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 2024-25 Tennessee  30-8 (0.789)  |  SEC
All-Play Percentage: 0.989 (5th)
 Schedule Strength: 0.759 (17th)
 Record Quality: 0.524 (8th)
 Avg. Season Rank: 5.54 (4th)
Pace: 63.01 (357th)
 Momentum: 1.24 (125th)
 Off. Momentum: 2.23 (66th)
 Def. Momentum: -0.99 (227th)
Consistency: -11.04 (335th)
 Res. Consistency: -13.28 (234th)
 Away From Home: -0.51 (207th)
 Paper Tiger Factor: -0.31 (120th)
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 7, 2025. 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: 123.12 33.20 74.59 89.81 47.23 38.63 34.97 18.33 42.04 32.85 64.55 13.20 16.42 7.89 43.01 20.41 36.58 2.06
RANK: 17th 14th 99th 66th 48th 54th 128th 269th 37th 142nd 33rd 123rd 91st 37th 78th 288th 172nd 257th

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: 91.16 22.59 -- 89.19 36.24 36.64 27.65 23.97 34.01 28.58 49.12 8.67 10.46 3.55 41.08 26.88 32.04 2.09
RANK: 3rd 32nd -- 274th 2nd 305th 3rd 290th 59th 51st 2nd 8th 5th 3rd 282nd 271st 35th 54th

ANALYSIS:
When you talk about the elite teams in college basketball this year, Tennessee most definitely is in the conversation. Haslametrics has them ranked fifth overall (out of 364) in All-Play Percentage, and the team holds a record of 30-8. They are also ranked by this site as the #3 team (out of 16) in the SEC (average ranking 32.0). Sporting a strength-of-schedule rating of 0.759 (the 17th-highest in the country), Tennessee has prepared themselves by challenging some of the best teams in the college game.

Tennessee will suffocate most opponents with its stifling defense. Allowing roughly 91 points for every 100 possessions vs. AO and exhibiting a preference for a style of play that will try to grind things to a crawl (the eighth-slowest pace in D1), this squad is rated #3 in defensive efficiency. Tennessee will do a number on many an opponent's shooting percentage, as the team ranks in the top-25 in three of our four major defensive field goal categories. They allow AO to convert only 27.6% of their three-pointers (third in the nation), 49.1% of their near-proximity attempts (second), and 36.2% of their total shots from the field (second). Tennessee also does a fantastic job to prevent opposing teams from capitalizing on chances from offensive rebounds. The squad allows AO to convert only 3.5% of all second-chance opportunities (ranked third in the NCAA), and with a rating of 10.46, they're fifth in potential points allowed off of the offensive glass as well.

Tennessee plays at about the same level on offense as they do on defense. The team ranks 17th nationally in offensive efficiency, scoring about 123 points every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO. Tennessee allows very few breakaway opportunities for the opposition, which typically translates to fewer turnovers. The team's rating vs. AO for potential breakaway points allowed off of steals is 8.67, which ranks #8 in the country. Tennessee also does a super job in their efforts to get to the free throw line. With a free throw attempt rate of 33.20 vs. AO, they are ranked 14th in the nation at getting to the charity stripe. In addition, the team is in the top-100 in free throw shooting, converting a solid 74.6% of their attempts.

Tennessee has been one of the more erratic teams in NCAA basketball this year (presently ranked 335th in the country in consistency), which makes forecasting the outcomes of their upcoming games tougher than most.
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.
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
2024-255th5th18th8thSEC357th335th17th120th207th4th
2023-245th5th25th6thSEC89th278th6th300th318th5th
2022-237th7th56th24thSEC307th362nd36th359th359th3rd
2021-2212th12th21st12thSEC177th276th11th332nd275th12th
2020-2123rd23rd68th33rdSEC225th297th54th314th302nd10th
2019-2060th60th148th70thSEC319th326th44th301st79th51st
2018-1910th10th10th4thSEC208th157th27th39th288th6th
2017-1818th18th32nd9thSEC307th173rd6th210th97th13th
2016-1752nd52nd179th84thSEC110th301st17th8th137th52nd
2015-1699th99th221st139thSEC130th189th45th118th247th91st
2014-1584th84th179th89thSEC332nd42nd28th86th10th91st
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-2517th14th99th66th48th54th128th269th37th142nd33rd123rd91st37th78th288th172nd257th
2023-2425th55th77th32nd93rd39th69th249th175th134th86th9th74th124th68th273rd190th265th
2022-2342nd102nd221st16th112th55th144th94th243rd265th10th184th59th64th108th132nd315th308th
2021-2233rd90th169th22nd93rd114th32nd123rd215th149th112th14th51st90th170th173rd200th204th
2020-2163rd110th31st57th108th205th151st44th78th248th105th160th82nd71st249th56th281st193rd
2019-2071st54th62nd217th65th218th153rd77th35th292nd36th256th262nd188th217th66th282nd222nd
2018-194th84th31st26th2nd293rd9th23rd1st132nd20th225th194th63rd327th32nd183rd80th
2017-1837th36th56th73rd70th209th35th34th75th274th81st90th82nd62nd238th42nd284th195th
2016-1771st12th120th94th124th308th182nd18th80th243rd107th281st39th120th316th21st259th117th
2015-1691st169th82nd28th151st89th258th80th29th260th138th129th184th171st142nd99th304th267th
2014-1569th254th152nd20th101st102nd188th106th16th158th128th24th101st136th163rd144th229th207th
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-253rd32nd--274th2nd305th3rd290th59th51st2nd8th5th3rd282nd271st35th54th
2023-244th143rd--42nd3rd247th6th170th1st37th22nd11th9th2nd302nd209th66th55th
2022-233rd124th--27th6th259th2nd65th33rd41st27th22nd6th14th320th121st73rd40th
2021-223rd99th--16th12th225th60th86th65th29th9th144th22nd19th298th151st74th52nd
2020-215th80th--50th13th162nd75th162nd43rd84th11th69th96th32nd229th207th118th123rd
2019-2060th169th--179th34th139th203rd146th62nd258th5th282nd47th20th137th154th246th241st
2018-1935th126th--207th21st276th208th162nd27th119th4th121st309th158th271st142nd120th101st
2017-1810th178th--97th9th149th15th148th21st153rd17th77th248th169th192nd171st172nd157th
2016-1738th179th--54th44th79th165th203rd17th117th41st25th31st14th114th247th151st201st
2015-16113th161st--281st54th251st107th189th27th224th64th98th280th171st212th159th189th165th
2014-15114th220th--16th120th345th218th3rd91st29th172nd19th44th59th351st9th58th3rd
© 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.