Kentucky

22-14

GAME THAT MATTERSAT

53.7%Kentucky

46.3%Texas A&M

MMH WIN PROBABILITY

MODEL SPREADTexas A&M -0.4

PROJECTED TOTAL158.2

MODEL MONEYLINEKentucky -116

Texas A&M

20-12

MMH MODEL PROJECTION

Projected ScoreKentucky 79

Projected Total158.2

Projected ScoreTexas A&M 79

Team Comparison

KentuckyMetricTexas A&M

63.9MMH Power Index58

115.2Offensive Efficiency116.1

106.3Defensive Efficiency108.4

8.9Net Efficiency7.7

8.7Strength of Schedule4.8

-1.0Last 10 Net Efficiency-7.2

69.9Tempo69.1

53.2%Effective FG%53.5%

15.4%Turnover Rate14.8%

33.2%Offensive Rebound %31.7%

38.0%Free Throw Rate37.5%

6.2Average Margin5.3

MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE

MODEL READ

Kentucky HAS THE EDGE

WIN PROBABILITY53.7%

STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE

8–3

MMH comparison metrics

WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMKentucky holds the advantage in MMH Power Index (63.9–58.0), defensive efficiency (106.3–108.4), net efficiency (8.9–7.7), strength of schedule (8.7–4.8).

Texas A&M COUNTERS WITHoffensive efficiency (116.1–115.2), shooting efficiency (53.5–53.2), ball security (14.8–15.4).

Final

Kentucky

85—96

Texas A&M

Texas A&M by 11 • 75.4 estimated possessions

Team Stats

KentuckyTEAM STATTexas A&M

30-63FG28-58

48.0%FG%48.0%

8-263PT13-28

31.0%3PT%46.0%

17-28FT27-39

61.0%FT%69.0%

41Rebounds38

13Offensive Rebounds9

22Assists16

13Turnovers7

4Steals8

1Blocks2

24Fouls21

Player Box Score

Kentucky

Player	Pos	Min	FG	3PT	FT	REB	AST	STL	BLK	PTS
Otega Oweh	G	37	6-15	3-5	9-12	9	5	3	0	24
Mouhamed Dioubate	F	22	8-9	0-0	3-6	7	1	0	0	19
Denzel Aberdeen	G	30	4-10	0-3	1-2	3	8	0	0	9
Trent Noah	F	12	2-5	2-5	3-3	3	0	0	0	9
Brandon Garrison	F	17	4-6	0-1	0-1	4	1	1	1	8
Malachi Moreno	C	22	2-4	0-0	1-4	6	1	0	0	5
Andrija Jelavic	F	13	2-5	1-3	0-0	1	1	0	0	5
Collin Chandler	G	34	1-5	1-5	0-0	4	3	0	0	3
Jasper Johnson	G	13	1-4	1-4	0-0	1	2	0	0	3

Texas A&M

Player	Pos	Min	FG	3PT	FT	REB	AST	STL	BLK	PTS
Rylan Griffen	G	29	7-12	4-8	3-3	4	0	2	0	21
Rubén Dominguez	G	20	6-11	5-8	0-0	3	0	0	0	17
Rashaun Agee	F	28	4-8	0-1	6-13	8	2	1	0	14
Zach Clemence	F	22	3-8	3-6	4-4	2	1	1	2	13
Pop Isaacs	G	29	3-7	1-4	5-6	6	8	2	0	12
Ali Dibba	G	22	2-4	0-1	4-4	3	2	1	0	8
Marcus Hill	G	25	1-6	0-0	4-6	2	2	0	0	6
Josh Holloway	G	14	2-2	0-0	1-2	2	1	1	0	5
Federiko Federiko	F	11	0-0	0-0	0-1	4	0	0	0	0

Advanced Game Stats

75.4Possessions75.4

112.7Offensive Efficiency127.3

127.3Defensive Efficiency112.7

-14.6Net Efficiency14.6

54.0%Effective FG%59.5%

55.7%True Shooting %62.7%

17.0%Turnover Rate9.4%

44.4%Free Throw Rate67.2%

41.3%3-Point Rate48.3%

1.69Assist / Turnover2.29

Game Summary

Texas A&M won by 11 points. The game played at approximately 75.4 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.