BYU

23-12

GAME THAT MATTERSAT

44.0%BYU

56.0%Cincinnati

MMH WIN PROBABILITY

MODEL SPREADCincinnati -2.0

PROJECTED TOTAL151.6

MODEL MONEYLINECincinnati -127

Cincinnati

18-15

MMH MODEL PROJECTION

Projected ScoreBYU 75

Projected Total151.6

Projected ScoreCincinnati 77

Team Comparison

BYUMetricCincinnati

63.9MMH Power Index61.5

118.3Offensive Efficiency105.3

106.8Defensive Efficiency97.3

11.5Net Efficiency8.0

6.5Strength of Schedule5.1

-2.2Last 10 Net Efficiency14.4

70.6Tempo69.4

54.7%Effective FG%50.6%

15.2%Turnover Rate17.0%

33.7%Offensive Rebound %30.6%

35.4%Free Throw Rate30.7%

8.1Average Margin5.5

MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE

MODEL READ

BYU HAS THE EDGE

WIN PROBABILITY56.0%

STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE

9–2

MMH comparison metrics

WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMBYU holds the advantage in MMH Power Index (63.9–61.5), offensive efficiency (118.3–105.3), net efficiency (11.5–8.0), strength of schedule (6.5–5.1).

Cincinnati COUNTERS WITHdefensive efficiency (97.3–106.8), recent form (14.4–-2.2).

Final

BYU

66—84

Cincinnati

Cincinnati by 18 • 63.8 estimated possessions

Team Stats

BYUTEAM STATCincinnati

24-51FG34-58

47.0%FG%59.0%

10-293PT10-20

34.0%3PT%50.0%

8-11FT6-9

73.0%FT%67.0%

17Rebounds32

3Offensive Rebounds11

14Assists17

12Turnovers11

2Steals4

2Blocks3

12Fouls8

Player Box Score

BYU

Player	Pos	Min	FG	3PT	FT	REB	AST	STL	BLK	PTS
Richie Saunders	G	28	4-8	1-5	6-6	1	2	0	1	15
Egor Demin	Guard	26	5-13	1-6	1-1	0	2	1	0	12
Dawson Baker	G	20	3-6	3-4	0-0	3	0	0	0	9
Keba Keita	F	19	4-6	0-0	0-2	3	0	0	0	8
Mihailo Boškovic	F	9	3-6	2-4	0-0	1	1	0	0	8
Dallin Hall	G	25	1-3	0-2	1-2	1	3	0	1	3
Trevin Knell	Guard	22	1-3	1-3	0-0	1	2	1	0	3
Kanon Catchings	F	15	1-2	1-2	0-0	0	1	0	0	3
Trey Stewart	Guard	9	1-2	1-2	0-0	1	0	0	0	3
Fousseyni Traore	Center	11	1-1	0-0	0-0	3	1	0	0	2
Mawot Mag	Forward	14	0-1	0-1	0-0	2	1	0	0	0
Elijah Crawford	G	2	0-0	0-0	0-0	0	1	0	0	0

Cincinnati

Player	Pos	Min	FG	3PT	FT	REB	AST	STL	BLK	PTS
Jizzle James	G	28	9-14	6-8	0-0	0	3	0	0	24
Day Day Thomas	G	27	7-9	1-1	0-0	4	4	1	0	15
Josh Reed	F	17	4-7	1-3	3-3	2	1	1	0	12
Aziz Bandaogo	Forward	25	4-5	0-0	1-2	6	0	0	0	9
Dan Skillings Jr.	G	21	4-5	0-0	0-2	5	1	1	1	8
Dillon Mitchell	F	27	2-3	0-0	2-2	2	1	1	2	6
Simas Lukosius	Guard	27	2-10	1-5	0-0	2	3	0	0	5
CJ Fredrick Jr.	Guard	12	1-1	1-1	0-0	0	2	0	0	3
Tyler Betsey	F	9	1-3	0-2	0-0	1	0	0	0	2
Arrinten Page	F	6	0-1	0-0	0-0	2	2	0	0	0
Rayvon Griffith	F	1	0-0	0-0	0-0	0	0	0	0	0

Advanced Game Stats

63.8Possessions63.8

103.4Offensive Efficiency131.7

131.7Defensive Efficiency103.4

-28.2Net Efficiency28.2

56.9%Effective FG%67.2%

58.7%True Shooting %67.4%

18.4%Turnover Rate17.7%

21.6%Free Throw Rate15.5%

56.9%3-Point Rate34.5%

1.17Assist / Turnover1.55

Game Summary

Cincinnati won by 18 points. The game played at approximately 63.8 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.