TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
2024-25      2023-24      2022-23      2021-22
2020-21      2019-20      2018-19      2017-18
2016-17      2015-16      2014-15     
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
2024-25      2023-24      2022-23      2021-22
2020-21      2019-20      2018-19      2017-18
2016-17      2015-16      2014-15     
   Automated Team Capsule for 2021-22 Baylor  27-7 (0.794)  |  Big 12
All-Play Percentage: 0.994 (3rd)
 Schedule Strength: 0.712 (15th)
 Record Quality: 0.517 (4th)
 Avg. Season Rank: 3.84 (2nd)
Pace: 67.92 (179th)
 Momentum: -0.92 (228th)
 Off. Momentum: 0.71 (157th)
 Def. Momentum: -1.63 (255th)
Consistency: -8.29 (75th)
 Res. Consistency: -12.85 (238th)
 Away From Home: -1.16 (308th)
 Paper Tiger Factor: -3.77 (344th)
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, 2022. 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: 116.75 26.80 71.89 90.19 47.63 32.61 35.47 26.51 39.27 31.07 67.52 15.44 14.98 5.77 36.16 29.39 34.45 2.02
RANK: 8th 92nd 171st 7th 20th 119th 70th 114th 97th 86th 9th 11th 81st 88th 192nd 174th 171st 175th

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: 89.05 22.65 -- 80.26 40.00 30.15 29.38 25.24 34.11 24.88 58.83 9.56 12.50 4.68 37.56 31.44 31.00 2.07
RANK: 12th 90th -- 27th 43rd 157th 27th 221st 39th 28th 165th 82nd 122nd 139th 221st 288th 57th 76th

ANALYSIS:
Baylor is among the very best of the best in NCAA hoops this year. They have a record of 27-7 and are ranked third overall (out of 358) in the latest Haslametrics ratings. Of the 10 schools in the Big 12 (average ranking 27.4), they're currently ranked as our #2 team in the conference. Sporting a strength-of-schedule rating of 0.712 (the 15th-highest in the country), Baylor has prepared themselves by challenging some of the best teams in the college game.

Baylor is undoubtedly one of the best in the business on offense. The team is rated eighth in offensive efficiency, scoring more than 116 points every 100 possessions vs. AO. Baylor is one of the very best when it comes to maximizing field goal opportunities. The team is ranked seventh in the NCAA in offensive field goal attempt rate with a rating of 90.19 vs. AO. Even better, the team is excellent at converting those attempts. They make about 47.6% of their field goal attempts vs. AO (20th-best in the country). Baylor is also one of the nation's most effective teams finishing close to the iron. The team is ranked ninth in the country in near-proximity field goal percentage, making approximately 67.5% of their attempts from up-close vs. AO.

Baylor plays at roughly the same level defensively as they do offensively. The team ranks 12th nationally in defensive efficiency, allowing about 89 points every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO. Baylor thrives on scoring fast and easy points off of steals. They're ranked 11th in potential points off of breakaway steals vs. AO with a rating of 15.44. Baylor also does a really good job to prevent opponents from getting off shots from the field. The club is ranked 27th in Division I in defensive field goal attempt rate with a rating of 80.26 vs. AO.
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:
Baylor is typically worse vs. teams that convert more frequently off of offensive rebounds. Against foes that have an offensive second-chance conversion percentage vs. AO greater than 5.06%, Baylor performs above their norm 29% of the time. Against the remaining opposition, the team performs above average 85% of the time.
When facing teams that tend to capitalize off breakaway opportunities, Baylor often performs worse than normal. Baylor is more efficient than usual 17% of the time when facing teams that have a potential point rate off steals vs. AO greater than 13.47. In their other contests, Baylor performs better than the norm 68% of the time.
Baylor does worse vs. clubs that shoot the ball well from the field. When playing squads that have an offensive field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 44.55%, Baylor performs above average 35% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 82% of the time.
LATEST NEWS ITEMS:
March Madness: Winners and losers from Saturday's NCAA Tournament games
(3/19/2022 6:56:13 PM) The NCAA Tournament's second round started off in exciting fashion Saturday, with one No. 1 seed going down and another barely avoiding an upset.
Tar Heels survive ejection, big rally, beat ’21 champ Baylor
(3/19/2022 6:07:31 PM) North Carolina nearly blew a 25-point second-half lead, but held on to take out Baylor in overtime.
No. 1 seed Baylor's incredible late run goes to waste as North Carolina holds on in OT to advance to Sweet 16
(3/19/2022 5:34:53 PM) Baylor's shot at winning back-to-back NCAA titles is over after UNC survives the Bears' wild comeback attempt in OT
Officials in UNC's upset of Baylor shouldn't be rewarded with more NCAA Tournament games | Opinion
(3/19/2022 5:30:07 PM) When a game is as physical as UNC-Baylor was from the start, refs must get it under control. But this officiating crew let the game get out of hand.
North Carolina men blow 25-point lead but rally to oust 2021 champ Baylor in overtime
(3/19/2022 3:58:26 PM) Eighth-seeded North Carolina found a way to beat the defending champs in the second round.
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
2024-2532nd32nd140th57thBig 12329th152nd8th364th360th21st
2023-2415th15th52nd20thBig 12316th313th9th359th348th16th
2022-2317th17th58th21stBig 12259th303rd9th340th345th14th
2021-223rd3rd12th4thBig 12179th75th15th344th308th2nd
2020-212nd2nd2nd1stBig 12279th310th56th260th265th2nd
2019-204th4th8th2ndBig 12306th142nd28th120th95th9th
2018-1940th40th114th53rdBig 12310th304th37th52nd163rd57th
2017-1833rd33rd147th80thBig 12261st260th40th276th334th41st
2016-1712th12th21st8thBig 12333rd199th6th181st212th7th
2015-1632nd32nd81st40thBig 12301st308th20th286th62nd31st
2014-1519th19th45th16thBig 12316th205th12th44th287th18th
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-2519th103rd63rd10th72nd115th91st87th102nd140th46th33rd26th47th191st137th241st199th
2023-249th8th117th198th17th127th7th210th113th194th19th59th69th11th116th216th194th229th
2022-233rd24th56th25th53rd16th13th114th57th342nd33rd193rd68th61st38th148th357th353rd
2021-228th92nd171st7th20th119th70th114th97th86th9th11th81st88th192nd174th171st175th
2020-212nd197th238th2nd8th67th1st172nd56th10th71st17th12th20th194th257th63rd102nd
2019-2012th121st248th2nd69th119th42nd55th194th87th55th16th30th46th230th93rd208th161st
2018-1926th58th312th29th43rd90th55th40th75th310th8th233rd3rd8th134th57th325th301st
2017-1856th102nd135th46th49th327th101st4th45th279th22nd202nd21st9th337th6th293rd104th
2016-1720th125th119th4th26th230th68th55th113th63rd11th231st8th6th280th81st147th78th
2015-1617th49th109th14th24th294th19th60th61st30th99th62nd8th17th323rd83rd54th28th
2014-1523rd46th253rd10th86th99th28th185th199th34th149th17th4th13th171st243rd85th135th
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-2551st169th--34th69th265th210th345th83rd1st230th1st134th135th315th358th1st6th
2023-2463rd75th--69th114th111th70th324th167th17th277th42nd6th16th152nd342nd22nd79th
2022-2399th113th--131st122nd277th41st260th170th23rd343rd63rd67th105th293rd272nd25th28th
2021-2212th90th--27th43rd157th27th221st39th28th165th82nd122nd139th221st288th57th76th
2020-2110th60th--41st65th78th60th181st26th115th136th7th94th156th119th242nd177th193rd
2019-204th109th--40th11th82nd65th308th4th21st92nd5th92nd137th129th333rd36th105th
2018-1956th254th--112th44th202nd121st340th152nd4th91st45th99th35th227th344th4th15th
2017-1826th140th--131st20th221st52nd347th110th1st151st99th75th14th236th349th1st7th
2016-1715th31st--239th17th226th42nd327th87th39th18th9th46th3rd199th327th35th56th
2015-1696th130th--48th151st149th256th271st228th14th156th64th9th13th220th302nd27th55th
2014-1520th17th--240th45th311th14th307th184th16th134th140th118th114th301st290th10th12th
© Copyright 2025 Erik Haslam, All Rights Reserved
Note: Haslametrics.com does not own any of the logos depicted within this site, we do not have the power to grant usage rights
to anyone. All team logos and names contained within this site are properties of the NCAA. Please source any information
obtained from this site by providing a link back.