TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2022-23 South Dakota  12-19 (0.387)  |  Summit League
All-Play Percentage: 0.138 (313th)
Schedule Strength: 0.374 (256th)
Record Quality: -0.222 (293rd)
Avg. Season Rank: 285.11 (289th)
Pace: 66.48 (268th)
Momentum: 1.07 (124th)
Off. Momentum: 1.51 (123rd)
Def. Momentum: -0.44 (165th)
Consistency: -11.11 (351st)
Res. Consistency: -18.08 (363rd)
Away From Home: -1.99 (315th)
Paper Tiger Factor: -2.48 (296th)
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: 98.47 23.72 76.68 82.62 41.55 32.52 35.75 25.40 36.27 24.70 54.62 7.27 10.05 2.74 39.36 30.75 29.90 2.09
RANK: 267th 251st 29th 268th 296th 123rd 88th 133rd 267th 346th 306th 346th 338th 360th 106th 120th 335th 319th

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: 113.04 26.95 -- 88.06 45.79 33.68 36.43 23.72 38.32 30.66 61.84 11.92 14.62 5.74 38.25 26.93 34.82 2.03
RANK: 354th 256th -- 320th 282nd 295th 306th 186th 205th 234th 283rd 274th 244th 241st 244th 138th 173rd 136th

ANALYSIS:
Not one of the better ball-clubs in college basketball, South Dakota should be a fairly easy win for most capable opponents. Haslametrics has them ranked 313th overall (out of 363) in All-Play Percentage, and the team holds a record of 12-19. They are also ranked by this site as the #8 team (out of 10) in the Summit League (average ranking 245.2).

Defense is the farthest thing from a strength for South Dakota this year. The team ranks tenth from the bottom in defensive efficiency, allowing more than 113 points every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO. South Dakota is extremely underskilled to force steals that turn into quick and easy points. They're ranked #346 in potential points off of breakaway steals with a rating of only 7.27 vs. AO. South Dakota also struggles on occasion to deny opponents opportunities to shoot from the floor. The team is ranked 320th in the nation in defensive field goal attempt rate with a rating of 88.06 vs. AO.

Though they rate better on offense than they do on defense, South Dakota still isn't one of the more capable offensive teams in college hoops. Scoring roughly 98 points for every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO, they are ranked #267 in the nation in offensive efficiency. South Dakota does a terrible job to take advantage of scoring chances off of offensive rebounds. Against AO, the team converts only 2.7% of all second-chance opportunities (fourth from the bottom nationally), and with a rating of 10.05, they're 338th in potential points scored off of the offensive boards as well. If South Dakota does have a strength offensively, it would have to be the team's outstanding shooting at the charity stripe. The squad makes 76.7% of their free throw attempts, which ranks #29 in Division I.

South Dakota has been one of the most erratic teams in college basketball this year (currently ranked 351st overall in consistency), which makes the outcomes of their future games far more difficult to predict. When playing on the road, South Dakota performs somewhat worse than they normally do on their home court. The club is nationally ranked 315th in our site's 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:
South Dakota 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 37.14%, South Dakota performs above average 72% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 18% of the time.
South Dakota performs worse against squads that convert well from outside the arc. When facing teams that have an offensive three-point field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 33.93%, South Dakota is more efficient than normal 22% of the time. In their other contests, the team is more efficient 65% of the time.
When playing teams that aren't terribly skilled defensively, South Dakota usually performs better than average. South Dakota is more efficient than normal 65% of the time when facing clubs that have a defensive efficiency rating vs. AO greater than 103.04. In all other contests, South Dakota performs better than average 22% 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
2024-25251st251st134th180thSummit League2nd68th254th243rd328th244th
2023-24322nd321st289th317thSummit League117th320th306th222nd199th318th
2022-23313th313th277th293rdSummit League268th351st256th296th315th289th
2021-22192nd191st117th171stSummit League279th114th293rd343rd301st229th
2020-21133rd132nd137th145thSummit League127th276th181st303rd242nd145th
2019-20163rd163rd91st158thSummit League62nd20th229th85th222nd145th
2018-19221st220th240th259thSummit League186th164th248th138th199th220th
2017-1882nd82nd32nd87thSummit League54th157th219th293rd115th80th
2016-17145th145th70th121stSummit League47th9th186th213th267th151st
2015-16230th230th224th200thSummit League58th24th134th167th154th212th
2014-15214th213th172nd205thSummit League115th262nd210th17th66th201st
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25167th4th206th192nd289th205th325th236th131st99th319th105th85th121st201st236th93rd110th
2023-24236th311th88th275th165th241st49th60th58th334th263rd362nd218th156th224th49th323rd257th
2022-23267th251st29th268th296th123rd88th133rd267th346th306th346th338th360th106th120th335th319th
2021-22133rd174th80th125th181st208th63rd27th64th331st234th355th263rd164th221st28th337th271st
2020-2181st151st17th250th59th246th13th48th49th339th122nd345th271st285th224th29th335th259th
2019-2079th24th46th342nd31st292nd16th156th62nd243rd105th326th334th260th251st95th168th121st
2018-19246th83rd43rd329th231st220th270th183rd122nd285th211th255th335th293rd160th140th234th224th
2017-1894th75th66th155th99th290th146th195th90th32nd211th91st164th147th299th197th29th29th
2016-17170th17th193rd277th182nd288th244th146th76th128th251st52nd172nd198th268th126th92nd66th
2015-16171st322nd154th122nd105th273rd141st85th195th110th98th71st275th203rd283rd82nd125th73rd
2014-15188th212th38th69th272nd186th192nd32nd209th286th245th289th94th138th220th43rd312th229th
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25324th328th--176th331st65th188th164th341st320th301st239th335th341st69th174th320th323rd
2023-24355th113th--360th314th274th300th300th264th259th333rd291st271st243rd157th239th142nd168th
2022-23354th256th--320th282nd295th306th186th205th234th283rd274th244th241st244th138th173rd136th
2021-22265th311th--171st258th51st196th254th206th266th257th157th86th134th53rd254th275th303rd
2020-21260th280th--251st130th272nd230th349th194th4th286th129th199th210th250th351st2nd14th
2019-20280th200th--174th285th102nd319th270th260th156th225th119th17th82nd85th263rd150th215th
2018-19211th306th--118th169th81st188th195th56th221st203rd92nd223rd201st94th213th243rd259th
2017-1881st101st--245th57th159th63rd244th61st190th64th40th200th167th133rd235th165th187th
2016-17167th119th--189th156th139th208th187th103rd210th146th44th185th282nd120th193rd203rd224th
2015-16309th280th--98th269th250th328th167th252nd78th250th55th310th298th268th190th95th67th
2014-15242nd87th--222nd263rd213th137th266th330th108th290th101st253rd323rd194th250th91st112th