TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2021-22 UMass  15-17 (0.469)  |  Atlantic 10
All-Play Percentage: 0.448 (199th)
Schedule Strength: 0.501 (128th)
Record Quality: -0.008 (186th)
Avg. Season Rank: 183.37 (181st)
Pace: 69.51 (73rd)
Momentum: 3.25 (40th)
Off. Momentum: 2.41 (68th)
Def. Momentum: 0.84 (99th)
Consistency: -8.41 (94th)
Res. Consistency: -13.49 (280th)
Away From Home: -0.40 (234th)
Paper Tiger Factor: 0.71 (57th)
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-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: 107.38 27.61 75.76 85.57 43.31 34.98 35.28 23.42 38.47 27.17 57.82 10.79 11.71 3.17 40.88 27.37 31.75 2.09
RANK: 68th 62nd 45th 113th 178th 55th 80th 224th 133rd 259th 202nd 175th 259th 343rd 66th 236th 272nd 306th

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: 110.28 25.25 -- 85.12 47.48 29.50 36.51 24.33 39.54 31.28 64.01 11.08 12.80 6.37 34.66 28.58 36.75 1.98
RANK: 332nd 210th -- 216th 338th 127th 330th 172nd 265th 281st 333rd 205th 145th 318th 112th 161st 280th 274th

ANALYSIS:
They're far from the worst of the worst, but UMass should not be a terribly frightening opponent for most clubs. They are ranked #199 (out of 358) in the most recent Haslametrics ratings and have a record of 15-17. They are also ranked by this site as the #11 team (out of 14) in the A-10 (average ranking 137.9).

The primary strength for UMass this year is offense. The team is ranked 68th in efficiency on that end of the floor, and they'll rack up more than 107 points for every 100 possessions vs. AO. UMass does a really good job converting from the free throw line. Making 75.8% of their attempts from the stripe, they are ranked 45th nationally in free throw percentage. Moreover, they get ample opportunity to beat you from the line, as the ball-club falls in the top-75 in free throw attempt rate with a rating of 27.61 vs. AO. UMass will also likely shoot a fair share of three-pointers each contest. The team ranks 66th in ratio of three-point attempts to total field goal attempts. If you do allow them to shoot from long, they have the ability to punish you for it, too. Ranked in the top-100 in three-point shooting percentage, they make approximately 35.3% of their three-point attempts vs. AO. If UMass does have a glaring weakness offensively, it would have to be the team's difficulties obtaining and converting second-chance opportunities from offensive rebounds. The squad has a second-chance conversion percentage of just 3.2% vs. AO, which ranks 16th-worst in the nation.

Sadly for UMass, the drop-off from offensive efficiency to defensive efficiency is massive. The team is ranked 332nd in defensive efficiency, allowing about 110 points every 100 possessions vs. AO. UMass allows opposing teams far too many easy chances from the floor, ranking in the bottom-50 in three of the four main defensive field goal shooting categories. AO will convert a healthy 36.5% of their three-pointers (330th in the nation), 64.0% of their near-proximity attempts (333rd), and 47.5% of their total shots from the field (338th). UMass also gives up too many chances to easily score off of offensive rebounds. The team allows AO to convert 6.4% of all second-chance opportunities (318th nationally).

UMass has been playing better basketball in their most recent outings, as evidenced by the team's #40 ranking in positive momentum.
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:
UMass is typically better vs. teams that tend to get off more shots. Against foes that have an offensive field goal attempt rate vs. AO greater than 82.87, UMass performs above their norm 68% of the time. Against the remaining opposition, the team performs above average 30% of the time.
When facing teams that tend to allow more shots on the perimeter, UMass often performs better than normal. UMass is more efficient than usual 75% of the time when facing teams that have a defensive shooting proximity score vs. AO greater than 2.03. In their other contests, UMass performs better than the norm 38% of the time.
UMass does worse vs. clubs that fail to defend efficiently inside the paint. When playing squads that have a defensive near-proximity field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 58.43%, UMass performs above average 33% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 70% of the time.
LATEST NEWS ITEMS:
Brea scores 16 to lift Dayton past UMass 82-61
(2/23/2022 9:20:52 PM) DAYTON, Ohio (AP) — Koby Brea had 16 points off the bench to lift Dayton to an 82-61 win over Massachusetts on Wednesday night.
Why Jakob Poeltl Is A Giant Bargain For The Spurs
(2/5/2022 11:00:58 AM) For his debut article at Forbes SportsMoney, Mat breaks down why the Spurs may be sitting on one of the best contracts in basketball.
Schwartz scores 15 to carry George Mason over UMass 72-62
(1/30/2022 6:33:38 PM) AMHERST, Mass. (AP) — D’Shawn Schwartz had 15 points as George Mason defeated Massachusetts 72-62 on Sunday.
Massachusetts public employee payroll tops $8B, as overtime riding high on MBTA
(1/3/2022 10:40:40 PM) The state's payroll received a booster shot last year surging to $8.39 billion with overtime on the MBTA allowing some to accelerate past $300,000 in annual pay, records show. First in a series this week.
UMass Lowell visits Merrimack
(12/3/2021 7:32:40 AM) UMass Lowell (5-3) vs. Merrimack (4-4)
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
2024-25222nd222nd294th237thA-1058th94th136th136th36th188th
2023-2485th83rd81st88thA-10149th236th137th53rd224th95th
2022-23204th204th216th155thA-1042nd284th129th234th167th152nd
2021-22199th198th209th186thA-1073rd94th128th57th234th181st
2020-21104th104th162nd133rdA-1046th248th126th331st5th103rd
2019-20179th179th237th174thA-10187th41st96th310th348th184th
2018-19215th213th289th253rdA-10175th326th182nd78th84th155th
2017-18187th186th264th206thA-10251st309th136th78th313th157th
2016-17168th167th223rd162ndA-1022nd165th107th26th175th131st
2015-16148th148th224th163rdA-1074th58th94th172nd81st142nd
2014-15138th138th159th87thA-1052nd35th66th79th193rd132nd
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25245th71st326th21st335th270th358th81st268th52nd326th88th33rd159th317th111th109th52nd
2023-2478th31st271st54th116th167th280th161st276th96th31st108th18th92nd211th179th130th139th
2022-23249th169th174th131st280th314th196th84th313th93rd284th157th35th58th318th92nd102nd49th
2021-2268th62nd45th113th178th55th80th224th133rd259th202nd175th259th343rd66th236th272nd306th
2020-2197th138th120th172nd129th47th134th276th74th207th156th38th236th101st49th284th203rd287th
2019-20182nd263rd208th111th197th72nd223rd264th277th130th135th66th217th137th85th276th146th236th
2018-19230th223rd267th214th209th143rd196th295th109th71st285th256th40th41st132nd293rd65th140th
2017-18126th333rd39th56th157th112th16th245th296th55th280th264th198th104th138th274th80th142nd
2016-17224th208th308th262nd146th118th332nd345th168th15th123rd26th95th68th99th344th8th83rd
2015-16180th180th221st199th198th102nd246th296th264th99th155th43rd238th259th99th292nd99th187th
2014-15142nd37th181st236th119th304th315th235th267th20th92nd75th119th53rd291st224th18th16th
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25181st242nd--228th135th178th197th58th58th332nd99th161st320th196th162nd45th324th285th
2023-24109th297th--120th78th117th54th71st180th299th37th247th325th265th131st77th319th297th
2022-23163rd226th--153rd137th243rd119th87th46th209th229th356th64th93rd259th75th225th154th
2021-22332nd210th--216th338th127th330th172nd265th281st333rd205th145th318th112th161st280th274th
2020-21105th159th--84th221st5th117th115th57th349th187th96th61st21st6th141st354th356th
2019-20156th160th--115th270th30th218th48th113th347th158th231st204th295th35th47th352nd349th
2018-19241st336th--53rd256th23rd263rd190th133rd224th225th323rd158th173rd39th232nd271st302nd
2017-18284th207th--234th270th46th243rd189th142nd318th222nd240th297th319th36th168th306th321st
2016-1798th311th--46th95th38th240th45th154th306th13th118th260th233rd65th63rd335th325th
2015-16134th283rd--151st86th127th31st79th79th291st79th125th289th261st139th83rd296th285th
2014-15138th142nd--230th135th82nd260th210th52nd289th95th219th99th109th56th191st282nd292nd