Maine logo

Maine

8-24
GAME THAT MATTERSAT
46.2%Maine
53.8%Binghamton
MMH WIN PROBABILITY
MODEL SPREADBinghamton -1.8
PROJECTED TOTAL132.5
MODEL MONEYLINEBinghamton -116
Binghamton logo

Binghamton

8-22
MMH MODEL PROJECTION
Projected ScoreMaine 65
Projected Total132.5
Projected ScoreBinghamton 67

Team Comparison

35.6MMH Power Index32.4
95.6Offensive Efficiency102.2
104.6Defensive Efficiency112.3
-9.0Net Efficiency-10.1
-1.8Strength of Schedule-6.0
-6.8Last 10 Net Efficiency-6.2
65.4Tempo64.2
50.5%Effective FG%51.3%
19.0%Turnover Rate18.5%
19.4%Offensive Rebound %21.5%
38.5%Free Throw Rate42.8%
-5.9Average Margin-6.5
MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE
MODEL READ

Binghamton HAS THE EDGE

WIN PROBABILITY53.8%
STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE
6–5
MMH comparison metrics
WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMBinghamton holds the advantage in offensive efficiency (102.2–95.6), recent form (-6.2–-6.8), shooting efficiency (51.3–50.5), ball security (18.5–19.0).
Maine COUNTERS WITHMMH Power Index (35.6–32.4), defensive efficiency (104.6–112.3), net efficiency (-9.0–-10.1).
Final
Maine logo
Maine
74—76
Binghamton logo
Binghamton
Binghamton by 2 • 72.8 estimated possessions

Team Stats

MaineTEAM STATBinghamton
27-61FG28-62
44.0%FG%45.0%
9-243PT11-23
38.0%3PT%48.0%
11-16FT9-21
69.0%FT%43.0%
34Rebounds44
6Offensive Rebounds12
9Assists15
11Turnovers12
8Steals5
5Blocks1
20Fouls16

Player Box Score

Maine
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
Peter FilipovityForward344-91-18-10142100017
Kellen TynesGuard427-131-21-113200016
Quion BurnsGuard175-92-61-110000013
Jaden ClaytonG405-111-31-212200012
Ja'Shonte Wright-McLeishGuard253-52-40-11120008
Kristians FeierbergsForward311-41-40-07110003
AJ LopezG211-71-40-00001003
Adam CisseForward151-30-00-15004002
Binghamton
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
Gavin WalshF356-112-33-590100017
Armon HarriedGuard456-133-41-387100016
Tymu CheneryGuard425-112-41-663000013
Dan PetcashGuard413-123-84-4101100013
Nehemiah BensonForward234-50-00-33220008
Tariq BalogunForward213-40-00-03101006
Chris WalkerG181-61-40-01100003

Advanced Game Stats

72.8Possessions72.8
101.6Offensive Efficiency104.4
104.4Defensive Efficiency101.6
-2.7Net Efficiency2.7
51.6%Effective FG%54.0%
53.9%True Shooting %52.8%
14.9%Turnover Rate16.7%
26.2%Free Throw Rate33.9%
39.3%3-Point Rate37.1%
0.82Assist / Turnover1.25
Game Summary
Binghamton won by 2 points. The game played at approximately 72.8 possessions. The largest advanced-stat separations came in Free Throw Rate, Net Efficiency, 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.