TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2024-25 Southern Utah  12-19 (0.387)  |  WAC
All-Play Percentage: 0.099 (328th)
Schedule Strength: 0.390 (229th)
Record Quality: -0.231 (301st)
Avg. Season Rank: 273.38 (277th)
Pace: 68.65 (57th)
Momentum: -3.62 (324th)
Off. Momentum: -4.20 (353rd)
Def. Momentum: 0.58 (127th)
Consistency: -8.86 (92nd)
Res. Consistency: -15.68 (331st)
Away From Home: 0.30 (110th)
Paper Tiger Factor: -2.05 (284th)
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: 95.78 27.20 72.24 84.37 40.12 27.99 30.09 27.14 34.81 29.24 54.67 8.11 13.89 6.38 33.18 32.17 34.65 1.99
RANK: 348th 183rd 186th 311th 338th 331st 349th 42nd 272nd 281st 307th 348th 213th 134th 325th 28th 250th 109th

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: 111.72 28.57 -- 90.24 45.27 28.58 35.96 23.19 39.36 38.47 55.76 16.57 15.10 5.90 31.67 25.70 42.63 1.89
RANK: 249th 238th -- 309th 244th 15th 285th 259th 258th 359th 75th 358th 220th 159th 8th 228th 352nd 362nd

ANALYSIS:
Southern Utah is not one of the better teams in Division I this year. They are ranked #328 (out of 364) in the most recent Haslametrics ratings and have a record of 12-19. They are also ranked by this site as the worst team (out of nine) in the WAC (average ranking 223.2).

Southern Utah has one of the most anemic offenses around. They rank 348th in efficiency on that end of the court and score fewer than 96 points every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO. Southern Utah 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 16.57, which ranks seventh from the bottom in D1. Southern Utah is also one of the least accurate teams when shooting from long-distance. They are ranked 349th in three-point field goal percentage nationally and make just 30.1% of their attempts from long vs. AO. Moreover, they find themselves in the bottom-50 in overall offensive field goal percentage, converting just 40.1% of their total attempts vs. AO.

Though they rate better on defense than they do on offense, Southern Utah still isn't one of the more capable defensive teams in college hoops. Allowing roughly 112 points for every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO, they are ranked #249 in the nation in defensive efficiency. Southern Utah is extremely underskilled to force steals that turn into quick and easy points. They're ranked #348 in potential points off of breakaway steals with a rating of only 8.11 vs. AO.

Southern Utah has recently performed below their norm from an efficiency standpoint. The team is currently ranked 324th in the country in positive momentum.
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 likely to allow more second chances off of offensive rebounds, Southern Utah often performs better than normal. Southern Utah is more efficient than usual 88% of the time when facing teams that have a defensive second-chance potential point rate vs. AO greater than 14.43. In their other contests, Southern Utah performs better than the norm 35% of the time.
Southern Utah does better vs. clubs that allow a greater number of field goal opportunities. When playing squads that have a defensive field goal attempt rate vs. AO greater than 86.70, Southern Utah performs above average 80% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 33% of the time.
Southern Utah performs better against squads that aren't terribly skilled defensively. When facing teams that have a defensive efficiency rating vs. AO greater than 106.99, Southern Utah is more efficient than normal 75% of the time. In their other contests, the team is more efficient 31% 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
2024-25328th328th287th301stWAC57th92nd229th284th110th277th
2023-24232nd232nd312th298thWAC72nd197th156th174th31st217th
2022-23128th128th76th97thWAC22nd36th115th83rd284th130th
2021-22178th178th75th140thBig Sky125th294th277th339th235th162nd
2020-21122nd122nd9th73rdBig Sky95th171st268th71st13th166th
2019-20156th154th166th190thBig Sky186th176th197th231st38th123rd
2018-19270th270th183rd239thBig Sky51st11th312th69th128th253rd
2017-18246th246th253rd230thBig Sky38th201st156th234th142nd242nd
2016-17330th330th345th344thBig Sky40th56th287th117th28th332nd
2015-16345th345th341st346thBig Sky138th242nd260th251st28th339th
2014-15309th309th283rd309thBig Sky41st53rd293rd126th83rd324th
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25348th183rd186th311th338th331st349th42nd272nd281st307th348th213th134th325th28th250th109th
2023-24194th106th130th183rd211th199th334th207th224th101st131st265th139th153rd202nd217th102nd124th
2022-23111th47th197th257th110th167th67th351st358th10th176th178th176th88th135th350th5th59th
2021-22137th183rd176th230th130th72nd163rd313th232nd159th85th222nd302nd197th62nd316th136th246th
2020-2162nd28th12th209th128th53rd239th341st200th93rd76th217th208th220th47th340th88th240th
2019-20207th44th126th293rd212th283rd197th283rd304th32nd279th182nd233rd177th264th273rd19th32nd
2018-19310th95th152nd346th302nd186th273rd316th226th183rd324th308th305th290th106th295th95th181st
2017-18238th158th98th325th212th176th136th217th67th273rd304th344th294th272nd123rd176th221st232nd
2016-17270th116th89th286th324th77th134th311th333rd217th346th252nd141st255th53rd305th178th268th
2015-16319th294th140th336th253rd261st94th286th180th92nd338th271st345th330th210th259th39th72nd
2014-15292nd200th309th336th194th234th25th231st283rd268th234th336th324th297th168th172nd184th184th
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25249th238th--309th244th15th285th259th258th359th75th358th220th159th8th228th352nd362nd
2023-24278th90th--269th343rd12th271st207th215th356th296th255th238th350th9th187th357th360th
2022-23162nd53rd--230th196th157th252nd218th242nd232nd131st245th38th211th130th210th220th227th
2021-22253rd50th--247th265th178th277th241st308th212th201st206th57th117th153rd212th184th209th
2020-21263rd122nd--327th191st261st257th298th184th161st193rd202nd307th209th189th258th99th127th
2019-20112th295th--166th59th118th69th211th95th206th57th71st192nd41st114th221st202nd228th
2018-19199th261st--119th206th64th228th101st290th304th88th318th53rd107th76th109th317th310th
2017-18264th322nd--104th276th30th238th117th147th300th224th252nd61st124th40th132nd320th326th
2016-17344th346th--78th337th198th345th33rd244th227th311th305th191st287th243rd46th264th209th
2015-16350th319th--106th348th21st350th60th349th334th243rd168th213th328th19th64th346th347th
2014-15310th347th--72nd296th39th207th201st276th195th287th135th153rd212th57th238th234th277th