Tulane logo

Tulane

18-15
GAME THAT MATTERSAT
12.9%Tulane
87.1%UAB
MMH WIN PROBABILITY
MODEL SPREADUAB -13.2
PROJECTED TOTAL152.6
MODEL MONEYLINEUAB -675
UAB logo

UAB

20-12
MMH MODEL PROJECTION
Projected ScoreTulane 70
Projected Total152.6
Projected ScoreUAB 83

Team Comparison

TulaneMetricUAB
44.3MMH Power Index56.9
105.3Offensive Efficiency110.5
109.9Defensive Efficiency102.9
-4.6Net Efficiency7.6
2.7Strength of Schedule0.4
-10.3Last 10 Net Efficiency2.9
68.7Tempo71.7
49.6%Effective FG%48.8%
15.6%Turnover Rate12.4%
22.8%Offensive Rebound %32.7%
44.8%Free Throw Rate36.9%
-3.2Average Margin5.4
MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE
MODEL READ

UAB HAS THE EDGE

WIN PROBABILITY87.1%
STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE
8–3
MMH comparison metrics
WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMUAB holds the advantage in MMH Power Index (56.9–44.3), offensive efficiency (110.5–105.3), defensive efficiency (102.9–109.9), net efficiency (7.6–-4.6).
Tulane COUNTERS WITHstrength of schedule (2.7–0.4), shooting efficiency (49.6–48.8), free throw rate (44.8–36.9).
Final
Tulane logo
Tulane
55—54
UAB logo
UAB
Tulane by 1 • 62.8 estimated possessions

Team Stats

TulaneTEAM STATUAB
21-58FG20-63
36.0%FG%32.0%
8-283PT4-27
29.0%3PT%15.0%
5-5FT10-17
100.0%FT%59.0%
36Rebounds47
7Offensive Rebounds17
9Assists7
10Turnovers8
5Steals5
6Blocks1
11Fouls8

Player Box Score

Tulane
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
Rowan BrumbaughG387-141-42-284100017
Asher WoodsG315-171-63-353200014
Scotty MiddletonF254-94-70-090120012
Curtis Williams Jr.G262-92-60-06002006
Tyler RinggoldF142-40-10-01000004
KJ GreeneG121-20-10-01100002
Luke RasmussenG320-30-30-00111000
Percy DanielsC220-00-00-04001000
UAB
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
Dayjaun AndersonG356-164-120-070100016
Evan ChatmanF404-110-24-6131100012
Daniel RiveraF375-150-12-7111110012
Chance WestryG353-100-62-24400008
Salim LondonG341-90-52-25020004
Quaran McPhersonG91-20-10-02100002
Ari GoochG70-00-00-01000000
Lance CarrF20-00-00-00000000
KyeRon Lindsay-MartinF10-00-00-01000000

Advanced Game Stats

62.8Possessions62.8
87.6Offensive Efficiency86.0
86.0Defensive Efficiency87.6
1.6Net Efficiency-1.6
43.1%Effective FG%34.9%
45.5%True Shooting %38.0%
15.8%Turnover Rate12.9%
8.6%Free Throw Rate27.0%
48.3%3-Point Rate42.9%
0.90Assist / Turnover0.88
Game Summary
Tulane won by 1 points. The game played at approximately 62.8 possessions. The largest advanced-stat separations came in Free Throw Rate, Effective FG%, True Shooting %.

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.