TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2019-20 Portland  9-23 (0.281)  |  West Coast
All-Play Percentage: 0.188 (287th)
Schedule Strength: 0.548 (116th)
Record Quality: -0.241 (293rd)
Avg. Season Rank: 263.00 (265th)
Pace: 70.39 (124th)
Momentum: -0.95 (227th)
Off. Momentum: -2.30 (321st)
Def. Momentum: 1.34 (64th)
Consistency: -9.04 (172nd)
Res. Consistency: -9.37 (28th)
Away From Home: 1.03 (69th)
Paper Tiger Factor: -0.25 (121st)
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 March 11, 2020. 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: 91.18 23.04 67.53 78.14 42.19 29.13 33.25 22.98 38.10 26.03 55.80 10.47 9.91 4.12 37.28 29.41 33.31 2.04
RANK: 306th 274th 284th 319th 232nd 227th 185th 163rd 128th 270th 271st 196th 313th 259th 188th 119th 227th 198th

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: 101.10 25.66 -- 83.27 43.66 33.83 34.11 21.16 40.26 28.28 57.62 15.29 14.37 4.04 40.62 25.41 33.96 2.07
RANK: 206th 191st -- 230th 179th 301st 222nd 115th 292nd 162nd 121st 350th 279th 60th 285th 100th 141st 90th

ANALYSIS:
Portland presently has one of the below-average teams in college basketball. Haslametrics has them ranked 287th overall (out of 353) in All-Play Percentage, and the team holds a record of 9-23. They are also ranked by this site as the worst team (out of 10) in the WCC (average ranking 125.3).

Portland is not one of the better offensive teams you will find. They are rated #306 in efficiency on that end of the court and only score about 91 points for every 100 possessions vs. AO. Portland tends to be very careless with the ball and allows far too many breakaway opportunities off of their own turnovers. The team's rating for potential breakaway points allowed off of steals vs. AO is 15.29, which ranks fourth from the bottom in D1. Portland 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 319th in offensive field goal attempt rate with a rating of only 78.14 vs. AO.

Though they rate better on defense than they do on offense, Portland still isn't one of the more capable defensive teams in college hoops. Allowing roughly 101 points for every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO, they are ranked #206 in the nation in defensive efficiency. Portland hasn't done terribly well defending the mid-range jumper. The squad is ranked 292nd nationally in defensive mid-range field goal percentage, allowing AO to make good on 40.3% of their attempts from those in-between spots on the floor.
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:
Portland is typically better vs. teams that have trouble defending the mid-range shot. Against foes that have a defensive mid-range field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 36.64%, Portland performs above their norm 82% of the time. Against the remaining opposition, the team performs above average 32% of the time.
When facing teams that allow a higher number of conversions off of the offensive glass, Portland often performs better than normal. Portland is more efficient than usual 75% of the time when facing teams that have a defensive second-chance conversion percentage vs. AO greater than 4.60%. In their other contests, Portland performs better than the norm 33% of the time.
Portland does better vs. clubs that aren't terribly skilled defensively. When playing squads that have a defensive efficiency rating vs. AO greater than 99.32, Portland performs above average 75% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 33% of the time.
LATEST NEWS ITEMS:
Ford carries Saint Mary’s past Santa Clara 78-72
(2/28/2020 3:07:00 AM) SANTA CLARA, Calif. (AP)Jordan Ford had 33 points as Saint Mary’s topped Santa Clara 78-72 on Thursday night. Malik Fitts had 14 points for Saint Mary’s (24-6, 11-4 West Coast Conference), which earned its fourth consecutive victory.
Bouyea, Lull lead San Francisco past Portland 81-65
(2/28/2020 1:53:00 AM) Get real-time COLLEGEBASKETBALL basketball coverage and scores as Portland Pilots takes on San Francisco Dons. We bring you the latest game previews, live stats, and recaps on CBSSports.com
‘It doesn’t get much bigger than this’: BYU opens ‘angry’ month of February against WCC nemesis
(1/31/2020 3:36:00 PM) Not to mention that BYU is seeking its first NCAA Tournament berth in five years. While the Cougars rolled past Pepperdine 107-80 Thursday, Saint Mary’s throttled Portland 86-64. BYU knocked down 17 3-pointers, tying a school record. The Gaels hit 18 3s, one shy of a school record. Saint Mary’s is No. 1 in the nation in 3-point shooting ...
BYU Basketball: 2019-20 keys for home game against Saint Mary’s Gaels
(1/31/2020 10:26:00 AM) They Gaels are 4-1 in true road games with their lone loss being the four-overtime, 107-99 game at Pacific on Jan. 4. Saint Mary’s had no problem in their 86-64 win at home over Portland (9-14, 1-7, #258 NET) on Thursday. Can BYU move into a tie for second place in the WCC? The following are keys for the Cougars going into this ballgame.
Killian Tillie leads No. 1 Gonzaga past Portland Pilots in men’s basketball
(1/3/2020 2:23:00 PM) top-ranked Gonzaga leaned on the experience and leadership of Killian Tillie. Tillie had 22 points, Corey Kispert added 18 and the Bulldogs rallied from a second-half deficit to beat Portland 85-72 on Thursday night for their 12th consecutive victory over the Pilots. “I tried to tell them, ‘We’re good, we’ve been like that before.
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
2024-25258th257th294th253rdWCC144th254th131st181st25th291st
2023-24296th296th296th273rdWCC205th356th125th315th344th273rd
2022-23189th189th253rd209thWCC105th349th98th349th88th160th
2021-22143rd141st153rd176thWCC95th179th182nd211th138th227th
2020-21316th315th301st290thWCC64th215th88th231st26th319th
2019-20287th287th316th293rdWCC124th172nd116th121st69th265th
2018-19316th314th336th323rdWCC271st42nd136th269th41st302nd
2017-18271st271st304th283rdWCC209th68th107th220th76th268th
2016-17293rd293rd288th277thWCC291st348th140th297th5th250th
2015-16177th177th254th244thWCC33rd270th161st192nd270th181st
2014-15132nd132nd172nd153rdWCC171st181st112th198th89th119th
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25200th295th26th292nd169th85th123rd254th168th289th156th344th262nd268th64th250th266th302nd
2023-24206th284th181st212th219th25th143rd321st196th260th214th352nd266th261st23rd321st249th336th
2022-23107th29th59th340th158th24th57th305th28th354th201st256th234th233rd7th287th340th359th
2021-22118th118th3rd292nd148th142nd49th89th57th348th169th313th313th271st108th63rd343rd321st
2020-21242nd253rd7th284th248th172nd117th292nd259th125th307th258th315th343rd137th276th86th157th
2019-20306th274th284th319th232nd227th185th163rd128th270th271st196th313th259th188th119th227th198th
2018-19315th159th305th334th292nd180th144th265th324th230th299th266th314th351st113th241st167th217th
2017-18268th208th254th335th205th206th63rd197th255th276th267th287th345th340th147th147th211th208th
2016-17293rd165th66th332nd283rd310th121st120th276th222nd323rd313th308th262nd270th87th160th94th
2015-16108th239th38th84th147th72nd97th128th9th276th275th111th202nd129th91st148th300th290th
2014-15114th127th67th170th140th248th69th67th128th252nd182nd269th197th177th250th56th253rd153rd
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25314th2nd--362nd249th348th333rd190th320th273rd111th326th199th113th289th100th148th101st
2023-24341st9th--361st252nd362nd353rd105th163rd167th263rd259th255th183rd353rd33rd83rd17th
2022-23279th100th--305th230th344th312th163rd301st126th175th278th146th66th323rd110th77th43rd
2021-22186th88th--287th122nd309th252nd286th196th57th75th182nd186th110th269th267th37th46th
2020-21351st22nd--291st354th280th350th18th227th334th344th221st151st270th243rd9th323rd258th
2019-20206th191st--230th179th301st222nd115th292nd162nd121st350th279th60th285th100th141st90th
2018-19294th226th--330th164th314th266th53rd175th299th86th316th240th178th274th26th252nd175th
2017-18238th232nd--276th166th301st117th168th149th167th254th212th91st146th273rd133rd132nd104th
2016-17252nd103rd--335th141st333rd259th189th115th140th147th286th256th278th318th129th77th46th
2015-16270th298th--211th195th227th307th157th30th206th225th276th344th254th209th153rd194th169th
2014-15175th182nd--198th159th144th88th191st245th230th132nd315th182nd232nd134th182nd216th220th