TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2024-25 Tenn. Tech  15-17 (0.469)  |  Ohio Valley
All-Play Percentage: 0.223 (284th)
Schedule Strength: 0.272 (340th)
Record Quality: -0.204 (287th)
Avg. Season Rank: 265.21 (271st)
Pace: 67.66 (112th)
Momentum: -4.06 (334th)
Off. Momentum: -1.86 (302nd)
Def. Momentum: -2.20 (284th)
Consistency: -8.18 (27th)
Res. Consistency: -10.61 (58th)
Away From Home: 0.51 (87th)
Paper Tiger Factor: 1.20 (25th)
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: 100.52 21.87 69.76 86.36 41.78 38.15 34.36 19.19 36.90 29.02 54.75 11.76 12.50 4.44 44.18 22.22 33.60 2.11
RANK: 293rd 346th 266th 220th 284th 65th 158th 247th 198th 291st 305th 207th 281st 321st 54th 246th 283rd 323rd

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: 112.18 22.14 -- 93.05 45.35 33.94 32.99 25.02 39.68 34.10 61.82 12.38 16.50 7.75 36.47 26.89 36.64 2.00
RANK: 257th 25th -- 357th 247th 197th 115th 319th 273rd 274th 289th 200th 314th 342nd 90th 272nd 178th 233rd

ANALYSIS:
Tenn. Tech presently has one of the below-average teams in college basketball. They have a record of 15-17 and are ranked 284th overall (out of 364) in the latest Haslametrics ratings. Of the 11 schools in the OVC (average ranking 272.3), they're currently ranked as our #6 team in the conference. With a strength-of-schedule rating of 0.272 (which ranks 340th nationally), Tenn. Tech has had one of the cushiest slates in all of college basketball.

Tenn. Tech is not one of the better offensive teams you will find. They are rated #293 in efficiency on that end of the court and only score about 101 points for every 100 possessions vs. AO. Tenn. Tech does an extremely poor job drawing fouls and getting to the free throw line. With a free throw attempt rate of just 21.87 vs. AO, they are 346th in the overall rankings for that category. Tenn. Tech is also one of the more deficient teams in the nation as it pertains to scoring off of offensive rebounds. Against AO, the team converts only 4.4% of all second-chance opportunities (321st nationally).

Tenn. Tech doesn't rate much better on defense than they do on offense. Allowing roughly 112 points for every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO, they are ranked #257 in the nation in defensive efficiency. Tenn. Tech allows the opposition to get off far too many shots from the floor. The team is ranked eighth from the bottom in the nation in defensive field goal attempt rate with a rating of 93.05 vs. AO. Tenn. Tech is also one of the very worst teams in the game when it comes to preventing opponents from scoring off of offensive rebounds. The team allows AO to convert 7.8% of all second-chance opportunities (342nd nationally). If Tenn. Tech does have a bright spot on defense, it would have to be their success preventing opponents from getting to the free throw line. The team has a defensive free throw attempt rate of 22.14 vs. AO, which ranks 25th-best in the country.

Tenn. Tech has recently performed below their norm from an efficiency standpoint. The team is currently ranked 334th in the country in positive momentum. Tenn. Tech is also one of the more consistent teams in Division I (presently ranked 27th in consistency), so forecasting the outcomes of their future contests tends to be easier than the norm.
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:
Tenn. Tech does better vs. clubs that effectively clean the offensive glass. When playing squads that have an offensive second-chance potential point rate vs. AO greater than 13.87, Tenn. Tech performs above average 60% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 10% of the time.
Tenn. Tech performs worse against squads that prefer the outside shot. When facing teams that have an offensive shooting proximity score vs. AO greater than 2.03, Tenn. Tech is more efficient than normal 11% of the time. In their other contests, the team is more efficient 57% of the time.
When playing teams that do not defend well on the perimeter, Tenn. Tech usually performs worse than average. Tenn. Tech is more efficient than normal 20% of the time when facing clubs that have a defensive three-point field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 35.17%. In all other contests, Tenn. Tech performs better than average 55% 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
2024-25284th283rd218th287thOVC112th27th340th25th87th271st
2023-24330th330th312th329thOVC281st324th300th48th339th326th
2022-23255th255th207th283rdOVC197th144th333rd226th278th273rd
2021-22243rd243rd290th288thOVC47th177th204th92nd157th243rd
2020-21327th327th334th334thOVC120th76th202nd236th231st328th
2019-20327th327th310th323rdOVC220th219th255th133rd292nd334th
2018-19326th326th329th331stOVC110th53rd230th166th142nd340th
2017-18225th225th131st165thOVC50th108th231st157th195th212th
2016-17243rd243rd269th267thOVC121st29th224th7th21st269th
2015-16224th224th110th146thOVC112th267th218th312th337th194th
2014-15238th238th258th270thOVC90th191st212th121st271st222nd
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25293rd346th266th220th284th65th158th247th198th291st305th207th281st321st54th246th283rd323rd
2023-24337th338th248th315th272nd280th277th223rd237th110th302nd302nd305th335th258th197th70th78th
2022-23222nd295th166th220th244th73rd30th178th131st331st322nd250th298th271st62nd169th329th334th
2021-22233rd319th344th80th163rd277th155th108th138th60th246th120th36th199th292nd123rd77th51st
2020-21283rd334th246th221st260th63rd303rd274th164th222nd194th149th245th342nd54th274th215th286th
2019-20330th343rd274th132nd336th48th231st285th345th179th329th146th178th226th52nd294th184th272nd
2018-19344th133rd343rd332nd338th317th288th99th332nd249th334th224th131st263rd280th60th193rd117th
2017-18286th88th274th241st308th237th286th224th335th85th297th43rd34th130th223rd218th68th86th
2016-17290th162nd150th264th303rd115th316th279th130th187th320th176th150th170th95th273rd156th220th
2015-16143rd92nd63rd289th181st64th135th307th36th236th277th193rd196th248th49th297th197th283rd
2014-15171st242nd190th48th191st229th244th89th23rd97th276th157th13th32nd255th113th146th105th
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25257th25th--357th247th197th115th319th273rd274th289th200th314th342nd90th272nd178th233rd
2023-24321st74th--288th313th267th251st203rd189th190th355th343rd38th241st233rd175th154th141st
2022-23287th82nd--316th276th258th173rd138th217th305th299th211th342nd322nd211th80th266th216th
2021-22252nd56th--307th235th279th119th141st293rd265th272nd185th257th313th224th104th217th179th
2020-21323rd105th--227th342nd217th288th117th275th252nd347th201st183rd256th201st101st239th201st
2019-20304th108th--199th321st166th323rd234th311th138th310th281st243rd325th158th236th131st162nd
2018-19212th222nd--176th231st70th132nd188th296th286th176th351st348th344th62nd180th286th300th
2017-18148th261st--84th184th121st89th37th289th285th112th87th279th276th153rd39th304th276th
2016-17218th280th--61st221st199th183rd79th192nd156th239th165th257th306th248th90th196th157th
2015-16289th168th--311th259th258th297th98th298th306th122nd206th308th296th202nd54th270th234th
2014-15275th319th--63rd311th70th282nd6th286th336th170th283rd219th339th98th7th345th325th