Queens University
0-0GAME THAT MATTERSAT
40.9%Queens University
59.1%Lipscomb
MMH WIN PROBABILITY
MODEL SPREADLipscomb -2.4
PROJECTED TOTAL154.9
MODEL MONEYLINELipscomb -144
Lipscomb
0-0MMH MODEL PROJECTION
Projected ScoreQueens University 76
Projected Total154.9
Projected ScoreLipscomb 79
Team Comparison
50.3MMH Power Index47.8
111.6Offensive Efficiency108.5
109.5Defensive Efficiency108.5
2.1Net Efficiency0.0
-1.9Strength of Schedule-1.9
2.1Last 10 Net Efficiency0.0
70.2Tempo68.9
53.1%Effective FG%52.7%
16.2%Turnover Rate16.5%
30.5%Offensive Rebound %29.6%
36.2%Free Throw Rate33.5%
1.4Average Margin0.0
MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE
MODEL READ
Lipscomb HAS THE EDGE
WIN PROBABILITY59.1%
STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE
9–1
MMH comparison metrics
WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMQueens University holds the advantage in MMH Power Index (50.3–47.8), offensive efficiency (111.6–108.5), net efficiency (2.1–0.0), recent form (2.1–0.0).
Lipscomb COUNTERS WITHdefensive efficiency (108.5–109.5).