TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2015-16 Loyola Marymount  14-17 (0.452)  |  West Coast
All-Play Percentage: 0.366 (223rd)
Schedule Strength: 0.542 (139th)
Record Quality: -0.060 (197th)
Avg. Season Rank: 212.21 (211th)
Pace: 69.06 (219th)
Momentum: 0.91 (128th)
Off. Momentum: -0.58 (233rd)
Def. Momentum: 1.50 (58th)
Consistency: -8.09 (76th)
Res. Consistency: -11.25 (156th)
Away From Home: 1.75 (37th)
Paper Tiger Factor: -1.99 (268th)
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, 2016. 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: 98.63 22.91 72.01 85.11 42.40 29.50 33.76 25.90 35.63 29.71 56.89 10.63 14.86 6.80 34.66 30.43 34.91 2.00
RANK: 212th 339th 99th 50th 234th 157th 233rd 113th 158th 129th 232nd 172nd 181st 158th 186th 136th 188th 162nd

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: 106.45 31.84 -- 78.67 45.74 30.09 38.09 19.98 35.11 28.60 61.21 11.12 15.44 7.50 38.25 25.40 36.36 2.02
RANK: 254th 288th -- 49th 260th 232nd 317th 33rd 136th 170th 235th 197th 198th 233rd 285th 46th 221st 132nd

ANALYSIS:
While not an atrocious team by any means, Loyola Marymount is not exactly one that should appear in many top-100 rankings either. They are ranked #223 (out of 351) in the most recent Haslametrics ratings and have a record of 14-17. They are also ranked by this site as the #9 team (out of 10) in the WCC (average ranking 151.3).

Loyola Marymount does not provide much of a challenge on defense. They are ranked at #254 in efficiency on that end of the court and give up about 106 points for every 100 possessions vs. AO. Loyola Marymount does a very lackluster job preventing opponents from draining threes. They rank 317th nationally in defensive three-point percentage, allowing AO to make 38.1% of their attempts from afar. If Loyola Marymount does have a bright spot on defense, it would have to be their ability to limit the number of shot attempts by the opposition. The team has a defensive field goal attempt rate of 78.67 vs. AO, which ranks 49th-best in college basketball.

Loyola Marymount doesn't rate much better on offense than they do on defense. Scoring roughly 99 points for every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO, they are ranked #212 in the nation in offensive efficiency. Loyola Marymount does an extremely poor job drawing fouls and getting to the free throw line. With a free throw attempt rate of just 22.91 vs. AO, they are 339th in the overall rankings for that category. If Loyola Marymount does have a strength offensively, it would have to be the team's ability to successfully get off shots each possession. The squad has a field goal attempt rate of 85.11 vs. AO, which ranks #50 in college basketball.

On the road, Loyola Marymount performs somewhat better than their norm, as the squad is nationally ranked 37th in our away-from-home metric.
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:
Loyola Marymount does better vs. clubs that have trouble defending the mid-range shot. When playing squads that have a defensive mid-range field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 35.19%, Loyola Marymount performs above average 72% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 25% of the time.
Loyola Marymount performs worse against squads that convert well from the charity stripe. When facing teams that have an adjusted free throw percentage vs. AO greater than 72.06%, Loyola Marymount is more efficient than normal 22% of the time. In their other contests, the team is more efficient 67% of the time.
When playing teams that find ways to get to the free throw line, Loyola Marymount usually performs better than average. Loyola Marymount is more efficient than normal 78% of the time when facing clubs that have an offensive free throw attempt rate vs. AO greater than 29.45. In all other contests, Loyola Marymount performs better than average 43% 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
2024-25133rd133rd164th154thWCC220th338th118th81st231st141st
2023-24208th208th286th245thWCC337th349th142nd291st306th168th
2022-23130th130th106th89thWCC194th142nd101st225th190th105th
2021-22194th194th265th220thWCC261st282nd105th319th168th152nd
2020-21108th106th121st76thWCC284th255th94th254th75th106th
2019-20188th188th292nd236thWCC351st30th99th298th58th183rd
2018-19113th113th75th107thWCC349th57th146th119th173rd123rd
2017-18218th218th282nd251stWCC263rd14th126th96th19th190th
2016-17183rd183rd179th183rdWCC187th64th149th162nd229th176th
2015-16223rd222nd213th197thWCC219th76th139th268th37th211th
2014-15254th254th331st259thWCC241st139th63rd102nd108th242nd
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25189th318th201st166th145th150th140th83rd57th323rd129th270th296th237th154th88th323rd280th
2023-24133rd296th123rd26th184th124th128th100th65th215th257th341st107th136th169th125th258th237th
2022-23119th151st328th148th144th42nd83rd326th218th126th162nd278th132nd162nd41st333rd136th269th
2021-22111th147th184th294th53rd211th68th331st61st32nd163rd318th246th119th176th327th15th63rd
2020-2192nd27th94th351st31st219th155th357th31st11th135th343rd94th16th153rd356th4th28th
2019-20208th161st237th328th64th238th317th340th93rd19th102nd300th237th99th195th338th6th37th
2018-19164th135th62nd221st114th346th224th97th86th38th200th95th161st148th347th85th34th5th
2017-18127th171st169th48th168th270th93rd185th333rd10th223rd44th18th13th295th217th26th26th
2016-17202nd235th350th200th127th174th85th289th270th51st204th36th167th146th170th289th46th109th
2015-16212th339th99th50th234th157th233rd113th158th129th232nd172nd181st158th186th136th188th162nd
2014-15225th178th127th188th229th280th112th120th259th124th257th114th21st18th276th110th119th81st
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25108th150th--336th55th176th63rd326th189th185th20th130th269th198th109th301st123rd185th
2023-24312th156th--344th238th126th306th306th239th292nd165th183rd261st233rd60th274th219th278th
2022-23179th232nd--123rd209th42nd205th242nd263rd248th123rd33rd29th30th52nd258th273rd303rd
2021-22284th193rd--124th319th126th301st129th266th256th306th332nd123rd228th142nd138th273rd260th
2020-21127th284th--22nd167th104th275th86th81st154th147th329th2nd17th169th142nd225th210th
2019-20198th275th--104th131st343rd63rd1st48th191st276th328th24th124th344th2nd212th50th
2018-19111th196th--78th99th253rd49th67th116th96th178th181st86th138th306th86th127th87th
2017-18315th298th--47th328th122nd300th46th293rd242nd308th143rd282nd279th172nd58th277th252nd
2016-17155th306th--26th225th57th119th46th228th249th190th243rd276th309th112th78th305th289th
2015-16254th288th--49th260th232nd317th33rd136th170th235th197th198th233rd285th46th221st132nd
2014-15271st147th--189th251st308th309th39th237th201st184th305th142nd146th309th30th194th94th