TIME-DEPENDENT RATINGS
TIME-INDEPENDENT RATINGS
   Automated Team Capsule for 2017-18 UCLA  21-12 (0.636)  |  Pac-12
All-Play Percentage: 0.854 (52nd)
Schedule Strength: 0.666 (66th)
Record Quality: 0.279 (52nd)
Avg. Season Rank: 60.67 (55th)
Pace: 72.00 (72nd)
Momentum: 0.07 (167th)
Off. Momentum: -0.26 (214th)
Def. Momentum: 0.33 (121st)
Consistency: -8.10 (64th)
Res. Consistency: -12.05 (202nd)
Away From Home: 0.39 (95th)
Paper Tiger Factor: 1.12 (26th)
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 2, 2018. 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: 111.88 27.27 71.70 82.08 48.03 33.69 40.03 22.65 41.36 25.74 64.38 9.76 15.09 7.59 41.05 27.59 31.36 2.10
RANK: 38th 114th 170th 170th 36th 83rd 10th 164th 33rd 284th 43rd 238th 155th 94th 84th 166th 280th 289th

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: 97.02 22.71 -- 86.36 40.30 34.70 33.61 26.25 34.37 25.41 55.57 10.98 15.49 5.70 40.18 30.40 29.42 2.11
RANK: 70th 56th -- 329th 27th 324th 83rd 296th 53rd 65th 49th 188th 242nd 59th 287th 272nd 34th 35th

ANALYSIS:
UCLA has been extremely effective at times this year and should be regarded as a serious opponent. They are ranked #52 (out of 351) in the most recent Haslametrics ratings and have a record of 21-12. They are also ranked by this site as the #4 team (out of 12) in the Pac-12 (average ranking 95.3).

The primary strength for UCLA this year is offense. The team is ranked 38th in efficiency on that end of the floor, and they'll rack up more than 111 points for every 100 possessions vs. AO. UCLA is an outstanding shooting team, capable of converting from a variety of locations on the floor and ranking in the top-50 in each of our four most noteworthy field goal categories. The long-ball may be their strength (40.0% from three vs. AO, tenth in the nation), but the team also makes 64.4% of their near-proximity shots (43rd), 41.4% of their mid-range chances (33rd), and 48.0% of their total shots from the field (36th) vs. AO.

UCLA plays at roughly the same level defensively as they do offensively. The team ranks 70th nationally in defensive efficiency, allowing about 97 points every 100 trips upcourt vs. AO. UCLA boasts one of the better overall defensive field goal percentages in the country. The team ranks #27 nationally in field goal percentage allowed, as AO only makes good on about 40.3% of their total attempts from the floor. UCLA has also done a really good job this year to prevent opponents from making shots from the inside. They are ranked 49th in the country in defensive near-proximity percentage, allowing AO to make good on only 55.6% of their attempts from close-up. Because of this, AO takes nowhere near as many inside shots as they typically would -- just 29.4% of AO's field goal attempts will come from short-distance. If UCLA does exhibit a noticeable weakness on the defensive end of the floor, it'd likely be the team's propensity to allow too many shot attempts per trip. The squad has a rating of 86.36 in defensive field goal attempt rate vs. AO, which ranks 23rd-worst in college basketball.
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:
UCLA does better vs. clubs that are more proficient at draining the mid-range shot. When playing squads that have an offensive mid-range field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 36.62%, UCLA performs above average 59% of the time. Against all other opponents, the team performs better than the norm 9% of the time.
UCLA performs worse against squads that do not defend well on the perimeter. When facing teams that have a defensive three-point field goal percentage vs. AO greater than 34.48%, UCLA is more efficient than normal 17% of the time. In their other contests, the team is more efficient 57% of the time.
When playing teams that find ways to get to the free throw line, UCLA usually performs better than average. UCLA is more efficient than normal 58% of the time when facing clubs that have an offensive free throw attempt rate vs. AO greater than 27.84. In all other contests, UCLA performs better than average 21% 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
2024-2525th24th58th33rdBig Ten328th344th45th352nd359th16th
2023-2489th89th208th122ndPac-12352nd130th68th70th29th81st
2022-232nd2nd5th6thPac-12272nd29th37th319th200th2nd
2021-2211th11th21st16thPac-12314th123rd43rd227th277th16th
2020-2115th15th59th12thPac-12345th88th4th135th254th42nd
2019-2062nd62nd102nd57thPac-12324th188th54th81st147th108th
2018-19138th138th170th105thPac-1244th319th59th308th348th111th
2017-1852nd52nd84th52ndPac-1272nd64th66th26th95th55th
2016-1720th20th4th11thPac-1234th110th83rd96th151st15th
2015-1679th79th203rd108thPac-1299th77th21st28th265th66th
2014-1550th50th104th51stPac-12111th303rd38th336th341st66th
OFFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-2529th91st254th57th27th190th22nd24th53rd331st6th39th87th146th224th27th342nd260th
2023-24119th33rd128th151st169th322nd97th10th286th332nd46th223rd184th269th325th8th334th176th
2022-2314th46th119th20th27th324th73rd19th154th79th23rd31st43rd40th335th38th128th36th
2021-2210th54th76th15th29th276th35th6th11th282nd45th53rd66th35th318th10th325th163rd
2020-2115th140th156th30th17th253rd18th7th9th275th51st270th69th137th294th13th313th181st
2019-2057th16th186th159th74th260th113th44th17th261st133rd153rd54th64th276th45th271st167th
2018-1979th10th335th251st46th268th39th285th222nd24th148th164th205th71st245th282nd23rd35th
2017-1838th114th170th170th36th83rd10th164th33rd284th43rd238th155th94th84th166th280th289th
2016-172nd245th57th25th1st97th10th119th1st164th2nd68th205th14th147th156th224th214th
2015-1658th191st231st61st29th292nd38th8th5th264th97th227th99th65th313th11th291st124th
2014-1551st130th251st91st30th299th30th95th225th50th28th140th50th26th310th103rd68th39th
DEFENSE Eff FTAR FT% FGAR FG% 3PAR 3P% MRAR MR% NPAR NP% PPSt PPSC SCC% %3PA %MRA %NPA Prox
2024-2523rd40th--35th29th338th86th106th3rd9th178th51st75th101st356th151st16th9th
2023-2467th258th--89th36th294th80th215th195th22nd34th29th69th14th327th233rd30th25th
2022-231st17th--92nd7th176th21st203rd67th79th4th5th65th39th218th235th106th118th
2021-2217th49th--133rd25th219th22nd247th101st62nd44th3rd10th11th228th260th72nd81st
2020-2139th65th--181st54th196th50th241st103rd123rd82nd40th19th13th196th236th112th132nd
2019-2088th92nd--109th83rd211th314th123rd9th133rd51st78th90th51st234th147th151st129th
2018-19230th42nd--352nd86th343rd207th269th84th197th85th259th284th74th283rd174th87th65th
2017-1870th56th--329th27th324th83rd296th53rd65th49th188th242nd59th287th272nd34th35th
2016-1787th13th--347th45th317th224th264th60th184th22nd209th57th42nd254th198th103rd85th
2015-16115th58th--308th62nd327th156th232nd91st94th78th205th55th8th305th192nd54th41st
2014-1563rd39th--277th28th338th138th150th18th89th48th245th46th22nd328th123rd54th28th