turnover Rate14.7%
29.6%Offensive Rebound %33.6%
37.6%Free Throw Rate38.9%
0.9Average Margin7.2
MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE
MODEL READ
Mercer HAS THE EDGE
WIN PROBABILITY68.5%
STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE
7–4
MMH comparison metrics
WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMMercer holds the advantage in MMH Power Index (54.1–51.7), defensive efficiency (106.5–117.0), net efficiency (10.1–1.4), ball security (14.7–14.8).
Queens University COUNTERS WITHoffensive efficiency (118.4–116.6), strength of schedule (0.1–-4.4), recent form (1.5–1.2).