90.73
W
W
W
W
W
Sandringham Sabres
Australia
Saturday Jul 26, 2025 - 05:00 (America/New_York)
Sandringham Sabres vs Hobart Chargers
Stats, H2H, Live Scores & xG
89.55
W
W
W
L
W
Hobart Chargers
Scoring Intelligence Panel
Sandringham Sabres vs Hobart Chargers
N/A
Possessions / Game
League Average: N/A
179
Points / Match
League Average: 177
28.4
( High )
Volatility
League Average: 16.4
🟢 Green = favorable situation (high pace, strong over trend, or very stable totals) ✅ ·
⚪ Gray = neutral, close to league average 👌 ·
🟡 Yellow / 🟠 Orange = warning, results can swing more than usual ⚠️ ·
🔴 Red = unfavorable / high risk (low pace for overs, strong under lean, or very volatile games) ❌
Scoring Momentum (Recent Form)
| Metric | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers |
|---|---|---|
| Average Total Points (Last 5 Games) | 188.80 | 188.20 |
| Previous 5 Avg | 190.00 | 182.40 |
| Trend Line (Last 5 Games) | 175, 202, 198, 230, 139 | 191, 166, 237, 164, 183 |
🟢 Green = value ✅ ·
🟡 Yellow = risky ⚠️ ·
🔴 Red = skip ❌
Team performance vs top opponents
scoring, conceding, and net rating.
| Metric | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers |
|---|---|---|
| Avg Pts vs Top 5 Def | 95.3 | 88.3 |
| Avg Pts Conceded vs Top 5 Off | 88.7 | 97.3 |
| Net Rating vs Top 5 Opps | 0.0 | 0.0 |
🟢 Green = value ✅ ·
🟡 Yellow = risky ⚠️ ·
🔴 Red = skip ❌ —
Values are compared to the team's own season average.
These indicators reflect performance against top opponents (TOP 5 offenses and defenses) and help assess true team strength.
Recent momentum
last 5 vs previous 5 games.
Sandringham Sabres
Hobart Chargers
| Period | Avg Points Scored | Avg Points Conceded | Net Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Last 5 | 99.8 | 82.8 | +17.0 |
| Previous 5 | 97.6 | 88.8 | +8.8 |
| Period | Avg Points Scored | Avg Points Conceded | Net Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Last 5 | 94.6 | 98.8 | -4.2 |
| Previous 5 | 92.0 | 90.8 | +1.2 |
🟢 Green = improving form 📈 ·
🟡 Yellow = neutral ➖ ·
🔴 Red = declining form 📉 —
Momentum analysis shows whether the team has recently been improving in offense and defense, or on the contrary – losing stability.
Sandringham Sabres
Australia - National Basketball League1 South
League Pos.
5 / 19
| Form | Results | PPG |
|---|---|---|
| Overall |
W
L
W
W
W
|
94.05 |
| Home |
W
W
W
W
W
|
90.73 |
| Away |
L
W
W
W
W
|
97.36 |
| Stats | Overall | Home | Away |
|---|---|---|---|
| Win % | 63.6% | 63.6% | 63.6% |
| Total Points Avg | 183.91 | 175 | 192.81 |
| Scored | 94.05 | 90.73 | 97.36 |
| Conceded | 89.86 | 84.27 | 95.45 |
| Pace Avg | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Off. Rating | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Def. Rating | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| ATS Cover % | 0% | 0% | 0% |
* Pace is not a value indicator but shows game tempo — higher numbers mean faster play and more possessions.
Hobart Chargers
Australia - National Basketball League1 South
League Pos.
8 / 19
| Form | Results | PPG |
|---|---|---|
| Overall |
L
W
W
L
W
|
88.32 |
| Home |
L
L
L
W
W
|
87.09 |
| Away |
W
W
W
L
W
|
89.55 |
| Stats | Overall | Home | Away |
|---|---|---|---|
| Win % | 59.1% | 45.5% | 72.7% |
| Total Points Avg | 174.59 | 170.36 | 178.82 |
| Scored | 88.32 | 87.09 | 89.55 |
| Conceded | 86.27 | 83.27 | 89.27 |
| Pace Avg | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Off. Rating | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Def. Rating | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| ATS Cover % | 0% | 0% | 0% |
* Pace is not a value indicator but shows game tempo — higher numbers mean faster play and more possessions.
Scoring consistency tracker
Last 10 games & full season
Last 3
Last 5
Last 10
Season
Hobart Chargers is +10% better in terms of Points Scored
Sandringham Sabres at Home
Hobart Chargers at Away
Full-Time
Quarters
| Scored Per Game | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers |
|---|---|---|
| % Above Avg (+5%) | 67% | 33% |
| % Around Avg (±5%) | 0% | 67% |
| % Well below Avg (-5%) | 33% | 0% |
🟢 Green = potential value signal · 🟡 Yellow = needs confirmation · 🔴 Red = caution. Shares are vs the team's own season average in this context.
Hobart Chargers is +4% better in terms of Points Scored
Sandringham Sabres at Home
Hobart Chargers at Away
Full-Time
Quarters
| Scored Per Game | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers |
|---|---|---|
| % Above Avg (+5%) | 60% | 20% |
| % Around Avg (±5%) | 20% | 80% |
| % Well below Avg (-5%) | 20% | 0% |
🟢 Green = potential value signal · 🟡 Yellow = needs confirmation · 🔴 Red = caution. Shares are vs the team's own season average in this context.
Sandringham Sabres is +2% better in terms of Points Scored
Sandringham Sabres at Home
Hobart Chargers at Away
Full-Time
Quarters
| Scored Per Game | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers |
|---|---|---|
| % Above Avg (+5%) | 50% | 30% |
| % Around Avg (±5%) | 20% | 40% |
| % Well below Avg (-5%) | 30% | 30% |
🟢 Green = potential value signal · 🟡 Yellow = needs confirmation · 🔴 Red = caution. Shares are vs the team's own season average in this context.
Sandringham Sabres is +1% better in terms of Points Scored
Sandringham Sabres at Home
Hobart Chargers at Away
Full-Time
Quarters
| Scored Per Game | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers |
|---|---|---|
| % Above Avg (+5%) | 45% | 27% |
| % Around Avg (±5%) | 18% | 45% |
| % Well below Avg (-5%) | 36% | 27% |
🟢 Green = potential value signal · 🟡 Yellow = needs confirmation · 🔴 Red = caution. Shares are vs the team's own season average in this context.
Offensive Efficiency & Shooting Profile
Where Teams Gain or Lose Value
🟢 Green = strong efficiency or shooting edge · 🟡 Yellow = balanced/average · 🔴 Red = weakness, needs caution. Some stats (like 3P Rate and FT Rate) indicate playing style, not necessarily good or bad — interpret in context.
Possession Control & Rebounding
Assists. Turnovers. Pace
Defensive Consistency vs Season Average
Last 10 & season games
Last 3
Last 5
Last 10
Season
Sandringham Sabres is +16% better defensively (fewer points conceded)
Sandringham Sabres at Home
Hobart Chargers at Away
Full-Time
Quarters
| Conceded Per Game | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers |
|---|---|---|
| % Below Avg (-5%) | 33% | 33% |
| % Around Avg (±5%) | 0% | 33% |
| % Well Above Avg (+7%) | 67% | 33% |
🟢 Green = strong defensive hold (unders-friendly) · 🟡 Yellow = neutral · 🔴 Red = weak defense (overs risk). Shares are vs the team's own season average in this context.
Sandringham Sabres is +14% better defensively (fewer points conceded)
Sandringham Sabres at Home
Hobart Chargers at Away
Full-Time
Quarters
| Conceded Per Game | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers |
|---|---|---|
| % Below Avg (-5%) | 20% | 40% |
| % Around Avg (±5%) | 20% | 20% |
| % Well Above Avg (+7%) | 60% | 40% |
🟢 Green = strong defensive hold (unders-friendly) · 🟡 Yellow = neutral · 🔴 Red = weak defense (overs risk). Shares are vs the team's own season average in this context.
Sandringham Sabres is +6% better defensively (fewer points conceded)
Sandringham Sabres at Home
Hobart Chargers at Away
Full-Time
Quarters
| Conceded Per Game | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers |
|---|---|---|
| % Below Avg (-5%) | 20% | 40% |
| % Around Avg (±5%) | 40% | 20% |
| % Well Above Avg (+7%) | 40% | 40% |
🟢 Green = strong defensive hold (unders-friendly) · 🟡 Yellow = neutral · 🔴 Red = weak defense (overs risk). Shares are vs the team's own season average in this context.
Sandringham Sabres is +6% better defensively (fewer points conceded)
Sandringham Sabres at Home
Hobart Chargers at Away
Full-Time
Quarters
| Conceded Per Game | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers |
|---|---|---|
| % Below Avg (-5%) | 18% | 36% |
| % Around Avg (±5%) | 36% | 27% |
| % Well Above Avg (+7%) | 45% | 36% |
🟢 Green = strong defensive hold (unders-friendly) · 🟡 Yellow = neutral · 🔴 Red = weak defense (overs risk). Shares are vs the team's own season average in this context.
Defensive Matchup
Edge Style vs Style
🟢 Green = Clear defensive edge (profitable trend) · 🟡 Yellow = Neutral (no big edge) · 🔴 Red = Weak defense / exploitable
Defensive Pressure & Disruption
Who Forces Mistakes?
🟢 Green = Strong edge · 🟡 Yellow = Average · 🔴 Red = Weak edge
* Rate = per 100 possessions. · Others = per game averages.
Total Points Hit-Rate
Scoring trends 10 & seasone games
Last 3
Last 5
Last 10
Season
Over X Points
Under X Points
| Match Points | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers | Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Over 130.5 | 100% | 100% | 100% |
| Over 140.5 | 91% | 100% | 95% |
| Over 150.5 | 91% | 100% | 95% |
| Over 160.5 | 73% | 73% | 73% |
| Over 170.5 | 64% | 45% | 55% |
| Over 180.5 | 36% | 45% | 41% |
| Over 190.5 | 27% | 18% | 23% |
| Over 200.5 | 9% | 18% | 14% |
| Over 210.5 | 0% | 9% | 5% |
| Over 220.5 | 0% | 9% | 5% |
| Over 230.5 | 0% | 9% | 5% |
| Over 240.5 | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| Match Points | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers | Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Under 130.5 | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| Under 140.5 | 9% | 0% | 5% |
| Under 150.5 | 9% | 0% | 5% |
| Under 160.5 | 27% | 27% | 27% |
| Under 170.5 | 36% | 55% | 45% |
| Under 180.5 | 64% | 55% | 59% |
| Under 190.5 | 73% | 82% | 77% |
| Under 200.5 | 91% | 82% | 86% |
| Under 210.5 | 100% | 91% | 95% |
| Under 220.5 | 100% | 91% | 95% |
| Under 230.5 | 100% | 91% | 95% |
| Under 240.5 | 100% | 100% | 100% |
🟢 Green = Strong over-trend· 🟡 Yellow = Balanced · 🔴 Red = Weak over-trend
Over X Points
Under X Points
| Match Points | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers | Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Over 160.5 | 67% | 67% | 67% |
| Over 170.5 | 67% | 33% | 50% |
| Over 180.5 | 33% | 33% | 33% |
| Over 190.5 | 33% | 33% | 33% |
| Over 200.5 | 0% | 33% | 17% |
| Over 210.5 | 0% | 33% | 17% |
| Over 220.5 | 0% | 33% | 17% |
| Over 230.5 | 0% | 33% | 17% |
| Over 240.5 | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| Match Points | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers | Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Under 160.5 | 33% | 33% | 33% |
| Under 170.5 | 33% | 67% | 50% |
| Under 180.5 | 67% | 67% | 67% |
| Under 190.5 | 67% | 67% | 67% |
| Under 200.5 | 100% | 67% | 83% |
| Under 210.5 | 100% | 67% | 83% |
| Under 220.5 | 100% | 67% | 83% |
| Under 230.5 | 100% | 67% | 83% |
| Under 240.5 | 100% | 100% | 100% |
🟢 Green = Strong over-trend· 🟡 Yellow = Balanced · 🔴 Red = Weak over-trend
Over X Points
Under X Points
| Match Points | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers | Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Over 130.5 | 80% | 80% | 80% |
| Over 140.5 | 60% | 80% | 70% |
| Over 150.5 | 60% | 80% | 70% |
| Over 160.5 | 60% | 80% | 70% |
| Over 170.5 | 40% | 60% | 50% |
| Over 180.5 | 20% | 60% | 40% |
| Over 190.5 | 20% | 20% | 20% |
| Over 200.5 | 0% | 20% | 10% |
| Over 210.5 | 0% | 20% | 10% |
| Over 220.5 | 0% | 20% | 10% |
| Over 230.5 | 0% | 20% | 10% |
| Over 240.5 | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| Match Points | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers | Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Under 130.5 | 20% | 20% | 20% |
| Under 140.5 | 40% | 20% | 30% |
| Under 150.5 | 40% | 20% | 30% |
| Under 160.5 | 40% | 20% | 30% |
| Under 170.5 | 60% | 40% | 50% |
| Under 180.5 | 80% | 40% | 60% |
| Under 190.5 | 80% | 80% | 80% |
| Under 200.5 | 100% | 80% | 90% |
| Under 210.5 | 100% | 80% | 90% |
| Under 220.5 | 100% | 80% | 90% |
| Under 230.5 | 100% | 80% | 90% |
| Under 240.5 | 100% | 100% | 100% |
🟢 Green = Strong over-trend· 🟡 Yellow = Balanced · 🔴 Red = Weak over-trend
Over X Points
Under X Points
| Match Points | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers | Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Over 130.5 | 90% | 90% | 90% |
| Over 140.5 | 80% | 90% | 85% |
| Over 150.5 | 80% | 90% | 85% |
| Over 160.5 | 70% | 70% | 70% |
| Over 170.5 | 60% | 50% | 55% |
| Over 180.5 | 40% | 50% | 45% |
| Over 190.5 | 30% | 20% | 25% |
| Over 200.5 | 10% | 20% | 15% |
| Over 210.5 | 0% | 10% | 5% |
| Over 220.5 | 0% | 10% | 5% |
| Over 230.5 | 0% | 10% | 5% |
| Over 240.5 | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| Match Points | Sandringham Sabres | Hobart Chargers | Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| Under 130.5 | 10% | 10% | 10% |
| Under 140.5 | 20% | 10% | 15% |
| Under 150.5 | 20% | 10% | 15% |
| Under 160.5 | 30% | 30% | 30% |
| Under 170.5 | 40% | 50% | 45% |
| Under 180.5 | 60% | 50% | 55% |
| Under 190.5 | 70% | 80% | 75% |
| Under 200.5 | 90% | 80% | 85% |
| Under 210.5 | 100% | 90% | 95% |
| Under 220.5 | 100% | 90% | 95% |
| Under 230.5 | 100% | 90% | 95% |
| Under 240.5 | 100% | 100% | 100% |
🟢 Green = Strong over-trend· 🟡 Yellow = Balanced · 🔴 Red = Weak over-trend
| # | Team | W | L | PCT | PPG | OPP PPG | DIFF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Knox Raiders | 17 | 5 | 0.773 | 91.7 | 84.4 | - |
| 2 | Mt Gambier | 16 | 6 | 0.727 | 96.5 | 82.4 | - |
| 3 | Kilsyth Cobras | 14 | 8 | 0.636 | 89.3 | 86.0 | - |
| 4 | Eltham Wildcats | 14 | 8 | 0.636 | 89.9 | 85.6 | - |
| 5 | Sandringham Sabres | 14 | 8 | 0.636 | 94.1 | 89.9 | - |
| 6 | Melbourne Tigers | 14 | 8 | 0.636 | 87.6 | 82.1 | - |
| 7 | Ballarat Miners | 14 | 8 | 0.636 | 87.9 | 88.9 | - |
| 8 | Hobart Chargers | 12 | 9 | 0.571 | 88.7 | 86.5 | - |
| 9 | Nunawading Spectres | 11 | 11 | 0.500 | 87.4 | 86.4 | - |
| 10 | Ringwood Hawks | 11 | 11 | 0.500 | 95.1 | 90.8 | - |
| 11 | Casey Cavaliers | 11 | 11 | 0.500 | 87.8 | 86.4 | - |
| 12 | Frankston Blues | 10 | 12 | 0.455 | 92.6 | 91.0 | - |
| 13 | Waverley Falcons | 9 | 13 | 0.409 | 93.7 | 96.6 | - |
| 14 | Dandenong Rangers | 8 | 14 | 0.364 | 91.1 | 95.5 | - |
| 15 | Keilor Thunder | 8 | 14 | 0.364 | 82.4 | 88.1 | - |
| 16 | Bendigo Braves | 8 | 14 | 0.364 | 81.7 | 94.3 | - |
| 17 | Geelong Supercats | 7 | 15 | 0.318 | 81.9 | 88.5 | - |
| 18 | NW Tasmania Thunder | 5 | 16 | 0.238 | 86.5 | 92.4 | - |
| 19 | Diamond Valley Eagles | 5 | 17 | 0.227 | 84.5 | 95.0 | - |
Monthly & Opponent Breakdown (How to Use)
Compares a team/player’s overall averages to their performance vs a specific opponent.
Why it’s useful:
Betting use:
Game Outcome Summary (How to Use)