TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2019-20 Cent. Michigan  14-18 (0.438)  |  Mid-American
All-Play Percentage: 0.392 (215th)
Schedule Strength: 0.528 (131st)
Record Quality: -0.101 (224th)
Avg. Season Rank: 193.73 (197th)
Pace: 74.52 (9th)
Momentum: -1.65 (259th)
Off. Momentum: -0.75 (271st)
Def. Momentum: -0.90 (191st)
Consistency: -8.19 (67th)
Res. Consistency: -11.19 (133rd)
Away From Home: -0.99 (246th)
Paper Tiger Factor: -1.97 (267th)
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 March 11, 2020. 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: 98.73 26.37 75.38 82.03 42.02 31.29 31.66 25.81 42.35 24.94 54.69 16.27 13.76 4.75 38.14 31.46 30.40 2.08
RANK: 183rd 132nd 47th 161st 241st 162nd 272nd 81st 13th 302nd 294th 5th 129th 194th 159th 79th 300th 269th

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: 103.16 23.81 -- 79.03 47.38 28.40 40.00 23.06 42.11 27.57 59.37 10.51 13.61 5.99 35.93 29.18 34.89 2.01
RANK: 258th 111th -- 64th 326th 84th 352nd 206th 326th 131st 180th 127th 223rd 291st 112th 238th 177th 216th

ANALYSIS:
While not an atrocious team by any means, Cent. Michigan is not exactly one that should appear in many top-100 rankings either. Their record this season is 14-18, and the club is ranked 215th overall (out of 353) in Haslametrics' most recent ratings. Of the 12 schools in the MAC (average ranking 168.3), they're currently ranked as our #11 team in the conference.

Defense is not exactly a strength for Cent. Michigan this year. The team is ranked 258th in defensive efficiency and allows more than 103 points for every 100 possessions vs. AO. Cent. Michigan 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. They are at their worst when defending outside the paint, allowing AO to convert 40.0% of their three-pointers (second from the bottom in the nation), 42.1% of their mid-range chances (326th), and 47.4% of their total shots from the field (326th). If Cent. Michigan does have a bright spot on defense, it would have to be their willingness to take risks in order to score fast points off of steals. The team has a solid rating of 16.27 in potential points scored off of steals vs. AO, which ranks fifth-best in college basketball.

Though they rate better on offense than they do on defense, Cent. Michigan still isn't one of the more capable offensive teams in college hoops. Scoring roughly 99 points for every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO, they are ranked #183 in the nation in offensive efficiency. Cent. Michigan fares worse than most teams when it comes to converting from locations close to the hoop. The team is ranked 294th in near-proximity field goal percentage, making only 54.7% of their attempts from up-close vs. AO. If Cent. Michigan does have a strength offensively, it would have to be the team's ability to successfully hit from mid-range locations on the court. The team makes 42.3% of their in-between field goal attempts vs. AO, which ranks 13th in the NCAA.
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:
Cent. Michigan is typically worse vs. teams that shoot the ball well from the field. Against foes that have an offensive field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 42.19%, Cent. Michigan performs above their norm 29% of the time. Against the remaining opposition, the team performs above average 83% of the time.
When facing teams that find ways to get to the free throw line, Cent. Michigan often performs worse than normal. Cent. Michigan is more efficient than usual 22% of the time when facing teams that have an offensive free throw attempt rate vs. AO greater than 26.13. In their other contests, Cent. Michigan performs better than the norm 65% of the time.
Cent. Michigan does worse vs. clubs that convert more frequently off of offensive rebounds. When playing squads that have an offensive second-chance conversion percentage vs. AO greater than 4.23%, Cent. Michigan performs above average 35% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 75% of the time.
LATEST NEWS ITEMS:
Ohio Men’s Basketball: Preston, Vander Plas Lead ‘Cats to Blowout Victory over CMU
(3/9/2020 11:55:00 PM) For the first time since 2017, Ohio will travel to Cleveland to play in the quarterfinals of the Mid-American Conference Tournament after thoroughly dominating Central Michigan on Monday night in the Convocation Center, pulling away to win 85-65. “Jay (Preston) put it a great way a couple weeks ago,” Vander Plas said. “He said ‘This is ...
Ohio beats Cent. Michigan 85-65 in MAC tourney
(3/9/2020 11:25:00 PM) Get real-time COLLEGEBASKETBALL basketball coverage and scores as Central Michigan Chippewas takes on Ohio Bobcats. We bring you the latest game previews, live stats, and recaps on CBSSports.com
Bobcats batter Chips, punch ticket for Cleveland
(3/9/2020 10:54:00 PM) And because of those efforts and preparation, Preston and Vander Plas now have Ohio back at the Mecca for MAC hoops. Vander Plas had game-highs of 25 points, 10 rebounds and seven assists, while Prestion added 21 points, six rebounds and seven assists, to lead the Bobcats in an 85-65 rout over Central Michigan on Monday night in a 2020 MAC ...
Hope opens NCAA tournament with a victory
(3/6/2020 11:53:00 PM) MOUNT PLEASANT, Mich. (AP) — Dallas Morgan scored 20 points, leading five into double figure scoring and Central Michigan broke a nine-game losing streak, defeating Western Michigan 85-68 Friday night in a regular season finale. Morgan was 4-for-9 shooting beyond the 3-point arc. Rob Montgomery and David Dileo each added 16 points ...
Morgan scores 20, C. Michigan breaks 9-game skid 85-68
(3/6/2020 9:50:00 PM) Dallas Morgan scored 20 points, leading five into double figure scoring and Central Michigan broke a nine-game losing streak, defeating Western Michigan 85-68 Friday night in a regular season finale.
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
2024-25203rd203rd236th270thMAC168th169th186th37th169th219th
2023-24272nd272nd150th199thMAC330th216th255th269th218th293rd
2022-23350th350th313th321stMAC150th218th247th162nd63rd326th
2021-22324th323rd333rd315thMAC150th260th190th87th47th340th
2020-21317th317th299th323rdMAC11th293rd224th37th17th301st
2019-20215th215th242nd224thMAC9th67th131st267th246th197th
2018-19144th144th69th103rdMAC36th26th155th81st36th149th
2017-18170th170th126th181stMAC213th70th245th66th210th158th
2016-17244th244th179th201stMAC8th160th194th147th97th218th
2015-16152nd151st181st186thMAC266th318th189th43rd208th179th
2014-1594th94th43rd74thMAC209th350th176th91st298th85th
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25207th127th154th152nd191st314th320th159th300th43rd140th98th51st54th322nd163rd53rd30th
2023-24322nd318th347th53rd336th143rd346th130th215th163rd319th264th161st253rd181st151st202nd194th
2022-23358th170th217th354th351st225th354th128th187th360th338th267th191st299th128th70th342nd316th
2021-22316th190th200th300th324th158th250th130th204th329th325th262nd186th300th118th107th323rd304th
2020-21278th91st240th322nd249th303rd255th72nd113th299th283rd124th200th216th271st54th260th160th
2019-20183rd132nd47th161st241st162nd272nd81st13th302nd294th5th129th194th159th79th300th269th
2018-1983rd24th293rd107th152nd158th46th242nd297th63rd216th52nd86th147th180th256th78th114th
2017-1886th149th3rd42nd249th8th213th336th222nd157th254th104th59th214th13th340th202nd319th
2016-1783rd219th7th30th289th2nd147th291st73rd339th308th227th93rd175th3rd306th345th351st
2015-1678th280th22nd10th203rd6th224th234th120th295th89th256th160th198th14th265th328th341st
2014-1525th157th47th34th115th6th100th312th36th245th133rd85th172nd264th10th324th293rd344th
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25203rd109th--127th240th312th316th64th120th106th271st56th145th243rd321st71st118th68th
2023-24166th170th--348th45th335th92nd136th108th271st31st229th346th333rd289th75th183rd112th
2022-23270th358th--52nd264th218th337th54th324th135th112th362nd302nd358th273rd81st194th129th
2021-22310th321st--204th238th299th297th39th34th233rd318th142nd209th92nd285th29th220th115th
2020-21350th161st--238th337th230th335th282nd343rd99th325th117th130th289th211th269th77th97th
2019-20258th111th--64th326th84th352nd206th326th131st180th127th223rd291st112th238th177th216th
2018-19182nd100th--285th230th119th18th97th211th343rd259th100th327th296th84th71st335th319th
2017-18274th73rd--286th278th306th171st78th264th246th305th75th320th307th279th53rd208th134th
2016-17343rd146th--349th317th293rd258th235th329th261st310th197th277th333rd200th164th171st168th
2015-16264th181st--297th219th212th175th186th174th271st238th20th272nd221st157th149th242nd231st
2014-15235th187th--85th301st185th278th63rd117th194th327th39th199th295th236th79th228th180th