Alabama A&M

18-15

GAME THAT MATTERSAT

39.9%Alabama A&M

60.1%Grambling

MMH WIN PROBABILITY

MODEL SPREADGrambling -4.2

PROJECTED TOTAL142.8

MODEL MONEYLINEGrambling -151

Grambling

14-19

MMH MODEL PROJECTION

Projected ScoreAlabama A&M 69

Projected Total142.8

Projected ScoreGrambling 74

Team Comparison

Alabama A&MMetricGrambling

42.3MMH Power Index41.4

105.9Offensive Efficiency100.7

106.6Defensive Efficiency100.4

-0.7Net Efficiency0.3

-6.8Strength of Schedule-5.7

3.3Last 10 Net Efficiency-0.4

68.0Tempo69.9

49.7%Effective FG%49.2%

16.8%Turnover Rate20.9%

28.0%Offensive Rebound %30.4%

45.7%Free Throw Rate42.2%

-0.5Average Margin0.2

MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE

MODEL READ

Alabama A&M HAS THE EDGE

WIN PROBABILITY60.1%

STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE

6–5

MMH comparison metrics

WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMAlabama A&M holds the advantage in MMH Power Index (42.3–41.4), offensive efficiency (105.9–100.7), recent form (3.3–-0.4), shooting efficiency (49.7–49.2).

Grambling COUNTERS WITHdefensive efficiency (100.4–106.6), net efficiency (0.3–-0.7), strength of schedule (-5.7–-6.8).

Final

Alabama A&M

56—73

Grambling

Grambling by 17 • 64.2 estimated possessions

Team Stats

Alabama A&MTEAM STATGrambling

17-51FG28-57

33.0%FG%49.0%

12-253PT9-21

48.0%3PT%43.0%

10-13FT8-11

77.0%FT%73.0%

31Rebounds34

7Offensive Rebounds7

12Assists16

14Turnovers9

7Steals11

3Blocks3

14Fouls15

Player Box Score

Alabama A&M

Player	Pos	Min	FG	3PT	FT	REB	AST	STL	BLK	PTS
Quincy McGriff	Guard	20	3-5	2-4	2-2	1	1	0	0	10
AC Bryant	G	22	3-8	3-4	0-0	3	2	1	0	9
London Riley	Guard	15	2-4	2-3	3-3	1	0	1	0	9
Dylan Mclean	Guard	19	2-7	0-2	4-4	3	1	0	0	8
Darius Ford	Guard	22	2-4	2-3	0-0	1	4	2	0	6
Saliou Seye	F	20	2-3	1-2	0-0	6	0	1	2	5
Lorenzo Downey	Guard	25	1-7	1-5	1-2	3	0	0	0	4
Angok Anyang	F	7	1-2	1-1	0-2	1	0	0	0	3
Chad Moodie	F	31	1-8	0-0	0-0	7	3	2	1	2
Bilal Abdur-Rahman	G	8	0-1	0-0	0-0	1	0	0	0	0
Aaron Smith	Guard	4	0-1	0-0	0-0	2	0	0	0	0
Clance Crosby	F	3	0-0	0-0	0-0	0	0	0	0	0
Jaylen Colon	Guard	3	0-1	0-1	0-0	0	1	0	0	0
Warren Yeh	Guard	1	0-0	0-0	0-0	1	0	0	0	0

Grambling

Player	Pos	Min	FG	3PT	FT	REB	AST	STL	BLK	PTS
Mikale Stevenson	G	22	7-9	3-4	0-0	2	3	0	0	17
Kintavious Dozier	G	29	6-11	0-2	4-5	2	6	2	0	16
PJ Eason	F	27	4-5	0-0	4-6	7	1	2	0	12
Antwan Burnett	G	30	3-9	2-4	0-0	7	2	2	1	8
Cbo Newton	G	29	3-5	2-3	0-0	7	2	1	1	8
Lou Hutchinson	G	15	2-4	1-3	0-0	2	1	1	0	5
James Flippin	F	24	2-7	0-1	0-0	3	1	0	1	4
P.J. Edwards	G	21	1-7	1-4	0-0	4	0	3	0	3
Dupree Fletcher	Guard	2	0-0	0-0	0-0	0	0	0	0	0
Emeka Nnaji	Forward	1	0-0	0-0	0-0	0	0	0	0	0

Advanced Game Stats

64.2Possessions64.2

87.2Offensive Efficiency113.7

113.7Defensive Efficiency87.2

-26.5Net Efficiency26.5

45.1%Effective FG%57.0%

49.0%True Shooting %58.7%

21.8%Turnover Rate14.0%

25.5%Free Throw Rate19.3%

49.0%3-Point Rate36.8%

0.86Assist / Turnover1.78

Game Summary

Grambling won by 17 points. The game played at approximately 64.2 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.