TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2017-18 Sam Houston  21-15 (0.583)  |  Southland
All-Play Percentage: 0.391 (214th)
Schedule Strength: 0.422 (259th)
Record Quality: -0.010 (183rd)
Avg. Season Rank: 232.22 (230th)
Pace: 69.53 (214th)
Momentum: 1.66 (100th)
Off. Momentum: 3.47 (31st)
Def. Momentum: -1.82 (247th)
Consistency: -8.92 (159th)
Res. Consistency: -10.95 (119th)
Away From Home: 0.48 (82nd)
Paper Tiger Factor: -3.44 (324th)
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: 99.15 26.23 73.25 84.49 41.67 28.57 33.31 24.41 32.68 31.52 56.22 10.97 18.21 8.44 33.81 28.89 37.30 1.97
RANK: 216th 161st 118th 58th 289th 244th 266th 116th 321st 62nd 277th 173rd 33rd 58th 274th 130th 91st 72nd

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: 103.81 27.89 -- 78.25 46.07 34.87 35.92 19.45 39.11 23.93 66.50 8.61 13.86 6.87 44.56 24.86 30.58 2.14
RANK: 181st 245th -- 34th 239th 328th 205th 55th 260th 32nd 333rd 20th 115th 181st 344th 83rd 57th 13th

ANALYSIS:
They're far from the worst of the worst, but Sam Houston should not be a terribly frightening opponent for most clubs. They have a record of 21-15 and are ranked 214th overall (out of 351) in the latest Haslametrics ratings. They are also ranked by this site as the #4 team (out of 13) in the Southland (average ranking 252.6).

Though their offense is far from the worst in the game, Sam Houston is not terribly gifted on that end of the court either. Scoring about 99 points for every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO, they are ranked at #216 in offensive efficiency. Sam Houston needs improvement when it comes to draining the mid-range shot. The team is ranked 321st in field goal percentage from that distance, making only 32.7% of their mid-range attempts vs. AO. If Sam Houston does have a strength offensively, it would have to be the team's care for the ball. The squad has a rating of 8.61 in potential points allowed off of steals vs. AO, which ranks 20th in the college game.

Sam Houston doesn't rate much better on defense than they do on offense. Allowing roughly 104 points for every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO, they are ranked #181 in the nation in defensive efficiency. Sam Houston fares terribly when attempting to stop opponents from converting from the inside. The team is ranked 333rd in the country in defensive near-proximity percentage, allowing AO to make good on 66.5% of their attempts from close-up. If Sam Houston 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 78.25 vs. AO, which ranks 34th-best in college basketball.
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 facing teams that are typically efficient on offense, Sam Houston often performs worse than normal. Sam Houston is more efficient than usual 10% of the time when facing teams that have an offensive efficiency rating vs. AO greater than 101.35. In their other contests, Sam Houston performs better than the norm 64% of the time.
Sam Houston does worse vs. clubs that convert well from outside the arc. When playing squads that have an offensive three-point field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 34.20%, Sam Houston performs above average 17% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 65% of the time.
Sam Houston performs worse against squads that shoot the ball well from the field. When facing teams that have an offensive field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 44.34%, Sam Houston is more efficient than normal 20% of the time. In their other contests, the team is more efficient 59% 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
2024-25172nd172nd273rd217thConference USA165th269th102nd306th146th162nd
2023-24136th135th84th121stConference USA148th193rd185th232nd207th173rd
2022-23103rd103rd25th44thWAC301st360th132nd328th163rd91st
2021-22117th116th143rd149thWAC310th322nd149th299th323rd178th
2020-21162nd162nd65th136thSouthland69th240th227th326th331st198th
2019-20218th218th131st207thSouthland67th130th261st47th55th161st
2018-19173rd173rd81st171stSouthland218th69th281st254th150th195th
2017-18214th214th126th183rdSouthland214th159th259th324th82nd230th
2016-17247th247th94th206thSouthland63rd22nd320th159th245th239th
2015-16228th228th170th222ndSouthland207th136th321st318th186th233rd
2014-15113th113th28th102ndSouthland136th148th340th308th226th105th
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25130th93rd133rd295th127th249th5th153rd265th237th234th222nd174th192nd217th128th200th166th
2023-24168th166th214th70th224th223rd129th215th311th28th277th62nd35th164th251st242nd51st62nd
2022-23189th125th298th202nd216th204th78th202nd296th155th233rd112th80th67th196th191st155th151st
2021-22197th356th358th3rd243rd32nd140th192nd282nd136th221st16th49th141st85th253rd223rd270th
2020-21180th217th198th75th237th83rd203rd216th233rd150th230th61st24th118th106th240th180th236th
2019-20216th295th94th93rd231st212th203rd41st172nd279th191st22nd238th225th242nd47th295th213th
2018-19151st342nd21st18th229th54th64th85th66th238th319th148th68th170th102nd130th300th296th
2017-18216th161st118th58th289th244th266th116th321st62nd277th173rd33rd58th274th130th91st72nd
2016-17314th167th219th191st309th290th338th94th271st114th282nd108th75th90th290th92nd109th63rd
2015-16203rd231st186th96th269th66th244th219th177th179th276th292nd191st234th79th235th223rd263rd
2014-15191st28th111th140th324th19th307th336th257th99th336th154th30th89th27th340th105th278th
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25242nd125th--264th185th320th291st211th180th85th225th192nd240th268th300th195th60th57th
2023-24106th270th--37th133rd251st155th14th94th182nd147th208th86th68th308th19th249th146th
2022-2342nd139th--14th62nd350th263rd30th34th2nd114th174th151st295th359th68th6th3rd
2021-2278th207th--34th85th300th79th53rd75th38th207th84th60th44th342nd93rd70th30th
2020-21174th304th--63rd173rd209th74th71st246th153rd230th98th340th302nd267th89th193rd137th
2019-20242nd335th--20th241st303rd117th7th299th77th295th215th216th206th340th10th144th37th
2018-19219th323rd--21st260th236th218th91st293rd46th315th49th175th255th313th139th76th45th
2017-18181st245th--34th239th328th205th55th260th32nd333rd20th115th181st344th83rd57th13th
2016-17177th330th--9th204th179th220th28th86th102nd248th187th27th146th281st65th187th131st
2015-16237th250th--21st287th289th301st26th278th62nd296th149th3rd38th335th45th124th43rd
2014-1555th257th--51st104th26th108th30th14th328th58th117th92nd163rd45th42nd343rd339th