UAB logo

UAB

20-12
GAME THAT MATTERSAT
58.4%UAB
41.6%Charlotte
MMH WIN PROBABILITY
MODEL SPREADUAB -1.8
PROJECTED TOTAL152.7
MODEL MONEYLINEUAB -140
Charlotte logo

Charlotte

17-17
MMH MODEL PROJECTION
Projected ScoreUAB 77
Projected Total152.7
Projected ScoreCharlotte 75

Team Comparison

56.9MMH Power Index49.3
110.5Offensive Efficiency111.6
102.9Defensive Efficiency113.3
7.6Net Efficiency-1.7
0.4Strength of Schedule2.9
2.9Last 10 Net Efficiency-5.2
71.7Tempo65.7
48.8%Effective FG%53.7%
12.4%Turnover Rate18.2%
32.7%Offensive Rebound %33.7%
36.9%Free Throw Rate37.2%
5.4Average Margin-1.1
MMH GAME INTELLIGENCE
MODEL READ

UAB HAS THE EDGE

WIN PROBABILITY58.4%
STATISTICAL ADVANTAGE
65
MMH comparison metrics
WHERE THE EDGE COMES FROMUAB holds the advantage in MMH Power Index (56.9–49.3), defensive efficiency (102.9–113.3), net efficiency (7.6–-1.7), recent form (2.9–-5.2).
Charlotte COUNTERS WITHoffensive efficiency (111.6–110.5), strength of schedule (2.9–0.4), shooting efficiency (53.7–48.8).
Final
UAB logo
UAB
8074
Charlotte logo
Charlotte
UAB by 663.8 estimated possessions

Team Stats

UABTEAM STATCharlotte
28-65FG27-55
43.0%FG%49.0%
4-183PT8-27
22.0%3PT%30.0%
20-20FT12-17
100.0%FT%71.0%
39Rebounds27
16Offensive Rebounds8
14Assists12
6Turnovers8
3Steals2
3Blocks3
12Fouls15

Player Box Score

UAB
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
Chance WestryG376-130-28-8811110020
Evan ChatmanF337-132-43-391000019
KyeRon Lindsay-MartinF196-110-00-050000012
Daniel RiveraF293-60-02-25002008
Dayjaun AndersonG312-81-72-21110007
Quaran McPhersonG142-51-22-22000007
Salim LondonG131-40-13-31000005
Jacob MeyerG241-50-20-04110002
Charlotte
PlayerPosMinFG3PTFTREBASTSTLBLKTOPFPTS
Arden ConyersF375-134-115-622000019
Ben BradfordG376-91-34-472000017
Dezayne MingoG375-162-91-424200013
Spencer ElliottF315-70-21-132000011
Anton BonkeC314-71-11-262030010
Jarne Elouna EyengaF91-20-10-01000002
Nick RichartF91-10-00-01000002
Raul VillarG60-00-00-03000000
Kylan BlackmonG30-00-00-00000000

Advanced Game Stats

63.8Possessions63.8
125.4Offensive Efficiency116.0
116.0Defensive Efficiency125.4
9.4Net Efficiency-9.4
46.2%Effective FG%56.4%
53.7%True Shooting %58.7%
9.3%Turnover Rate12.7%
30.8%Free Throw Rate30.9%
27.7%3-Point Rate49.1%
2.33Assist / Turnover1.50
Game Summary
UAB won by 6 points. The game played at approximately 63.8 possessions. The largest advanced-stat separations came in Net Efficiency, Effective FG%, 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.