UTSA

5-25

GAME THAT MATTERSAT

3.1%UTSA

96.9%UAB

MMH WIN PROBABILITY

MODEL SPREADUAB -23.6

PROJECTED TOTAL154.0

MODEL MONEYLINEUAB -3126

UAB

20-12

MMH MODEL PROJECTION

Projected ScoreUTSA 65

Projected Total154.0

Projected ScoreUAB 89

Team Comparison

UTSAMetricUAB

30.5MMH Power Index56.9

99.0Offensive Efficiency110.5

115.0Defensive Efficiency102.9

-16.0Net Efficiency7.6

-1.2Strength of Schedule0.4

-17.6Last 10 Net Efficiency2.9

70.2Tempo71.7

45.9%Effective FG%48.8%

17.0%Turnover Rate12.4%

30.9%Offensive Rebound %32.7%

29.9%Free Throw Rate36.9%

-11.3Average Margin5.4

MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE

MODEL READ

UAB HAS THE EDGE

WIN PROBABILITY96.9%

STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE

11–0

MMH comparison metrics

WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMUAB holds the advantage in MMH Power Index (56.9–30.5), offensive efficiency (110.5–99.0), defensive efficiency (102.9–115.0), net efficiency (7.6–-16.0).

Final

UTSA

78—81

UAB

UAB by 3 • 67.5 estimated possessions

Team Stats

UTSATEAM STATUAB

27-68FG26-61

40.0%FG%43.0%

13-343PT3-17

38.0%3PT%18.0%

11-14FT26-30

79.0%FT%87.0%

32Rebounds47

12Offensive Rebounds17

15Assists15

5Turnovers9

5Steals3

3Blocks7

19Fouls10

Player Box Score

UTSA

Player	Pos	Min	FG	3PT	FT	REB	AST	STL	BLK	PTS
Primo Spears	Guard	40	10-23	3-8	4-4	2	8	1	0	27
Damari Monsanto	Guard	37	6-16	6-16	3-3	7	2	0	2	21
Marcus Millender	G	40	5-15	3-7	0-0	3	3	1	0	13
Jonnivius Smith	Forward	31	5-9	1-1	1-3	8	1	1	1	12
Raekwon Horton	Forward	23	1-5	0-2	3-4	3	1	2	0	5
Baboucarr Njie	F	17	0-0	0-0	0-0	3	0	0	0	0
David Hermes	F	12	0-0	0-0	0-0	2	0	0	0	0

UAB

Player	Pos	Min	FG	3PT	FT	REB	AST	STL	BLK	PTS
Yaxel Lendeborg	F	37	7-13	0-2	10-11	14	7	1	3	24
Christian Coleman	G	35	5-14	0-0	4-4	9	2	0	4	14
Butta Johnson	G	33	5-12	0-5	1-2	4	3	1	0	11
Tyren Moore	G	20	3-5	2-4	0-0	1	1	0	0	8
Tony Toney	Guard	27	2-4	1-2	2-2	3	0	1	0	7
Alejandro Vasquez	Guard	21	2-7	0-3	2-2	4	1	0	0	6
Ja'Borri McGhee	G	19	2-4	0-1	2-3	4	1	0	0	6
Bradley Ezewiro	Forward	8	0-2	0-0	5-6	1	0	0	0	5

Advanced Game Stats

67.5Possessions67.5

115.6Offensive Efficiency120.0

120.0Defensive Efficiency115.6

-4.4Net Efficiency4.4

49.3%Effective FG%45.1%

52.2%True Shooting %53.8%

7.4%Turnover Rate13.4%

20.6%Free Throw Rate49.2%

50.0%3-Point Rate27.9%

3.00Assist / Turnover1.67

Game Summary

UAB won by 3 points. The game played at approximately 67.5 possessions. The largest advanced-stat separations came in Free Throw Rate, Net Efficiency, Turnover Rate.

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.