TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2018-19 UTSA  17-15 (0.531)  |  Conference USA
All-Play Percentage: 0.588 (146th)
Schedule Strength: 0.543 (122nd)
Record Quality: 0.035 (159th)
Avg. Season Rank: 157.78 (156th)
Pace: 72.81 (16th)
Momentum: -3.02 (296th)
Off. Momentum: -1.32 (284th)
Def. Momentum: -1.69 (246th)
Consistency: -8.19 (39th)
Res. Consistency: -11.07 (107th)
Away From Home: -2.24 (336th)
Paper Tiger Factor: -3.60 (336th)
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 8, 2019. 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: 104.05 21.86 72.85 86.29 44.14 34.21 34.91 24.26 38.18 27.82 60.68 12.21 14.01 6.13 39.64 28.12 32.24 2.07
RANK: 152nd 313th 118th 58th 168th 108th 150th 74th 78th 256th 135th 126th 149th 145th 144th 90th 292nd 263rd

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: 102.05 28.50 -- 81.24 43.29 34.02 33.96 20.39 39.47 26.83 58.04 10.71 13.62 5.68 41.88 25.09 33.03 2.09
RANK: 137th 266th -- 84th 130th 256th 137th 157th 309th 53rd 106th 109th 169th 127th 302nd 188th 61st 46th

ANALYSIS:
As an average to slightly above-average foe, UTSA should probably not be discounted by opponents this year. They are ranked #146 (out of 353) in the most recent Haslametrics ratings and have a record of 17-15. They are also ranked by this site as the #5 team (out of 14) in Conference USA (average ranking 186.6).

Based on their performances this year, UTSA will likely find more success on defense than they will on offense. Allowing about 102 points for every 100 possessions vs. AO and favoring a very up-tempo style of play (the 16th-fastest pace in D1), they currently occupy the #137 slot in the ratings for defensive efficiency. UTSA has been doing fairly decent work to prevent opponents from getting off shots from the field. The club is ranked 84th in Division I in defensive field goal attempt rate with a rating of 81.24 vs. AO. If UTSA does exhibit a weakness on the defensive end of the floor, it'd likely be the team's troubles stopping opponents from converting mid-range jumpers. AO will make good on 39.5% of their mid-range field goal attempts, and the squad ranks 45th-worst in that category because of it.

UTSA plays at about the same level on offense as they do on defense. The team ranks 152nd nationally in offensive efficiency, scoring about 104 points every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO. UTSA does a pretty decent job in most cases to maximize opportunities to score on offense. The team is ranked 58th in the NCAA in offensive field goal attempt rate with a rating of 86.29 vs. AO. As far as making those field goal attempts goes, the team is somewhat middle-of-the-road, converting about 44.1% of them vs. AO. If UTSA does have a weakness offensively, it would have to be the team's inability to get to the free throw line. The squad has a free throw attempt rate of only 21.86 vs. AO, which ranks 41st-worst in the country.

UTSA is one of the more consistent teams in Division I (presently ranked 39th in consistency), so forecasting the outcomes of their future contests tends to be easier than the norm. On the road, UTSA performs noticeably worse than they do at home. The team is currently ranked 336th in the country in the away-from-home metric we track.
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:
UTSA is typically worse vs. teams that tend to get off more shots. Against foes that have an offensive field goal attempt rate vs. AO greater than 83.60, UTSA performs above their norm 8% of the time. Against the remaining opposition, the team performs above average 73% of the time.
When facing teams that allow opponents to shoot well from the field, UTSA often performs better than normal. UTSA is more efficient than usual 60% of the time when facing teams that have a defensive field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 42.10%. In their other contests, UTSA never performs above average.
UTSA does worse vs. clubs that are typically efficient on offense. When playing squads that have an offensive efficiency rating vs. AO greater than 104.46, UTSA performs above average 10% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 61% of the time.
LATEST NEWS ITEMS:
Bonus play could liven up Conference USA
(2/13/2019 1:09:00 PM) they’ll want to be paying attention to the game between Texas-San Antonio and Southern Miss Thursday night. If the Roadrunners lose, either Thursday or Saturday, ODU can clinch the No.1 seed in ...
WKU slips past UTSA in overtime
(2/1/2019 1:05:00 PM) BOWLING GREEN — Western Kentucky rallied in the final minute of regulation to force overtime, then dominated the extra frame to overhaul Texas-San Antonio 96-88 in a Conference USA basketball ... added 26 points for the Roadrunners (12-10, 6-3).
Role players key to ODU remaining atop Conference USA
(2/1/2019 12:45:00 PM) As most all of college basketball is aware, the Monarchs had an epic meltdown last Saturday, losing a 17-point lead in the final three-plus minutes to fall at Texas-San Antonio 74-73 ... But given how ODU lost to the Roadrunners, some coaches would ...
In a season of extremes, ODU looks for less drama, more consistency
(1/30/2019 9:30:00 AM) It’s been a season of extremes for the Old Dominion men's basketball team. The latest: an epic meltdown Saturday at Texas-San Antonio ... tossed in by the Roadrunners. It was the flip side ...
Free Throw Shooting A Key Factor in Hogs’ Win Over Roadrunners
(12/17/2018 8:16:00 PM) In Arkansas’ 79-67 win over the University of Texas-San Antonio Roadrunners (3-7) at Verizon Arena in North ... “Whenever you’re playing basketball, you’re always in those situations,” Joe said. “When you get out there, you think about having ...
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
2024-25161st161st287th246thAAC64th198th140th26th128th199th
2023-24226th226th302nd265thAAC38th182nd170th5th115th289th
2022-23269th269th319th278thConference USA64th33rd126th245th197th308th
2021-22320th320th305th302ndConference USA101st238th177th79th260th314th
2020-21136th134th128th155thConference USA49th196th131st197th334th178th
2019-20206th206th264th249thConference USA13th204th142nd44th314th205th
2018-19146th146th153rd159thConference USA16th39th122nd336th336th156th
2017-18179th179th137th160thConference USA48th115th161st104th171st169th
2016-17249th249th248th252ndConference USA194th141st201st14th346th280th
2015-16338th338th348th343rdConference USA50th235th239th184th200th348th
2014-15188th188th210th238thConference USA121st190th229th269th32nd216th
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25153rd211th21st136th241st76th67th187th224th298th298th1st235th285th80th189th303rd312th
2023-24179th78th208th64th318th29th206th228th289th249th301st210th11th59th37th250th282nd320th
2022-23227th53rd109th247th290th231st222nd175th148th216th326th293rd79th90th201st159th202nd180th
2021-22323rd282nd242nd27th344th235th353rd45th340th146th274th136th56th163rd273rd65th191st116th
2020-2198th324th72nd4th177th105th234th41st63rd211th185th199th163rd279th196th77th292nd243rd
2019-20173rd317th14th47th262nd57th89th88th259th312th216th127th285th269th76th108th323rd318th
2018-19152nd313th118th58th168th108th150th74th78th256th135th126th149th145th144th90th292nd263rd
2017-18181st258th319th79th211th51st140th133rd188th297th165th225th188th204th72nd142nd313th310th
2016-17298th67th265th64th334th281st343rd36th223rd182nd327th239th20th122nd304th44th212th97th
2015-16310th196th128th284th298th159th320th281st205th132nd305th100th288th267th127th274th102nd161st
2014-15136th56th241st102nd225th143rd216th255th289th47th214th65th92nd168th160th275th63rd121st
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-25199th323rd--16th253rd139th274th96th251st102nd220th142nd272nd153rd242nd150th177th145th
2023-24293rd195th--314th214th278th325th177th202nd262nd144th167th285th150th231st133rd198th165th
2022-23294th206th--307th218th296th247th253rd245th129th248th108th289th233rd254th221st78th87th
2021-22256th305th--74th305th202nd328th52nd316th198th226th209th211th106th242nd74th233rd177th
2020-21231st343rd--48th180th177th229th116th156th95th211th14th240th263rd251st164th132nd112th
2019-20255th284th--101st240th222nd307th174th255th79th189th116th57th83rd253rd190th82nd80th
2018-19137th266th--84th130th256th137th157th309th53rd106th109th169th127th302nd188th61st46th
2017-18167th323rd--143rd108th262nd118th264th139th39th209th91st148th108th283rd268th39th43rd
2016-17148th213th--148th148th210th232nd248th123rd68th189th129th114th75th218th261st73rd81st
2015-16345th303rd--55th349th176th349th38th351st215th327th174th225th347th239th49th260th206th
2014-15283rd37th--290th242nd340th236th116th339th128th200th164th162nd200th330th80th90th42nd