When the Virginia Tech Hokies faced off against the Vanderbilt Commodores, it was more than just another college basketball game—it was a display of emerging talent, strategic coaching, and individual brilliance. Fans were treated to a thrilling contest that showcased some exceptional player performances and pivotal statistical moments. Whether you’re a die-hard follower or just catching up, analyzing the stat sheet from this matchup offers deep insights into how each team fared both collectively and individually.
TL;DR:
Virginia Tech narrowly edged out Vanderbilt in a hard-fought battle that went down to the wire. Key players from both sides made significant contributions, with standout performances from Tech’s offensive leaders and Vanderbilt’s defensive standouts. The game stats tell a story of clutch shooting, aggressive rebounding, and tough perimeter defense. If you’re looking for rising stars or consistent veterans, this game had it all.
Team Comparison Overview
Before diving into individual performances, let’s take a moment to compare the two teams on a broader statistical level:
- Shooting Percentage: Virginia Tech – 48.3%, Vanderbilt – 41.2%
- Three-Point Shooting: VT – 9/21 (42.8%), Vandy – 7/24 (29.1%)
- Rebounds: VT – 34 total (9 offensive), Vandy – 30 total (8 offensive)
- Turnovers: VT – 11, Vandy – 13
- Assists: VT – 17, Vandy – 13
Virginia Tech’s shooting accuracy and ball movement played crucial roles in their victory. They capitalized on Vanderbilt’s shooting droughts and maintained better ball control down the stretch.
Virginia Tech Hokies: Player Highlights
1. Hunter Cattoor – Guard
Stat line: 19 points, 4 assists, 3 rebounds
Cattoor continues to be the heartbeat of the Hokies’ offense. Not only did he maintain an impressive shooting percentage from beyond the arc, but his on-ball defense and facilitation flagged him as a two-way threat. His leadership through high-pressure possessions added a maturity that gave Virginia Tech an edge in the final moments.
2. Sean Pedulla – Guard
Stat line: 14 points, 7 assists, 5 rebounds
Pedulla’s combination of court vision and three-point range made him difficult for Vanderbilt to contain. He consistently found open shooters and drove to the lane with purpose, drawing fouls and creating offensive rhythm. His ability to control pace was critical, especially during scoring runs late in the second half.
Image not found in postmeta3. Justyn Mutts – Forward
Stat line: 10 points, 9 rebounds, 2 blocks
Though he fell just short of a double-double, Mutts was the engine behind Virginia Tech’s defensive resistance. His interior presence forced Vanderbilt to rely more on perimeter shots. He chalked up impactful plays that don’t always appear in a box score—tipped passes, altered shots, and physical screen setting.
Bench Contributions
The Hokies’ bench played a vital role, contributing 22 points across a mix of guards and big men. MJ Collins and Lynn Kidd provided solid minutes, with Kidd adding 6 points and 5 boards in limited playtime. The bench outperformed Vanderbilt’s reserves and was a major factor in maintaining momentum even when starters had to rest.
Vanderbilt Commodores: Player Spotlights
1. Tyrin Lawrence – Guard
Stat line: 21 points, 5 rebounds
Lawrence was a dynamo on offense, constantly probing the Hokies’ defense. He led all scorers and created shot opportunities with clever off-the-ball movement and timely drives. While he couldn’t close the game, his efforts kept Vanderbilt within striking distance.
2. Ezra Manjon – Point Guard
Stat line: 11 points, 6 assists, 4 steals
Manjon played the role of floor general adeptly. Known for his defensive instincts, he collected 4 steals, sparking crucial fast-break opportunities. Offensively, his penetration forced the Hokies’ defense to collapse, leading to open kicks for teammates—though not all resulted in conversions.
Image not found in postmeta3. Liam Robbins – Center
Stat line: 8 points, 7 rebounds, 3 blocks
Robbins had a quiet offensive night but was a towering figure in the paint for Vanderbilt. His rim protection delayed several easy baskets and gave the Commodores extra time to recuperate on defensive rotations. However, he struggled with foul trouble, which limited his impact in the second half.
Bench Observations
Unlike their Virginia Tech counterparts, Vanderbilt’s bench failed to make a significant push. They collectively managed only 11 points, with no single reserve scoring more than 5. Lack of depth was evident, especially in crunch time when Coach Jerry Stackhouse looked hesitant to stretch rotations.
Most Impactful Moments
- Midway through the Second Half: Cattoor hit back-to-back threes that turned a 4-point lead into a 10-point buffer, shifting momentum heavily in Tech’s favor.
- Final 90 Seconds: Vanderbilt forced two crucial turnovers but failed to convert any points, signaling poor execution in the most critical phase.
- Last Defensive Stand: Justyn Mutts’ clean block with 11 seconds left effectively sealed the win for Virginia Tech.
By the Numbers: Advanced Metrics
- Effective Field Goal %: VT – 55.2%, Vandy – 45.0%
- Turnover Percentage: VT – 13.7%, Vandy – 16.5%
- Assist Rate: VT – 70.8%, Vandy – 52.0%
- Defensive Rebound Percentage: VT – 74.1%, Vandy – 68.3%
These deeper stats reinforce what the eye test already saw—Virginia Tech was sharper in transition, more efficient in half-court sets, and better at finishing possessions with rebounds rather than fouls or turnovers.
Final Takeaways
This matchup offered a compact blueprint for both programs: Virginia Tech seems to be surging with chemistry and depth, while Vanderbilt shows flashes of brilliance but must sharpen execution across its lineup. If both teams can refine their respective weak spots, fans can expect a high-seed postseason from the Hokies and a potential Cinderella story for the Commodores.
For now, all eyes should remain on key players like Cattoor and Lawrence, who delivered performances worthy of highlight reels and stat sheet glory alike. As both teams head into conference play, this clash provided more than entertainment—it offered answers, raised questions, and reminded fans why college hoops continues to captivate.
