TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2014-15 Hampton  17-18 (0.486)  |  MEAC
All-Play Percentage: 0.303 (246th)
Schedule Strength: 0.354 (329th)
Record Quality: -0.123 (233rd)
Avg. Season Rank: 264.57 (270th)
Pace: 69.84 (13th)
Momentum: 5.10 (10th)
Off. Momentum: 2.41 (74th)
Def. Momentum: 2.68 (15th)
Consistency: -9.10 (156th)
Res. Consistency: -11.97 (207th)
Away From Home: 0.60 (99th)
Paper Tiger Factor: -2.62 (291st)
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 6, 2015. 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: 93.48 31.98 65.29 80.65 40.02 25.26 31.87 27.96 33.79 27.43 53.87 11.78 16.44 6.54 31.31 34.67 34.01 1.97
RANK: 291st 60th 294th 232nd 297th 261st 285th 104th 242nd 225th 292nd 137th 103rd 184th 252nd 83rd 203rd 130th

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: 100.53 33.38 -- 78.62 43.87 24.83 35.72 25.63 36.44 28.16 57.82 10.72 13.71 5.80 31.58 32.59 35.82 1.96
RANK: 163rd 311th -- 55th 187th 51st 235th 184th 213th 156th 144th 114th 62nd 79th 81st 234th 214th 258th

ANALYSIS:
If you see Hampton on the schedule, you will likely get one of the average to below-average teams in college hoops. They are ranked #246 (out of 351) in the most recent Haslametrics ratings and have a record of 17-18. Of the 13 schools in the MEAC (average ranking 280.5), they're currently ranked as our #4 team in the conference. With a strength-of-schedule rating of 0.354 (which ranks 329th nationally), Hampton has had one of the cushiest slates in all of college basketball.

Based on their performances this year, Hampton will likely find more success on defense than they will on offense. Allowing about 101 points for every 100 possessions vs. AO and favoring a very up-tempo style of play (the 13th-fastest pace in D1), they currently occupy the #163 slot in the ratings for defensive efficiency. Hampton has been doing fairly decent work to prevent opponents from getting off shots from the field. The club is ranked 55th in Division I in defensive field goal attempt rate with a rating of 78.62 vs. AO. Hampton also does a fairly satisfactory job to deny opponents chances to score off of the offensive glass. They have a rating of 13.71 vs. AO in potential points allowed off of second chances (ranked 62nd in the country). If Hampton does exhibit a weakness on the defensive end of the floor, it'd likely be the team's tendency to send opponents to the line too much by fouling. The squad has a rating of 33.38 in defensive free throw attempt rate vs. AO, which ranks 41st-worst in the country.

The offense for Hampton, on the other hand, isn't nearly as efficient as the defense is. The team is ranked 291st in offensive efficiency, scoring about 93 points every 100 possessions vs. AO. Hampton would not consider converting field goal attempts to be a strength. The team is rated #297 in the country in field goal percentage, making good on a meager 40.0% of their attempts vs. AO.

Hampton has been playing much better basketball as of late and is presently ranked tenth in positive momentum because of it.
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 have trouble defending the mid-range shot, Hampton often performs better than normal. Hampton is more efficient than usual 61% of the time when facing teams that have a defensive mid-range field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 35.44%. In their other contests, Hampton performs better than the norm 17% of the time.
Hampton does worse vs. clubs that are more proficient at draining the mid-range shot. When playing squads that have an offensive mid-range field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 32.47%, Hampton performs above average 29% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 71% of the time.
Hampton performs better against squads that allow more chances at the line. When facing teams that have a defensive free throw attempt rate vs. AO greater than 28.56, Hampton is more efficient than normal 58% of the time. In their other contests, the team is more efficient 18% 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
2024-25202nd201st183rd218thCAA294th218th236th151st218th252nd
2023-24338th338th332nd342ndCAA65th346th259th139th148th343rd
2022-23355th355th342nd344thColonial69th306th291st197th244th356th
2021-22330th330th303rd329thBig South42nd196th314th144th214th334th
2020-21319th318th220th278thBig South89th52nd328th111th15th316th
2019-20310th310th241st297thBig South64th298th294th234th241st337th
2018-19157th157th181st216thBig South30th89th251st92nd243rd198th
2017-18292nd292nd161st247thMEAC34th75th345th265th252nd288th
2016-17314th313th230th281stMEAC131st17th340th84th208th321st
2015-16255th255th78th160thMEAC51st157th343rd304th131st261st
2014-15246th245th189th233rdMEAC13th156th329th291st99th270th
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25223rd200th235th24th306th196th279th11th194th318th252nd197th80th188th248th19th344th252nd
2023-24338th255th203rd168th351st209th349th163rd335th158th332nd255th91st173rd212th159th162nd156th
2022-23327th164th293rd126th354th237th320th91st328th202nd350th304th33rd168th250th101st221st162nd
2021-22350th157th276th261st348th297th332nd31st198th315th354th344th161st226th281st24th308th172nd
2020-21281st274th149th297th261st182nd141st134th143rd313th302nd312th290th222nd147th101st300th271st
2019-20167th39th204th122nd209th300th292nd15th126th281st141st313th91st98th308th22nd294th140th
2018-19130th116th2nd51st269th191st191st36th181st228th256th185th141st134th228th52nd271st199th
2017-18272nd189th38th130th280th332nd336th27th271st123rd234th176th107th152nd336th26th142nd43rd
2016-17331st295th106th154th336th285th310th60th343rd193rd300th214th106th191st295th54th199th100th
2015-16250th63rd249th93rd305th210th341st138th334th80th215th308th92nd117th235th158th114th102nd
2014-15291st60th294th232nd297th261st285th104th242nd225th292nd137th103rd184th252nd83rd203rd130th
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25205th344th--27th277th9th157th116th92nd311th290th145th126th218th26th171st346th350th
2023-24332nd155th--351st240th282nd156th140th262nd329th249th339th247th321st205th79th273rd230th
2022-23357th295th--217th354th219th356th161st310th238th315th92nd261st337th204th134th235th200th
2021-22235th340th--205th198th84th65th236th332nd264th118th44th357th332nd81st225th260th285th
2020-21320th279th--347th183rd302nd237th80th136th335th121st261st351st337th235th35th299th234th
2019-20344th326th--269th324th216th304th212th209th213th343rd64th348th352nd187th186th166th167th
2018-19197th279th--151st171st137th129th209th33rd183rd283rd26th183rd189th138th219th190th208th
2017-18282nd287th--272nd230th200th241st144th186th280th193rd226th345th271st145th114th252nd235th
2016-17228th296th--89th269th49th298th107th186th281st176th198th182nd191st62nd119th304th311th
2015-16257th93rd--234th273rd183rd248th129th260th280th223rd117th102nd200th153rd114th265th250th
2014-15163rd311th--55th187th51st235th184th213th156th144th114th62nd79th81st234th214th258th