Ole Miss

15-20

GAME THAT MATTERSAT

25.6%Ole Miss

74.4%Texas A&M

MMH WIN PROBABILITY

MODEL SPREADTexas A&M -8.3

PROJECTED TOTAL156.5

MODEL MONEYLINETexas A&M -291

Texas A&M

20-12

MMH MODEL PROJECTION

Projected ScoreOle Miss 74

Projected Total156.5

Projected ScoreTexas A&M 82

Team Comparison

Ole MissMetricTexas A&M

53MMH Power Index58

109.2Offensive Efficiency116.1

109.5Defensive Efficiency108.4

-0.3Net Efficiency7.7

5.4Strength of Schedule4.8

-2.3Last 10 Net Efficiency-7.2

69.5Tempo69.1

50.6%Effective FG%53.5%

14.0%Turnover Rate14.8%

28.0%Offensive Rebound %31.7%

33.8%Free Throw Rate37.5%

-0.2Average Margin5.3

MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE

MODEL READ

Texas A&M HAS THE EDGE

WIN PROBABILITY74.4%

STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE

8–3

MMH comparison metrics

WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMTexas A&M holds the advantage in MMH Power Index (58.0–53.0), offensive efficiency (116.1–109.2), defensive efficiency (108.4–109.5), net efficiency (7.7–-0.3).

Ole Miss COUNTERS WITHstrength of schedule (5.4–4.8), recent form (-2.3–-7.2), ball security (14.0–14.8).

Final

Ole Miss

77—80

Texas A&M

Texas A&M by 3 • 68.8 estimated possessions

Team Stats

Ole MissTEAM STATTexas A&M

29-55FG30-62

53.0%FG%48.0%

7-253PT5-20

28.0%3PT%25.0%

12-15FT15-20

80.0%FT%75.0%

23Rebounds37

4Offensive Rebounds16

17Assists18

11Turnovers13

8Steals3

3Blocks—

18Fouls15

Player Box Score

Ole Miss

Player	Pos	Min	FG	3PT	FT	REB	AST	STL	BLK	PTS
AJ Storr	G	36	6-13	2-7	7-8	3	2	1	0	21
Malik Dia	F	25	10-14	0-1	0-0	5	2	0	1	20
Ilias Kamardine	G	40	5-10	1-5	1-1	3	4	2	1	12
Patton Pinkins	G	27	4-5	2-3	1-2	0	2	3	0	11
Travis Perry	G	23	3-7	2-5	0-0	3	1	1	0	8
Koren Johnson	G	29	1-5	0-4	2-2	2	6	1	1	4
Augusto Cassiá	F	7	0-0	0-0	1-2	0	0	0	0	1
James Scott	F	10	0-1	0-0	0-0	4	0	0	0	0
Zach Day	G	3	0-0	0-0	0-0	2	0	0	0	0

Texas A&M

Player	Pos	Min	FG	3PT	FT	REB	AST	STL	PTS
Rashaun Agee	F	32	7-13	0-1	3-5	10	5	0	17
Marcus Hill	G	28	6-13	0-1	2-3	1	0	1	14
Zach Clemence	F	24	6-12	0-3	2-3	4	1	2	14
Rubén Dominguez	G	24	3-5	2-4	5-5	4	5	0	13
Rylan Griffen	G	23	2-7	2-6	0-0	3	5	0	6
Josh Holloway	G	18	2-2	0-0	0-0	3	1	0	4
Ali Dibba	G	18	1-6	0-3	2-2	2	0	0	4
Pop Isaacs	G	15	1-2	0-1	1-2	2	1	0	3
Jacari Lane	G	11	1-1	1-1	0-0	1	0	0	3
Federiko Federiko	F	7	1-1	0-0	0-0	4	0	0	2

Advanced Game Stats

68.8Possessions68.8

111.9Offensive Efficiency116.3

116.3Defensive Efficiency111.9

-4.4Net Efficiency4.4

59.1%Effective FG%52.4%

62.0%True Shooting %55.9%

15.9%Turnover Rate19.0%

27.3%Free Throw Rate32.3%

45.5%3-Point Rate32.3%

1.55Assist / Turnover1.38

Game Summary

Texas A&M won by 3 points. The game played at approximately 68.8 possessions. The largest advanced-stat separations came in Net Efficiency, 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.