TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
Automated 2024-25 Game Preview
TCU  4-1 (0.800)  |  Big 12
-- AT --
Cincinnati  5-0 (1.000)  |  Big 12
Includes games through November 24, 2024.
Data shown on this page is based on time-dependent ratings.
0.846 (56th)
   All-Play Percentage
  
0.950 (19th)
0.350 (281st)
   Schedule Strength
  
0.342 (285th)
0.257 (77th)
   Record Quality
  
0.447 (23rd)
40.77 (38th)
   Avg. Season Rank
  
21.41 (20th)
N/A (N/A)
   Momentum
  
N/A (N/A)
-9.36 (221st)
   Consistency
  
-6.43 (82nd)
-8.75 (327th)
   Away/Home Court   
4.05 (69th)
70.53 (91st)
Pace
67.83 (276th)
IN POSSESSION
TCU
CINC
Cat Rtg Rk Rtg Rk
Eff 109.22 98 93.42 9
FTAR 29.48 67 22.31 13
FT% 57.29 359 -- --
FGAR 86.95 88 87.48 308
FG% 47.17 36 39.43 18
3P% 35.94 58 32.09 69
MR% 37.47 269 34.55 22
NP% 62.65 39 50.89 10
PPSt 15.47 21 10.73 79
SCC% 7.87 11 5.37 174
Prox 1.92 14 1.99 274
IN POSSESSION
CINC
TCU
Cat Rtg Rk Rtg Rk
Eff 117.47 17 97.01 44
FTAR 23.86 332 26.63 166
FT% 65.61 297 -- --
FGAR 89.48 7 80.77 6
FG% 49.75 7 41.76 66
3P% 39.75 6 31.78 55
MR% 41.76 68 36.89 75
NP% 65.33 12 54.23 44
PPSt 12.11 164 11.30 118
SCC% 5.50 164 5.06 108
Prox 1.99 106 2.00 262
TCU IN POSSESSION:
According to the numbers, the Cincinnati D should have a modest advantage on TCU at this particular end of the floor. Cincinnati is currently ninth in the country in defensive efficiency, while TCU nationally comes in at #98 in offensive efficiency.
SHOT SELECTION: The TCU offense exhibits a solid preference for inside shots over those from longer-distance, while the Cincinnati defense is more balanced, allowing a mixture of shots from both the paint and the perimeter. Against the Cincinnati defense, this site projects that the shot makeup of the TCU offense will be 29.3% three-pointers (8.5% below the D1 average), 30.9% mid-range jumpers (4.3% above the D1 average), and 39.8% near-proximity twos (4.2% above the D1 average).
SHOOTING PERCENTAGE: TCU does a pretty good job to convert shots each possession, ranking 36th in the country in overall field goal percentage. The Cincinnati defense, meanwhile, has been one of the best in the country when it comes to defensive field goal percentage, nationally rated 18th in that category. On this end of the court, the Cincinnati defense gets the analytical nod in both mid-range shooting and near-proximity shooting, while the two units rate fairly evenly in three-point shooting. This site expects TCU to shoot 33.7% from three (a touch below the D1 average), 32.7% from the mid-range (6.6% below the D1 average), 56.0% from near-proximity locations (1.7% below the D1 average), and 42.3% overall (1.5% below the D1 average).
REBOUNDING: TCU should comfortably win the rebounding battle on this end. TCU has the fingerprint of a unit that can really hammer the offensive boards at an elite level. To boot, they are sensational at scoring quickly off of any second-chance opportunities they obtain (nationally rated #11 in that department). Cincinnati, meanwhile, is relatively mediocre when it comes to eliminating second-chance opportunities, and they're similarly only fair in defensive putback conversion percentage (ranked 174th in the country there).
TURNOVERS: The TCU offense has a small advantage over the Cincinnati defense in the turnover game on this end. Offensively, TCU rates somewhat close to the Division I norm when it comes to protecting the basketball. Their field goal attempt rate is very respectable (rated 88th in the country), while their rating for potential quick points allowed off of steals is more than satisfactory (118th in the country). Meanwhile, the Cincinnati defense demonstrates fairly balanced pressure and shouldn't be considered overly conservative or aggressive.
FREE THROWS: This looks to be somewhat of a stalemate. TCU is a team that has a nose for getting to the charity stripe (nationally ranked #67 in free throw attempt rate), though they're absolutely pitiful marksmen from the line (57.3%, ranked #359 in Division I). Meanwhile, the Cincinnati D has been excellent at minimizing opponents' free throw opportunities, ranking 13th in the NCAA in defensive free throw attempt rate.

CINCINNATI IN POSSESSION:
When pitted against the TCU defense, the Cincinnati offense appears to have somewhat of an advantage. This site rates Cincinnati to be 17th in the nation in offensive efficiency, while TCU is currently our #44 squad in defensive efficiency.
SHOT SELECTION: These two units prefer similar shot locations on this end of the court. Both schemes are relatively balanced, and neither the outside shot nor the inside shot will be consistently employed/allowed by either ball-club. Against the TCU defense, this site forecasts that the shot breakdown of the Cincinnati offense will be 37.3% three-pointers (0.5% below the D1 average), 21.8% mid-range jumpers (4.8% below the D1 average), and 40.9% near-proximity twos (5.3% above the D1 average).
SHOOTING PERCENTAGE: Cincinnati is a superbly efficient team when it comes to shooting, as the unit is ranked seventh in the country in overall field goal percentage. Meanwhile, the TCU defense sports one of college basketball's better defensive field goal percentages, ranking 66th in the country in that category. On this end of the court, the Cincinnati offense has an analytical edge in both three-point shooting and near-proximity shooting, while the two opposing units are rated fairly evenly in mid-range shooting. We expect Cincinnati to shoot 38.4% from behind the arc (4.6% above the D1 average), 40.8% from mid-range locations (1.4% above the D1 average), 62.6% from near-proximity (4.9% above the D1 average), and 48.8% overall (5.0% above the D1 average).
REBOUNDING: TCU may very well have a slight rebounding advantage at this end of the floor. Cincinnati appears to be one of the better offensive rebounding units in all of Division I. When it comes to converting second-chance opportunities, they're unremarkable, coming in at #164 nationally in our ratings there. The opposition here, TCU, will rarely surrender second chances, and they've likewise done fairly acceptable work containing foes' conversion rates off of second chances (nationally ranking #108 in that department).
TURNOVERS: The TCU defense is likely to force a few takeaways on this end of the floor. On offense, Cincinnati exhibits better ball-control skills than the average D1 squad. Their field goal attempt rate is top-notch (rated seventh in the country), while their rating for potential quick points allowed off of steals is more than satisfactory (79th in the country). As for the opposition, the TCU D is fairly aggressive and is certainly capable of coming away with their fair share of steals. They're elite in both potential quick points scored off steals (ranked 21st in the country) and defensive field goal attempt rate (sixth in the country).
FREE THROWS: We expect a below-average number of foul line opportunities for the Cincinnati offense here. They're typically a team that won't see many opportunities at the charity stripe (332nd in the country in free throw attempt rate), and they're not one of the better shooting teams from there (65.6%, 297th in the country). As for the opposition, the aggressive TCU defense is relatively average in defensive free throw attempt rate, ranking 166th in the country in that category.

THE X-FACTORS:
PACE: We'd forecast a fairly average tempo by Division I standards here. There are contrasting tastes between these two units. TCU (91st in the country in game pace) prefers more of an up-and-down game, while Cincinnati (276th) is happy to put the brakes on if need be.
AWAY/HOME COURT: We would expect a potential performance bump for the home team here. Cincinnati has performed better at home than they have away from home this season. To boot, they are facing TCU, a team that has played their very worst basketball this year away from their home court.
CONSISTENCY: Cincinnati is one of college basketball's more consistent teams, ranking 82nd in the country in consistency. TCU rates more in the middle.

THE VERDICT:
TCU definitely has a chance, but Cincinnati is the right pick here. Cincinnati 76.68, TCU 67.39.