TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2022-23 Gardner-Webb  15-16 (0.484)  |  Big South
All-Play Percentage: 0.453 (198th)
Schedule Strength: 0.344 (283rd)
Record Quality: -0.101 (229th)
Avg. Season Rank: 192.89 (192nd)
Pace: 67.21 (212th)
Momentum: -3.98 (331st)
Off. Momentum: 0.18 (205th)
Def. Momentum: -4.16 (346th)
Consistency: -8.99 (155th)
Res. Consistency: -8.95 (19th)
Away From Home: 0.62 (51st)
Paper Tiger Factor: -0.22 (128th)
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 3, 2023. 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: 97.18 26.16 63.16 82.16 43.90 26.81 31.75 24.24 37.25 31.11 59.55 10.45 13.07 4.78 32.63 29.50 37.86 1.95
RANK: 285th 128th 355th 297th 169th 316th 297th 174th 211th 109th 155th 199th 239th 242nd 303rd 147th 80th 54th

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: 99.85 28.25 -- 80.31 43.09 30.40 34.77 25.34 40.33 24.57 56.21 11.45 10.90 2.85 37.85 31.55 30.59 2.07
RANK: 108th 302nd -- 31st 128th 150th 227th 250th 283rd 14th 85th 232nd 17th 2nd 232nd 307th 37th 63rd

ANALYSIS:
If you see Gardner-Webb on the schedule, you will likely get one of the average to below-average teams in college hoops. Carrying a record of 15-16, they are currently rated #198 overall (out of 363) in All-Play Percentage this season. They are also ranked by this site as the #4 team (out of 10) in the Big South (average ranking 231.4).

Gardner-Webb will likely call on their defense to win a majority of their games. The team is ranked 108th in defensive efficiency and allows fewer than 100 points for every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO. Gardner-Webb does a fantastic job to prevent opposing teams from capitalizing on chances from offensive rebounds. The squad allows AO to convert only 2.9% of all second-chance opportunities (ranked second in the NCAA), and with a rating of 10.90, they're 17th in potential points allowed off of the offensive glass as well. Gardner-Webb also does a really good job to prevent opponents from getting off shots from the field. The club is ranked 31st in Division I in defensive field goal attempt rate with a rating of 80.31 vs. AO.

Unfortunately, Gardner-Webb is not even remotely close to being as good on offense as they are on defense. The team is ranked 285th in offensive efficiency, scoring about 97 points every 100 possessions vs. AO. Gardner-Webb has had serious struggles making their free throws this year. Converting just 63.2% of their attempts, the squad is ranked #355 overall in free throw percentage.

Gardner-Webb has recently performed below their norm from an efficiency standpoint. The team is currently ranked 331st in the country 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:
When facing teams that typically allow more than a fair share of breakaway opportunities, Gardner-Webb often performs worse than normal. Gardner-Webb is more efficient than usual 24% of the time when facing teams that have a potential point rate allowed off steals vs. AO greater than 11.32. In their other contests, Gardner-Webb performs better than the norm 67% of the time.
Gardner-Webb does better vs. clubs that effectively clean the offensive glass. When playing squads that have an offensive second-chance potential point rate vs. AO greater than 15.80, Gardner-Webb performs above average 67% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 30% of the time.
Gardner-Webb performs better against squads that tend to get off more shots. When facing teams that have an offensive field goal attempt rate vs. AO greater than 84.65, Gardner-Webb is more efficient than normal 67% of the time. In their other contests, the team is more efficient 30% 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
2024-25277th277th309th283rdBig South75th331st234th239th164th238th
2023-24197th197th184th197thBig South66th15th153rd87th41st203rd
2022-23198th198th216th229thBig South212th155th283rd128th51st192nd
2021-22176th176th138th200thBig South156th314th263rd336th128th175th
2020-21161st161st228th251stBig South234th321st228th43rd205th195th
2019-20199th199th192nd246thBig South280th206th293rd93rd156th215th
2018-19171st171st69th126thBig South174th178th237th19th126th184th
2017-18252nd252nd230th265thBig South169th35th241st267th226th264th
2016-17195th195th123rd191stBig South44th5th295th141st13th213th
2015-16242nd241st181st227thBig South119th335th263rd196th57th223rd
2014-15217th216th133rd172ndBig South35th275th205th18th67th206th
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25253rd121st261st329th162nd330th269th237th247th44th197th313th152nd85th319th215th17th21st
2023-24233rd97th356th253rd207th236th39th195th354th133rd220th137th118th133rd229th187th112th118th
2022-23285th128th355th297th169th316th297th174th211th109th155th199th239th242nd303rd147th80th54th
2021-22276th272nd220th207th270th186th262nd293rd325th46th270th199th202nd178th183rd295th47th97th
2020-21157th207th255th195th167th65th64th300th180th168th235th272nd217th140th63rd304th160th256th
2019-20192nd209th257th131st203rd170th83rd187th219th128th266th233rd179th195th176th202nd138th164th
2018-19132nd100th139th325th40th316th22nd251st211th67th127th123rd338th284th281st225th37th39th
2017-18295th313th89th264th238th269th182nd161st337th124th206th241st272nd284th247th148th98th90th
2016-17242nd55th339th345th117th345th82nd152nd348th73rd78th9th164th237th335th106th37th15th
2015-16253rd165th324th106th308th69th226th147th228th288th318th34th80th176th78th167th303rd297th
2014-15161st206th206th198th152nd40th186th267th45th277th162nd194th263rd311th35th269th282nd320th
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25286th294th--249th257th207th100th123rd274th292nd275th350th199th299th170th96th277th241st
2023-24156th223rd--212th164th66th141st339th148th113th248th107th125th103rd51st337th108th222nd
2022-23108th302nd--31st128th150th227th250th283rd14th85th232nd17th2nd232nd307th37th63rd
2021-2290th308th--77th55th230th19th153rd36th76th205th277th84th48th260th177th96th80th
2020-21209th289th--211th100th288th221st249th179th59th87th105th243rd224th283rd237th51st48th
2019-20223rd134th--283rd145th299th170th202nd229th137th177th240th329th296th264th168th93rd78th
2018-19225th88th--301st178th298th145th232nd107th120th308th105th166th333rd264th200th96th85th
2017-18208th289th--184th151st261st65th240th89th72nd332nd174th232nd174th265th238th74th77th
2016-17137th310th--76th165th68th114th280th46th66th315th145th236th260th101st310th100th174th
2015-16227th276th--82nd240th174th186th134th74th164th322nd251st242nd229th210th164th181st159th
2014-15282nd27th--305th323rd53rd288th281st275th312th295th198th269th338th27th245th283rd312th