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	5.234	107	-0.9418	294
2	SF Austin	-0.471	161	0.3172	132
3	UT Rio Grande	-1.735	169	0.9910	63
4	Texas A&M-CC	-10.675	257	-0.6961	267
5	New Orleans	-11.760	270	0.6656	99
6	Lamar	-14.152	287	-1.3278	320
7	Nicholls	-16.008	300	-1.5307	332
8	SE Louisiana	-19.951	327	-1.8147	346
9	Houston Baptist	-21.147	330	-0.7912	277
10	Northwestern St	-21.168	331	-0.0146	182
11	Incarnate Word	-21.460	333	-1.3972	325
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	-22.963	341	-0.5373	250

Net Efficiency (PPP Differential)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	0.208	28	-0.0100	239
2	SF Austin	0.171	41	0.0033	127
3	UT Rio Grande	0.053	145	0.0216	28
4	Lamar	-0.007	204	-0.0035	185
5	Texas A&M-CC	-0.017	218	0.0053	104
6	Incarnate Word	-0.045	243	-0.0096	234
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	-0.067	263	-0.0003	161
8	New Orleans	-0.075	273	0.0237	25
9	Nicholls	-0.094	286	0.0021	133
10	Houston Baptist	-0.120	311	-0.0000	157
11	SE Louisiana	-0.136	322	-0.0027	180
12	Northwestern St	-0.142	330	0.0163	43

Elo

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	1688.393	28	15.7448	52
2	SF Austin	1597.226	77	25.5719	13
3	Texas A&M-CC	1487.349	199	-1.8073	208
4	UT Rio Grande	1483.027	206	23.7890	14
5	Nicholls	1459.133	233	-9.7917	281
6	New Orleans	1399.762	296	20.4664	31
7	Lamar	1399.328	297	-16.8371	328
8	SE Louisiana	1380.999	310	-20.0994	340
9	Northwestern St	1374.756	316	-8.8290	275
10	Incarnate Word	1367.026	323	-6.8722	257
11	Houston Baptist	1352.013	334	1.7879	166
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	1320.292	349	-4.9360	242

RPI

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	0.584	39	0.0023	199
2	SF Austin	0.553	72	0.0060	137
3	UT Rio Grande	0.499	177	0.0143	29
4	Texas A&M-CC	0.484	210	-0.0002	239
5	New Orleans	0.476	221	0.0003	230
6	Nicholls	0.463	242	0.0053	148
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.434	300	0.0034	180
8	Lamar	0.426	312	-0.0003	244
9	Houston Baptist	0.424	315	0.0048	154
10	Incarnate Word	0.422	319	-0.0046	298
11	Northwestern St	0.411	331	0.0040	166
12	SE Louisiana	0.409	334	-0.0016	262

Shooting (Effective Field Goal Pct)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	UT Rio Grande	0.548	50	0.0133	21
2	SF Austin	0.518	167	-0.0040	203
3	McNeese	0.512	194	-0.0137	322
4	Nicholls	0.508	207	-0.0087	262
5	Incarnate Word	0.504	228	0.0049	82
6	Houston Baptist	0.500	249	-0.0069	234
7	Texas A&M-CC	0.499	254	0.0167	12
8	New Orleans	0.498	263	-0.0113	298
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.496	271	0.0073	59
10	Northwestern St	0.487	300	-0.0193	352
11	Lamar	0.478	321	-0.0172	337
12	SE Louisiana	0.470	338	0.0058	71

Points per Possession

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	1.155	42	-0.0237	322
2	UT Rio Grande	1.121	85	0.0131	59
3	SF Austin	1.117	92	-0.0078	223
4	Incarnate Word	1.093	137	0.0009	154
5	New Orleans	1.045	252	0.0015	148
6	Texas A&M-CC	1.040	263	0.0140	55
7	Nicholls	1.039	265	-0.0161	283
8	Lamar	1.020	301	-0.0391	356
9	Northwestern St	1.020	302	-0.0362	354
10	Houston Baptist	1.008	317	-0.0181	293
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.999	325	0.0118	71
12	SE Louisiana	0.975	343	0.0076	100

Turnover Rate

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	0.131	23	-0.0022	200
2	McNeese	0.131	24	-0.0087	47
3	Incarnate Word	0.154	176	-0.0075	74
4	Nicholls	0.162	235	0.0066	337
5	UT Rio Grande	0.166	264	0.0033	303
6	Northwestern St	0.167	268	0.0025	294
7	Lamar	0.169	280	0.0058	333
8	SE Louisiana	0.171	298	-0.0036	162
9	Houston Baptist	0.175	310	-0.0016	216
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.179	331	-0.0081	58
11	Texas A&M-CC	0.179	332	0.0116	361
12	New Orleans	0.188	349	-0.0069	83

Offensive Rebounding Pct

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	33.840	34	0.0129	17
2	Lamar	33.710	35	-0.0057	131
3	McNeese	33.620	36	-0.0237	303
4	SF Austin	31.510	81	-0.0210	285
5	Incarnate Word	29.730	131	-0.0390	361
6	Texas A&M-CC	28.270	179	-0.0072	142
7	Houston Baptist	27.670	200	-0.0239	304
8	SE Louisiana	26.920	224	-0.0080	154
9	Nicholls	26.650	231	0.0069	42
10	UT Rio Grande	25.800	259	-0.0225	296
11	Northwestern St	23.360	324	-0.0221	292
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	22.940	330	-0.0137	215

Free Throw Rate

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	0.478	2	0.0196	43
2	Texas A&M-CC	0.419	48	-0.0338	342
3	SE Louisiana	0.415	56	-0.0055	193
4	Northwestern St	0.411	60	0.0024	138
5	McNeese	0.387	108	-0.0242	310
6	Houston Baptist	0.365	156	-0.0032	178
7	Nicholls	0.355	188	-0.0165	275
8	Incarnate Word	0.348	209	-0.0007	158
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.322	269	0.0108	88
10	SF Austin	0.310	296	-0.0095	232
11	UT Rio Grande	0.294	332	0.0069	110
12	Lamar	0.287	341	-0.0145	260

Adjusted Offensive Efficiency

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	113.756	138	-0.5667	335
2	UT Rio Grande	109.597	199	0.9266	112
3	SF Austin	109.556	200	1.3228	55
4	New Orleans	106.255	259	0.6096	168
5	Incarnate Word	104.716	279	-0.5610	333
6	Nicholls	103.602	291	0.1238	261
7	Lamar	101.402	318	0.1069	264
8	Texas A&M-CC	101.271	321	0.1473	256
9	Houston Baptist	100.824	328	-0.1069	281
10	Northwestern St	100.371	329	-0.3960	322
11	SE Louisiana	98.234	343	-0.3414	318
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	97.802	346	0.3635	221

Field Goal Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	40.568	43	-0.6972	284
2	SF Austin	40.422	48	-0.1784	198
3	UT Rio Grande	39.769	68	0.2329	129
4	Incarnate Word	38.191	157	0.0263	165
5	Lamar	37.532	193	-0.7541	291
6	Texas A&M-CC	36.813	233	0.8085	45
7	Nicholls	36.253	264	-0.1433	194
8	Houston Baptist	35.793	285	-0.2546	214
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	35.338	297	0.5113	83
10	New Orleans	34.640	320	-0.2889	219
11	Northwestern St	34.622	323	-1.5037	358
12	SE Louisiana	33.415	349	0.5076	84

Field Goal Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	90.022	5	0.0361	210
2	Lamar	88.312	16	0.4749	143
3	McNeese	87.452	29	1.3119	52
4	Incarnate Word	85.888	75	-0.4451	272
5	UT Rio Grande	84.073	165	-1.2035	332
6	Nicholls	83.059	221	0.3523	160
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	81.560	283	0.1715	186
8	Houston Baptist	81.090	300	-0.3218	261
9	Texas A&M-CC	80.697	312	-0.0003	215
10	SE Louisiana	80.443	323	0.2019	178
11	Northwestern St	79.296	343	-0.4609	275
12	New Orleans	78.346	354	0.6751	120

Field Goal Percentage (FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	UT Rio Grande	47.318	56	1.0051	31
2	McNeese	46.634	89	-1.3942	335
3	Texas A&M-CC	45.714	150	0.9993	32
4	SF Austin	44.914	191	-0.2266	184
5	Incarnate Word	44.506	220	0.2654	101
6	New Orleans	44.446	226	-0.7236	262
7	Houston Baptist	44.257	238	-0.1243	169
8	Nicholls	43.687	276	-0.3612	213
9	Northwestern St	43.678	278	-1.6033	350
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	43.251	292	0.7066	61
11	Lamar	42.596	312	-1.0907	312
12	SE Louisiana	41.555	335	0.5353	79

2 Point Rate (2ptA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-CC	68.097	35	-1.2145	308
2	New Orleans	66.536	57	0.4291	133
3	Northwestern St	66.005	69	1.1405	68
4	Lamar	65.805	74	0.3249	148
5	McNeese	65.231	88	-0.2797	210
6	Houston Baptist	63.337	128	0.6561	114
7	Incarnate Word	60.809	180	-1.4370	318
8	SF Austin	60.301	184	-0.0317	188
9	SE Louisiana	60.192	186	-0.4703	237
10	Nicholls	56.022	275	0.3888	141
11	UT Rio Grande	55.762	281	-0.5610	253
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	53.684	325	-0.3223	216

2 Point Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	30.811	15	-0.9355	324
2	Lamar	27.682	121	0.2379	138
3	Texas A&M-CC	27.556	125	-0.2961	236
4	SF Austin	27.450	131	0.1500	149
5	Houston Baptist	26.399	178	0.7704	60
6	New Orleans	26.261	193	0.3107	118
7	UT Rio Grande	25.935	204	-0.0492	193
8	Northwestern St	25.674	218	-0.9715	326
9	Incarnate Word	25.594	224	-0.2547	226
10	SE Louisiana	24.341	286	0.3608	110
11	Nicholls	23.993	300	0.6844	68
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	23.121	329	0.4873	93

2 Point Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Lamar	58.257	25	0.4912	153
2	McNeese	56.978	39	0.6092	140
3	Texas A&M-CC	54.852	79	-1.0350	302
4	SF Austin	54.154	94	0.1390	190
5	Northwestern St	52.367	140	0.4830	157
6	Incarnate Word	52.230	143	-1.4869	333
7	New Orleans	51.863	153	0.7965	110
8	Houston Baptist	51.257	171	0.4855	156
9	SE Louisiana	48.505	230	-0.3174	237
10	UT Rio Grande	46.921	270	-0.9908	298
11	Nicholls	46.495	279	0.5582	146
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	43.784	335	-0.2231	233

2 Point Percentage (2Pt FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	UT Rio Grande	56.031	49	1.2559	39
2	McNeese	54.174	111	-1.8871	333
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	52.853	164	1.5029	25
4	Houston Baptist	51.659	218	1.0016	62
5	Nicholls	51.451	228	0.5698	95
6	SF Austin	50.802	253	0.3137	116
7	New Orleans	50.682	256	-0.1718	185
8	Texas A&M-CC	50.384	268	0.3295	115
9	SE Louisiana	50.276	273	0.9753	65
10	Incarnate Word	49.103	307	0.9558	66
11	Northwestern St	48.900	314	-2.5799	356
12	Lamar	47.441	337	0.0644	153

3 Point Rate (3ptA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-Commerce	46.316	41	0.3223	150
2	UT Rio Grande	44.238	85	0.5610	113
3	Nicholls	43.978	91	-0.3888	225
4	SE Louisiana	39.808	180	0.4703	129
5	SF Austin	39.699	182	0.0317	178
6	Incarnate Word	39.191	186	1.4370	48
7	Houston Baptist	36.663	238	-0.6561	252
8	McNeese	34.769	278	0.2797	156
9	Lamar	34.195	292	-0.3249	218
10	Northwestern St	33.995	297	-1.1405	298
11	New Orleans	33.464	309	-0.4291	233
12	Texas A&M-CC	31.903	331	1.2145	58

3 Point Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	UT Rio Grande	13.834	46	0.2820	87
2	SF Austin	12.972	82	-0.3285	246
3	Incarnate Word	12.598	102	0.2811	90
4	Nicholls	12.260	120	-0.8278	337
5	Texas A&M-Commerce	12.218	122	0.0239	157
6	Lamar	9.850	269	-0.9920	344
7	McNeese	9.758	273	0.2382	102
8	Houston Baptist	9.394	300	-1.0251	345
9	Texas A&M-CC	9.257	304	1.1046	11
10	SE Louisiana	9.073	316	0.1468	123
11	Northwestern St	8.948	320	-0.5322	294
12	New Orleans	8.379	337	-0.5996	303

3 Point Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-Commerce	37.776	68	0.3946	144
2	UT Rio Grande	37.153	84	-0.2126	221
3	Nicholls	36.565	102	-0.2058	219
4	SF Austin	35.868	119	-0.1029	207
5	Incarnate Word	33.658	167	1.0418	69
6	SE Louisiana	31.937	203	0.5193	132
7	McNeese	30.474	244	0.7026	103
8	Lamar	30.055	254	-0.0162	192
9	Houston Baptist	29.833	262	-0.8072	288
10	Northwestern St	26.929	327	-0.9439	294
11	New Orleans	26.483	334	-0.1214	210
12	Texas A&M-CC	25.846	344	1.0346	70

3 Point Percentage (3Pt FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	UT Rio Grande	36.801	39	1.0853	55
2	Incarnate Word	36.424	49	0.0362	138
3	Texas A&M-CC	35.890	69	2.8212	6
4	SF Austin	35.810	73	-0.8646	245
5	Nicholls	33.757	193	-2.1400	349
6	Northwestern St	33.405	214	-0.6956	226
7	Lamar	33.252	222	-3.0906	363
8	McNeese	32.100	278	0.0871	134
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	32.009	285	0.0633	137
10	New Orleans	31.185	316	-1.3970	296
11	Houston Baptist	30.725	329	-2.5520	360
12	SE Louisiana	28.901	360	-0.2120	166

Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	47.810	2	1.9547	43
2	Texas A&M-CC	41.900	48	-3.3826	342
3	SE Louisiana	41.500	56	-0.5533	193
4	Northwestern St	41.120	60	0.2387	138
5	McNeese	38.700	108	-2.4198	310
6	Houston Baptist	36.510	156	-0.3151	178
7	Nicholls	35.480	188	-1.6510	275
8	Incarnate Word	34.830	209	-0.0743	158
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	32.160	269	1.0821	88
10	SF Austin	31.010	296	-0.9544	232
11	UT Rio Grande	29.380	332	0.6858	110
12	Lamar	28.750	341	-1.4491	260

Free Throw Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	26.858	7	1.3278	34
2	McNeese	24.567	37	-1.2158	307
3	Northwestern St	23.817	57	-0.0828	171
4	SE Louisiana	21.621	161	-0.3999	217
5	Texas A&M-CC	21.142	178	-1.3225	312
6	Houston Baptist	20.515	205	-0.4046	219
7	Incarnate Word	20.331	213	-0.2465	195
8	Nicholls	19.130	254	-0.4938	232
9	UT Rio Grande	18.764	271	0.5647	104
10	SF Austin	17.887	313	-0.0968	174
11	Lamar	17.123	336	-1.4093	318
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	17.024	340	0.1591	143

Free Throw Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	36.131	7	2.2669	15
2	McNeese	32.653	52	-1.7318	315
3	Northwestern St	32.106	64	0.0919	149
4	SE Louisiana	31.801	80	-0.2042	182
5	Texas A&M-CC	31.294	96	-2.4165	343
6	Houston Baptist	29.411	173	-0.3626	201
7	Nicholls	28.662	196	-1.0923	270
8	Incarnate Word	28.337	211	-0.5243	217
9	SF Austin	26.231	276	-0.5322	218
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	25.170	311	0.8732	85
11	UT Rio Grande	24.517	328	0.1951	140
12	Lamar	24.459	332	-1.1235	274

Free Throw Percentage (FTM/FTA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	UT Rio Grande	77.089	28	1.8237	49
2	McNeese	75.509	60	2.0403	36
3	New Orleans	74.046	106	-0.7104	262
4	Northwestern St	73.884	115	-0.4191	243
5	Incarnate Word	71.360	216	-0.8659	275
6	Houston Baptist	69.430	277	-0.5645	252
7	SE Louisiana	68.809	291	-0.3558	237
8	SF Austin	68.436	304	0.2046	177
9	Lamar	68.248	312	-2.7354	346
10	Texas A&M-CC	67.761	325	0.8303	127
11	Nicholls	67.192	331	0.6952	137
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	67.028	338	-1.0255	284

Assists per Made Field Goal (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-Commerce	64.316	9	-0.4028	202
2	UT Rio Grande	61.283	22	-1.4971	269
3	Houston Baptist	58.104	56	-0.4606	206
4	Lamar	55.645	98	-1.7434	282
5	SE Louisiana	52.427	173	0.1536	166
6	Nicholls	52.023	188	0.3603	146
7	Texas A&M-CC	51.882	192	0.9631	94
8	New Orleans	51.877	193	1.5024	60
9	Northwestern St	51.639	205	0.3120	151
10	McNeese	48.939	270	-0.3444	195
11	SF Austin	48.624	275	-1.5132	271
12	Incarnate Word	45.130	335	0.8798	102

Balls Stolen per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	6.105	1	-0.3879	64
2	SF Austin	7.517	36	0.4776	290
3	Incarnate Word	8.135	86	-0.5092	39
4	Nicholls	8.767	170	0.7078	332
5	UT Rio Grande	9.064	198	1.0964	361
6	Texas A&M-CC	9.248	224	1.0845	357
7	SE Louisiana	9.648	268	0.5282	301
8	Houston Baptist	9.759	274	-0.2442	116
9	Northwestern St	9.824	282	0.7270	338
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	9.839	285	0.0570	196
11	Lamar	10.836	339	0.7965	344
12	New Orleans	10.899	342	-0.3303	82

Balls Blocked per Shot Attempt (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	3.467	27	-0.0556	151
2	Texas A&M-Commerce	4.262	139	-0.0590	147
3	Nicholls	4.442	175	0.0112	180
4	UT Rio Grande	4.445	176	-0.1898	104
5	SE Louisiana	4.503	190	-0.1212	125
6	Incarnate Word	4.545	198	0.4608	312
7	Northwestern St	4.642	212	-0.0886	133
8	Houston Baptist	4.718	222	0.1530	231
9	Lamar	4.865	235	0.0585	194
10	New Orleans	5.019	263	-0.4507	34
11	SF Austin	5.138	283	0.4665	313
12	Texas A&M-CC	5.520	320	-0.3811	50

Fouls Drawn per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	28.987	6	1.4253	22
2	SE Louisiana	26.535	36	-0.0650	204
3	Northwestern St	26.506	39	0.6355	89
4	McNeese	24.256	171	-0.7273	308
5	Texas A&M-CC	24.038	181	0.0163	185
6	Nicholls	23.550	216	-0.1102	214
7	Incarnate Word	22.845	252	1.1403	40
8	Houston Baptist	22.645	267	0.6292	92
9	Lamar	22.467	282	-0.6950	301
10	UT Rio Grande	21.842	315	0.8926	56
11	SF Austin	21.320	336	-0.6765	297
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	20.327	356	0.6138	94

Offensive Possessions per Game

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	71.399	104	-1.1258	309
2	Texas A&M-Commerce	69.453	212	-1.6701	349
3	Nicholls	69.273	215	-1.2718	320
4	McNeese	68.133	267	0.3552	64
5	Texas A&M-CC	68.082	270	-1.7390	352
6	SF Austin	67.920	275	-0.3610	180
7	UT Rio Grande	67.595	291	0.1853	86
8	Lamar	67.361	296	-0.2788	168
9	Incarnate Word	66.912	313	-1.6701	348
10	SE Louisiana	66.693	322	-0.0157	122
11	Northwestern St	66.194	335	-1.3538	327
12	Houston Baptist	65.704	343	0.1045	101

Opp Shooting (Effective Field Goal Pct)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	UT Rio Grande	0.478	36	-0.0095	61
2	SF Austin	0.480	39	0.0118	305
3	New Orleans	0.491	65	-0.0021	144
4	McNeese	0.494	76	0.0019	185
5	Texas A&M-CC	0.502	100	-0.0051	105
6	Lamar	0.510	150	0.0090	273
7	SE Louisiana	0.525	230	0.0088	272
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.528	248	0.0007	175
9	Northwestern St	0.533	275	-0.0113	46
10	Nicholls	0.545	311	-0.0053	100
11	Houston Baptist	0.546	313	-0.0185	20
12	Incarnate Word	0.547	318	0.0015	180

Opp Points per Possession

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	0.988	29	0.0324	328
2	McNeese	0.991	31	0.0053	176
3	UT Rio Grande	1.017	61	-0.0101	76
4	Texas A&M-CC	1.021	69	0.0002	141
5	Lamar	1.046	112	0.0144	240
6	SE Louisiana	1.077	203	0.0113	207
7	New Orleans	1.083	220	-0.0272	17
8	Nicholls	1.094	247	-0.0017	122
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	1.095	250	0.0165	252
10	Northwestern St	1.099	259	-0.0263	20
11	Houston Baptist	1.107	277	-0.0333	8
12	Incarnate Word	1.141	332	0.0024	163

Opp Turnover Rate

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	0.219	2	-0.0019	135
2	Nicholls	0.191	16	-0.0076	268
3	Texas A&M-CC	0.178	46	-0.0126	339
4	SE Louisiana	0.173	69	-0.0048	203
5	SF Austin	0.163	119	0.0005	88
6	Houston Baptist	0.161	133	0.0054	32
7	Lamar	0.160	140	0.0003	90
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.158	150	-0.0048	206
9	Northwestern St	0.157	163	-0.0039	182
10	UT Rio Grande	0.152	202	-0.0079	272
11	Incarnate Word	0.142	266	-0.0056	224
12	New Orleans	0.137	303	0.0079	13

Defensive Rebounding Pct

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	73.970	85	-0.0135	310
2	Lamar	73.450	108	-0.0002	177
3	Texas A&M-CC	73.050	131	0.0065	118
4	SE Louisiana	70.880	223	0.0006	167
5	UT Rio Grande	70.730	228	0.0049	130
6	Incarnate Word	70.600	237	0.0059	121
7	Houston Baptist	70.190	259	-0.0056	247
8	McNeese	68.970	300	0.0071	113
9	Northwestern St	68.760	309	0.0133	58
10	New Orleans	68.610	312	0.0030	145
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	68.530	313	-0.0091	276
12	Nicholls	67.870	326	0.0152	48

Opp Free Throw Rate

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	0.314	79	0.0045	234
2	Houston Baptist	0.314	80	0.0071	260
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	0.352	164	-0.0172	70
4	Northwestern St	0.371	221	-0.0434	2
5	Nicholls	0.386	263	-0.0245	34
6	UT Rio Grande	0.394	279	0.0127	298
7	New Orleans	0.399	288	-0.0043	164
8	SE Louisiana	0.422	318	-0.0119	105
9	Incarnate Word	0.429	322	-0.0343	10
10	McNeese	0.431	326	0.0004	205
11	Lamar	0.451	345	0.0030	224
12	Texas A&M-CC	0.473	354	-0.0066	141

Adjusted Defensive Efficiency

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	108.522	98	0.3449	140
2	SF Austin	110.027	126	1.1727	284
3	UT Rio Grande	111.332	149	0.0163	88
4	Texas A&M-CC	111.946	158	0.6655	201
5	Lamar	115.554	225	1.4343	317
6	New Orleans	118.015	266	-0.0547	73
7	SE Louisiana	118.185	271	1.4551	319
8	Nicholls	119.610	296	1.6812	336
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	120.765	311	0.9866	257
10	Northwestern St	121.538	320	-0.3112	40
11	Houston Baptist	121.971	326	0.7292	215
12	Incarnate Word	126.177	352	0.8992	241

Opp Field Goal Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	31.887	3	0.1131	148
2	Texas A&M-CC	34.287	37	0.3188	183
3	UT Rio Grande	34.918	58	-0.2727	101
4	Lamar	35.000	64	0.4942	207
5	SF Austin	35.531	83	0.9255	279
6	SE Louisiana	36.403	124	1.0550	301
7	New Orleans	36.486	132	-0.5510	59
8	Nicholls	37.730	207	-0.1587	117
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	38.636	258	0.5984	226
10	Northwestern St	38.701	263	0.0782	146
11	Incarnate Word	39.802	310	0.6869	241
12	Houston Baptist	40.508	332	-1.3136	11

Opp Field Goal Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	76.868	4	-0.4905	72
2	Texas A&M-CC	77.177	6	1.3431	295
3	Lamar	79.208	38	-0.2855	103
4	Nicholls	79.434	41	1.1128	277
5	SE Louisiana	79.938	54	0.4446	203
6	Incarnate Word	82.182	117	1.5365	309
7	UT Rio Grande	83.221	157	0.4542	206
8	Northwestern St	83.443	165	1.6035	313
9	SF Austin	83.511	169	0.3792	196
10	Houston Baptist	84.598	237	-0.2907	101
11	Texas A&M-Commerce	84.968	251	1.2245	292
12	New Orleans	85.702	282	-1.0488	30

Opp Field Goal Percentage (FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	41.732	37	0.3883	217
2	UT Rio Grande	42.053	44	-0.4597	100
3	New Orleans	42.568	62	-0.0651	145
4	SF Austin	42.633	67	0.8764	285
5	Lamar	44.396	145	0.9660	301
6	Texas A&M-CC	44.645	166	-0.3102	119
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	45.716	231	-0.0505	148
8	SE Louisiana	45.740	233	1.0952	315
9	Northwestern St	46.478	274	-0.8125	57
10	Nicholls	47.831	324	-0.8832	48
11	Houston Baptist	48.003	328	-1.3584	23
12	Incarnate Word	48.556	342	-0.1588	133

Opp 2 Point Rate (2ptA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	53.226	17	-0.1341	152
2	New Orleans	59.583	150	0.4830	231
3	Nicholls	61.671	222	-2.2319	16
4	Northwestern St	61.843	226	0.7140	259
5	Texas A&M-Commerce	61.929	234	-0.9139	83
6	UT Rio Grande	61.985	236	1.4899	306
7	SE Louisiana	62.278	246	1.4660	304
8	Lamar	62.522	253	-0.0088	173
9	Houston Baptist	62.702	255	1.6326	315
10	SF Austin	64.532	310	-1.2773	52
11	Incarnate Word	64.697	312	-1.0310	73
12	Texas A&M-CC	65.331	324	0.4669	229

Opp 2 Point Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	20.121	3	0.5176	225
2	Lamar	24.459	85	0.6793	254
3	New Orleans	25.313	121	-0.1155	129
4	UT Rio Grande	25.325	122	0.4767	219
5	SE Louisiana	25.509	131	1.3427	338
6	Texas A&M-CC	25.752	150	0.5397	229
7	SF Austin	26.534	211	0.3908	201
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	26.646	218	0.1942	174
9	Nicholls	27.112	241	-0.8518	25
10	Northwestern St	27.345	260	0.3655	199
11	Houston Baptist	29.411	337	-0.4302	68
12	Incarnate Word	29.708	342	-0.1287	125

Opp 2 Point Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	41.052	4	-0.3980	103
2	Nicholls	48.644	107	-1.0705	46
3	Lamar	49.404	136	-0.2630	122
4	SE Louisiana	49.688	144	1.4253	300
5	Texas A&M-CC	50.223	167	1.3321	292
6	New Orleans	51.316	206	-0.1437	134
7	UT Rio Grande	51.479	216	1.4861	306
8	Northwestern St	51.665	224	1.5629	311
9	Texas A&M-Commerce	52.609	264	-0.0344	148
10	Houston Baptist	52.865	272	1.1725	280
11	Incarnate Word	52.909	275	0.0180	157
12	SF Austin	53.866	307	-0.8183	66

Opp 2 Point Percentage (2Pt FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	49.531	70	1.6673	325
2	SF Austin	49.599	72	1.2770	304
3	Lamar	49.650	74	1.7455	331
4	New Orleans	49.712	76	-0.0798	148
5	UT Rio Grande	49.922	87	-0.5253	92
6	Texas A&M-Commerce	50.888	127	0.3038	196
7	SE Louisiana	51.824	167	1.3616	313
8	Texas A&M-CC	52.043	180	-0.1061	144
9	Northwestern St	53.440	245	-0.9621	63
10	Houston Baptist	55.609	315	-1.7983	24
11	Nicholls	56.123	321	-0.7073	78
12	Incarnate Word	56.450	331	-0.4392	99

Opp 3 Point Rate (3ptA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-CC	34.669	42	-0.4669	137
2	Incarnate Word	35.303	54	1.0310	293
3	SF Austin	35.468	56	1.2773	314
4	Houston Baptist	37.298	111	-1.6326	51
5	Lamar	37.478	113	0.0088	193
6	SE Louisiana	37.722	120	-1.4660	62
7	UT Rio Grande	38.015	130	-1.4899	60
8	Texas A&M-Commerce	38.071	132	0.9139	283
9	Northwestern St	38.157	140	-0.7140	107
10	Nicholls	38.329	144	2.2319	350
11	New Orleans	40.417	216	-0.4830	135
12	McNeese	46.774	349	0.1341	214

Opp 3 Point Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-CC	8.535	13	-0.2209	132
2	SF Austin	8.997	28	0.5347	289
3	UT Rio Grande	9.593	49	-0.7494	45
4	Incarnate Word	10.095	77	0.8155	324
5	Lamar	10.541	112	-0.1850	142
6	Nicholls	10.618	124	0.6931	312
7	SE Louisiana	10.893	155	-0.2877	115
8	Houston Baptist	11.097	180	-0.8834	30
9	New Orleans	11.173	188	-0.4355	81
10	Northwestern St	11.356	203	-0.2873	116
11	McNeese	11.766	238	-0.4045	88
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	11.989	265	0.4042	269

Opp 3 Point Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Texas A&M-CC	26.954	20	0.0110	183
2	Incarnate Word	29.273	59	1.5185	321
3	SF Austin	29.644	65	1.1974	300
4	Lamar	29.804	69	-0.0225	180
5	SE Louisiana	30.251	86	-0.9808	79
6	Nicholls	30.790	111	2.1833	346
7	Houston Baptist	31.733	133	-1.4631	39
8	UT Rio Grande	31.742	134	-1.0319	76
9	Northwestern St	31.778	135	0.0406	186
10	Texas A&M-Commerce	32.359	156	1.2589	306
11	New Orleans	34.386	246	-0.9051	82
12	McNeese	35.816	287	-0.0926	164

Opp 3 Point Percentage (3Pt FGM/FGA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	30.369	20	0.8522	267
2	UT Rio Grande	30.582	27	-1.2009	72
3	Texas A&M-CC	31.873	63	-0.5952	120
4	New Orleans	32.133	82	-0.1864	158
5	McNeese	32.239	84	-1.0205	87
6	Nicholls	34.370	218	-0.1718	160
7	Incarnate Word	34.552	232	0.5563	230
8	Houston Baptist	34.557	233	-1.1607	77
9	Lamar	34.941	260	-0.0138	179
10	Northwestern St	35.558	282	-1.0767	84
11	SE Louisiana	35.722	289	0.2774	203
12	Texas A&M-Commerce	36.726	331	-0.2875	153

Opp Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA %)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	31.370	79	0.4542	234
2	Houston Baptist	31.410	80	0.7093	260
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	35.190	164	-1.7183	70
4	Northwestern St	37.100	221	-4.3360	2
5	Nicholls	38.560	263	-2.4516	34
6	UT Rio Grande	39.350	279	1.2679	298
7	New Orleans	39.870	288	-0.4278	164
8	SE Louisiana	42.160	318	-1.1901	105
9	Incarnate Word	42.870	322	-3.4296	10
10	McNeese	43.130	326	0.0435	205
11	Lamar	45.050	345	0.3020	224
12	Texas A&M-CC	47.300	354	-0.6569	141

Opp Free Throw Makes per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Houston Baptist	18.539	64	0.1873	202
2	SF Austin	18.726	70	0.8557	289
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	20.222	134	0.0496	186
4	Northwestern St	21.178	183	-2.4975	1
5	UT Rio Grande	22.234	244	0.2834	217
6	Nicholls	23.274	293	-0.5374	110
7	McNeese	23.535	305	0.7128	274
8	SE Louisiana	24.032	313	-0.6885	88
9	Lamar	24.055	314	0.6445	268
10	New Orleans	24.154	317	-1.1818	37
11	Incarnate Word	24.397	324	-1.9488	6
12	Texas A&M-CC	25.022	338	-0.3929	129

Opp Free Throw Attempts per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	25.750	69	0.6070	246
2	Houston Baptist	25.959	73	0.5101	238
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	28.902	166	-0.8311	90
4	Nicholls	29.837	208	-1.3958	48
5	Northwestern St	30.219	226	-2.9743	1
6	McNeese	32.109	298	0.2876	213
7	UT Rio Grande	32.207	301	1.3826	319
8	SE Louisiana	32.707	311	-0.5615	116
9	New Orleans	33.648	324	-0.5732	113
10	Incarnate Word	34.030	329	-2.2655	10
11	Lamar	34.997	344	-0.0529	179
12	Texas A&M-CC	35.318	345	0.0439	189

Opp Free Throw Percentage (FTM/FTA)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	Lamar	67.990	13	1.3950	284
2	UT Rio Grande	69.166	35	-1.7354	44
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	69.335	44	2.3594	331
4	Texas A&M-CC	70.152	73	-2.0884	32
5	Northwestern St	70.795	99	-2.1122	31
6	Incarnate Word	70.864	107	-1.7179	45
7	New Orleans	71.238	128	-2.5723	13
8	SF Austin	72.217	181	0.6805	230
9	Houston Baptist	72.310	187	-0.7303	113
10	McNeese	72.479	201	1.9451	312
11	SE Louisiana	72.736	221	-0.8243	107
12	Nicholls	78.827	364	2.6492	343

Opp Assists per Made Field Goal (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	47.159	59	1.2044	265
2	Texas A&M-CC	49.115	99	-1.3282	97
3	SE Louisiana	51.561	162	2.6983	336
4	Incarnate Word	51.589	164	-1.2188	103
5	Northwestern St	51.865	170	-0.6398	145
6	Houston Baptist	54.225	240	-1.3326	96
7	Texas A&M-Commerce	55.449	273	-1.1237	110
8	Nicholls	56.446	294	2.1167	313
9	McNeese	56.632	300	-2.0929	58
10	Lamar	58.259	326	1.1798	264
11	UT Rio Grande	58.884	329	-1.0729	117
12	New Orleans	59.810	338	-0.9914	126

Steals per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	14.965	1	0.3324	63
2	Nicholls	12.537	12	-0.2105	185
3	Texas A&M-CC	10.265	102	-0.3614	232
4	SF Austin	10.158	112	0.3594	57
5	SE Louisiana	10.089	116	-0.2819	210
6	Texas A&M-Commerce	9.713	140	0.2373	90
7	Houston Baptist	9.563	150	0.3280	64
8	Northwestern St	9.244	183	-0.5537	288
9	Lamar	8.927	206	-0.2873	212
10	UT Rio Grande	8.571	238	-0.4668	268
11	New Orleans	8.037	281	0.4537	41
12	Incarnate Word	7.769	308	-0.3875	239

Blocks per Shot Attempt (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	McNeese	6.555	25	-0.0481	170
2	Lamar	6.270	39	-0.4703	321
3	Houston Baptist	5.613	82	0.4369	43
4	SF Austin	5.322	104	0.2929	66
5	New Orleans	5.189	122	-0.1477	218
6	Texas A&M-Commerce	4.547	193	-0.3672	291
7	SE Louisiana	4.125	244	-0.0470	169
8	UT Rio Grande	4.032	256	-0.1805	237
9	Nicholls	4.014	261	0.1363	98
10	Texas A&M-CC	3.842	277	-0.0901	191
11	Incarnate Word	3.596	299	-0.7673	358
12	Northwestern St	3.448	312	0.2137	84

Fouls per Possession (%)

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	SF Austin	23.550	82	-0.3276	136
2	Houston Baptist	23.581	83	0.5131	301
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	24.328	131	-0.4781	107
4	Northwestern St	25.225	186	-1.1003	26
5	Nicholls	26.009	247	-0.4947	104
6	Lamar	26.174	257	-0.1241	175
7	UT Rio Grande	26.304	270	0.3912	279
8	SE Louisiana	27.097	306	-0.7031	65
9	New Orleans	27.253	315	0.3256	270
10	Incarnate Word	27.369	321	-1.4851	6
11	McNeese	28.145	340	-0.4616	110
12	Texas A&M-CC	30.092	360	0.0694	220

Opp Offensive Possessions per Game

Rank	Team	Mean	D1 Rank	MACD	D1 Trend Rank	Trend Strength
1	New Orleans	71.877	85	-0.8444	280
2	UT Rio Grande	69.310	211	0.3361	74
3	Texas A&M-Commerce	69.262	213	-1.5760	341
4	Nicholls	69.106	224	-1.7452	353
5	McNeese	68.031	276	0.2717	82
6	Texas A&M-CC	67.930	280	-1.2131	326
7	SF Austin	67.561	292	-0.3869	202
8	Lamar	67.323	301	-0.3764	199
9	Northwestern St	66.497	330	-0.9500	290
10	SE Louisiana	66.306	336	0.3194	75
11	Incarnate Word	65.902	348	-1.1052	312
12	Houston Baptist	65.740	351	0.5811	49

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