Vermont logo

Vermont

22-12
GAME THAT MATTERSAT
23.5%Vermont
76.5%UMBC
MMH WIN PROBABILITY
MODEL SPREADUMBC -8.3
PROJECTED TOTAL140.0
MODEL MONEYLINEUMBC -326
UMBC logo

UMBC

24-8
MMH MODEL PROJECTION
Projected ScoreVermont 66
Projected Total140.0
Projected ScoreUMBC 74

Team Comparison

53.1MMH Power Index59.1
112.2Offensive Efficiency113.0
104.7Defensive Efficiency99.0
7.5Net Efficiency14.0
-4.4Strength of Schedule-5.6
12.4Last 10 Net Efficiency24.7
65.4Tempo65.5
54.1%Effective FG%54.3%
14.4%Turnover Rate14.3%
26.8%Offensive Rebound %25.2%
32.4%Free Throw Rate34.1%
4.9Average Margin9.1
MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE
MODEL READ

UMBC HAS THE EDGE

WIN PROBABILITY76.5%
STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE
92
MMH comparison metrics
WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMUMBC holds the advantage in MMH Power Index (59.1–53.1), offensive efficiency (113.0–112.2), defensive efficiency (99.0–104.7), net efficiency (14.0–7.5).
Vermont COUNTERS WITHstrength of schedule (-4.4–-5.6), offensive rebounding (26.8–25.2).
Final
Vermont logo
Vermont
6275
UMBC logo
UMBC
UMBC by 1367.4 estimated possessions

Team Stats

VermontTEAM STATUMBC
22-63FG22-57
35.0%FG%39.0%
10-283PT11-26
36.0%3PT%42.0%
8-10FT20-25
80.0%FT%80.0%
36Rebounds45
7Offensive Rebounds10
12Assists8
7Turnovers8
6Steals3
1Blocks2
16Fouls12

Player Box Score

Vermont
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
TJ LongG277-153-84-481000021
Gus YaldenF317-183-60-0122200017
Momo NkugwaG193-41-10-03021007
TJ HurleyG341-81-52-22110005
Sean BlakeG212-71-20-02400005
Noah BarnettF191-40-02-44010004
Ben JohnsonG161-51-40-01100003
Lucas MariG320-20-20-02300000
Ben MichaelsF10-00-00-00000000
UMBC
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
Jah'Likai KingG356-185-97-850100024
Ace ValentineG313-82-44-725100012
Caden DiggsF263-82-54-421000012
DJ Armstrong Jr.G323-91-62-25000009
Josh OdunowoF183-50-02-27100008
Jose Roberto TanchynF283-41-20-013111007
Cougar DowningG101-20-00-01000002
Riley JacobsF130-30-01-25001001
Paul GreeneF70-00-00-02000000

Advanced Game Stats

67.4Possessions67.4
92.0Offensive Efficiency111.3
111.3Defensive Efficiency92.0
-19.3Net Efficiency19.3
42.9%Effective FG%48.2%
45.8%True Shooting %54.4%
10.3%Turnover Rate12.0%
15.9%Free Throw Rate43.9%
44.4%3-Point Rate45.6%
1.71Assist / Turnover1.00
Game Summary
UMBC won by 13 points. The game played at approximately 67.4 possessions. The largest advanced-stat separations came in Net Efficiency, Free Throw Rate, 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.