Portland
WCC · 3–1
How this rating is built
Power = w × (average margin counted + average opponent rating) + (1 − w) × preseason prior, where w = games ÷ (games + 8). After 4 games, w is 33%, so the preseason prior is 67% of this rating — mostly preseason, for now. Every game played shrinks that share.
| Part | Value | Weight | Adds |
|---|---|---|---|
| Margin counted | +25.3 avg | × 33% | +8.5 |
| Opponents faced | -21.0 avg | × 33% | -7.0 |
| Preseason prior | -7.0 | × 67% | -4.7 |
| Power | -3.2 | ||
This explains how the model reached the number. The opponent ratings come out of the same fitted model, so it is not independent proof that the rating is right.
Results
Expected is the margin the model's ratings imply for that matchup and site. Perf is how far the actual margin beat it — the result against expectation. Adds is a different question: how many points of Power the game contributes, counting its margin and the strength of the opponent together. A game can beat expectation and still add little, or the reverse. Adds, plus the preseason prior, sum to Power (figures are rounded so the column adds up). Hover an Adds figure for its arithmetic.
| Wk | Opponent | Result | Expected | Perf | Adds | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | vs | Willamette non-D1 | W 133–89 | +32.9 | +11.1 | +0.5 |
| 2 | N | UT Arlington | L 85–89 | +1.0 | -5.0 | -0.8 |
| 3 | N | Bethesda University non-D1 | W 130–56 | +30.0 | +44.0 | +0.4 |
| 3 | at | Hawai'i | W 73–66 | -4.0 | +11.0 | +1.4 |
| Preseason prior (67% of the rating) | -4.7 | |||||
| Power | -3.2 | |||||
Remaining schedule
| Wk | Opponent | Projected | Win prob | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | vs | East Texas A&M | +10.3 | 82% |
| 4 | at | Colorado | -14.6 | 9% |
| 4 | vs | Fordham | -2.2 | 42% |
| 5 | N | California Baptist | +7.1 | 74% |
| 5 | at | Stanford | -18.1 | 5% |
| 6 | at | UC Davis | +0.4 | 51% |
Season by season
Best finish: #73 in 2009–10. 22 seasons rated. The two columns' numbers are not comparable; the rank within each is. Season links open that year's game log.
Finishing rank, best at the top, on an axis running to 400 — this team's own range, not the size of the field. Two lines where both ratings cover a season - MRI 2.0 in red, Classic in grey. Hover a point for the season.
| Season | Rec | MRI 2.0 | MRI Classic |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025–26 | 15–19 | #259 of 365 · -6.82 | – |
| 2024–25 | 12–20 | #303 of 364 · -10.04 | – |
| 2023–24 | 12–21 | #300 of 362 · -8.74 | – |
| 2022–23 | 14–19 | #183 of 363 · -0.77 | – |
| 2021–22 | 19–15 | #221 of 358 · -3.26 | – |
| 2020–21 | 6–15 | #337 of 347 · -16.06 | – |
| 2019–20 | 7–22 | – | #313 of 353 · -40.38 |
| 2018–19 | 5–25 | – | #338 of 353 · -74.47 |
| 2017–18 | 10–22 | – | #311 of 351 · -32.95 |
| 2016–17 | 11–22 | – | #291 of 351 · -20.89 |
| 2015–16 | 12–20 | – | #220 of 351 · 11.67 |
| 2014–15 | 17–16 | – | #128 of 351 · 54.14 |
| 2013–14 | 15–16 | – | #119 of 351 · 60.04 |
| 2012–13 | 9–21 | – | #268 of 347 · -20.01 |
| 2011–12 | 7–24 | – | #303 of 345 · -34.47 |
| 2010–11 | 20–12 | – | #97 of 346 · 70.09 |
| 2009–10 | 21–11 | – | #73 of 335 · 86.11 |
| 2008–09 | 19–13 | – | #113 of 330 · 60.70 |
| 2007–08 | 9–22 | – | #256 of 328 · -11.08 |
| 2006–07 | 9–23 | – | #281 of 326 · -25.54 |
| 2005–06 | 11–18 | – | #280 of 326 · -16.82 |
| 2004–05 | 14–15 | – | #178 of 326 · 26.34 |