Rice logo

Rice

13-18
GAME THAT MATTERSAT
13.9%Rice
86.1%UAB
MMH WIN PROBABILITY
MODEL SPREADUAB -12.2
PROJECTED TOTAL153.0
MODEL MONEYLINEUAB -619
UAB logo

UAB

20-12
MMH MODEL PROJECTION
Projected ScoreRice 70
Projected Total153.0
Projected ScoreUAB 83

Team Comparison

RiceMetricUAB
45.1MMH Power Index56.9
108.3Offensive Efficiency110.5
109.2Defensive Efficiency102.9
-0.9Net Efficiency7.6
-2.2Strength of Schedule0.4
-4.3Last 10 Net Efficiency2.9
68.3Tempo71.7
49.7%Effective FG%48.8%
17.8%Turnover Rate12.4%
35.7%Offensive Rebound %32.7%
34.7%Free Throw Rate36.9%
-0.6Average Margin5.4
MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE
MODEL READ

UAB HAS THE EDGE

WIN PROBABILITY86.1%
STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE
92
MMH comparison metrics
WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMUAB holds the advantage in MMH Power Index (56.9–45.1), offensive efficiency (110.5–108.3), defensive efficiency (102.9–109.2), net efficiency (7.6–-0.9).
Rice COUNTERS WITHshooting efficiency (49.7–48.8), offensive rebounding (35.7–32.7).
Final
Rice logo
Rice
6571
UAB logo
UAB
UAB by 666.4 estimated possessions

Team Stats

RiceTEAM STATUAB
26-68FG26-63
38.0%FG%41.0%
8-283PT6-22
29.0%3PT%27.0%
5-10FT13-21
50.0%FT%62.0%
44Rebounds43
17Offensive Rebounds14
11Assists13
11Turnovers7
4Steals6
5Blocks5
19Fouls10

Player Box Score

Rice
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
Trae BroadnaxG286-141-22-353100015
Nick AndersonG335-142-80-083100012
Bodey HowellG184-103-80-000000011
Jimmy Oladokun Jr.F274-80-01-312012009
Jalen SmithG352-92-72-23211008
Stephen GiwaC72-20-00-14000004
Cam CarrollG201-50-20-03102002
Eternity EguagieF191-30-10-14200002
Trey PattersonF81-10-00-03000002
Andrew AkuchieF50-20-00-01000000
UAB
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
Chance WestryG347-173-65-739110022
Daniel RiveraF408-120-03-591110019
Evan ChatmanF394-100-22-2171120010
Quaran McPhersonG122-61-41-20000006
Jacob MeyerG172-50-10-01000004
Dayjaun AndersonG201-51-40-14011003
Ahmad RobinsonG151-31-20-22110003
Salim LondonG171-40-20-03110002
Ari GoochG60-10-12-20000002

Advanced Game Stats

66.4Possessions66.4
97.9Offensive Efficiency106.9
106.9Defensive Efficiency97.9
-9.0Net Efficiency9.0
44.1%Effective FG%46.0%
44.7%True Shooting %48.6%
16.5%Turnover Rate10.6%
14.7%Free Throw Rate33.3%
41.2%3-Point Rate34.9%
1.00Assist / Turnover1.86
Game Summary
UAB won by 6 points. The game played at approximately 66.4 possessions. The largest advanced-stat separations came in Free Throw Rate, Net Efficiency, 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.