The United States Naval Academy established control early, taking a 43-27 lead into halftime against Army West Point. This 16-point gap would prove insurmountable for Army, as Navy maintained a significant advantage throughout the second half. The final score, 81-63 in favor of Navy, reflected the considerable margin between the two teams, with Navy ultimately winning by 18 points.
The second half saw Navy and Army trade points, with each team scoring 36 and 38 points, respectively. However, the damage had already been done, and Navy's first-half lead proved too great for Army to overcome. The disparity in the final score is consistent with the teams' respective NET rankings, with Navy at 147 and Army at 331. The result underscores the significant gap between these two programs, with Navy emerging as the clear superior team in this matchup.
Austin Benigni led the way for Navy, scoring 27 points on 6-12 shooting from the field, including 3-4 from beyond the arc. He also converted all 12 of his free throw attempts, demonstrating his ability to draw contact and capitalize at the line. Benigni added 3 assists to his stat line, although he did not record a rebound. Aidan Kehoe also had a strong outing, posting 16 points and 11 rebounds, while also contributing 3 assists and 4 blocks.
Kehoe's efficiency from the field was notable, as he made 6 of his 7 field goal attempts, although he struggled somewhat at the free throw line, making just 4 of 10 attempts. Jinwoo Kim rounded out Navy's top performers, scoring 13 points on 4-6 shooting from the field, including 3-5 from three-point range. Kim also pulled down 7 rebounds and dished out 3 assists, making him a well-rounded contributor to Navy's victory. His 2-2 mark from the free throw line was also a positive aspect of his performance.
Army's top performers were unable to muster enough offense to keep pace with Navy, despite some notable individual efforts. Jaxson Bell led the way with 17 points, buoyed by a strong showing from the free throw line, where he converted 9 of 10 attempts. However, his 3-8 field goal shooting and 2-6 mark from beyond the arc were not enough to overcome Navy's balanced attack. Bell also chipped in with 5 rebounds and 3 assists, but his overall production was not sufficient to spark a comeback.
Jorn Everson and Dylan Benner struggled to find their rhythm, combining for just 16 points on 6-15 shooting. Everson's 3-11 field goal shooting and 2-6 mark from three-point range were particularly costly, as he was unable to get untracked against Navy's defense. Benner, meanwhile, was efficient in limited opportunities, going 3-4 from the field, but his 8 points were not enough to make a significant impact on the outcome. Ultimately, Army's top players were shut down by Navy's stifling defense, which limited their ability to score consistently and ultimately sealed the Black Knights' fate.
Beyond the standout performances, the remainder of the players for both teams largely adhered to their seasonal trends, with no notable outliers.
CHD Scout Report Card
CORRECTPredicted
Final
The pre-game prediction of a Navy victory by nearly 17 points proved to be a relatively accurate assessment, as the Midshipmen ultimately emerged with an 18-point win. While the margin of victory was slightly larger than anticipated, the outcome itself was not surprising, given the teams' respective performances on the court. The prediction's correctness suggests that the underlying factors that were expected to contribute to a Navy win did indeed materialize, setting the stage for a decisive victory.
A closer examination of the team statistics reveals that Navy's superior shooting and rebounding were key factors in their victory. The Midshipmen's effective field goal percentage of 55.7% was notably higher than Army's 47.2%, indicating a significant advantage in terms of shot-making. Furthermore, Navy's offensive rebounding rate of 38.1% was substantially higher than their season average, suggesting that they were able to capitalize on second-chance opportunities and limit Army's defensive possessions. These advantages allowed Navy to control the tempo of the game and ultimately secure a convincing win.
The outcome of this contest has significant implications for both teams' NCAA Tournament resumes. For Navy, the victory provides a much-needed boost, albeit a modest one, given the Quad 4 designation of the game. While it does little to alleviate concerns about their ability to compete against top-tier opponents, as evidenced by their 0-4 record against Quad 1 and 2 teams, it does help to solidify their position as a potential low-seed contender, potentially in the 14-16 seed range. In contrast, Army's loss further diminishes their already faint tournament hopes, with their 0-2 record against Quad 1 and 2 teams and a NET ranking of 331 making it increasingly unlikely they will be considered for an at-large bid. Ultimately, this result serves as a stark reminder that, for mid-major programs like Navy and Army, the margin between a tournament berth and a postseason absence is often razor-thin, and Navy's ability to capitalize on this win will be crucial in determining their postseason fate.