Tulane logo

Tulane

18-15
GAME THAT MATTERSAT
5.8%Tulane
94.2%Tulsa
MMH WIN PROBABILITY
MODEL SPREADTulsa -19.6
PROJECTED TOTAL156.0
MODEL MONEYLINETulsa -1624
Tulsa logo

Tulsa

30-8
MMH MODEL PROJECTION
Projected ScoreTulane 68
Projected Total156.0
Projected ScoreTulsa 88

Team Comparison

44.3MMH Power Index64.8
105.3Offensive Efficiency121.1
109.9Defensive Efficiency104.8
-4.6Net Efficiency16.3
2.7Strength of Schedule0.0
-10.3Last 10 Net Efficiency10.3
68.7Tempo70.2
49.6%Effective FG%55.4%
15.6%Turnover Rate15.4%
22.8%Offensive Rebound %33.8%
44.8%Free Throw Rate42.4%
-3.2Average Margin11.5
MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE
MODEL READ

Tulsa HAS THE EDGE

WIN PROBABILITY94.2%
STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE
9–2
MMH comparison metrics
WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMTulsa holds the advantage in MMH Power Index (64.8–44.3), offensive efficiency (121.1–105.3), defensive efficiency (104.8–109.9), net efficiency (16.3–-4.6).
Tulane COUNTERS WITHstrength of schedule (2.7–0.0), free throw rate (44.8–42.4).
Final
Tulane logo
Tulane
94—87
Tulsa logo
Tulsa
Tulane by 7 • 86.6 estimated possessions

Team Stats

TulaneTEAM STATTulsa
31-67FG30-74
46.0%FG%41.0%
8-223PT10-30
36.0%3PT%33.0%
24-29FT17-26
83.0%FT%65.0%
41Rebounds44
7Offensive Rebounds12
9Assists11
13Turnovers12
7Steals8
1Blocks2
19Fouls19

Player Box Score

Tulane
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
Kevin Cross, Jr.Forward429-161-29-1091300028
Jaylen ForbesGuard405-124-66-751100020
Tre' WilliamsGuard294-71-43-330010012
Kolby KingG324-82-40-072300010
Collin HollowayForward293-70-14-571000010
Sion JamesGuard413-140-51-25400007
Gregg Glenn IIIF92-20-01-21000005
Percy DanielsC31-10-00-02000002
Tulsa
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
PJ HaggertyG437-180-211-1455200025
Cobe WilliamsGuard387-172-71-254300017
Matt ReedF314-103-42-3160000013
Isaiah BarnesG394-92-61-220200011
Jared GarciaF144-60-11-33001009
Carlous WilliamsF373-92-70-010001008
Tyshawn ArchieG91-31-11-22110004
Jarred HallF80-10-10-01100000
Jesaiah McWrightG60-10-10-00000000

Advanced Game Stats

86.6Possessions86.6
108.5Offensive Efficiency100.5
100.5Defensive Efficiency108.5
8.1Net Efficiency-8.1
52.2%Effective FG%47.3%
58.2%True Shooting %50.4%
15.0%Turnover Rate13.9%
43.3%Free Throw Rate35.1%
32.8%3-Point Rate40.5%
0.69Assist / Turnover0.92
Game Summary
Tulane won by 7 points. The game played at approximately 86.6 possessions. The largest advanced-stat separations came in Net Efficiency, Free Throw Rate, Offensive 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.