TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2020-21 Tennessee St.  4-19 (0.174)  |  Ohio Valley
All-Play Percentage: 0.110 (318th)
Schedule Strength: 0.360 (288th)
Record Quality: -0.472 (345th)
Avg. Season Rank: 297.97 (308th)
Pace: 72.51 (52nd)
Momentum: -0.28 (188th)
Off. Momentum: 5.02 (2nd)
Def. Momentum: -5.30 (344th)
Consistency: -6.83 (7th)
Res. Consistency: -8.56 (18th)
Away From Home: 0.62 (127th)
Paper Tiger Factor: -0.14 (127th)
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 5, 2021. 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: 88.59 23.97 67.35 79.73 40.20 28.47 29.34 23.89 35.98 27.37 55.16 11.95 10.61 3.13 35.71 29.96 34.33 2.01
RANK: 335th 201st 291st 271st 310th 256th 338th 152nd 253rd 205th 273rd 122nd 291st 333rd 232nd 126th 168th 138th

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: 104.29 34.17 -- 76.60 46.04 26.85 35.91 21.98 40.26 27.78 60.40 10.62 15.86 6.58 35.05 28.69 36.26 1.99
RANK: 275th 355th -- 14th 280th 37th 270th 123rd 248th 162nd 235th 140th 334th 326th 84th 201st 250th 275th

ANALYSIS:
If you're looking for a squad in the bottom quartile of all Division I basketball teams this year, Tennessee St. likely fits the bill. They have a record of 4-19 and are ranked 318th overall (out of 357) in the latest Haslametrics ratings. Of the 12 schools in the OVC (average ranking 240.7), they're currently ranked as our #9 team in the conference.

Tennessee St. has one of the most anemic offenses around. They rank 335th in efficiency on that end of the court and score fewer than 89 points every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO. Tennessee St. is one of the least accurate teams when shooting from long-distance. They are ranked 338th in three-point field goal percentage nationally and make just 29.3% of their attempts from long vs. AO. Moreover, they find themselves in the bottom-50 in overall offensive field goal percentage, converting just 40.2% of their total attempts vs. AO. Tennessee St. also does a terrible job to take advantage of scoring chances off of offensive rebounds. Against AO, the team converts only 3.1% of all second-chance opportunities (333rd nationally).

Though they rate better on defense than they do on offense, Tennessee St. still isn't one of the more capable defensive teams in college hoops. Allowing roughly 104 points for every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO, they are ranked #275 in the nation in defensive efficiency. Tennessee St. fouls far too much and sends the opposition to the line way too often. With a defensive free throw attempt rate of 34.17 vs. AO, the squad is ranked #355 in the country in that category. Tennessee St. also gives up far too many offensive rebounds and second chances to their opponents. The club has a rating of 15.86 vs. AO in potential points allowed off of second chances (334th nationally), and they let AO convert a healthy 6.6% of all second-chance opportunities (ranked 326th) as well. If Tennessee St. 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 76.60 vs. AO, which ranks 14th-best in college basketball.

Tennessee St. is one of the most consistent teams in NCAA basketball (currently ranked seventh in consistency), which makes the outcomes of their upcoming games far easier to predict.
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:
Tennessee St. performs worse against squads that convert more frequently off of offensive rebounds. When facing teams that have an offensive second-chance conversion percentage vs. AO greater than 4.83%, Tennessee St. is more efficient than normal 11% of the time. In their other contests, the team is more efficient 77% of the time.
When playing teams that prefer the outside shot, Tennessee St. usually performs better than average. Tennessee St. is more efficient than normal 89% of the time when facing clubs that have an offensive shooting proximity score vs. AO greater than 2.05. In all other contests, Tennessee St. performs better than average 23% of the time.
Tennessee St. is typically worse vs. teams that shoot the ball well from the field. Against foes that have an offensive field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 42.04%, Tennessee St. performs above their norm 31% of the time. Against the remaining opposition, the team performs above average 78% of the time.
LATEST NEWS ITEMS:
Freeman carries Tennessee St. past Tennessee Tech 91-86 - USA TODAY
(2/19/2021 12:05:07 AM) Mark Freeman had 22 points and 13 assists as Tennessee State narrowly beat Tennessee Tech 91-86
Freeman carries Tennessee St. past Tennessee Tech 91-86 - The Philadelphia Inquirer
(2/18/2021 11:44:04 PM) Mark Freeman had 22 points and 13 assists as Tennessee State narrowly beat Tennessee Tech 91-86
Freeman carries Tennessee St. past Tennessee Tech 91-86 - WTOP
(2/18/2021 11:43:04 PM) NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Mark Freeman had 22 points and 13 assists as Tennessee State narrowly defeated Tennessee Tech 91-86 on Thursday night. Monty Johal had 16 points for Tennessee State (4-16…
Tennessee Tech vs. Tennessee State - Game Recap - February 18, 2021 - ESPN
(2/18/2021 11:31:44 PM) Get a recap of the Tennessee Tech Golden Eagles vs. Tennessee State Tigers basketball game.
Freeman carries Tennessee St. past Tennessee Tech 91-86
(2/18/2021 11:27:07 PM) NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Mark Freeman had 22 points and 13 assists as Tennessee State narrowly defeated Tennessee Tech 91-86 on Thursday night.
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
2024-25217th217th183rd264thOVC23rd25th350th101st68th273rd
2023-24278th277th164th244thOVC69th183rd333rd243rd142nd260th
2022-23271st271st142nd272ndOVC25th58th363rd64th330th271st
2021-22254th254th234th281stOVC126th216th307th159th278th290th
2020-21318th318th335th345thOVC52nd7th288th127th127th308th
2019-20250th249th152nd208thOVC149th177th272nd89th253rd204th
2018-19296th295th317th321stOVC50th238th212th171st113th304th
2017-18228th228th182nd220thOVC294th323rd250th135th309th220th
2016-17136th136th133rd168thOVC212th323rd200th70th11th141st
2015-16163rd163rd85th147thOVC122nd73rd274th147th212th171st
2014-15333rd332nd343rd340thOVC207th189th160th304th53rd330th
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25226th63rd293rd356th109th335th205th153rd166th190th101st182nd59th83rd314th103rd124th63rd
2023-24297th90th38th356th270th295th326th300th306th86th245th139th220th304th240th269th37th56th
2022-23264th130th316th223rd299th100th161st224th205th263rd320th204th126th232nd87th211th252nd284th
2021-22266th267th253rd193rd214th315th158th24th54th267th313th115th47th80th321st20th270th110th
2020-21335th201st291st271st310th256th338th152nd253rd205th273rd122nd291st333rd232nd126th168th138th
2019-20276th288th333rd324th146th225th102nd237th235th188th154th273rd155th163rd181st210th123rd143rd
2018-19300th88th208th338th275th226th268th273rd310th188th251st121st115th72nd157th246th111th152nd
2017-18297th145th57th348th274th163rd246th281st200th253rd302nd150th229th245th94th246th172nd230th
2016-17240th135th176th245th215th280th289th278th337th19th208th235th13th25th269th274th10th20th
2015-16251st146th207th288th185th331st265th175th77th42nd286th41st170th82nd320th151st29th21st
2014-15343rd241st339th286th337th237th217th17th286th349th323rd284th188th288th213th8th345th301st
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25191st338th--92nd181st141st149th131st94th202nd240th329th321st296th168th153rd233rd216th
2023-24245th358th--29th212th80th170th160th265th142nd186th352nd336th315th135th204th203rd224th
2022-23281st359th--48th269th55th195th165th295th212th203rd267th155th103rd83rd206th276th284th
2021-22240th332nd--75th211th122nd191st283rd283rd49th238th276th291st209th165th309th76th120th
2020-21275th355th--14th280th37th270th123rd248th162nd235th140th334th326th84th201st250th275th
2019-20210th324th--182nd127th161st111th189th271st200th71st337th337th311th162nd181st194th197th
2018-19278th353rd--1st329th15th343rd227th253rd30th334th261st129th350th108th321st97th176th
2017-18136th165th--16th182nd334th289th24th203rd29th195th219th37th22nd350th32nd64th9th
2016-1763rd345th--3rd58th224th177th53rd14th21st114th132nd119th54th322nd113th63rd31st
2015-1685th289th--11th98th263rd244th91st134th13th98th151st81st102nd329th163rd42nd24th
2014-15265th305th--131st204th335th105th84th285th41st313th336th248th247th343rd91st43rd10th