Ranking every team in college basketball from Florida A&M (351) to Duke (1)

Our projections system—which has been the most accurate in the country for the past two years—returns to rank every team in Division I college basketball.
Author:
Publish date:

We forecast what we can and happily cede the rest to the players and the drama they improvise on the court. Sports Illustrated’s College Basketball Projection System, now in its third year, simulates the season 10,000 times and ranks teams 1–351 according to their average efficiency. Last year in the preseason, we identified North Carolina as a weak No. 1 in a historically wide-open field—and five months later, the Tar Heels led Villanova with 15 minutes left in the national title game. What transpired after that, culminating in Kris Jenkins’s buzzer-beating three, was the greatest finish in the history of the sport. You don’t get Jenkins’s dagger without the exhilarating crapshoot that is the single-elimination NCAA tournament, and you don’t get the nation’s most accurate preseason projections—as ours have been for the past two years—without running 10,000 simulations. 

This project starts from the ground up, assessing every roster, player by player. For offense, the system projects efficiency and shot volume by considering past performance, recruiting rankings and advanced AAU stats, development curves for similar Division I players over the past 14 seasons, the quality of a player’s teammates and his coach’s ability to develop and maximize talent. Those stats are weighted based on the team’s rotation—including scouting intel on who’s expected to play—then used to produce each team’s offensive efficiency projection. (The simulations account for variance in individual performances as well as injury scenarios.) Team defensive efficiency projections are based on players’ projected rebound, steal and block percentages, height (taller frontcourts make for stingier D), experience (veterans have fewer lapses) and coaches’ defensive résumés. For a deeper look at how our model works, read this explainer, and for all of our analytics-driven preview content, click here.

This is how our system ranks all 351 teams heading into 2016­–17:

Rank

Team

Proj. Off. Eff.

Off. Rank

Proj. Def. Eff.

Def. Rank

Proj. Pyth. Win%

Proj. Conf. Rank

Proj. NCAAs seed

1

Duke

125.2

1

94.0

11

0.9641

1st in ACC

1 seed

2

Kansas

118.6

8

91.5

3

0.9519

1st in B12

1 seed

3

Kentucky

119.2

7

92.0

4

0.9515

1st in SEC

1 seed

4

Oregon

120.1

4

93.9

9

0.9447

1st in P12

1 seed

5

Villanova

120.2

3

94.2

13

0.9431

1st in BE

2 seed

While our projections saw no dominant teams in the 2015–16 preseason, this year they view Duke as a juggernaut, ranking first in offensive efficiency by a wide margin and 11th in defense. We went back and examined every preseason No. 1 from the past decade—using beginning-of-season rosters to project performance—to see how these Blue Devils stacked up, and starting with the ‘07–08 preseason, only one team had a stronger projection. That was ‘08–09 North Carolina, which came into that season with a veteran, national player of the year candidate in power forward Tyler Hansbrough; a supporting cast of efficient sidekicks in guards Ty Lawson, Wayne Ellington and Danny Green; and two elite freshmen big men in Ed Davis and Tyler Zeller. 

Davidson's Jack Gibbs leads SI's Top 100 projected scorers this season

If that roster blueprint seems familiar, it’s because it closely resembles what the Blue Devils have now. Junior combo guard Grayson Allen is SI’s projected frontrunner for national player of the year and he’s just the kind of high-volume, high-efficiency scorer that makes an elite offense possible. He has quality veterans around him in guards Matt Jones and Luke Kennard and power forward Amile Jefferson. And Duke added two freshmen who could potentially be the No. 1 pick in the 2017 NBA draft (Jayson Tatum and Harry Giles) and two more who could be first-rounders (Marques Bolden and Frank Jackson). The Blue Devils can give every, meaningful minute to players who were ranked in the top 35 of their recruiting class, and they have depth to withstand injuries. All this adds up to an otherworldly offensive projection; it just needs to work in the real world the same way it did for Carolina in 2009, when the Tar Heels cruised to a national title. If issues arise—if say, Duke’s lack of a true, pass-first point guard is a problem—then Kansas, a team with two veteran floor generals, a crop of talented underclassmen and a strong, No. 2 overall projection, will be right there waiting.

Rank

Team

Proj. Off. Eff.

Off. Rank

Proj. Def. Eff.

Def. Rank

Proj. Pyth. Win%

Proj. Conf. Rank

Proj. NCAAs seed

6

North Carolina

121.8

2

95.8

27

0.9406

2nd in ACC

2 seed

7

Virginia

115.0

25

90.6

2

0.9393

3rd in ACC

2 seed

8

Wisconsin

114.8

27

90.6

1

0.9385

1st in B10

2 seed

9

Gonzaga

116.3

14

94.5

16

0.9157

1st in WCC

3 seed

10

Arizona

115.3

23

93.8

8

0.9147

2nd in P12

3 seed

In 2009–10, when Butler made the first of its back-to-back runs to the national championship game, it had more than just wunderkind coach Brad Stevens and future NBA draft picks Gordon Hayward and Shelvin Mack on its side. The Bulldogs also had a remarkable level of roster continuity, bringing back every rotation player from a team that finished 38th in efficiency the previous season. They allocated a nation-high 93.2% of their minutes to the same players from ‘08–09, made substantial improvements—and came within a halfcourt heave of upsetting Duke in the title game. Wisconsin, which finished 38th in efficiency last season—just like ‘08–09 Butler—brings back 99% of its minutes played, and our projections think the Badgers can improve enough to chase their third Final Four in four years.

Big Ten preview: Wisconsin's stable of returners makes it a favorite

Wisconsin’s defense, which was already elite last season, projects to be the nation’s best, but its offense, which we forecast to jump from 90th in efficiency to 27th, is its prime area for growth. The Badgers gave 28% of their minutes to freshmen last season, many of whom committed turnovers at an uncharacteristically high rate for the program, which has a history of ranking among the nation’s best at ball-control. Sophomores Ethan Happ (a TO rate of 19.0% last season), Khalil Iverson (28.7%) and Alex Illikainen (15.9%) are expected to become more sure-handed with experience, and they should benefit from running the same offense, under the same head coach, all of this season, too. Bo Ryan’s midseason retirement, and the switch to longtime assistant Greg Gard—who subsequently implemented a classic version of the swing offense—made for an abnormal season.

Rank

Team

Proj. Off. Eff.

Off. Rank

Proj. Def. Eff.

Def. Rank

Proj. Pyth. Win%

Proj. Conf. Rank

Proj. NCAAs seed

11

Purdue

117.8

9

97.2

37

0.9014

2nd in B10

3 seed

12

Xavier

115.6

19

95.4

24

0.9013

2nd in BE

3 seed

13

Louisville

112.3

49

92.7

5

0.9005

4th in ACC

4 seed

14

Syracuse

113.6

33

93.9

10

0.8999

5th in ACC

4 seed

15

Indiana

119.6

5

99.4

79

0.8936

3rd in B10

4 seed

16

UCLA

116.7

12

98.2

50

0.8789

3rd in P12

4 seed

17

California

111.7

53

94.3

14

0.8760

4th in P12

5 seed

18

NC State

117.6

10

99.4

80

0.8742

6th in ACC

5 seed

19

West Virginia

111.8

52

94.5

15

0.8736

2nd in B12

5 seed

20

Connecticut

112.5

46

95.6

25

0.8663

1st in Amer

5 seed

21

Creighton

114.6

29

97.9

46

0.8587

3rd in BE

6 seed

22

Saint Mary's

116.2

16

99.5

83

0.8560

2nd in WCC

6 seed

23

Michigan

115.5

20

99.0

67

0.8554

4th in B10

6 seed

24

Baylor

117.0

11

100.3

102

0.8544

3rd in B12

6 seed

25

Texas

112.5

45

96.6

31

0.8528

4th in B12

7 seed

The player data we’ve gathered from the past 14 seasons gives us a unique window into how much can be realistically expected out of highly ranked recruits. Players outside the top 20 of the Recruiting Services Consensus Index tend to take until Year 2 to break out, and those second-tier recruits tend to make the biggest freshman-to-sophomore offensive leaps of any players in D-I. That bodes well for Louisville, which lost key seniors Damion Lee and Trey Lewis, but has two former top-40 recruits ready to take over in sophomore combo guard Donovan Mitchell and wing Deng Adel. Both of them flashed breakout-star potential during their appearance at the adidas Nations camp in Garden Grove, Calif., this summer, and they’re a big reason why the Cardinals are ranked 13th and projected to finish fourth in a loaded ACC.

Here We Go, 'Zo: Can Lonzo Ball bring UCLA back to the top?

Three teams appear in SI’s projected top 25 that were left out of the popular human polls. NC State (No. 16) has added as much key talent as anyone in the nation save for Kentucky and Duke, in freshman point guard Dennis Smith Jr. and power forward Omer Yurtseven, and back-from-injury senior shooting guard Terry Henderson. Our projections see Michigan (23)—and especially senior wing Zak Irvin—set up for a bounce-back year after an injury-plagued ‘15–16 sunk the Wolverines to eighth in the Big Ten. And Baylor (24), despite losing stars Taurean Prince (to the NBA draft) and Rico Gathers (to the NFL draft), still has enough offensive firepower to be the third-best team in the Big 12.

Rank

Team

Proj. Off. Eff.

Off. Rank

Proj. Def. Eff.

Def. Rank

Proj. Pyth. Win%

Proj. Conf. Rank

Proj. NCAAs seed

26

Wichita St.

110.3

70

94.7

18

0.8526

1st in MVC

7 seed

27

Cincinnati

110.4

67

94.8

20

0.8520

2nd in Amer

7 seed

28

Michigan St.

115.2

24

99.0

69

0.8513

5th in B10

7 seed

29

Butler

116.2

15

99.9

93

0.8512

4th in BE

8 seed

30

VCU

110.7

60

95.2

23

0.8503

1st in A10

8 seed

31

Florida

110.6

62

95.1

22

0.8500

2nd in SEC

8 seed

32

Rhode Island

112.6

44

96.8

33

0.8496

2nd in A10

8 seed

33

Miami FL

115.3

22

99.2

77

0.8495

7th in ACC

9 seed

34

Clemson

112.6

43

96.9

34

0.8489

8th in ACC

9 seed

35

San Diego St.

107.9

112

92.9

6

0.8481

1st in MWC

9 seed

36

Maryland

112.4

47

97.0

36

0.8447

6th in B10

9 seed

37

Texas A&M

109.0

88

94.1

12

0.8440

3rd in SEC

10 seed

38

Virginia Tech

115.4

21

99.7

90

0.8423

9th in ACC

10 seed

39

Iowa St.

115.6

18

99.9

95

0.8422

5th in B12

10 seed

40

Oklahoma

111.2

54

96.2

28

0.8418

6th in B12

10 seed

41

Notre Dame

119.5

6

103.4

172

0.8413

10th in ACC

11 seed

42

Dayton

109.5

79

94.7

19

0.8412

3rd in A10

11 seed

43

Seton Hall

108.0

108

93.5

7

0.8410

5th in BE

11 seed

44

Florida St.

114.3

30

99.0

68

0.8402

11th in ACC

Play In

45

BYU

114.7

28

99.3

78

0.8397

3rd in WCC

Play In

46

Georgetown

112.7

42

97.6

40

0.8395

6th in BE

Play In

47

Princeton

114.9

26

99.5

84

0.8391

1st in Ivy

12 seed

48

Ohio St.

110.5

64

95.8

26

0.8389

7th in B10

Play In

49

Pittsburgh

113.5

35

98.4

55

0.8385

12th in ACC

 

50

USC

112.9

39

98.4

54

0.8298

5th in P12

 

Some of our system’s most contrarian positions appear in this section, starting with it having Michigan State—a team some human rankings have in the top 10—all the way down at 28. The model believes that the Spartans’ loss of valuable frontcourt players Matt Costello and Deyonta Davis to the pros, plus early season injuries to Ben Carter and Gavin Schilling, creates a rebounding-and-rim-protection void that drags their defense down to 69th overall in efficiency. The model sees similar issues occurring at Maryland (21st in the Coaches’ Poll, 36th here) and Iowa State (27th in Coaches, 39th here).

Josh Hart, Grayson Allen lead SI's player of the year projections

Meanwhile, in the Atlantic 10, Dayton (No. 42) and Rhode Island (32) were picked 1–2 in the league’s preseason poll of coaches and media, but our projections actually view VCU (30) as its best team. We’re also forecasting the Ivy League to have an at-large bid-worthy team in Princeton (47), which brings back 96% of its minutes from last season and adds talented senior power forward Hans Brase, who missed last season with an injury.

Rank

Team

Proj. Off. Eff.

Off. Rank

Proj. Def. Eff.

Def. Rank

Proj. Pyth. Win%

Proj. Conf. Rank

Proj. NCAAs seed

51

Marquette

113.2

36

98.8

63

0.8263

7th in BE

 

52

Texas Tech

112.9

40

98.6

58

0.8259

7th in B12

 

53

SMU

113.0

38

98.7

60

0.8251

3rd in Amer

 

54

Vanderbilt

113.1

37

98.8

65

0.8250

4th in SEC

 

55

Utah

112.7

41

98.7

59

0.8225

6th in P12

 

56

Northwestern

111.2

55

98.8

64

0.7945

8th in B10

 

57

Colorado

108.5

95

96.6

30

0.7917

7th in P12

 

58

Georgia

108.5

97

96.7

32

0.7882

5th in SEC

 

59

Houston

115.8

17

103.9

188

0.7770

4th in Amer

 

60

Illinois

109.0

90

97.8

44

0.7758

9th in B10

 

61

Arkansas

110.3

68

99.1

71

0.7746

6th in SEC

 

62

Mississippi

110.8

58

99.8

91

0.7692

7th in SEC

 

63

Washington

110.3

69

99.4

81

0.7682

8th in P12

 

64

UNC Wilmington

111.0

56

100.1

99

0.7665

1st in CAA

12 seed

65

Monmouth

108.7

92

98.0

48

0.7658

1st in MAAC

12 seed

66

Providence

108.5

96

97.9

45

0.7652

8th in BE

 

67

Iowa

110.7

59

100.1

100

0.7613

10th in B10

 

68

Mississippi St.

108.4

100

98.1

49

0.7588

8th in SEC

 

69

Oregon St.

109.4

83

99.1

72

0.7563

9th in P12

 

70

Stanford

109.3

85

99.2

75

0.7527

10th in P12

 

71

Davidson

113.7

32

103.2

166

0.7526

4th in A10

 

72

UT Arlington

109.8

76

99.7

88

0.7525

1st in SB

13 seed

73

Oklahoma St.

109.7

78

99.9

94

0.7462

8th in B12

 

74

UAB

111.9

50

102.0

135

0.7443

1st in CUSA

13 seed

75

Arizona St.

109.4

82

99.8

92

0.7422

11th in P12

 

76

Kansas St.

107.1

123

97.8

43

0.7401

9th in B12

 

77

South Carolina

107.7

116

98.4

53

0.7388

9th in SEC

 

78

Wake Forest

110.5

65

101.2

119

0.7339

13th in ACC

 

79

Auburn

108.8

91

99.7

87

0.7325

10th in SEC

 

80

Ohio

113.9

31

104.4

201

0.7321

1st in MAC

13 seed

81

Western Kentucky

109.9

74

100.8

110

0.7307

2nd in CUSA

 

82

Nevada

106.5

136

97.7

42

0.7287

2nd in MWC

 

83

New Mexico

109.8

75

100.8

112

0.7276

3rd in MWC

 

84

Harvard

106.7

130

98.0

47

0.7271

2nd in Ivy

 

85

Temple

107.2

121

98.5

57

0.7260

5th in Amer

 

86

Valparaiso

103.2

209

94.8

21

0.7258

1st in Horz

13 seed

87

Alabama

106.1

143

97.5

39

0.7255

11th in SEC

 

88

Richmond

112.3

48

103.2

165

0.7251

5th in A10

 

89

Penn St.

107.4

118

98.7

62

0.7248

11th in B10

 

90

TCU

104.9

168

96.5

29

0.7231

10th in B12

 

91

Long Beach St.

109.9

73

101.2

120

0.7211

1st in BW

14 seed

92

Nebraska

106.9

126

98.5

56

0.7199

12th in B10

 

93

Belmont

116.4

13

107.4

257

0.7161

1st in OVC

14 seed

94

George Washington

108.3

102

100.2

101

0.7102

6th in A10

 

95

Toledo

110.6

63

102.5

147

0.7044

2nd in MAC

 

96

East Tennessee St.

109.4

81

102.1

139

0.6897

1st in SC

14 seed

97

Minnesota

106.1

144

99.1

70

0.6866

13th in B10

 

98

South Dakota St.

106.3

140

99.4

82

0.6846

1st in Sum

14 seed

99

Tennessee

109.2

87

102.1

140

0.6843

12th in SEC

 

100

Old Dominion

104.1

185

97.6

41

0.6785

3rd in CUSA

 

This tier includes two former Duke assistant coaches trying to break through to the NCAA tournament in their relatively new jobs—but to earn at-large bids, Steve Wojciechowski’s Marquette team (whom we rank 51st) and Chris Collins’s Northwestern team (56th) will need to outperform their projections by a few wins apiece. Slightly lower, at Nos. 64 and 65, respectively, are two teams that project to be formidable 12-seeds: UNC-Wilmington, which led Duke at halftime of a 4–13, first-round tourney game in March, and Monmouth, one of the best mid-majors that didn’t make the Big Dance last season. 

The top six mid-major contenders this season

Rank

Team

Proj. Off. Eff.

Off. Rank

Proj. Def. Eff.

Def. Rank

Proj. Pyth. Win%

Proj. Conf. Rank

Proj. NCAAs seed

101

Memphis

107.0

124

100.5

104

0.6742

6th in Amer

 

102

Georgia St.

104.5

179

98.2

51

0.6718

2nd in SB

 

103

St. John's

105.4

158

99.1

74

0.6696

9th in BE

 

104

LSU

107.8

113

101.4

125

0.6680

13th in SEC

 

105

Middle Tennessee

105.3

162

99.1

73

0.6676

4th in CUSA

 

106

College of Charleston

100.5

274

94.7

17

0.6647

2nd in CAA

 

107

St. Bonaventure

110.9

57

104.5

204

0.6646

7th in A10

 

108

Boise St.

106.3

139

100.3

103

0.6611

4th in MWC

 

109

Yale

106.5

134

100.5

106

0.6594

3rd in Ivy

 

110

Northern Iowa

104.1

186

98.3

52

0.6589

2nd in MVC

 

111

Arkansas Little Rock

103.2

211

97.5

38

0.6585

3rd in SB

 

112

Siena

109.3

84

103.3

167

0.6583

2nd in MAAC

 

113

James Madison

104.7

176

98.9

66

0.6581

3rd in CAA

 

114

Akron

108.3

103

102.3

143

0.6574

3rd in MAC

 

115

Vermont

110.0

72

104.0

193

0.6558

1st in AE

15 seed

116

Iona

110.1

71

104.2

198

0.6533

3rd in MAAC

 

117

UCF

105.3

163

99.7

89

0.6516

7th in Amer

 

118

Eastern Michigan

108.0

110

102.3

141

0.6505

4th in MAC

 

119

Illinois St.

105.1

164

99.7

86

0.6488

3rd in MVC

 

120

Buffalo

106.6

131

101.2

121

0.6441

5th in MAC

 

121

Fresno St.

107.7

115

102.7

151

0.6341

5th in MWC

 

122

Lehigh

107.8

114

102.9

156

0.6305

1st in Pat

15 seed

123

North Dakota St.

104.7

175

100.0

98

0.6303

2nd in Sum

 

124

William & Mary

110.7

61

105.7

230

0.6296

4th in CAA

 

125

Oakland

113.6

34

108.5

273

0.6290

2nd in Horz

 

126

Saint Joseph's

107.5

117

102.9

157

0.6242

8th in A10

 

127

New Mexico St.

101.1

259

96.9

35

0.6189

1st in WAC

15 seed

128

Green Bay

108.2

104

103.8

183

0.6164

3rd in Horz

 

129

Chattanooga

104.9

170

100.7

109

0.6151

2nd in SC

 

130

Towson

105.6

153

101.4

124

0.6148

5th in CAA

 

131

Weber St.

105.7

147

101.5

126

0.6147

1st in BSky

15 seed

132

Hofstra

109.5

80

105.1

217

0.6141

6th in CAA

 

133

Sam Houston St.

107.0

125

102.8

153

0.6136

1st in Slnd

16 seed

134

Ball St.

108.0

109

103.8

184

0.6116

6th in MAC

 

135

Winthrop

109.8

77

105.7

228

0.6083

1st in BSth

16 seed

136

Grand Canyon

105.3

160

101.7

129

0.6002

2nd in WAC

 

137

Morehead St.

106.6

132

102.9

161

0.5978

2nd in OVC

 

138

Elon

108.6

94

104.9

213

0.5977

7th in CAA

 

139

Northern Illinois

104.0

189

100.6

108

0.5951

7th in MAC

 

140

Albany

106.7

129

103.4

173

0.5892

2nd in AE

 

141

UNLV

105.4

159

102.3

145

0.5840

6th in MWC

 

142

Mercer

108.6

93

105.5

222

0.5838

3rd in SC

 

143

La Salle

103.9

192

100.9

113

0.5838

9th in A10

 

144

Florida Gulf Coast

105.6

150

102.6

148

0.5830

1st in ASun

Play In

145

Massachusetts

104.4

183

101.5

127

0.5800

10th in A10

 

146

Marshall

110.5

66

107.5

260

0.5795

5th in CUSA

 

147

East Carolina

106.3

138

103.4

174

0.5793

8th in Amer

 

148

Stony Brook

102.0

239

99.2

76

0.5788

3rd in AE

 

149

Wofford

109.2

86

106.3

241

0.5782

4th in SC

 

150

Evansville

102.5

222

100.0

97

0.5728

4th in MVC

 

If you’re doing early scouting for potential 15-over-2 giant killers, champ, Vermont (No. 115) is our projected America East champ and the strongest 15 in our preseason NCAA tourney seed forecast. The other projected 15s aren’t too far behind: Lehigh (122), New Mexico State (127) and Weber State (131). Southland conference favorite Sam Houston State (133), meanwhile, is the strongest projected No. 16 seed.

Rank

Team

Proj. Off. Eff.

Off. Rank

Proj. Def. Eff.

Def. Rank

Proj. Pyth. Win%

Proj. Conf. Rank

Proj. NCAAs seed

151

IPFW

108.4

98

105.8

234

0.5714

3rd in Sum

 

152

Fordham

105.5

157

102.9

158

0.5703

11th in A10

 

153

Tulsa

105.1

165

102.7

149

0.5672

9th in Amer

 

154

Saint Peter's

101.1

260

98.7

61

0.5671

4th in MAAC

 

155

Nebraska Omaha

108.4

99

105.9

237

0.5664

4th in Sum

 

156

Indiana St.

101.6

248

99.5

85

0.5590

5th in MVC

 

157

Georgia Southern

107.9

111

105.7

233

0.5586

4th in SB

 

158

Washington St.

107.1

122

104.9

214

0.5579

12th in P12

 

159

Kent St.

105.5

155

103.5

178

0.5540

8th in MAC

 

160

Wagner

103.7

197

101.8

132

0.5539

1st in NEC

Play In

161

Colorado St.

108.3

101

106.3

242

0.5533

7th in MWC

 

162

Western Michigan

105.7

148

103.9

189

0.5499

9th in MAC

 

163

Louisiana Tech

104.5

180

102.8

154

0.5481

6th in CUSA

 

164

Santa Clara

106.7

128

105.2

218

0.5409

4th in WCC

 

165

Central Michigan

111.9

51

110.5

314

0.5348

10th in MAC

 

166

New Hampshire

102.8

219

101.6

128

0.5317

4th in AE

 

167

Charlotte

105.1

166

103.9

190

0.5310

7th in CUSA

 

168

Cal St. Bakersfield

101.8

244

100.8

111

0.5300

3rd in WAC

 

169

UC Irvine

102.3

232

101.3

123

0.5278

2nd in BW

 

170

Stephen F. Austin

102.0

238

101.3

122

0.5216

2nd in Slnd

 

171

UNC Greensboro

104.0

187

103.3

169

0.5215

5th in SC

 

172

Northeastern

106.2

142

105.5

226

0.5196

8th in CAA

 

173

Utah St.

108.0

107

107.4

258

0.5178

8th in MWC

 

174

Pacific

103.8

196

103.3

168

0.5161

5th in WCC

 

175

UC Santa Barbara

104.0

191

103.4

175

0.5158

3rd in BW

 

176

IUPUI

102.4

227

101.8

131

0.5155

5th in Sum

 

177

Denver

101.4

254

101.0

115

0.5097

6th in Sum

 

178

DePaul

105.6

151

105.3

219

0.5092

10th in BE

 

179

Pepperdine

103.4

203

103.1

163

0.5086

6th in WCC

 

180

Holy Cross

102.4

225

102.4

146

0.4996

2nd in Pat

 

181

Montana

103.9

193

104.0

192

0.4962

2nd in BSky

 

182

Coastal Carolina

101.9

241

102.0

138

0.4958

5th in SB

 

183

Wyoming

105.5

156

105.7

231

0.4953

9th in MWC

 

184

Missouri St.

103.1

215

103.3

170

0.4939

6th in MVC

 

185

Bucknell

104.9

169

105.1

216

0.4935

3rd in Pat

 

186

George Mason

104.4

182

104.8

208

0.4895

12th in A10

 

187

Tennessee St.

100.2

275

100.6

107

0.4893

3rd in OVC

 

188

Rider

101.5

251

102.0

137

0.4833

5th in MAAC

 

189

Boston University

106.8

127

107.4

259

0.4830

4th in Pat

 

190

Missouri

103.5

201

104.1

195

0.4827

14th in SEC

 

191

Southern Illinois

104.0

190

104.7

206

0.4798

7th in MVC

 

192

Loyola Chicago

101.2

258

102.0

136

0.4780

8th in MVC

 

193

UNC Asheville

102.3

229

103.2

164

0.4770

2nd in BSth

 

194

Cal Poly

106.3

141

107.3

253

0.4731

4th in BW

 

195

UTEP

103.2

210

104.2

199

0.4714

8th in CUSA

 

196

Cal St. Northridge

103.2

212

104.3

200

0.4694

5th in BW

 

197

Fairfield

104.8

174

106.0

239

0.4684

6th in MAAC

 

198

Bowling Green

102.7

221

103.9

187

0.4680

11th in MAC

 

199

Murray St.

103.3

207

104.4

202

0.4679

4th in OVC

 

200

Louisiana Lafayette

104.8

171

106.1

240

0.4661

6th in SB

 

201

Furman

103.5

199

104.8

209

0.4650

6th in SC

 

202

Air Force

103.5

200

104.8

207

0.4649

10th in MWC

 

203

Drake

108.1

105

109.5

297

0.4635

9th in MVC

 

204

Georgia Tech

101.3

255

102.7

150

0.4614

14th in ACC

 

205

Rice

108.0

106

109.6

301

0.4580

9th in CUSA

 

206

Oral Roberts

104.0

188

105.9

236

0.4500

7th in Sum

 

207

Texas A&M CC

102.3

231

104.1

196

0.4483

3rd in Slnd

 

208

Tulane

101.0

261

102.9

160

0.4463

10th in Amer

 

209

Duquesne

104.8

172

106.8

247

0.4458

13th in A10

 

210

Columbia

104.6

178

106.6

245

0.4453

4th in Ivy

 

211

North Dakota

101.8

245

103.8

182

0.4445

3rd in BSky

 

212

NJIT

101.5

249

103.6

180

0.4410

2nd in ASun

 

213

Boston College

97.8

309

99.9

96

0.4383

15th in ACC

 

214

Dartmouth

102.5

223

104.8

211

0.4365

5th in Ivy

 

215

Penn

104.8

173

107.3

256

0.4325

6th in Ivy

 

216

Loyola Marymount

103.1

214

105.7

232

0.4292

7th in WCC

 

217

North Florida

109.0

89

111.8

329

0.4281

3rd in ASun

 

218

Detroit

106.4

137

109.1

290

0.4279

4th in Horz

 

219

Saint Louis

99.5

286

102.3

144

0.4207

14th in A10

 

220

South Alabama

100.9

265

103.8

185

0.4191

7th in SB

 

221

Youngstown St.

106.5

135

109.6

300

0.4180

5th in Horz

 

222

Wright St.

98.1

303

101.0

114

0.4171

6th in Horz

 

223

Cornell

100.5

273

103.6

179

0.4147

7th in Ivy

 

224

Rutgers

100.9

266

104.0

191

0.4138

14th in B10

 

225

Troy

102.3

230

105.5

223

0.4130

8th in SB

 

226

UC Riverside

101.7

247

104.8

212

0.4123

6th in BW

 

227

Manhattan

100.7

270

103.9

186

0.4109

7th in MAAC

 

228

Portland

105.7

149

109.1

288

0.4093

8th in WCC

 

229

Northern Kentucky

102.2

235

105.5

227

0.4082

7th in Horz

 

230

Hawaii

99.5

288

102.8

152

0.4075

7th in BW

 

231

Idaho

103.0

218

106.4

243

0.4058

4th in BSky

 

232

South Florida

102.2

236

105.7

229

0.4044

11th in Amer

 

233

UMKC

105.6

154

109.3

293

0.4022

4th in WAC

 

234

South Dakota

104.7

177

108.4

272

0.4011

8th in Sum

 

235

Western Illinois

100.1

277

103.7

181

0.4010

9th in Sum

 

236

Jacksonville

105.3

161

109.1

287

0.4003

4th in ASun

 

237

Eastern Illinois

103.4

204

107.2

250

0.3988

5th in OVC

 

238

Texas Southern

104.5

181

108.5

274

0.3936

1st in SWAC

Play In

239

Stetson

106.5

133

110.8

320

0.3879

5th in ASun

 

240

Lipscomb

103.9

194

108.1

266

0.3878

6th in ASun

 

241

Samford

103.9

195

108.2

269

0.3852

7th in SC

 

242

Austin Peay

105.0

167

109.5

295

0.3832

6th in OVC

 

243

Fairleigh Dickinson

107.3

119

111.9

330

0.3821

2nd in NEC

 

244

Tennessee Tech

106.0

145

110.7

318

0.3766

7th in OVC

 

245

Texas St.

97.2

317

101.7

130

0.3711

9th in SB

 

246

Idaho St.

103.4

205

108.4

270

0.3682

5th in BSky

 

247

Gardner Webb

100.9

264

105.8

235

0.3671

3rd in BSth

 

248

Norfolk St.

102.1

237

107.2

249

0.3648

1st in MEAC

Play In

249

Navy

99.9

283

105.0

215

0.3607

5th in Pat

 

250

Cal St. Fullerton

102.3

228

107.6

263

0.3588

8th in BW

 

The three weakest major-conference teams fall into this tier, with Georgia Tech at No. 204, Boston College at 213 and Rutgers at 224. This is the second straight season the Scarlet Knights have had the weakest major-conference projection, but things are looking up: In 2015–16 we projected them to finish 288th (and they finished 291st). At No. 248 is the NCAA tournament team with the weakest projection: Norfolk State, which is the favorite to win the MEAC and appear in the First Four in Dayton.

Rank

Team

Proj. Off. Eff.

Off. Rank

Proj. Def. Eff.

Def. Rank

Proj. Pyth. Win%

Proj. Conf. Rank

Proj. NCAAs seed

251

Eastern Kentucky

104.2

184

109.7

302

0.3582

8th in OVC

 

252

UC Davis

97.7

311

102.9

155

0.3559

9th in BW

 

253

Eastern Washington

107.3

120

113.0

337

0.3549

6th in BSky

 

254

Miami OH

97.6

313

102.9

159

0.3529

12th in MAC

 

255

North Texas

103.2

208

109.0

282

0.3496

10th in CUSA

 

256

San Francisco

103.1

216

109.2

291

0.3406

9th in WCC

 

257

High Point

103.1

213

109.3

294

0.3401

4th in BSth

 

258

Utah Valley

101.8

243

108.4

271

0.3285

5th in WAC

 

259

Louisiana Monroe

98.1

304

104.5

203

0.3269

10th in SB

 

260

FIU

100.9

263

107.5

261

0.3268

11th in CUSA

 

261

Canisius

105.6

152

112.5

336

0.3260

8th in MAAC

 

262

Western Carolina

99.4

289

105.9

238

0.3260

8th in SC

 

263

Montana St.

103.4

202

110.2

311

0.3248

7th in BSky

 

264

Cleveland St.

95.6

326

101.9

133

0.3246

8th in Horz

 

265

Kennesaw St.

100.9

262

107.6

262

0.3235

7th in ASun

 

266

Brown

102.7

220

109.5

299

0.3231

8th in Ivy

 

267

Southern Miss

100.1

278

106.9

248

0.3207

12th in CUSA

 

268

USC Upstate

103.7

198

110.8

319

0.3195

8th in ASun

 

269

Quinnipiac

96.6

319

103.3

171

0.3163

9th in MAAC

 

270

San Jose St.

96.4

321

103.1

162

0.3155

11th in MWC

 

271

Mount St. Mary's

95.5

327

102.3

142

0.3128

3rd in NEC

 

272

Colgate

102.4

226

109.7

304

0.3118

6th in Pat

 

273

Tennessee Martin

100.2

276

107.3

255

0.3111

9th in OVC

 

274

Liberty

101.7

246

109.0

283

0.3106

5th in BSth

 

275

Jackson St.

95.1

330

101.9

134

0.3105

2nd in SWAC

 

276

Drexel

100.1

279

107.2

252

0.3103

9th in CAA

 

277

Binghamton

94.4

334

101.2

117

0.3097

5th in AE

 

278

Charleston Southern

100.8

268

108.1

268

0.3083

6th in BSth

 

279

Florida Atlantic

98.3

302

105.4

221

0.3082

13th in CUSA

 

280

Portland St.

103.3

206

111.0

324

0.3042

8th in BSky

 

281

Appalachian St.

100.6

272

108.1

267

0.3024

11th in SB

 

282

Sacramento St.

101.4

253

109.1

286

0.3013

9th in BSky

 

283

San Diego

93.8

336

101.2

118

0.2952

10th in WCC

 

284

South Carolina St.

102.5

224

110.6

315

0.2945

2nd in MEAC

 

285

Milwaukee

100.7

269

108.7

279

0.2938

9th in Horz

 

286

Northwestern St.

105.8

146

114.3

344

0.2909

4th in Slnd

 

287

Incarnate Word

100.6

271

108.8

280

0.2901

5th in Slnd

 

288

Nicholls St.

97.5

314

105.5

224

0.2886

6th in Slnd

 

289

Lamar

101.5

250

109.9

306

0.2854

7th in Slnd

 

290

Arkansas St.

99.4

290

107.7

265

0.2834

12th in SB

 

291

Houston Baptist

101.4

252

110.0

308

0.2831

8th in Slnd

 

292

Jacksonville St.

101.3

257

109.9

305

0.2818

10th in OVC

 

293

Southern

96.6

320

104.8

210

0.2816

3rd in SWAC

 

294

Seattle

96.0

324

104.1

197

0.2814

6th in WAC

 

295

NC Central

100.0

282

108.5

275

0.2797

3rd in MEAC

 

296

Alabama St.

100.0

280

108.8

281

0.2761

4th in SWAC

 

297

VMI

98.6

295

107.3

254

0.2747

9th in SC

 

298

UMass Lowell

102.2

233

111.3

327

0.2728

6th in AE

 

299

Marist

103.0

217

112.4

335

0.2683

10th in MAAC

 

300

SE Louisiana

99.5

287

108.7

277

0.2664

9th in Slnd

 

301

Niagara

96.3

322

105.5

225

0.2579

11th in MAAC

 

302

Campbell

100.9

267

110.7

317

0.2556

7th in BSth

 

303

Howard

97.9

307

107.7

264

0.2512

4th in MEAC

 

304

Illinois Chicago

94.9

331

104.6

205

0.2457

10th in Horz

 

305

New Orleans

98.6

296

108.7

278

0.2452

10th in Slnd

 

306

American

95.5

328

105.4

220

0.2422

7th in Pat

 

307

Robert Morris

93.6

339

103.5

177

0.2391

4th in NEC

 

308

Radford

99.8

285

110.4

312

0.2389

8th in BSth

 

309

Bradley

90.8

349

100.5

105

0.2387

10th in MVC

 

310

Savannah St.

91.4

346

101.2

116

0.2369

5th in MEAC

 

311

Sacred Heart

98.4

298

109.2

292

0.2318

5th in NEC

 

312

UMBC

102.2

234

113.7

340

0.2269

7th in AE

 

313

Northern Arizona

97.8

310

109.1

289

0.2208

10th in BSky

 

314

Hartford

99.0

292

110.6

316

0.2179

8th in AE

 

315

McNeese St.

101.9

242

113.8

341

0.2179

11th in Slnd

 

316

St. Francis PA

98.8

294

110.4

313

0.2171

6th in NEC

 

317

SIU Edwardsville

95.4

329

106.6

244

0.2168

11th in OVC

 

318

Hampton

92.5

344

103.4

176

0.2155

6th in MEAC

 

319

Morgan St.

95.8

325

107.2

251

0.2141

7th in MEAC

 

320

Abilene Christian

98.3

301

110.1

310

0.2125

12th in Slnd

 

321

Loyola MD

97.7

312

109.5

296

0.2120

8th in Pat

 

322

St. Francis NY

92.9

341

104.1

194

0.2116

7th in NEC

 

323

Bryant

99.0

293

111.0

325

0.2099

8th in NEC

 

324

The Citadel

102.0

240

114.5

346

0.2095

10th in SC

 

325

Longwood

98.1

305

110.1

309

0.2094

9th in BSth

 

326

Northern Colorado

99.8

284

112.1

332

0.2078

11th in BSky

 

327

LIU Brooklyn

98.4

299

111.0

322

0.1997

9th in NEC

 

328

Central Arkansas

101.3

256

114.3

345

0.1994

13th in Slnd

 

329

Bethune Cookman

99.4

291

112.2

334

0.1981

8th in MEAC

 

330

Delaware

97.9

306

111.0

323

0.1917

10th in CAA

 

331

MD Eastern Shore

98.4

300

111.6

328

0.1898

9th in MEAC

 

332

Lafayette

100.0

281

113.9

343

0.1831

9th in Pat

 

333

Southern Utah

98.4

297

113.5

339

0.1617

12th in BSky

 

334

Coppin St.

96.9

318

112.2

333

0.1558

10th in MEAC

 

335

Arkansas Pine Bluff

92.6

342

108.6

276

0.1380

5th in SWAC

 

336

Prairie View A&M

90.9

348

106.8

246

0.1353

6th in SWAC

 

337

Mississippi Valley St.

93.5

340

110.0

307

0.1337

7th in SWAC

 

338

Alabama A&M

97.8

308

115.2

350

0.1327

8th in SWAC

 

339

North Carolina A&T

97.5

315

114.9

348

0.1319

11th in MEAC

 

340

Delaware St.

94.2

335

111.1

326

0.1304

12th in MEAC

 

341

Alcorn St.

93.8

337

110.8

321

0.1276

9th in SWAC

 

342

UTSA

97.3

316

115.1

349

0.1263

14th in CUSA

 

343

Chicago St.

94.6

332

112.0

331

0.1259

7th in WAC

 

344

Army

92.2

345

109.7

303

0.1191

10th in Pat

 

345

SE Missouri St.

91.2

347

109.0

285

0.1132

12th in OVC

 

346

UTRGV

96.0

323

114.9

347

0.1125

8th in WAC

 

347

Presbyterian

94.4

333

113.2

338

0.1102

10th in BSth

 

348

Maine

93.6

338

113.9

342

0.0951

9th in AE

 

349

Grambling St.

90.0

350

109.5

298

0.0946

10th in SWAC

 

350

Central Connecticut

92.5

343

115.2

351

0.0743

10th in NEC

 

351

Florida A&M

87.4

351

109.0

284

0.0730

13th in MEAC

 

Florida A&M, which lost out on the No. 351 crown to Central Connecticut last season, is projected to win it in ‘16–17. The Rattlers had the nation’s least-efficient offense in ‘15–16, and their only double-digit scorer, Malcolm Bernard, departed on a graduate transfer to Xavier. This final group isn’t entirely lost-cause territory, though: Two teams here—Jackson State (No. 275) and South Carolina State (284)—are projected to finish second in their leagues, giving them decent odds of winning a conference tournament and earning an automatic bid to the NCAAs.