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	5.943	109	-0.5177	226
2	SF Austin	4.008	123	2.5224	19
3	UT Rio Grande	-3.022	194	0.3411	147
4	Lamar	-9.086	242	-0.5480	230
5	Texas A&M-CC	-12.178	271	-1.2124	288
6	New Orleans	-13.294	279	1.1617	81
7	Nicholls	-13.532	282	-1.1630	282
8	SE Louisiana	-18.257	317	-1.4331	299
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	-20.977	331	-0.2504	200
10	Incarnate Word	-22.139	335	-1.2120	287
11	Northwestern St	-22.243	336	-0.9665	264
12	Houston Baptist	-22.299	337	-1.1963	286

Net Efficiency (PPP Differential)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	0.222	30	-0.0092	241
2	SF Austin	0.179	49	0.0216	31
3	UT Rio Grande	0.034	169	0.0185	44
4	Lamar	-0.006	200	0.0024	133
5	Texas A&M-CC	-0.031	225	0.0028	128
6	Incarnate Word	-0.045	240	-0.0039	200
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	-0.058	250	0.0025	131
8	New Orleans	-0.086	273	0.0220	30
9	Nicholls	-0.108	285	0.0024	132
10	Houston Baptist	-0.125	302	-0.0096	249
11	SE Louisiana	-0.146	325	-0.0053	213
12	Northwestern St	-0.167	333	0.0094	85

Elo

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	1655.481	42	10.8416	67
2	SF Austin	1584.739	80	24.2955	8
3	Texas A&M-CC	1483.351	197	-4.5973	228
4	Lamar	1472.409	218	0.5087	180
5	Nicholls	1467.727	221	-8.4259	261
6	UT Rio Grande	1450.101	243	11.8233	55
7	SE Louisiana	1403.470	297	-17.4830	333
8	Incarnate Word	1389.500	308	3.0627	146
9	New Orleans	1372.588	326	13.7303	44
10	Northwestern St	1361.224	335	-9.9260	282
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	1351.689	343	-0.1106	187
12	Houston Baptist	1334.733	347	-0.8459	191

RPI

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	0.582	49	0.0053	173
2	SF Austin	0.552	76	0.0071	143
3	UT Rio Grande	0.489	201	0.0091	126
4	Texas A&M-CC	0.483	214	0.0018	221
5	New Orleans	0.477	222	-0.0012	266
6	Nicholls	0.467	237	0.0102	112
7	Lamar	0.464	240	0.0031	208
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.448	265	0.0110	99
9	Incarnate Word	0.430	303	-0.0036	288
10	SE Louisiana	0.426	309	0.0017	224
11	Houston Baptist	0.400	339	-0.0007	257
12	Northwestern St	0.396	346	0.0017	225

Shooting (Effective Field Goal Pct)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	UT Rio Grande	0.534	97	0.0139	34
2	SF Austin	0.527	125	0.0168	20
3	McNeese	0.516	178	-0.0112	312
4	New Orleans	0.508	203	0.0108	50
5	Houston Baptist	0.508	207	-0.0145	336
6	Nicholls	0.508	207	-0.0059	253
7	Incarnate Word	0.502	231	0.0055	112
8	Northwestern St	0.495	263	-0.0158	343
9	Lamar	0.492	278	0.0113	46
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.485	300	-0.0102	299
11	Texas A&M-CC	0.483	305	0.0084	83
12	SE Louisiana	0.463	342	0.0036	135

Points per Possession

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	1.177	30	-0.0176	304
2	SF Austin	1.129	82	0.0360	17
3	UT Rio Grande	1.109	113	0.0480	7
4	Incarnate Word	1.093	143	-0.0176	303
5	Lamar	1.050	232	0.0265	42
6	New Orleans	1.046	241	0.0217	60
7	Nicholls	1.042	251	-0.0136	284
8	Northwestern St	1.036	267	-0.0257	335
9	Texas A&M-CC	1.033	275	0.0113	115
10	Houston Baptist	1.022	297	-0.0075	247
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.994	327	-0.0027	216
12	SE Louisiana	0.958	346	-0.0208	324

Turnover Rate

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	0.135	35	-0.0065	86
2	McNeese	0.141	60	0.0012	250
3	Nicholls	0.164	229	0.0018	263
4	Lamar	0.164	233	-0.0078	66
5	Incarnate Word	0.164	234	0.0231	365
6	UT Rio Grande	0.167	253	-0.0049	117
7	Northwestern St	0.170	274	-0.0046	123
8	Texas A&M-CC	0.173	288	0.0049	313
9	Houston Baptist	0.177	306	0.0026	280
10	SE Louisiana	0.177	307	0.0147	363
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.183	327	-0.0113	25
12	New Orleans	0.193	349	0.0035	295

Offensive Rebounding Pct

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	36.180	11	-0.0145	227
2	Lamar	34.170	35	-0.0048	136
3	New Orleans	32.970	60	0.0011	83
4	SF Austin	31.900	86	-0.0223	286
5	Incarnate Word	30.530	118	-0.0157	240
6	Houston Baptist	28.830	171	0.0024	69
7	Texas A&M-CC	26.920	224	-0.0392	350
8	Nicholls	26.450	243	-0.0146	228
9	SE Louisiana	26.240	249	-0.0079	172
10	UT Rio Grande	25.530	272	0.0022	72
11	Northwestern St	24.030	312	-0.0197	269
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	23.620	323	-0.0165	247

Free Throw Rate

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	0.449	21	0.0478	5
2	Texas A&M-CC	0.449	22	0.0547	2
3	SE Louisiana	0.423	51	-0.0000	190
4	McNeese	0.409	66	0.0255	56
5	Northwestern St	0.409	67	-0.0282	339
6	Houston Baptist	0.376	143	0.0070	143
7	Nicholls	0.367	170	-0.0050	223
8	Incarnate Word	0.358	191	0.0292	47
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.323	270	0.0154	95
10	SF Austin	0.311	301	0.0101	124
11	UT Rio Grande	0.288	331	0.0355	25
12	Lamar	0.281	339	-0.0222	322

Adjusted Offensive Efficiency

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	114.795	113	0.3569	219
2	SF Austin	109.722	173	2.4842	15
3	UT Rio Grande	106.819	227	-0.2776	285
4	New Orleans	106.500	232	1.6624	54
5	Lamar	104.293	269	0.4501	200
6	Nicholls	103.680	281	0.7445	159
7	Incarnate Word	102.937	290	-1.0437	336
8	Houston Baptist	102.048	297	0.8411	141
9	Northwestern St	101.453	301	0.5177	190
10	Texas A&M-CC	98.763	337	-0.9846	334
11	SE Louisiana	96.861	344	-0.4833	311
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	96.305	349	0.4031	208

Field Goal Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	40.992	37	0.6426	80
2	McNeese	40.969	38	-1.4360	350
3	UT Rio Grande	39.458	96	0.6313	82
4	Lamar	38.582	132	1.5065	13
5	Incarnate Word	38.304	147	-1.3481	346
6	Texas A&M-CC	36.498	243	-0.6381	288
7	Houston Baptist	35.915	274	-1.0227	325
8	Nicholls	35.912	275	-0.4099	258
9	Northwestern St	35.252	303	-0.2863	237
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	34.978	307	-0.5481	275
11	New Orleans	34.827	311	-0.0233	189
12	SE Louisiana	32.551	354	-0.4518	262

Field Goal Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	89.967	5	-0.7180	276
2	Lamar	88.921	11	1.6073	25
3	McNeese	86.833	37	-1.0815	312
4	Incarnate Word	85.481	85	-3.0647	364
5	UT Rio Grande	84.631	130	-0.5596	261
6	Nicholls	82.835	219	-0.2624	226
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	81.743	270	0.4885	120
8	Houston Baptist	80.914	296	0.2282	157
9	Texas A&M-CC	80.739	305	-2.7816	363
10	SE Louisiana	79.668	327	-1.3335	330
11	Northwestern St	79.546	331	1.5235	32
12	New Orleans	78.110	354	-2.2128	358

Field Goal Percentage (FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	47.428	63	-0.9958	313
2	UT Rio Grande	46.464	109	1.0607	43
3	SF Austin	45.542	158	1.1407	37
4	Texas A&M-CC	45.348	174	0.7862	69
5	New Orleans	44.861	202	1.1518	36
6	Incarnate Word	44.853	203	0.1557	165
7	Houston Baptist	44.512	224	-1.2951	340
8	Northwestern St	44.333	238	-1.0414	317
9	Lamar	43.525	271	0.9456	53
10	Nicholls	43.374	280	-0.2970	229
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	42.612	302	-0.7878	289
12	SE Louisiana	40.884	346	0.0714	183

2 Point Rate (2ptA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-CC	69.121	21	0.6707	109
2	McNeese	65.358	80	-0.2104	216
3	Lamar	65.103	88	0.2024	171
4	New Orleans	65.032	91	1.0984	70
5	Northwestern St	64.769	98	1.0775	74
6	Houston Baptist	62.644	132	1.1566	66
7	Incarnate Word	61.532	161	-1.0203	285
8	SF Austin	59.665	199	-0.0569	206
9	SE Louisiana	59.663	200	-1.1535	297
10	UT Rio Grande	56.667	258	-0.5764	242
11	Nicholls	55.123	290	-0.3710	228
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	54.255	313	0.6907	103

2 Point Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	31.334	8	-1.1177	332
2	Lamar	27.935	107	0.9479	45
3	Texas A&M-CC	27.870	113	-0.4251	248
4	SF Austin	27.340	142	-0.2071	205
5	Northwestern St	25.905	200	0.4252	100
6	Incarnate Word	25.898	201	-1.4467	350
7	UT Rio Grande	25.804	205	0.2313	127
8	Houston Baptist	25.694	210	-0.7796	297
9	New Orleans	25.486	222	0.2856	120
10	SE Louisiana	23.524	311	-0.7406	293
11	Nicholls	23.077	319	0.0849	153
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	22.752	330	-0.2088	206

2 Point Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Lamar	58.184	21	1.1604	66
2	McNeese	56.772	35	-0.9163	291
3	Texas A&M-CC	55.739	53	-1.4167	318
4	SF Austin	53.368	107	-0.4799	243
5	Incarnate Word	52.611	129	-2.6248	359
6	Northwestern St	51.623	157	1.9014	18
7	New Orleans	50.513	179	-0.6601	262
8	Houston Baptist	50.469	181	1.0947	71
9	UT Rio Grande	47.904	237	-0.6940	265
10	SE Louisiana	47.654	245	-1.6746	328
11	Nicholls	45.600	294	-0.4717	240
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	44.356	318	0.8469	95

2 Point Percentage (2Pt FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	55.052	90	-0.9854	287
2	UT Rio Grande	54.386	119	1.2317	44
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	51.206	232	-1.1944	308
4	Houston Baptist	51.146	237	-2.4800	356
5	SF Austin	51.082	240	0.1015	165
6	Nicholls	50.694	253	0.7075	87
7	New Orleans	50.506	260	1.0971	57
8	Texas A&M-CC	50.259	267	0.3910	128
9	Northwestern St	50.127	271	-0.6112	250
10	SE Louisiana	49.554	293	-0.0817	193
11	Incarnate Word	49.242	299	-0.3499	224
12	Lamar	47.889	327	0.7764	80

3 Point Rate (3ptA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-Commerce	45.745	53	-0.6907	263
2	Nicholls	44.877	76	0.3710	138
3	UT Rio Grande	43.333	108	0.5764	124
4	SE Louisiana	40.337	166	1.1535	69
5	SF Austin	40.335	167	0.0569	160
6	Incarnate Word	38.468	205	1.0203	81
7	Houston Baptist	37.356	234	-1.1566	300
8	Northwestern St	35.231	268	-1.0775	292
9	New Orleans	34.968	275	-1.0984	296
10	Lamar	34.897	278	-0.2024	195
11	McNeese	34.642	286	0.2104	150
12	Texas A&M-CC	30.879	345	-0.6707	257

3 Point Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	UT Rio Grande	13.655	54	0.4000	98
2	SF Austin	13.651	55	0.8496	31
3	Nicholls	12.835	89	-0.4948	297
4	Incarnate Word	12.406	112	0.0987	156
5	Texas A&M-Commerce	12.227	123	-0.3393	276
6	Lamar	10.647	219	0.5586	70
7	Houston Baptist	10.221	250	-0.2431	244
8	McNeese	9.635	284	-0.3183	268
9	Northwestern St	9.348	300	-0.7115	334
10	New Orleans	9.341	301	-0.3089	264
11	SE Louisiana	9.027	313	0.2888	120
12	Texas A&M-CC	8.628	331	-0.2130	239

3 Point Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-Commerce	37.387	76	-0.3585	219
2	Nicholls	37.235	83	0.2094	149
3	UT Rio Grande	36.727	99	0.1344	165
4	SF Austin	36.599	103	-0.2382	202
5	Incarnate Word	32.869	186	-0.4399	232
6	SE Louisiana	32.014	208	0.3411	137
7	Lamar	30.737	245	0.4469	125
8	Houston Baptist	30.445	248	-0.8665	280
9	McNeese	30.061	258	-0.1652	194
10	Northwestern St	27.923	304	-0.3779	222
11	New Orleans	27.597	309	-1.5527	335
12	Texas A&M-CC	25.000	350	-1.3649	326

3 Point Percentage (3Pt FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	37.167	36	2.7294	11
2	UT Rio Grande	36.568	49	1.2441	65
3	Incarnate Word	36.519	52	0.9912	86
4	Lamar	35.004	126	1.3331	55
5	Nicholls	34.549	148	-1.6741	334
6	Texas A&M-CC	34.536	150	1.2883	60
7	Northwestern St	33.780	193	-1.8879	342
8	New Orleans	33.561	208	1.1157	76
9	Houston Baptist	32.815	236	-0.0603	198
10	McNeese	32.507	257	-0.4525	244
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	32.153	272	-0.5722	259
12	SE Louisiana	28.974	355	0.5035	133

Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	44.900	21	4.7849	5
2	Texas A&M-CC	44.880	22	5.4711	2
3	SE Louisiana	42.280	51	-0.0006	190
4	McNeese	40.950	66	2.5481	56
5	Northwestern St	40.920	67	-2.8176	339
6	Houston Baptist	37.580	143	0.6976	143
7	Nicholls	36.740	170	-0.4993	223
8	Incarnate Word	35.850	191	2.9193	47
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	32.270	270	1.5394	95
10	SF Austin	31.100	301	1.0112	124
11	UT Rio Grande	28.850	331	3.5532	25
12	Lamar	28.100	339	-2.2244	322

Free Throw Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	26.128	21	1.4263	61
2	New Orleans	25.640	27	2.5234	14
3	Northwestern St	23.698	75	-1.2900	319
4	Texas A&M-CC	21.713	155	2.6172	10
5	SE Louisiana	21.701	156	-1.4617	328
6	Houston Baptist	20.975	187	1.3442	68
7	Incarnate Word	20.293	214	0.8367	111
8	Nicholls	19.588	237	-0.0449	211
9	UT Rio Grande	18.323	293	3.1361	1
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	17.257	331	1.2020	81
11	Lamar	17.225	332	-0.9169	293
12	SF Austin	17.220	333	1.4689	59

Free Throw Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	34.051	36	1.8072	57
2	New Orleans	34.047	38	2.8721	15
3	Texas A&M-CC	32.511	72	3.1343	7
4	Northwestern St	32.011	89	-1.7642	326
5	SE Louisiana	31.762	96	-0.8315	270
6	Houston Baptist	30.213	156	0.6676	137
7	Nicholls	29.380	181	-0.3008	221
8	Incarnate Word	28.937	194	1.2047	87
9	SF Austin	25.620	294	1.0190	106
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	25.193	308	1.3958	77
11	UT Rio Grande	24.312	330	2.9176	13
12	Lamar	24.071	333	-1.5920	319

Free Throw Percentage (FTM/FTA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	76.528	33	0.9601	132
2	UT Rio Grande	76.269	38	4.2539	2
3	New Orleans	75.018	80	1.1000	114
4	Northwestern St	73.731	124	-0.1701	223
5	Incarnate Word	69.860	249	-0.0624	208
6	Lamar	69.797	253	1.1077	112
7	Houston Baptist	69.174	270	2.9558	13
8	SE Louisiana	68.898	283	-4.2123	363
9	SF Austin	68.143	301	2.1069	42
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	67.311	324	1.3945	91
11	Nicholls	67.288	326	0.3040	179
12	Texas A&M-CC	67.087	331	1.7292	61

Assists per Made Field Goal (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-Commerce	64.377	10	-0.2153	198
2	UT Rio Grande	62.577	19	2.7854	22
3	Houston Baptist	59.021	42	1.7629	57
4	Lamar	56.901	79	1.1259	92
5	SE Louisiana	53.828	149	1.4221	74
6	Texas A&M-CC	52.400	193	-0.1200	190
7	Nicholls	52.003	199	-1.1682	273
8	Northwestern St	51.783	206	0.7502	123
9	New Orleans	50.436	246	0.9178	110
10	McNeese	49.720	259	2.0665	44
11	SF Austin	49.527	268	-0.7056	236
12	Incarnate Word	44.556	340	0.0179	179

Balls Stolen per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	6.412	7	0.0203	183
2	SF Austin	7.769	58	-0.1996	116
3	UT Rio Grande	8.207	101	-0.0722	158
4	Nicholls	8.385	123	0.0156	180
5	Incarnate Word	8.467	136	1.5588	364
6	Texas A&M-CC	8.510	138	0.6639	323
7	SE Louisiana	9.238	224	0.8221	340
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	9.399	247	-0.4472	71
9	Houston Baptist	9.699	275	-0.0378	167
10	Northwestern St	9.779	280	0.1652	222
11	Lamar	10.133	306	-0.1361	133
12	New Orleans	11.494	356	0.6090	313

Balls Blocked per Shot Attempt (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	3.633	49	-0.2382	93
2	Incarnate Word	4.072	113	0.1915	259
3	Nicholls	4.432	184	-0.3403	57
4	Texas A&M-Commerce	4.476	193	0.8320	356
5	Houston Baptist	4.485	194	0.2537	276
6	UT Rio Grande	4.681	225	0.4111	316
7	SF Austin	4.761	232	-0.0754	157
8	Lamar	4.794	238	0.5651	335
9	SE Louisiana	4.834	248	0.3420	304
10	Northwestern St	4.925	258	-0.1231	137
11	New Orleans	5.361	311	-0.0364	169
12	Texas A&M-CC	5.612	332	-0.4389	37

Fouls Drawn per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	27.881	18	1.2309	69
2	SE Louisiana	26.781	45	0.6713	151
3	Northwestern St	25.911	75	-0.3522	288
4	McNeese	24.549	150	1.0318	93
5	Nicholls	23.672	195	1.3747	53
6	Texas A&M-CC	23.257	214	3.0105	1
7	Lamar	22.520	259	-1.1969	351
8	Incarnate Word	22.153	279	2.1154	6
9	Houston Baptist	21.927	290	0.9884	100
10	UT Rio Grande	21.354	311	2.1573	5
11	SF Austin	20.834	335	0.3382	194
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	19.943	351	0.3929	188

Offensive Possessions per Game

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	72.116	98	0.9748	17
2	Texas A&M-Commerce	70.781	158	-0.2894	148
3	Nicholls	70.013	198	-0.8367	254
4	Texas A&M-CC	68.536	262	-1.2786	322
5	SF Austin	68.435	267	-0.9735	283
6	Incarnate Word	68.260	275	-0.2044	128
7	UT Rio Grande	68.100	282	-1.0028	287
8	McNeese	67.631	294	-0.8983	270
9	Lamar	67.478	298	-0.3696	168
10	Northwestern St	67.157	315	-0.6002	204
11	SE Louisiana	66.848	325	-1.6103	348
12	Houston Baptist	65.442	352	-1.3719	330

Opp Shooting (Effective Field Goal Pct)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	0.458	12	-0.0045	119
2	UT Rio Grande	0.484	57	-0.0110	53
3	McNeese	0.499	103	0.0034	208
4	New Orleans	0.501	112	-0.0084	78
5	Texas A&M-CC	0.512	171	0.0108	291
6	Lamar	0.512	171	0.0089	269
7	SE Louisiana	0.517	203	-0.0091	63
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.527	243	-0.0169	19
9	Incarnate Word	0.549	308	0.0170	335
10	Northwestern St	0.550	313	-0.0139	37
11	Nicholls	0.553	324	0.0012	189
12	Houston Baptist	0.564	348	0.0027	203

Opp Points per Possession

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	0.956	15	-0.0059	113
2	McNeese	1.005	57	0.0035	191
3	UT Rio Grande	1.017	75	-0.0242	33
4	Texas A&M-CC	1.025	94	0.0134	241
5	Lamar	1.041	117	0.0239	292
6	SE Louisiana	1.065	185	0.0006	159
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	1.077	221	-0.0255	29
8	Nicholls	1.092	246	0.0012	168
9	New Orleans	1.117	290	-0.0094	93
10	Northwestern St	1.134	314	-0.0255	30
11	Houston Baptist	1.140	321	-0.0023	142
12	Incarnate Word	1.143	322	0.0348	329

Opp Turnover Rate

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	0.221	2	0.0096	17
2	Nicholls	0.204	10	0.0059	42
3	Texas A&M-CC	0.186	33	0.0017	109
4	SE Louisiana	0.180	61	-0.0039	213
5	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.166	127	-0.0037	210
6	Lamar	0.164	136	-0.0137	356
7	UT Rio Grande	0.164	139	0.0020	105
8	Houston Baptist	0.160	163	0.0142	5
9	SF Austin	0.160	166	-0.0011	166
10	Northwestern St	0.159	172	-0.0009	165
11	Incarnate Word	0.149	234	-0.0084	294
12	New Orleans	0.130	337	0.0006	128

Defensive Rebounding Pct

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	74.160	78	-0.0052	257
2	Lamar	73.610	101	0.0059	116
3	Texas A&M-CC	72.240	153	0.0057	117
4	UT Rio Grande	70.770	217	0.0144	47
5	SE Louisiana	70.010	252	-0.0184	338
6	Incarnate Word	69.960	257	0.0067	109
7	Houston Baptist	69.910	260	-0.0186	339
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	69.110	285	0.0146	44
9	New Orleans	68.190	310	0.0031	154
10	Northwestern St	67.540	326	0.0132	55
11	Nicholls	67.270	329	-0.0018	217
12	McNeese	66.810	336	-0.0110	301

Opp Free Throw Rate

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Houston Baptist	0.308	59	-0.0059	138
2	SF Austin	0.330	101	-0.0326	14
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.369	211	-0.0007	173
4	UT Rio Grande	0.387	254	0.0248	331
5	New Orleans	0.405	285	0.0191	299
6	Northwestern St	0.405	286	-0.0172	63
7	Nicholls	0.417	305	0.0082	229
8	SE Louisiana	0.435	323	-0.0191	53
9	Texas A&M-CC	0.446	335	-0.0030	160
10	McNeese	0.449	337	0.0355	354
11	Lamar	0.454	340	-0.0059	140
12	Incarnate Word	0.465	347	0.0344	352

Adjusted Defensive Efficiency

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	105.714	71	0.2334	130
2	McNeese	108.852	121	0.8123	215
3	UT Rio Grande	109.842	140	-0.4749	65
4	Texas A&M-CC	110.941	164	-0.0585	98
5	Lamar	113.379	204	0.9930	238
6	SE Louisiana	115.118	242	0.9205	227
7	Nicholls	117.212	274	1.9262	326
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	117.282	275	0.7679	208
9	New Orleans	119.794	302	0.5032	170
10	Northwestern St	123.696	339	1.5755	296
11	Houston Baptist	124.348	345	2.1005	338
12	Incarnate Word	125.076	348	0.2501	131

Opp Field Goal Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	32.042	11	-0.5406	84
2	SF Austin	34.022	42	0.3687	228
3	UT Rio Grande	34.567	57	-1.3914	13
4	Texas A&M-CC	34.753	66	0.6226	260
5	Lamar	34.832	70	1.0262	316
6	SE Louisiana	35.604	100	0.4366	239
7	New Orleans	37.265	191	-1.0374	36
8	Nicholls	37.391	201	-0.3043	109
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	37.924	234	-1.1614	25
10	Incarnate Word	39.124	292	0.7514	279
11	Northwestern St	39.227	297	-1.0192	39
12	Houston Baptist	41.552	348	-0.1099	137

Opp Field Goal Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-CC	77.130	10	-0.4804	107
2	Nicholls	77.160	11	-1.0278	57
3	McNeese	77.348	18	-1.4214	30
4	Lamar	78.575	34	1.1538	299
5	SE Louisiana	79.481	51	2.2066	357
6	Incarnate Word	80.452	71	-0.8850	69
7	UT Rio Grande	82.030	126	-1.7297	19
8	Northwestern St	82.170	132	0.4321	220
9	SF Austin	83.312	180	1.4112	321
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	83.568	193	0.2243	194
11	Houston Baptist	84.904	262	-0.5530	101
12	New Orleans	86.284	313	-0.8164	77

Opp Field Goal Percentage (FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	40.880	32	-0.2815	121
2	McNeese	41.711	49	0.0670	182
3	UT Rio Grande	42.159	65	-0.8307	68
4	New Orleans	43.159	94	-0.7694	74
5	Lamar	44.400	157	0.7394	272
6	SE Louisiana	44.939	193	-0.7258	78
7	Texas A&M-CC	45.305	214	0.9924	297
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	45.753	241	-1.3849	19
9	Northwestern St	47.824	312	-1.3590	22
10	Nicholls	48.760	342	0.1842	196
11	Incarnate Word	48.836	343	1.3612	335
12	Houston Baptist	49.057	349	0.1333	190

Opp 2 Point Rate (2ptA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	52.932	13	0.5144	245
2	New Orleans	58.836	126	-0.4947	123
3	Houston Baptist	59.839	161	-0.7773	98
4	UT Rio Grande	60.342	181	0.6635	261
5	Northwestern St	60.576	193	-0.2292	152
6	SE Louisiana	61.627	221	0.5374	247
7	Lamar	62.582	250	1.2263	309
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	62.651	254	0.7919	277
9	Nicholls	63.382	278	0.1609	207
10	Texas A&M-CC	63.944	291	-0.9949	75
11	Incarnate Word	65.135	326	-0.2051	155
12	SF Austin	66.954	344	0.1277	202

Opp 2 Point Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	19.385	3	-0.6714	68
2	Lamar	24.113	73	0.5937	277
3	UT Rio Grande	24.310	80	-0.8008	58
4	SE Louisiana	24.802	113	0.4057	245
5	New Orleans	25.368	140	-0.7838	60
6	Texas A&M-CC	25.719	168	0.5169	268
7	SF Austin	25.839	174	0.5199	269
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	26.469	222	-0.6728	67
9	Nicholls	27.261	261	-0.0843	146
10	Northwestern St	27.413	271	-1.0157	35
11	Houston Baptist	29.076	332	-0.2623	126
12	Incarnate Word	29.521	342	0.2218	208

Opp 2 Point Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	41.153	5	-0.2321	145
2	Nicholls	48.563	117	-0.5288	114
3	SE Louisiana	48.880	135	1.8001	339
4	Lamar	49.118	143	1.6377	328
5	Texas A&M-CC	49.186	151	-1.1432	58
6	UT Rio Grande	49.335	156	-0.6529	95
7	Northwestern St	49.869	176	0.0386	184
8	Houston Baptist	50.623	199	-0.9578	70
9	New Orleans	51.038	219	-0.8527	80
10	Incarnate Word	52.227	263	-0.8910	75
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	52.382	271	0.7340	264
12	SF Austin	55.723	339	1.1227	296

Opp 2 Point Percentage (2Pt FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	46.350	24	-0.0525	160
2	McNeese	47.708	38	-1.2824	44
3	Lamar	49.168	80	-0.2587	138
4	UT Rio Grande	50.063	103	-1.1120	65
5	New Orleans	50.114	108	-0.7174	98
6	Texas A&M-Commerce	50.886	137	-1.7603	21
7	SE Louisiana	51.001	144	-0.9452	78
8	Texas A&M-CC	52.984	222	2.0860	350
9	Northwestern St	55.463	301	-1.9717	18
10	Nicholls	56.582	326	0.0388	174
11	Incarnate Word	56.976	332	1.2985	310
12	Houston Baptist	57.123	340	0.3701	209

Opp 3 Point Rate (3ptA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	33.046	22	-0.1277	164
2	Incarnate Word	34.865	40	0.2051	211
3	Texas A&M-CC	36.056	75	0.9949	291
4	Nicholls	36.618	88	-0.1609	159
5	Texas A&M-Commerce	37.349	112	-0.7919	89
6	Lamar	37.418	116	-1.2263	57
7	SE Louisiana	38.373	145	-0.5374	119
8	Northwestern St	39.424	173	0.2292	214
9	UT Rio Grande	39.658	185	-0.6635	105
10	Houston Baptist	40.161	205	0.7773	268
11	New Orleans	41.164	240	0.4947	243
12	McNeese	47.068	353	-0.5144	121

Opp 3 Point Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	8.183	8	-0.1512	130
2	Texas A&M-CC	9.034	29	0.1058	199
3	Incarnate Word	9.603	60	0.5297	290
4	Nicholls	10.130	89	-0.2199	117
5	UT Rio Grande	10.257	102	-0.5905	50
6	Lamar	10.718	142	0.4325	270
7	SE Louisiana	10.803	146	0.0309	185
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	11.455	210	-0.4886	67
9	Northwestern St	11.814	244	-0.0035	176
10	New Orleans	11.897	255	-0.2536	113
11	Houston Baptist	12.475	294	0.1525	210
12	McNeese	12.657	310	0.1308	206

Opp 3 Point Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	27.589	25	0.2885	209
2	Texas A&M-CC	27.944	31	0.6628	260
3	Incarnate Word	28.225	36	0.0060	168
4	Nicholls	28.597	45	-0.4990	107
5	Lamar	29.457	72	-0.4839	113
6	SE Louisiana	30.602	100	0.4066	226
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	31.186	122	-0.5098	106
8	Northwestern St	32.301	154	0.3935	224
9	UT Rio Grande	32.696	165	-1.0768	56
10	Houston Baptist	34.282	243	0.4048	225
11	New Orleans	35.246	277	0.0364	170
12	McNeese	36.195	292	-1.1893	44

Opp 3 Point Percentage (3Pt FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	29.807	22	-0.3932	133
2	UT Rio Grande	31.318	61	-0.9953	70
3	Texas A&M-CC	32.907	134	-0.2441	154
4	New Orleans	33.531	169	-1.0143	67
5	Incarnate Word	34.300	207	2.0744	338
6	McNeese	34.462	218	1.4017	309
7	SE Louisiana	34.949	241	-0.7891	95
8	Nicholls	35.370	265	0.5721	243
9	Lamar	35.396	267	2.0631	337
10	Northwestern St	36.556	318	-0.3462	137
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	36.678	324	-0.6477	110
12	Houston Baptist	36.690	325	0.0581	181

Opp Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Houston Baptist	30.770	59	-0.5939	138
2	SF Austin	33.000	101	-3.2582	14
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	36.890	211	-0.0708	173
4	UT Rio Grande	38.720	254	2.4794	331
5	New Orleans	40.450	285	1.9139	299
6	Northwestern St	40.540	286	-1.7216	63
7	Nicholls	41.660	305	0.8207	229
8	SE Louisiana	43.550	323	-1.9050	53
9	Texas A&M-CC	44.620	335	-0.3009	160
10	McNeese	44.880	337	3.5482	354
11	Lamar	45.370	340	-0.5856	140
12	Incarnate Word	46.480	347	3.4412	352

Opp Free Throw Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Houston Baptist	18.380	59	-0.1545	144
2	SF Austin	19.370	93	-1.1715	39
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	20.438	148	0.2562	184
4	UT Rio Grande	22.291	242	0.9577	284
5	Northwestern St	23.171	279	-0.5046	101
6	Lamar	23.670	292	-0.0841	153
7	McNeese	23.780	294	1.3043	317
8	Texas A&M-CC	24.004	305	-0.0080	159
9	Nicholls	24.275	318	0.9685	288
10	SE Louisiana	24.525	327	-0.8433	69
11	New Orleans	25.257	338	1.3955	326
12	Incarnate Word	26.421	349	1.4488	332

Opp Free Throw Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Houston Baptist	25.467	60	-0.4962	112
2	SF Austin	26.942	93	-2.2128	13
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	29.653	202	0.0159	168
4	UT Rio Grande	31.131	258	1.2647	286
5	Nicholls	31.475	271	0.4784	214
6	Northwestern St	32.529	295	-1.0494	68
7	McNeese	33.120	309	1.7055	327
8	SE Louisiana	33.428	313	-0.9752	74
9	Texas A&M-CC	33.815	319	-0.1977	147
10	New Orleans	34.294	333	1.2171	280
11	Lamar	35.084	338	-0.0410	163
12	Incarnate Word	36.308	350	2.3614	353

Opp Free Throw Percentage (FTM/FTA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Lamar	67.014	18	-1.0190	82
2	Texas A&M-Commerce	68.034	28	0.6592	225
3	McNeese	70.597	108	0.4890	198
4	Texas A&M-CC	70.851	120	0.2998	183
5	UT Rio Grande	71.598	160	0.3723	190
6	SF Austin	72.151	189	1.7843	313
7	SE Louisiana	72.226	198	-1.2821	62
8	Incarnate Word	72.595	214	-0.2085	140
9	Northwestern St	72.688	216	1.3327	285
10	New Orleans	73.192	241	1.4560	295
11	Houston Baptist	73.505	256	1.0182	260
12	Nicholls	77.383	357	2.0595	331

Opp Assists per Made Field Goal (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	45.234	34	-1.2703	84
2	SE Louisiana	50.319	126	0.0841	177
3	Texas A&M-CC	50.644	138	-4.7131	3
4	Incarnate Word	52.996	196	2.3507	334
5	Northwestern St	54.529	238	1.2253	273
6	Texas A&M-Commerce	55.950	277	-0.8492	106
7	Lamar	56.274	285	1.4231	285
8	Nicholls	56.387	289	1.0803	262
9	Houston Baptist	57.005	302	4.9091	363
10	McNeese	58.475	324	-0.3909	137
11	New Orleans	60.750	348	0.2319	196
12	UT Rio Grande	61.289	350	1.2299	274

Steals per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	14.811	2	0.7351	23
2	Nicholls	13.122	9	0.3043	90
3	Texas A&M-CC	10.463	101	-0.2609	229
4	SE Louisiana	10.375	107	-0.8546	342
5	Texas A&M-Commerce	9.986	137	0.3917	68
6	SF Austin	9.921	141	0.1803	110
7	Northwestern St	9.581	169	-0.0839	183
8	Houston Baptist	9.546	174	0.3087	85
9	Lamar	9.384	183	-1.2237	358
10	UT Rio Grande	9.276	187	0.0804	139
11	Incarnate Word	7.939	294	-0.9255	349
12	New Orleans	7.568	319	-0.1667	204

Blocks per Shot Attempt (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	7.030	22	0.6418	24
2	Lamar	6.620	32	-0.4894	312
3	New Orleans	5.407	102	-0.0102	170
4	Houston Baptist	5.318	111	0.3682	63
5	SF Austin	5.283	114	0.0017	167
6	Texas A&M-Commerce	4.583	185	-0.0279	173
7	Incarnate Word	4.204	230	-0.1874	226
8	UT Rio Grande	4.175	234	0.5654	30
9	SE Louisiana	4.164	236	0.1346	126
10	Texas A&M-CC	3.928	263	-0.5126	317
11	Nicholls	3.627	292	0.0997	137
12	Northwestern St	3.085	337	0.3214	72

Fouls per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Houston Baptist	23.317	69	0.7977	305
2	SF Austin	24.333	118	-0.6541	51
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	24.886	144	-0.2017	135
4	Lamar	26.048	231	-1.1319	18
5	UT Rio Grande	26.122	239	0.6144	278
6	Nicholls	26.481	262	0.1849	211
7	Northwestern St	26.547	265	-0.4300	87
8	New Orleans	27.298	307	0.2684	224
9	SE Louisiana	27.782	322	-0.9152	27
10	Incarnate Word	28.908	343	1.0457	331
11	McNeese	29.134	349	0.4627	258
12	Texas A&M-CC	29.599	359	0.6457	281

Opp Offensive Possessions per Game

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	72.338	79	0.2434	83
2	Texas A&M-Commerce	70.602	160	-0.6283	235
3	Nicholls	70.595	161	-0.2434	158
4	UT Rio Grande	69.816	215	-0.2121	152
5	SF Austin	68.381	275	-0.2155	153
6	Texas A&M-CC	68.149	282	-0.4676	199
7	McNeese	67.958	290	-0.8781	279
8	Lamar	67.632	303	-0.7187	257
9	Northwestern St	67.249	316	-0.4417	195
10	Incarnate Word	66.658	332	-0.0950	129
11	SE Louisiana	66.313	339	-1.4071	339
12	Houston Baptist	65.290	356	-0.8649	276

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