TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2023-24 Georgia Tech  14-18 (0.438)  |  ACC
All-Play Percentage: 0.684 (115th)
Schedule Strength: 0.719 (15th)
Record Quality: 0.130 (109th)
Avg. Season Rank: 126.41 (123rd)
Pace: 67.54 (195th)
Momentum: 2.31 (76th)
Off. Momentum: 2.47 (62nd)
Def. Momentum: -0.16 (154th)
Consistency: -9.80 (255th)
Res. Consistency: -14.75 (325th)
Away From Home: -0.01 (179th)
Paper Tiger Factor: -0.60 (137th)
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 8, 2024. Data shown on this page is based on time-dependent 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: 108.81 25.56 70.83 88.28 44.23 35.47 35.54 26.44 39.77 26.37 60.40 9.02 14.57 6.07 40.18 29.95 29.87 2.10
RANK: 108th 217th 241st 55th 166th 64th 117th 81st 145th 327th 96th 311th 125th 122nd 87th 100th 341st 329th

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: 103.57 24.68 -- 88.69 41.69 35.13 33.07 25.92 39.01 27.64 55.17 12.25 13.74 5.49 39.61 29.22 31.17 2.08
RANK: 137th 109th -- 315th 63rd 319th 115th 296th 184th 58th 73rd 246th 212th 175th 285th 276th 28th 39th

ANALYSIS:
Per this website's calculations, Georgia Tech is somewhere between an average to slightly above-average D1 ball-club. They are ranked #115 (out of 362) in the most recent Haslametrics ratings and have a record of 14-18. They are also ranked by this site as the #14 team (out of 15) in the ACC (average ranking 63.7). With a strength-of-schedule rating of 0.719 (which ranks 15th nationally), Georgia Tech is one of the more battle-tested teams in the college game.

If there is a strength for Georgia Tech this year, it's probably on the offensive end of the court. The team is rated 108th in offensive efficiency, scoring more than 108 points every 100 possessions vs. AO. Georgia Tech does a pretty decent job in most cases to maximize opportunities to score on offense. The team is ranked 55th in the NCAA in offensive field goal attempt rate with a rating of 88.28 vs. AO. As far as making those field goal attempts goes, the team is somewhat middle-of-the-road, converting about 44.2% of them vs. AO.

Georgia Tech plays at roughly the same level defensively as they do offensively. The team ranks 137th nationally in defensive efficiency, allowing about 104 points every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO. Georgia Tech has had some success this season preventing opponents from converting many of their overall field goal attempts. The team ranks #63 nationally in field goal percentage allowed, as AO only makes good on about 41.7% of their total attempts from the floor. Georgia Tech has also been pretty good preventing teams from hitting shots in the paint. They are ranked 73rd in the country in defensive near-proximity percentage, allowing AO to make good on only 55.2% of their attempts from close-up. Because of this, AO takes nowhere near as many inside shots as they typically would -- just 31.2% of AO's field goal attempts will come from short-distance. If Georgia Tech does exhibit a weakness on the defensive end of the floor, it'd likely be the team's propensity to allow too many shot attempts per trip. The squad has a rating of 88.69 in defensive field goal attempt rate vs. AO, which ranks 48th-worst in college basketball.
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 tend to capitalize off breakaway opportunities, Georgia Tech often performs better than normal. Georgia Tech is more efficient than usual 79% of the time when facing teams that have a potential point rate off steals vs. AO greater than 12.69. In their other contests, Georgia Tech performs better than the norm 33% of the time.
Georgia Tech does better vs. clubs that find ways to get to the free throw line. When playing squads that have an offensive free throw attempt rate vs. AO greater than 28.11, Georgia Tech performs above average 70% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 25% of the time.
Georgia Tech performs better against squads that shoot the ball well from the field. When facing teams that have an offensive field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 45.01%, Georgia Tech is more efficient than normal 67% of the time. In their other contests, the team is more efficient 27% of the time.
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
2024-25108th108th196th121stACC121st340th86th242nd347th105th
2023-24115th115th249th109thACC195th255th15th137th179th123rd
2022-23149th149th230th172ndACC238th207th87th345th81st164th
2021-22149th149th272nd205thACC127th27th72nd54th48th137th
2020-2137th37th79th38thACC266th152nd62nd61st61st44th
2019-2061st61st148th74thACC113th262nd24th166th51st96th
2018-19132nd132nd230th143rdACC307th348th58th345th33rd91st
2017-18107th107th253rd168thACC254th248th55th108th223rd112th
2016-1773rd73rd132nd70thACC201st172nd46th10th312th112th
2015-1642nd42nd128th62ndACC241st284th14th114th216th43rd
2014-1576th76th262nd148thACC230th61st25th13th146th72nd
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25166th167th257th161st158th213th132nd155th225th169th147th223rd115th148th214th152nd168th156th
2023-24108th217th241st55th166th64th117th81st145th327th96th311th125th122nd87th100th341st329th
2022-23149th283rd241st27th224th94th137th65th171st278th182nd87th85th131st132nd100th321st296th
2021-22201st260th244th239th91st301st136th97th190th151st98th29th178th181st293rd86th124th65th
2020-2120th181st63rd149th5th257th68th178th97th65th2nd2nd289th121st267th183rd71st67th
2019-20144th34th262nd330th23rd350th154th96th49th83rd79th105th52nd28th343rd71st49th10th
2018-19197th169th260th244th104th324th271st299th319th3rd155th67th320th283rd328th297th3rd1st
2017-18168th99th165th194th110th347th172nd35th289th67th70th126th122nd133rd347th30th60th6th
2016-17188th127th248th254th94th347th192nd85th141st35th163rd67th223rd211th348th74th27th5th
2015-1630th138th101st18th35th302nd69th4th19th233rd55th279th10th10th326th9th287th107th
2014-15145th151st224th21st171st315th322nd25th211th49th109th120th29th77th331st49th94th35th
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-2584th30th--316th50th328th227th269th29th73rd51st293rd251st22nd292nd235th46th54th
2023-24137th109th--315th63rd319th115th296th184th58th73rd246th212th175th285th276th28th39th
2022-23183rd153rd--301st142nd213th31st164th128th312th230th241st227th155th162nd120th281st251st
2021-22124th185th--100th142nd254th104th47th30th184th243rd217th176th160th268th56th210th131st
2020-2182nd45th--83rd163rd89th239th167th105th194th137th27th211th259th104th199th232nd253rd
2019-2028th233rd--95th28th32nd2nd274th172nd180th23rd145th253rd49th46th297th209th281st
2018-1986th172nd--295th38th269th29th176th60th210th52nd171st66th27th230th132nd154th144th
2017-1860th103rd--130th72nd63rd245th201st121st225th13th159th236th35th75th220th244th272nd
2016-1713th24th--281st7th256th24th170th33rd222nd5th188th298th196th214th146th177th170th
2015-1672nd55th--289th89th61st11th309th107th240th151st16th63rd89th35th296th198th276th
2014-1544th40th--152nd83rd141st29th287th190th85th128th294th3rd15th144th305th85th137th