TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2023-24 Princeton  24-5 (0.828)  |  Ivy
All-Play Percentage: 0.759 (88th)
Schedule Strength: 0.462 (145th)
Record Quality: 0.327 (38th)
Avg. Season Rank: 63.17 (63rd)
Pace: 66.56 (265th)
Momentum: -3.42 (303rd)
Off. Momentum: 0.00 (201st)
Def. Momentum: -3.42 (331st)
Consistency: -8.20 (54th)
Res. Consistency: -8.85 (9th)
Away From Home: 0.98 (71st)
Paper Tiger Factor: -0.71 (148th)
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: 114.22 25.57 79.95 87.68 45.07 42.17 34.95 15.50 39.30 30.02 62.28 9.47 9.39 2.80 48.09 17.67 34.23 2.14
RANK: 41st 216th 4th 75th 126th 3rd 152nd 345th 172nd 218th 63rd 286th 349th 360th 3rd 348th 246th 352nd

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: 105.19 22.79 -- 85.49 45.70 31.36 33.20 23.63 39.70 30.50 63.20 9.30 11.51 4.89 36.68 27.64 35.68 2.01
RANK: 169th 39th -- 176th 259th 178th 122nd 221st 225th 161st 339th 39th 50th 96th 173rd 226th 158th 174th

ANALYSIS:
This website places Princeton in the top 25% of all NCAA college basketball teams this year. Carrying a record of 24-5, they are currently rated #88 overall (out of 362) in All-Play Percentage this season. Of the eight schools in the Ivy League (average ranking 190.0), they're currently ranked as the best team in the conference.

Princeton has a reasonably potent offensive attack. Occupying the #41 slot in our offensive efficiency rankings, they will score about 114 points for every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO. Princeton lives and dies by the three-ball and will launch from long-distance early and often. The team ranks third in ratio of three-point attempts to total field goal attempts. When it comes to actually making their three-point attempts, the squad shoots a so-so 34.9% from beyond the arc vs. AO. Princeton is also deadly accurate at the free throw line. Making 79.9% of their attempts from the stripe, they are ranked fourth nationally in free throw percentage. If Princeton 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 2.8% vs. AO, which ranks third-worst in the nation.

Though they're not quite as efficient defensively as they are offensively, Princeton still does OK when the opposition has possession of the ball. The team ranks 169th nationally in defensive efficiency, allowing about 105 points every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO. Princeton does a pretty solid job avoiding careless fouls and minimizing opponents' opportunities from the free throw line. With a defensive free throw attempt rate of 22.79 vs. AO, they are currently rated 39th in the country in that category. Princeton is also a solid rebounding team that will deny the opposition chances to score off of offensive rebounds. They have a rating of 11.51 vs. AO in potential points allowed off of second chances (ranked 50th in the country). If Princeton does exhibit a noticeable weakness on the defensive end of the floor, it'd likely be the team's difficulties stopping opponents from converting from the inside. AO will convert 63.2% of their near-proximity field goal attempts, and the team ranks 24th-worst in that category as a result.
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:
Princeton does worse vs. clubs that allow opponents to shoot well from the field. When playing squads that have a defensive field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 43.32%, Princeton performs above average 31% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 82% of the time.
Princeton performs worse against squads that have trouble defending the mid-range shot. When facing teams that have a defensive mid-range field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 38.12%, Princeton is more efficient than normal 39% of the time. In their other contests, the team is more efficient 78% of the time.
When playing teams that are more proficient at draining the mid-range shot, Princeton usually performs worse than average. Princeton is more efficient than normal 39% of the time when facing clubs that have an offensive mid-range field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 37.69%. In all other contests, Princeton performs better than average 78% 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
2024-25182nd182nd92nd116thIvy League199th274th146th148th86th148th
2023-2488th88th8th38thIvy League265th54th145th148th71st63rd
2022-2374th74th44th65thIvy League201st122nd134th132nd46th109th
2021-22106th105th27th81stIvy League188th118th245th90th134th121st
2020-21171st171st--170thIvy League190th--------168th
2019-20153rd152nd182nd199thIvy League265th49th199th264th47th199th
2018-19180th179th129th132ndIvy League163rd47th131st204th16th191st
2017-18159th159th227th216thIvy League335th337th177th257th214th152nd
2016-1768th68th24th53rdIvy League345th246th185th305th190th94th
2015-1668th68th26th77thIvy League180th261st185th280th104th72nd
2014-15146th146th156th175thIvy League150th255th227th225th181st169th
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25219th336th172nd126th279th3rd135th353rd265th201st309th268th306th345th5th353rd219th344th
2023-2441st216th4th75th126th3rd152nd345th172nd218th63rd286th349th360th3rd348th246th352nd
2022-2385th247th205th51st108th43rd157th355th180th6th170th357th351st348th60th358th15th129th
2021-2241st355th354th14th40th9th11th355th264th5th122nd311th347th349th25th358th33rd224th
2020-21171st225th124th235th182nd30th180th351st236th94th188th249th329th268th24th352nd84th257th
2019-20121st303rd70th252nd86th22nd46th353rd346th26th172nd257th323rd284th14th353rd18th216th
2018-19256th265th47th217th270th94th321st309th339th100th189th316th303rd334th87th313th94th189th
2017-18130th332nd191st123rd143rd9th85th340th63rd205th224th325th343rd333rd7th346th225th330th
2016-1769th342nd68th10th154th4th71st335th218th122nd195th133rd335th343rd7th341st203rd332nd
2015-1653rd216th164th164th50th34th9th347th267th40th159th160th289th247th29th349th42nd237th
2014-15112th41st156th351st50th36th78th349th132nd289th34th349th341st344th9th346th168th332nd
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25170th157th--60th255th102nd205th137th162nd187th283rd77th57th157th148th177th243rd237th
2023-24169th39th--176th259th178th122nd221st225th161st339th39th50th96th173rd226th158th174th
2022-2362nd108th--226th76th29th52nd316th191st265th43rd11th10th1st22nd315th255th316th
2021-22232nd22nd--326th289th12th175th340th238th313th284th18th36th183rd5th335th281st342nd
2020-21187th141st--220th212th50th199th308th229th235th166th196th38th165th40th303rd220th295th
2019-20237th64th--236th300th5th301st343rd262nd268th201st222nd13th63rd4th344th237th334th
2018-19113th79th--244th132nd46th46th298th321st257th55th237th228th147th24th293rd240th297th
2017-18215th144th--249th181st111th226th191st262nd288th69th41st120th113th83rd163rd264th287th
2016-1752nd94th--113th94th47th106th252nd284th175th37th12th70th80th54th274th189th252nd
2015-1694th46th--294th168th7th70th284th318th338th38th142nd200th115th3rd268th332nd350th
2014-15207th254th--128th192nd28th270th268th208th222nd130th234th139th179th29th281st235th294th