TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2017-18 NC A&T  20-15 (0.571)  |  MEAC
All-Play Percentage: 0.083 (322nd)
Schedule Strength: 0.237 (349th)
Record Quality: -0.124 (231st)
Avg. Season Rank: 303.17 (310th)
Pace: 70.99 (118th)
Momentum: -2.18 (278th)
Off. Momentum: -2.97 (333rd)
Def. Momentum: 0.79 (100th)
Consistency: -7.99 (51st)
Res. Consistency: -9.78 (51st)
Away From Home: -1.30 (268th)
Paper Tiger Factor: 0.63 (49th)
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 2, 2018. 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: 93.63 26.71 72.85 78.47 42.65 25.89 27.93 21.33 36.21 31.25 59.25 10.85 13.12 6.70 32.99 27.18 39.82 1.93
RANK: 309th 144th 131st 317th 242nd 312th 349th 220th 212th 71st 185th 179th 242nd 166th 293rd 182nd 38th 37th

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: 109.61 26.62 -- 83.22 48.07 30.10 36.72 22.52 40.84 30.60 64.55 11.94 16.84 8.89 36.17 27.06 36.78 1.99
RANK: 308th 198th -- 230th 313th 145th 246th 176th 316th 248th 302nd 263rd 307th 324th 126th 158th 235th 237th

ANALYSIS:
Despite having a win percentage north of .500, NC A&T is definitely a below-average ball-club in college hoops this year. They have a record of 20-15 and are ranked 322nd overall (out of 351) in the latest Haslametrics ratings. They are also ranked by this site as the #6 team (out of 13) in the MEAC (average ranking 326.4). With a strength-of-schedule rating of 0.237 (which ranks third from the bottom in the nation), NC A&T has faced some of the easiest opponents in all of college basketball.

NC A&T is not one of the most productive teams on offense. Scoring fewer than 94 points for every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO, they are rated at #309 in offensive efficiency. NC A&T is one of the least accurate teams when shooting from long-distance. They are ranked third from the bottom in three-point field goal percentage nationally and make just 27.9% of their attempts from long vs. AO. NC A&T is also one of the more inferior teams in the college game when it comes to maximizing opportunities to score on offense. The team is nationally ranked 317th in offensive field goal attempt rate with a rating of only 78.47 vs. AO.

NC A&T doesn't rate much better on defense than they do on offense. Allowing roughly 110 points for every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO, they are ranked #308 in the nation in defensive efficiency. NC A&T gives up too many chances to easily score off of offensive rebounds. The team allows AO to convert 8.9% of all second-chance opportunities (324th nationally), and with a rating of 16.84, they're 307th in potential points surrendered off of the offensive boards as well. NC A&T also 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 exceptionally deficient defending inside the three-point line, allowing AO to make good on 40.8% of their mid-range jumpers (316th in the nation), 64.5% of their near-proximity chances (302nd), and 48.1% of their total shots from the field (313th).
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 playing teams that do not defend well on the perimeter, NC A&T usually performs worse than average. NC A&T is more efficient than normal 33% of the time when facing clubs that have a defensive three-point field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 37.17%. In all other contests, NC A&T performs better than average 73% of the time.
NC A&T is typically worse vs. teams that allow more chances at the line. Against foes that have a defensive free throw attempt rate vs. AO greater than 26.23, NC A&T performs above their norm 38% of the time. Against the remaining opposition, the team performs above average 75% of the time.
When facing teams that tend to capitalize off breakaway opportunities, NC A&T often performs better than normal. NC A&T is more efficient than usual 64% of the time when facing teams that have a potential point rate off steals vs. AO greater than 9.46. In their other contests, NC A&T performs better than the norm 27% 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
2024-25342nd342nd339th342ndCAA88th18th258th77th95th331st
2023-24352nd352nd345th327thCAA157th164th224th306th261st349th
2022-23329th328th264th298thColonial43rd249th277th146th191st309th
2021-22290th290th272nd299thBig South178th280th259th58th74th300th
2020-21320th320th166th223rdMEAC45th308th292nd345th129th321st
2019-20289th288th166th212thMEAC7th195th323rd331st212th294th
2018-19308th307th110th200thMEAC234th239th349th155th244th294th
2017-18322nd322nd137th231stMEAC118th51st349th49th268th310th
2016-17344th344th350th351stMEAC332nd276th339th1st78th341st
2015-16344th344th291st319thMEAC224th208th346th334th327th341st
2014-15334th334th320th337thMEAC300th67th310th181st194th331st
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25339th214th311th206th341st262nd345th140th350th164th283rd322nd240th316th258th133rd152nd112th
2023-24341st149th188th138th360th276th358th20th333rd323rd310th258th270th345th287th21st327th207th
2022-23332nd222nd308th179th345th155th318th171st318th223rd331st92nd148th323rd150th173rd220th226th
2021-22299th242nd332nd53rd320th262nd270th74th292nd82nd342nd107th11th92nd288th99th121st70th
2020-21296th97th237th164th330th314th261st68th314th137th345th131st228th346th315th66th138th59th
2019-20312th55th329th307th273rd325th329th98th250th141st244th193rd200th252nd316th76th102nd49th
2018-19321st298th342nd219th251st284th315th207th127th58th302nd175th243rd331st274th206th51st50th
2017-18309th144th131st317th242nd312th349th220th212th71st185th179th242nd166th293rd182nd38th37th
2016-17313th254th134th227th306th244th273rd159th192nd112th332nd298th139th238th244th148th99th90th
2015-16318th199th173rd195th327th202nd299th92nd314th269th297th229th139th231st201st78th258th202nd
2014-15326th288th258th201st311th209th333rd105th119th274th311th308th134th248th198th90th275th215th
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25316th155th--329th265th257th232nd184th183rd281st297th302nd216th244th189th141st226th203rd
2023-24346th133rd--325th342nd243rd305th200th243rd287th352nd187th217th258th165th156th237th226th
2022-23319th150th--344th212th326th238th44th55th330th238th71st174th224th284th15th289th188th
2021-22254th337th--67th231st217th239th26th277th236th166th130th274th281st253rd28th276th188th
2020-21296th197th--271st263rd321st309th45th49th250th302nd121st337th276th308th29th222nd129th
2019-20215th337th--60th238th215th66th36th264th186th279th190th280th289th266th44th226th154th
2018-19255th183rd--239th250th217th185th26th288th329th161st239th297th177th188th18th324th272nd
2017-18308th198th--230th313th145th246th176th316th248th302nd263rd307th324th126th158th235th237th
2016-17350th328th--325th315th343rd337th52nd331st211th236th322nd330th265th331st23rd142nd49th
2015-16344th344th--128th320th337th237th4th322nd190th330th241st248th260th340th4th211th58th
2014-15319th287th--174th277th314th330th26th308th214th168th290th236th252nd319th16th207th92nd