TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2021-22 Rice  16-17 (0.485)  |  Conference USA
All-Play Percentage: 0.373 (224th)
Schedule Strength: 0.426 (183rd)
Record Quality: -0.052 (207th)
Avg. Season Rank: 185.36 (186th)
Pace: 68.80 (177th)
Momentum: -1.31 (237th)
Off. Momentum: -1.07 (260th)
Def. Momentum: -0.24 (164th)
Consistency: -8.82 (135th)
Res. Consistency: -13.10 (253rd)
Away From Home: -1.07 (301st)
Paper Tiger Factor: -3.02 (325th)
NOTE: All data below reflects predicted performance against the "AO" (average opponent), a fictitious opponent who represents the average in every stat category.
Hover over column headers or visit "ABOUT" page for an explanation of each measurement.
Includes games through April 4, 2022. Data shown on this page is based on time-independent ratings.
OFFENSE Eff Upc FTAR FT% FGAR FGMR FG% 3PAR 3PMR 3P% MRAR MRMR MR% NPAR NPMR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
RATING: 102.06 21.83 71.85 84.47 44.00 34.34 35.04 22.03 34.99 28.11 62.01 9.09 9.91 3.77 40.65 26.08 33.27 2.07
RANK: 141st 270th 172nd 124th 152nd 86th 108th 224th 302nd 215th 80th 294th 334th 292nd 99th 238th 225th 263rd

DEFENSE Eff Upc FTAR FT% FGAR FGMR FG% 3PAR 3PMR 3P% MRAR MRMR MR% NPAR NPMR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
RATING: 106.76 18.21 -- 91.03 45.20 32.79 34.69 28.68 38.75 29.56 63.11 12.26 12.46 4.12 36.02 31.51 32.47 2.04
RANK: 293rd 11th -- 358th 247th 248th 227th 335th 224th 217th 321st 272nd 124th 85th 121st 309th 98th 172nd

ANALYSIS:
While not an atrocious team by any means, Rice is not exactly one that should appear in many top-100 rankings either. Haslametrics has them ranked 224th overall (out of 358) in All-Play Percentage, and the team holds a record of 16-17. Of the 14 schools in Conference USA (average ranking 179.5), they're currently ranked as our #11 team in the conference.

If there is a strength for Rice this year, it's probably on the offensive end of the court. The team is rated 141st in offensive efficiency, scoring more than 102 points every 100 possessions vs. AO. Rice fares better than most teams when it comes to converting from locations close to the basket. The team is ranked 80th in the country in near-proximity field goal percentage, making approximately 62.0% of their attempts from up-close vs. AO. If Rice does have a glaring weakness offensively, it would have to be the team's difficulties obtaining second-chance opportunities from offensive rebounds. The squad only has a rating of 9.91 vs. AO in potential points off of second chances, which ranks 25th-worst in college hoops.

Unfortunately, Rice is not even remotely close to being as good on defense as they are on offense. The team is ranked 293rd in defensive efficiency, allowing about 107 points every 100 possessions vs. AO. Rice allows the opposition to get off far too many shots from the floor. The team is ranked last in the nation in defensive field goal attempt rate with a rating of 91.03 vs. AO. Rice has also done a pretty poor job this season to prevent opponents from making shots from the inside. The team is ranked 321st in the country in defensive near-proximity percentage, allowing AO to make good on 63.1% of their attempts from close-up. If Rice does have a bright spot on defense, it would have to be their success preventing opponents from getting to the free throw line. The team has a defensive free throw attempt rate of 18.21 vs. AO, which ranks 11th-best in the country.
SORTABLE SCHEDULE / RESULTS:
Projections are based on present-day ratings. Stars indicate games played at a neutral location.
Game efficiencies only account for data before a contest has gone analytically final and are adjusted to extract home-court advantage.
CURIOUS TRENDS:
When facing teams that are likely to allow more second chances off of offensive rebounds, Rice often performs better than normal. Rice is more efficient than usual 73% of the time when facing teams that have a defensive second-chance potential point rate vs. AO greater than 11.65. In their other contests, Rice performs better than the norm 11% of the time.
Rice does worse vs. clubs that are typically efficient on offense. When playing squads that have an offensive efficiency rating vs. AO greater than 103.49, Rice performs above average 20% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 71% of the time.
Rice performs worse against squads that shoot the ball well from the field. When facing teams that have an offensive field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 43.78%, Rice is more efficient than normal 25% of the time. In their other contests, the team is more efficient 74% of the time.
LATEST NEWS ITEMS:
Sears lifts Ohio past Rice on late shot
(3/19/2022 10:45:33 PM) DAYTONA BEACH, Fla. (AP) — Mark Sears made a layup with four seconds remaining to lead Ohio to a 65-64 win over Rice in the College Basketball Invitat...
'Might as well try' | Rice professor doesn't think public demands will lead to release of Americans detained abroad
(3/7/2022 11:39:06 PM) Britney Griner is currently imprisoned in Russia and a Change.org petition is gaining steam. But that doesn't mean it will lead to her release.
UTEP Miners men's basketball rallies late, tops Rice 70-67
(3/3/2022 11:09:36 PM) UTEP scores last three points to win a tightly contested game with Rice to secure the No. 4 seed in the C-USA Tournament.
Louisiana Tech vs. Rice - Game Recap - February 24, 2022 - ESPN
(2/24/2022 10:54:26 PM) Get a recap of the Louisiana Tech Bulldogs vs. Rice Owls basketball game.
Lofton, Archibald lift Louisiana Tech over Rice 83-79
(2/24/2022 10:49:46 PM) HOUSTON (AP) — Kenneth Lofton Jr. had 16 points and Amorie Archibald scored 14 to lead Louisiana Tech to an 83-79 victory over Rice on Thursday night.
HASLAMETRICS ALL-PLAY PERCENTAGE RANKING BY DAY: Select data to plot:

HASLAMETRICS TEAM HISTORY: Select data to view:
SUMMARY Rk AP% Rec (WinPct) RQ Conference Pace Con SOS PTF AFH ASR
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox