Conferences – HoopSci

College Basketball Analytics, Insights, and Trends

Conferences
- America East
- American
- Atlantic 10
- ACC
- Atlantic Sun
- Big 12
- Big East
- Big Sky
- Big South
- Big Ten
- Big West
- Coastal
- Conference USA
- Horizon League
- Ivy League
- MAAC
- Mid-American
- MEAC
- Missouri Valley
- Mountain West
- Northeast
- Ohio Valley
- Pac-12
- Patriot League
- SEC
- Southern
- Southland
- SWAC
- Summit League
- Sun Belt
- WCC
- WAC
Teams
- America East
  - Albany
  - Bryant
  - Binghamton
  - Maine
  - New Hampshire
  - NJIT
  - UMass Lowell
  - UMBC
  - Vermont
- American
  - Charlotte
  - East Carolina
  - Florida Atlantic
  - Memphis
  - North Texas
  - Rice
  - Temple
  - Tulane
  - Tulsa
  - UAB
  - USF
  - UTSA
  - Wichita State
- Atlantic 10
  - Davidson
  - Dayton
  - Duquesne
  - Fordham
  - George Mason
  - George Washington
  - La Salle
  - Loyola-Chicago
  - Richmond
  - St. Josephs
  - Saint Louis
  - St. Bonaventure
  - Rhode Island
  - VCU
- ACC
  - Boston College
  - California
  - Clemson
  - Duke
  - Florida State
  - Georgia Tech
  - Louisville
  - Miami
  - NC State
  - North Carolina
  - Notre Dame
  - Pitt
  - SMU
  - Stanford
  - Syracuse
  - Virginia
  - Virginia Tech
  - Wake Forest
- Atlantic Sun
- Big 12
  - Arizona
  - Arizona State
  - Baylor
  - BYU
  - Cincinnati
  - Colorado
  - Houston
  - Iowa State
  - Kansas
  - Kansas State
  - Oklahoma State
  - TCU
  - Texas Tech
  - UCF
  - Utah
  - West Virginia
- Big East
  - Butler
  - Creighton
  - Depaul
  - Georgetown
  - Marquette
  - Providence
  - Seton Hall
  - St. John’s
  - UConn
  - Villanova
  - Xavier
- Big Sky
- Big South
- Big Ten
  - Illinois
  - Indiana
  - Iowa
  - Maryland
  - Michigan State
  - Minnesota
  - Nebraska
  - Northwestern
  - Ohio State
  - Oregon
  - Penn State
  - Purdue
  - Rutgers
  - UCLA
  - USC
  - Washington
  - Wisconsin
- Big West
- Coastal
  - Campbell
  - Charleston
  - Drexel
  - Elon
  - Hampton
  - Hofstra
  - Monmouth
  - North Carolina A&T
  - Northeastern
  - Stony Brook
  - Towson
  - UNC Wilmington
  - William & Mary
- Conference USA
- Horizon League
- Ivy League
  - Brown
  - Columbia
  - Cornell
  - Dartmouth
  - Harvard
  - Pennsylvania
  - Princeton
  - Yale
- MAAC
  - Canisius
  - Fairfield
  - Iona
  - Manhattan
  - Marist
  - Merrimack
  - Mt. St. Mary’s
  - Niagara
  - Quinnipiac
  - Rider
  - Sacred Heart
  - Saint Peter’s
  - Siena
- Mid-American
  - Akron
  - Ball State
  - Bowling Green
  - Buffalo
  - Central Michigan
  - Eastern Michigan
  - Kent State
  - Miami (OH)
  - Northern Illinois
  - Ohio
  - Toledo
  - UMass
  - Western Michigan
- MEAC
- Missouri Valley
  - Belmont
  - Bradley
  - Drake
  - Evansville
  - Illinois State
  - Indiana State
  - Murray State
  - Northern Iowa
  - Southern Illinois
  - UIC
  - Valparaiso
- Mountain West
  - Air Force
  - Boise State
  - Colorado State
  - Fresno State
  - Grand Canyon
  - Nevada
  - New Mexico
  - San Diego State
  - San Jose State
  - UNLV
  - Utah State
  - Wyoming
- Northeast
- Ohio Valley
- Pac-12
- Patriot League
  - American
  - Army
  - Boston University
  - Bucknell
  - Colgate
  - Holy Cross
  - Lafayette
  - Lehigh
  - Loyola (MD)
  - Navy
- SEC
  - Alabama
  - Arkansas
  - Auburn
  - Florida
  - Georgia
  - Kentucky
  - LSU
  - Mississippi State
  - Missouri
  - Oklahoma
  - Ole Miss
  - South Carolina
  - Tennessee
  - Texas
  - Texas A&M
  - Vanderbilt
- Southern
  - Chattanooga
  - East Tennessee State
  - Furman
  - Mercer
  - Samford
  - The Citadel
  - UNC Greensboro
  - VMI
  - Western Carolina
  - Wofford
- Southland
- SWAC
- Summit League
- Sun Belt
- WCC
- WAC
Games
Models
Statistics
Efficiency Trajectories
Articles
Contact

Search for:

Standings
Statistics
Trend Lab

Team	Wins	Losses	Win Pct	Conf Wins	Conf Losses	Conf Win Pct	GB

Displaying:

Highlight:

Sort by:

Adjusted Efficiency Margin (Adj EM)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	4.796	116	-0.7170	245
2	SF Austin	3.010	130	2.3025	22
3	UT Rio Grande	-1.717	176	0.5574	129
4	Lamar	-9.713	250	-0.5815	233
5	Texas A&M-CC	-12.600	274	-1.2552	292
6	New Orleans	-12.830	275	0.9969	96
7	Nicholls	-15.713	299	-1.3756	297
8	SE Louisiana	-17.739	314	-1.4479	300
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	-20.148	329	-0.1628	196
10	Northwestern St	-21.337	333	-0.8053	254
11	Houston Baptist	-21.890	336	-1.1911	287
12	Incarnate Word	-22.498	338	-1.3513	296

Net Efficiency (PPP Differential)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	0.220	30	-0.0104	251
2	SF Austin	0.178	49	0.0201	39
3	UT Rio Grande	0.037	167	0.0207	38
4	Lamar	-0.006	200	0.0023	133
5	Texas A&M-CC	-0.029	220	0.0030	124
6	Incarnate Word	-0.045	240	-0.0058	215
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	-0.059	251	0.0027	125
8	New Orleans	-0.085	273	0.0222	28
9	Nicholls	-0.106	285	0.0018	142
10	Houston Baptist	-0.125	302	-0.0085	234
11	SE Louisiana	-0.144	323	-0.0042	201
12	Northwestern St	-0.164	333	0.0108	79

Elo

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	1657.111	44	10.6610	71
2	SF Austin	1587.302	77	25.3809	8
3	Texas A&M-CC	1473.042	215	-5.1007	234
4	UT Rio Grande	1463.363	227	14.8395	40
5	Lamar	1456.983	238	-1.3489	195
6	Nicholls	1454.465	244	-10.0435	280
7	SE Louisiana	1410.303	290	-16.6582	329
8	New Orleans	1382.897	316	14.9563	38
9	Incarnate Word	1382.668	317	1.4044	165
10	Northwestern St	1376.650	323	-10.6563	285
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	1349.125	343	-0.0348	184
12	Houston Baptist	1333.103	347	-1.7754	198

RPI

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	0.578	54	0.0043	189
2	SF Austin	0.554	71	0.0073	140
3	UT Rio Grande	0.493	194	0.0107	97
4	New Orleans	0.481	218	-0.0014	264
5	Texas A&M-CC	0.477	225	0.0007	233
6	Nicholls	0.461	242	0.0089	131
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.454	249	0.0102	107
8	Lamar	0.453	254	0.0035	201
9	SE Louisiana	0.426	309	0.0022	216
10	Incarnate Word	0.425	313	-0.0039	296
11	Northwestern St	0.409	332	0.0020	219
12	Houston Baptist	0.405	336	-0.0005	252

Shooting (Effective Field Goal Pct)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	UT Rio Grande	0.542	74	0.0257	4
2	SF Austin	0.526	131	0.0121	50
3	McNeese	0.518	170	-0.0059	259
4	Nicholls	0.508	206	-0.0049	250
5	Houston Baptist	0.507	210	-0.0127	327
6	New Orleans	0.506	215	0.0052	116
7	Incarnate Word	0.498	245	-0.0031	234
8	Northwestern St	0.496	260	-0.0124	322
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.491	282	0.0031	147
10	Lamar	0.491	284	0.0068	96
11	Texas A&M-CC	0.480	315	-0.0019	220
12	SE Louisiana	0.467	337	0.0100	63

Points per Possession

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	1.172	33	-0.0222	323
2	SF Austin	1.128	83	0.0307	24
3	UT Rio Grande	1.120	93	0.0621	3
4	Incarnate Word	1.090	147	-0.0181	305
5	Lamar	1.047	239	0.0161	90
6	New Orleans	1.044	249	0.0132	108
7	Nicholls	1.041	255	-0.0142	286
8	Northwestern St	1.036	265	-0.0195	309
9	Texas A&M-CC	1.028	288	-0.0033	213
10	Houston Baptist	1.021	300	-0.0062	237
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.997	324	0.0053	159
12	SE Louisiana	0.968	344	0.0004	189

Turnover Rate

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	0.135	35	-0.0060	96
2	McNeese	0.142	63	0.0024	282
3	Nicholls	0.161	216	-0.0023	177
4	Incarnate Word	0.163	229	0.0160	363
5	Lamar	0.164	234	-0.0070	78
6	Northwestern St	0.168	264	-0.0075	67
7	UT Rio Grande	0.170	274	0.0009	256
8	SE Louisiana	0.173	296	0.0057	321
9	Texas A&M-CC	0.175	303	0.0065	334
10	Houston Baptist	0.177	308	0.0019	274
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.184	332	-0.0074	71
12	New Orleans	0.194	349	0.0054	316

Offensive Rebounding Pct

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	35.330	20	-0.0289	318
2	Lamar	33.810	42	-0.0120	197
3	New Orleans	32.580	66	-0.0069	147
4	SF Austin	32.080	81	-0.0177	251
5	Incarnate Word	30.610	116	-0.0158	238
6	Houston Baptist	28.580	176	-0.0044	125
7	Texas A&M-CC	26.940	226	-0.0387	354
8	UT Rio Grande	26.490	240	0.0154	16
9	SE Louisiana	26.360	247	-0.0070	150
10	Nicholls	26.150	255	-0.0202	270
11	Northwestern St	23.860	315	-0.0241	292
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	22.970	335	-0.0285	314

Free Throw Rate

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	0.480	4	0.1008	1
2	Texas A&M-CC	0.455	15	0.0567	2
3	SE Louisiana	0.417	58	-0.0103	254
4	Northwestern St	0.407	72	-0.0253	327
5	McNeese	0.405	73	0.0143	100
6	Houston Baptist	0.375	142	0.0048	159
7	Nicholls	0.368	170	-0.0034	207
8	Incarnate Word	0.355	196	0.0187	74
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.321	271	0.0092	129
10	SF Austin	0.312	301	0.0098	123
11	UT Rio Grande	0.293	327	0.0368	16
12	Lamar	0.286	335	-0.0094	251

Adjusted Offensive Efficiency

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	114.031	120	0.1863	234
2	SF Austin	109.305	181	2.3616	14
3	UT Rio Grande	108.180	208	-0.0234	253
4	New Orleans	106.183	240	1.4925	66
5	Lamar	103.852	275	0.4970	194
6	Nicholls	103.360	287	0.6071	178
7	Incarnate Word	102.965	291	-1.0312	338
8	Houston Baptist	102.028	299	0.7112	158
9	Northwestern St	101.626	301	0.3562	215
10	Texas A&M-CC	98.248	340	-0.8835	333
11	SE Louisiana	97.376	342	-0.4766	310
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	97.147	344	0.4143	205

Field Goal Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	41.010	36	-1.0349	331
2	SF Austin	40.976	37	0.6056	84
3	UT Rio Grande	39.865	77	1.3655	17
4	Lamar	38.354	147	0.8285	55
5	Incarnate Word	38.092	157	-1.4625	356
6	Texas A&M-CC	36.135	259	-1.2968	349
7	Nicholls	35.931	273	-0.3105	240
8	Houston Baptist	35.831	280	-0.9550	323
9	Northwestern St	35.346	302	-0.0762	198
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	35.167	307	-0.0019	180
11	New Orleans	34.368	325	-0.9523	322
12	SE Louisiana	33.067	352	0.5776	89

Field Goal Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	90.037	4	-0.3137	235
2	Lamar	88.575	15	0.6923	94
3	McNeese	86.487	43	-1.5688	342
4	Incarnate Word	85.758	75	-1.8708	349
5	UT Rio Grande	84.374	148	-0.9452	303
6	Nicholls	82.825	224	-0.2752	232
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	81.431	278	-0.2516	227
8	Houston Baptist	80.794	302	-0.0707	199
9	Texas A&M-CC	80.433	312	-2.8423	364
10	SE Louisiana	80.182	322	-0.1324	210
11	Northwestern St	79.733	328	1.5206	30
12	New Orleans	77.135	359	-3.8032	365

Field Goal Percentage (FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	47.679	53	-0.2494	228
2	UT Rio Grande	47.144	70	2.2515	3
3	SF Austin	45.491	163	0.8892	55
4	Texas A&M-CC	45.034	189	-0.0603	193
5	New Orleans	44.806	201	0.8347	62
6	Incarnate Word	44.487	227	-0.5785	266
7	Houston Baptist	44.467	230	-1.0793	319
8	Northwestern St	44.346	238	-0.8193	290
9	Lamar	43.423	277	0.5923	91
10	Nicholls	43.402	282	-0.1873	215
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	43.056	300	0.3379	137
12	SE Louisiana	41.213	340	0.6502	81

2 Point Rate (2ptA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-CC	69.106	20	0.4719	141
2	McNeese	66.003	66	1.1579	73
3	New Orleans	65.648	74	1.9423	24
4	Lamar	65.367	82	0.6752	119
5	Northwestern St	64.892	92	1.1257	76
6	Houston Baptist	62.629	131	0.9767	94
7	Incarnate Word	61.713	156	-0.5333	240
8	SF Austin	59.966	194	0.5149	135
9	SE Louisiana	59.593	202	-1.2689	294
10	UT Rio Grande	56.785	256	-0.1036	205
11	Nicholls	55.020	293	-0.6426	248
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	54.011	318	0.0753	183

2 Point Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	31.587	6	-0.3221	229
2	Lamar	27.791	111	0.5470	86
3	Texas A&M-CC	27.669	124	-0.8087	299
4	SF Austin	27.450	137	0.0964	154
5	UT Rio Grande	26.215	188	1.0474	38
6	Northwestern St	25.951	199	0.4317	104
7	Incarnate Word	25.720	209	-1.5295	356
8	Houston Baptist	25.666	213	-0.6134	279
9	New Orleans	25.307	232	-0.2046	206
10	SE Louisiana	23.881	301	0.0243	167
11	Nicholls	23.161	319	0.1984	135
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	22.880	329	0.1388	148

2 Point Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Lamar	58.159	22	0.9403	96
2	McNeese	57.049	34	-0.1502	202
3	Texas A&M-CC	55.520	57	-1.6095	327
4	SF Austin	53.700	103	0.3116	150
5	Incarnate Word	52.949	121	-1.4741	316
6	Northwestern St	51.844	152	1.9302	24
7	Houston Baptist	50.390	185	0.7778	104
8	New Orleans	50.221	188	-1.3048	305
9	SE Louisiana	47.891	240	-1.0974	289
10	UT Rio Grande	47.853	241	-0.5435	243
11	Nicholls	45.511	298	-0.6976	263
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	44.007	325	-0.0256	189

2 Point Percentage (2Pt FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	UT Rio Grande	55.307	79	2.8068	3
2	McNeese	55.214	84	-0.3814	224
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	52.079	201	0.9213	72
4	Houston Baptist	51.161	236	-1.8715	341
5	SF Austin	50.990	245	-0.0531	186
6	Nicholls	50.989	246	1.2251	54
7	New Orleans	50.432	263	0.7611	89
8	Texas A&M-CC	50.067	274	-0.1550	204
9	Northwestern St	50.016	278	-0.6969	256
10	SE Louisiana	49.996	280	0.8445	79
11	Incarnate Word	48.678	312	-1.3959	320
12	Lamar	47.664	331	0.2539	152

3 Point Rate (3ptA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-Commerce	45.989	48	-0.0753	183
2	Nicholls	44.980	73	0.6426	118
3	UT Rio Grande	43.215	110	0.1036	161
4	SE Louisiana	40.407	164	1.2689	72
5	SF Austin	40.034	172	-0.5149	231
6	Incarnate Word	38.287	210	0.5333	126
7	Houston Baptist	37.371	235	-0.9767	272
8	Northwestern St	35.108	274	-1.1257	290
9	Lamar	34.633	284	-0.6752	247
10	New Orleans	34.352	292	-1.9423	342
11	McNeese	33.997	300	-1.1579	293
12	Texas A&M-CC	30.894	346	-0.4719	225

3 Point Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	UT Rio Grande	13.650	52	0.3180	113
2	SF Austin	13.526	55	0.5092	75
3	Nicholls	12.769	89	-0.5088	295
4	Incarnate Word	12.372	119	0.0671	167
5	Texas A&M-Commerce	12.288	122	-0.1407	215
6	Lamar	10.563	221	0.2815	123
7	Houston Baptist	10.165	253	-0.3416	273
8	McNeese	9.423	289	-0.7128	325
9	Northwestern St	9.395	293	-0.5079	294
10	SE Louisiana	9.185	308	0.5533	67
11	New Orleans	9.061	312	-0.7477	333
12	Texas A&M-CC	8.466	334	-0.4880	290

3 Point Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-Commerce	37.424	77	-0.2261	193
2	Nicholls	37.314	81	0.4224	137
3	UT Rio Grande	36.521	104	-0.4017	220
4	SF Austin	36.338	108	-0.6253	250
5	Incarnate Word	32.809	185	-0.3967	219
6	SE Louisiana	32.292	199	0.9650	81
7	Lamar	30.416	245	-0.2480	194
8	Houston Baptist	30.403	247	-0.8485	276
9	McNeese	29.438	269	-1.4186	330
10	Northwestern St	27.888	304	-0.4096	222
11	New Orleans	26.914	323	-2.4983	361
12	Texas A&M-CC	24.913	350	-1.2328	316

3 Point Percentage (3Pt FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	37.081	36	2.1711	23
2	UT Rio Grande	36.819	42	1.6074	39
3	Incarnate Word	36.532	52	0.8894	94
4	Lamar	35.108	115	1.2412	71
5	Nicholls	34.310	169	-1.8476	339
6	Northwestern St	33.984	188	-1.1587	308
7	Texas A&M-CC	33.955	190	-0.1523	199
8	New Orleans	33.107	227	0.1000	169
9	Houston Baptist	32.702	241	-0.3267	224
10	McNeese	32.407	253	-0.5998	261
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	32.301	263	-0.1261	197
12	SE Louisiana	29.148	355	0.6849	112

Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	47.980	4	10.0773	1
2	Texas A&M-CC	45.500	15	5.6687	2
3	SE Louisiana	41.690	58	-1.0347	254
4	Northwestern St	40.690	72	-2.5325	327
5	McNeese	40.540	73	1.4315	100
6	Houston Baptist	37.510	142	0.4812	159
7	Nicholls	36.770	170	-0.3421	207
8	Incarnate Word	35.520	196	1.8738	74
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	32.050	271	0.9196	129
10	SF Austin	31.170	301	0.9847	123
11	UT Rio Grande	29.260	327	3.6815	16
12	Lamar	28.590	335	-0.9434	251

Free Throw Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	26.577	14	3.9676	1
2	McNeese	25.777	25	0.5589	141
3	Northwestern St	23.532	82	-1.2905	316
4	Texas A&M-CC	22.032	142	2.7482	5
5	SE Louisiana	21.482	162	-1.6632	340
6	Houston Baptist	21.136	177	1.4465	57
7	Incarnate Word	20.472	204	1.0497	97
8	Nicholls	19.476	242	-0.2912	228
9	UT Rio Grande	18.613	279	3.1574	2
10	Lamar	17.467	323	-0.3164	231
11	SF Austin	17.313	329	1.3449	68
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	17.124	335	0.7169	119

Free Throw Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	35.302	21	4.8704	1
2	McNeese	33.674	43	0.7741	129
3	Texas A&M-CC	32.900	55	3.2823	5
4	Northwestern St	31.933	89	-1.4762	309
5	SE Louisiana	31.530	103	-1.1526	287
6	Houston Baptist	30.122	157	0.4275	159
7	Nicholls	29.437	181	-0.1495	204
8	Incarnate Word	28.836	192	0.7941	126
9	SF Austin	25.798	288	1.1571	95
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	24.991	314	0.7245	134
11	UT Rio Grande	24.543	326	2.8799	9
12	Lamar	24.388	329	-0.7298	258

Free Throw Percentage (FTM/FTA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	UT Rio Grande	76.618	33	4.1759	3
2	McNeese	76.290	40	0.4884	172
3	New Orleans	75.017	80	0.9949	127
4	Northwestern St	73.382	137	-0.8064	269
5	Incarnate Word	70.816	220	1.8792	51
6	Houston Baptist	69.986	247	4.0134	4
7	Lamar	69.919	249	1.0787	119
8	SE Louisiana	68.642	294	-3.9883	362
9	SF Austin	68.017	304	1.4349	84
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	67.385	324	1.2842	98
11	Texas A&M-CC	67.214	328	1.6838	65
12	Nicholls	66.779	332	-0.8069	270

Assists per Made Field Goal (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-Commerce	64.120	12	-0.7119	236
2	UT Rio Grande	61.892	21	0.8108	122
3	Houston Baptist	59.269	42	2.0846	41
4	Lamar	56.885	77	0.8759	118
5	SE Louisiana	53.532	155	0.7568	124
6	Northwestern St	52.752	181	2.5152	27
7	Nicholls	51.769	206	-1.2660	277
8	Texas A&M-CC	51.637	209	-1.5299	286
9	New Orleans	51.018	226	1.9617	49
10	SF Austin	49.768	260	-0.1118	187
11	McNeese	49.662	263	1.5595	71
12	Incarnate Word	44.174	344	-0.7326	239

Balls Stolen per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	6.619	12	0.3706	274
2	SF Austin	7.519	35	-0.7459	23
3	Nicholls	8.386	122	-0.0159	162
4	Incarnate Word	8.459	136	1.1643	357
5	UT Rio Grande	8.541	144	0.5495	302
6	Texas A&M-CC	8.580	151	0.6091	313
7	SE Louisiana	9.194	222	0.5840	309
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	9.509	258	-0.1943	120
9	Northwestern St	9.569	263	-0.3055	90
10	Houston Baptist	9.899	288	0.2911	259
11	Lamar	10.250	314	0.0790	187
12	New Orleans	11.454	354	0.4072	281

Balls Blocked per Shot Attempt (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	3.545	40	-0.3761	51
2	Incarnate Word	4.173	128	0.3293	285
3	Nicholls	4.310	164	-0.5445	21
4	Texas A&M-Commerce	4.422	183	0.5145	327
5	UT Rio Grande	4.674	221	0.3396	288
6	SE Louisiana	4.706	224	0.0009	176
7	Houston Baptist	4.717	229	0.6540	344
8	SF Austin	4.811	242	0.0311	187
9	Northwestern St	4.908	255	-0.1342	134
10	Lamar	4.954	260	0.7350	352
11	New Orleans	5.287	299	-0.1806	119
12	Texas A&M-CC	5.661	337	-0.2631	81

Fouls Drawn per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	28.681	9	2.6552	2
2	SE Louisiana	26.619	46	0.2143	203
3	Northwestern St	26.017	70	-0.0374	251
4	McNeese	24.436	147	0.5739	157
5	Nicholls	23.844	182	1.4606	43
6	Texas A&M-CC	23.469	202	2.7609	1
7	Lamar	22.422	261	-1.2060	348
8	Incarnate Word	22.257	275	1.8379	16
9	Houston Baptist	21.990	289	0.8406	120
10	UT Rio Grande	21.583	307	2.2119	5
11	SF Austin	20.963	332	0.4663	171
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	20.002	352	0.3741	183

Offensive Possessions per Game

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	72.655	74	1.8913	2
2	Texas A&M-Commerce	70.548	171	-0.6555	236
3	Nicholls	70.073	197	-0.5831	218
4	Texas A&M-CC	69.443	222	0.4474	50
5	SF Austin	68.351	269	-0.9875	292
6	UT Rio Grande	68.030	285	-0.9859	291
7	Incarnate Word	67.911	289	-0.7932	261
8	McNeese	67.694	293	-0.6186	227
9	Lamar	67.564	299	-0.1416	133
10	Northwestern St	67.128	315	-0.5273	206
11	SE Louisiana	66.629	332	-1.7311	349
12	Houston Baptist	65.554	349	-0.9589	286

Opp Shooting (Effective Field Goal Pct)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	0.466	19	0.0093	281
2	UT Rio Grande	0.485	56	-0.0071	89
3	New Orleans	0.497	95	-0.0152	28
4	McNeese	0.498	102	0.0024	197
5	Texas A&M-CC	0.509	154	0.0051	230
6	Lamar	0.512	169	0.0080	267
7	SE Louisiana	0.513	178	-0.0151	29
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.526	243	-0.0156	26
9	Northwestern St	0.547	301	-0.0166	19
10	Incarnate Word	0.550	314	0.0158	329
11	Nicholls	0.560	340	0.0160	330
12	Houston Baptist	0.564	348	0.0033	212

Opp Points per Possession

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	0.961	18	0.0030	188
2	McNeese	1.006	57	0.0044	199
3	UT Rio Grande	1.016	70	-0.0208	44
4	Texas A&M-CC	1.023	88	0.0082	220
5	Lamar	1.041	120	0.0215	285
6	SE Louisiana	1.064	177	-0.0029	135
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	1.079	224	-0.0177	55
8	Nicholls	1.104	268	0.0262	304
9	New Orleans	1.108	276	-0.0261	29
10	Northwestern St	1.128	308	-0.0302	17
11	Houston Baptist	1.136	316	-0.0068	107
12	Incarnate Word	1.145	325	0.0353	335

Opp Turnover Rate

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	0.219	2	0.0047	55
2	Nicholls	0.205	9	0.0072	26
3	Texas A&M-CC	0.188	24	0.0045	60
4	SE Louisiana	0.178	69	-0.0065	267
5	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.164	132	-0.0056	251
6	Lamar	0.162	145	-0.0142	358
7	UT Rio Grande	0.161	151	-0.0026	188
8	SF Austin	0.161	153	0.0018	104
9	Houston Baptist	0.160	161	0.0112	12
10	Northwestern St	0.159	168	-0.0009	149
11	Incarnate Word	0.147	248	-0.0113	336
12	New Orleans	0.133	329	0.0061	34

Defensive Rebounding Pct

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	74.930	53	0.0113	74
2	Lamar	73.880	92	0.0102	85
3	Texas A&M-CC	72.470	145	0.0084	101
4	UT Rio Grande	71.200	198	0.0203	15
5	Houston Baptist	70.490	233	-0.0037	242
6	Incarnate Word	70.010	258	0.0062	129
7	SE Louisiana	69.910	264	-0.0168	336
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	68.900	290	0.0085	99
9	New Orleans	68.370	308	0.0063	125
10	Northwestern St	67.830	319	0.0150	46
11	McNeese	67.250	328	-0.0022	220
12	Nicholls	66.650	338	-0.0138	328

Opp Free Throw Rate

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Houston Baptist	0.308	64	-0.0045	154
2	SF Austin	0.328	99	-0.0301	20
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.367	210	-0.0035	165
4	UT Rio Grande	0.387	256	0.0210	309
5	Northwestern St	0.405	283	-0.0133	83
6	New Orleans	0.411	297	0.0322	346
7	Nicholls	0.415	303	0.0058	231
8	SE Louisiana	0.429	320	-0.0252	31
9	McNeese	0.445	333	0.0242	324
10	Lamar	0.450	337	-0.0104	108
11	Incarnate Word	0.456	343	0.0155	284
12	Texas A&M-CC	0.483	357	0.0608	362

Adjusted Defensive Efficiency

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	106.295	82	0.3199	144
2	McNeese	109.235	127	0.8434	219
3	UT Rio Grande	109.897	139	-0.4477	67
4	Texas A&M-CC	110.848	161	0.0916	114
5	Lamar	113.564	205	1.0734	248
6	SE Louisiana	115.115	242	0.9428	231
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	117.296	276	0.6864	195
8	New Orleans	119.013	297	0.4978	164
9	Nicholls	119.073	300	2.0038	337
10	Northwestern St	122.963	334	1.2495	269
11	Houston Baptist	123.917	341	1.9617	330
12	Incarnate Word	125.464	352	0.3976	154

Opp Field Goal Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	32.119	10	-0.3211	111
2	Texas A&M-CC	34.211	43	-0.3891	99
3	SF Austin	34.277	45	0.6915	269
4	UT Rio Grande	34.646	56	-1.0549	31
5	Lamar	34.952	75	1.0628	317
6	SE Louisiana	35.496	96	0.1118	171
7	New Orleans	36.871	169	-1.7128	6
8	Nicholls	37.901	233	0.7680	279
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	38.036	244	-0.7356	60
10	Northwestern St	38.961	284	-1.2128	20
11	Incarnate Word	39.411	303	1.1458	326
12	Houston Baptist	41.570	348	-0.0111	151

Opp Field Goal Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-CC	76.016	3	-2.3702	6
2	Nicholls	77.203	13	-0.8840	70
3	McNeese	77.372	18	-1.1974	41
4	Lamar	78.820	41	1.2529	313
5	SE Louisiana	80.020	56	2.6933	361
6	Incarnate Word	81.001	94	0.1865	183
7	UT Rio Grande	82.054	124	-1.4622	30
8	Northwestern St	82.103	127	0.1850	182
9	SF Austin	82.892	161	0.3318	206
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	83.908	213	0.8046	260
11	Houston Baptist	84.612	252	-0.9912	61
12	New Orleans	85.756	298	-1.7805	19

Opp Field Goal Percentage (FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	41.458	40	0.7586	276
2	McNeese	41.784	50	0.2053	188
3	UT Rio Grande	42.242	63	-0.5553	94
4	New Orleans	42.933	87	-1.1421	42
5	Lamar	44.410	155	0.6992	262
6	SE Louisiana	44.555	165	-1.2954	23
7	Texas A&M-CC	45.218	207	0.7441	272
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	45.691	240	-1.2340	31
9	Northwestern St	47.531	306	-1.4981	13
10	Incarnate Word	48.849	343	1.2040	324
11	Houston Baptist	49.259	351	0.5377	241
12	Nicholls	49.373	353	1.4525	341

Opp 2 Point Rate (2ptA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	53.337	15	1.1223	302
2	New Orleans	59.232	138	0.4021	226
3	UT Rio Grande	60.003	171	-0.2237	160
4	Houston Baptist	60.780	195	0.9129	282
5	Northwestern St	61.047	204	0.6553	257
6	SE Louisiana	61.812	231	0.8817	278
7	Lamar	62.811	256	1.4230	316
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	62.841	259	0.8941	280
9	Nicholls	63.225	273	-0.1732	163
10	Texas A&M-CC	64.729	315	0.5281	239
11	Incarnate Word	64.806	316	-0.8820	90
12	SF Austin	66.126	339	-1.3025	59

Opp 2 Point Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	19.629	3	-0.1339	141
2	Lamar	24.242	80	0.7151	287
3	UT Rio Grande	24.349	83	-0.6587	71
4	SE Louisiana	24.662	101	0.0727	179
5	New Orleans	25.267	136	-0.8709	46
6	Texas A&M-CC	25.496	151	0.0916	184
7	SF Austin	25.850	175	0.4455	255
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	26.620	233	-0.2968	125
9	Northwestern St	27.286	265	-0.9642	39
10	Nicholls	27.629	286	0.6541	281
11	Houston Baptist	29.449	340	0.4332	250
12	Incarnate Word	29.655	342	0.4198	246

Opp 2 Point Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	41.472	5	0.3209	212
2	Nicholls	48.482	118	-0.6764	108
3	Texas A&M-CC	48.903	136	-1.4658	45
4	UT Rio Grande	49.076	144	-1.1873	62
5	SE Louisiana	49.387	155	2.4268	355
6	Lamar	49.467	162	1.8891	333
7	Northwestern St	50.205	183	0.6042	245
8	New Orleans	51.006	216	-0.7734	94
9	Houston Baptist	51.191	224	0.1054	188
10	Incarnate Word	52.289	265	-0.7739	93
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	52.768	279	1.2254	300
12	SF Austin	54.834	325	-0.6482	113

Opp 2 Point Percentage (2Pt FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	47.548	35	2.0885	348
2	McNeese	47.874	41	-0.7305	89
3	Lamar	49.090	75	-0.2823	139
4	New Orleans	49.928	98	-0.9956	67
5	SE Louisiana	50.340	112	-1.9985	18
6	UT Rio Grande	50.411	117	-0.2231	147
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	50.799	135	-1.5640	31
8	Texas A&M-CC	52.777	216	1.5167	320
9	Northwestern St	54.899	287	-2.3937	7
10	Incarnate Word	57.141	339	1.5174	321
11	Houston Baptist	57.208	340	0.5490	233
12	Nicholls	57.450	342	1.8486	337

Opp 3 Point Rate (3ptA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	33.874	27	1.3025	307
2	Incarnate Word	35.194	50	0.8820	276
3	Texas A&M-CC	35.271	51	-0.5281	127
4	Nicholls	36.775	93	0.1732	203
5	Texas A&M-Commerce	37.159	107	-0.8941	86
6	Lamar	37.189	110	-1.4230	50
7	SE Louisiana	38.188	135	-0.8817	88
8	Northwestern St	38.953	162	-0.6553	109
9	Houston Baptist	39.220	171	-0.9129	84
10	UT Rio Grande	39.997	195	0.2237	206
11	New Orleans	40.768	228	-0.4021	140
12	McNeese	46.663	351	-1.1223	64

Opp 3 Point Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	8.428	11	0.2460	225
2	Texas A&M-CC	8.715	18	-0.4808	70
3	Incarnate Word	9.757	63	0.7260	321
4	Nicholls	10.272	99	0.1139	205
5	UT Rio Grande	10.297	104	-0.3962	85
6	Lamar	10.710	141	0.3477	251
7	SE Louisiana	10.834	156	0.0391	194
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	11.416	206	-0.4388	77
9	New Orleans	11.604	227	-0.8419	23
10	Northwestern St	11.676	233	-0.2486	110
11	Houston Baptist	12.122	276	-0.4442	75
12	McNeese	12.491	295	-0.1872	126

Opp 3 Point Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-CC	27.114	18	-0.9044	81
2	SF Austin	28.057	31	0.9800	292
3	Incarnate Word	28.713	47	0.9604	287
4	Nicholls	28.722	48	-0.2076	144
5	Lamar	29.354	65	-0.6362	104
6	SE Louisiana	30.633	103	0.2665	202
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	31.140	119	-0.4208	122
8	Northwestern St	31.898	141	-0.4192	123
9	UT Rio Grande	32.978	171	-0.2748	134
10	Houston Baptist	33.421	197	-1.0967	58
11	New Orleans	34.750	261	-1.0071	66
12	McNeese	35.900	286	-1.5184	36

Opp 3 Point Percentage (3Pt FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	30.076	31	0.0614	189
2	UT Rio Grande	31.199	58	-1.0832	67
3	Texas A&M-CC	32.399	102	-1.0724	68
4	New Orleans	32.990	134	-1.9901	18
5	Incarnate Word	34.256	204	1.6029	318
6	McNeese	34.268	205	0.8192	264
7	SE Louisiana	35.028	247	-0.5010	126
8	Lamar	35.548	274	2.0515	334
9	Nicholls	35.681	279	1.1761	292
10	Houston Baptist	36.399	311	-0.3964	140
11	Northwestern St	36.597	319	-0.1834	164
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	36.608	321	-0.6345	116

Opp Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Houston Baptist	30.800	64	-0.4491	154
2	SF Austin	32.750	99	-3.0055	20
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	36.720	210	-0.3489	165
4	UT Rio Grande	38.660	256	2.0995	309
5	Northwestern St	40.490	283	-1.3305	83
6	New Orleans	41.140	297	3.2225	346
7	Nicholls	41.530	303	0.5809	231
8	SE Louisiana	42.920	320	-2.5188	31
9	McNeese	44.480	333	2.4151	324
10	Lamar	44.950	337	-1.0364	108
11	Incarnate Word	45.640	343	1.5484	284
12	Texas A&M-CC	48.290	357	6.0831	362

Opp Free Throw Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Houston Baptist	18.336	60	-0.2030	149
2	SF Austin	19.129	88	-1.3275	32
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	20.401	145	0.1373	194
4	UT Rio Grande	22.052	227	0.4283	222
5	Northwestern St	23.165	279	-0.3454	125
6	Lamar	23.490	291	-0.3176	129
7	McNeese	23.832	297	1.2697	313
8	Nicholls	24.329	317	0.9821	291
9	SE Louisiana	24.534	323	-0.5445	99
10	Texas A&M-CC	25.198	338	2.0850	349
11	New Orleans	25.434	340	1.6561	339
12	Incarnate Word	25.958	344	0.5123	235

Opp Free Throw Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Houston Baptist	25.430	59	-0.4925	117
2	SF Austin	26.638	91	-2.2758	13
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	29.670	202	0.0495	185
4	UT Rio Grande	31.116	259	1.1434	281
5	Nicholls	31.416	266	0.3630	223
6	Northwestern St	32.492	295	-0.8069	88
7	McNeese	32.895	304	1.1359	279
8	SE Louisiana	33.136	314	-1.2246	49
9	New Orleans	34.612	333	1.8502	334
10	Lamar	34.866	336	-0.3233	141
11	Texas A&M-CC	35.320	340	2.4515	350
12	Incarnate Word	35.838	344	1.2449	288

Opp Free Throw Percentage (FTM/FTA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Lamar	66.927	17	-0.9672	88
2	Texas A&M-Commerce	67.908	28	0.2659	191
3	UT Rio Grande	70.857	120	-1.0944	77
4	Texas A&M-CC	71.048	128	0.6757	228
5	McNeese	71.418	151	1.8697	323
6	SF Austin	72.024	184	1.2575	289
7	Incarnate Word	72.136	189	-0.8690	93
8	Northwestern St	72.690	216	1.0731	265
9	New Orleans	73.075	234	0.9881	260
10	SE Louisiana	73.123	236	0.7376	235
11	Houston Baptist	73.379	253	0.7764	239
12	Nicholls	77.700	360	2.4208	344

Opp Assists per Made Field Goal (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	45.775	38	-0.2158	152
2	SE Louisiana	49.680	109	-1.1472	92
3	Texas A&M-CC	51.328	152	-2.5952	36
4	Incarnate Word	52.697	189	1.5452	294
5	Northwestern St	54.615	240	1.2800	272
6	Nicholls	55.931	279	0.1998	195
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	55.933	280	-0.7486	119
8	Houston Baptist	56.626	293	3.5265	357
9	Lamar	57.132	301	2.7037	343
10	McNeese	58.768	326	0.2944	205
11	New Orleans	59.653	339	-1.9640	52
12	UT Rio Grande	60.631	347	-0.0808	166

Steals per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	14.806	2	0.6268	39
2	Nicholls	13.264	9	0.5571	51
3	Texas A&M-CC	10.466	99	-0.2154	221
4	SE Louisiana	10.286	114	-0.8252	335
5	SF Austin	10.024	129	0.2939	89
6	Northwestern St	9.728	156	0.1906	107
7	Houston Baptist	9.635	163	0.3769	71
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	9.633	164	-0.4135	263
9	UT Rio Grande	9.238	186	-0.0398	168
10	Lamar	9.172	192	-1.3793	364
11	Incarnate Word	7.947	294	-0.7792	332
12	New Orleans	7.676	314	0.0415	145

Blocks per Shot Attempt (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	7.171	18	0.8063	13
2	Lamar	6.528	34	-0.5722	338
3	New Orleans	5.465	98	0.1289	128
4	SF Austin	5.187	124	-0.1626	227
5	Houston Baptist	5.150	129	-0.0248	172
6	Texas A&M-Commerce	4.643	179	0.0558	151
7	SE Louisiana	4.265	223	0.3040	82
8	Incarnate Word	4.087	245	-0.3937	291
9	UT Rio Grande	4.054	250	0.2228	99
10	Texas A&M-CC	3.908	266	-0.4724	318
11	Nicholls	3.664	291	0.1165	130
12	Northwestern St	3.327	320	0.6556	22

Fouls per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Houston Baptist	23.247	67	0.5768	285
2	SF Austin	24.209	114	-0.6939	53
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	24.851	147	-0.2023	152
4	Lamar	26.158	241	-0.6347	59
5	UT Rio Grande	26.203	242	0.7471	301
6	Northwestern St	26.269	247	-0.7986	39
7	Nicholls	26.505	264	0.2422	235
8	New Orleans	27.348	310	0.4543	269
9	SE Louisiana	27.655	320	-0.8983	30
10	Incarnate Word	28.627	342	0.4494	266
11	McNeese	28.890	345	0.0299	189
12	Texas A&M-CC	30.471	362	2.0656	364

Opp Offensive Possessions per Game

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	72.947	60	1.4596	7
2	Texas A&M-Commerce	70.431	170	-0.7588	268
3	Nicholls	70.424	171	-0.5040	223
4	UT Rio Grande	69.887	209	-0.0595	132
5	Texas A&M-CC	68.980	249	1.0698	19
6	SF Austin	68.241	280	-0.4576	213
7	McNeese	67.961	291	-0.6648	248
8	Lamar	67.583	307	-0.6315	241
9	Northwestern St	67.345	312	-0.1315	143
10	Incarnate Word	66.428	337	-0.5211	227
11	SE Louisiana	66.075	346	-1.5999	347
12	Houston Baptist	65.454	353	-0.4081	207

Location invert reset

Result invert reset

Game Type invert reset

Points Per Possession reset

Mean
Std
Median
Min
Max

selected out of records.

Showing - of

Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Envo Magazine