🐻⬇️🏀

Indiana Fever

Season: 2026 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017
Also known as: Indiana Fever
Program History

2004 Team Stats (29 games)

64.8
PPG
65.7
Opp
-0.8
Margin
39.6%
FG%
35.3%
3P%
78.6%
FT%
32.2
RPG
16.6
APG
13.9
TO
68.6
Est. poss./game
62.8
Adj PPG
64.5
Adj Opp PPG
#10
Scoring Rank

Model Outputs

2004
Catalog

Output is shown as model rating with league rank in parentheses when available.

Model Output Notes
Elo Elo Streaming paired-comparison rating with recency baked into sequential updates. More → 861 (#12) -
Bradley-Terry Bradley-Terry Static logistic paired-comparison model with one team strength parameter. More → 962 (#11) -
Bradley-Terry Recency Bradley-Terry Recency Static Bradley-Terry with exponential recency weights on newer games. HCA +105 elo More → 952 (#11) HCA +105 elo
Margin Margin Linear team-strength model fit on point differential instead of binary wins. HCA +3.2 More → -1.7 (#10) HCA +3.2
Margin Recency Margin Recency Margin regression with exponential recency weights on newer games. HCA +3.6 More → -1.8 (#9) HCA +3.6
Pythagorean Pythagorean Pythagorean win expectation from raw points scored and allowed. More → 0.439 (#10) -
Adjusted Efficiency Adjusted Efficiency Opponent-adjusted efficiency model with separate offensive and defensive components. AdjNet -2.7 More → 0.424 (#10) AdjNet -2.7
Log Adjusted Log Adjusted Log-scale adjusted efficiency model that downweights blowout leverage. AdjNet -2.7 More → 0.423 (#11) AdjNet -2.7
Points Off/Def Points Off/Def Raw points regression with separate offensive and defensive team parameters. AdjO 62.8 | AdjD 64.5 More → 0.462 (#10) AdjO 62.8 | AdjD 64.5
Points Off/Def Recency Points Off/Def Recency Off/def points regression with exponential recency weights. AdjO 64.1 | AdjD 65.7 More → 0.465 (#9) AdjO 64.1 | AdjD 65.7
Core Ensemble Core Ensemble Equal-logit blend of Elo, recency BT, recency margin, log-adjusted pyth, and points off/def. Blend of Elo, BT, Margin, PythLog, PtsOD More → 0.411 (#11) Blend of Elo, BT, Margin, PythLog, PtsOD
Recency Ensemble Recency Ensemble Equal-logit blend of Elo, recency BT, recency margin, log-adjusted pyth, and recency points off/def. Blend of Elo, BT, Margin, PythLog, PtsOD More → 0.412 (#10) Blend of Elo, BT, Margin, PythLog, PtsOD
Dynamic Bradley-Terry Dynamic Bradley-Terry Time-evolving paired-comparison model with latent team strength drift. RD 143 | GP 34 More → 907 (#11) RD 143 | GP 34

2004 Schedule & Results

Date Vs/At Opponent Result Score
2004-05-21 vs New York Liberty - Incomplete score
2004-06-01 @ Las Vegas Aces W 79 - 60
2004-06-05 vs Charlotte W 70 - 57
2004-06-09 vs Dallas Wings - Incomplete score
2004-06-11 @ New York Liberty W 72 - 68
2004-06-12 @ Dallas Wings L 67 - 72
2004-06-16 vs Sacramento Monarchs W 63 - 50
2004-06-19 vs New York Liberty W 70 - 65
2004-06-22 vs Connecticut Sun L 58 - 63
2004-06-25 vs Los Angeles Sparks W 71 - 67
2004-06-26 @ Charlotte L 37 - 46
2004-06-29 @ Dallas Wings W 69 - 68
2004-07-01 @ Washington Mystics L 64 - 69
2004-07-03 vs Phoenix Mercury - Incomplete score
2004-07-06 @ Connecticut Sun L 77 - 79
2004-07-08 vs Minnesota Lynx W 58 - 56
2004-07-11 vs Connecticut Sun L 61 - 65
2004-07-14 vs Houston Comets W 70 - 62
2004-07-16 vs Dallas Wings W 85 - 73
2004-07-19 @ Los Angeles Sparks L 51 - 82
2004-07-22 @ Seattle Storm L 54 - 59
2004-07-24 @ Phoenix Mercury L 56 - 71
2004-07-25 @ Sacramento Monarchs L 62 - 71
2004-07-28 vs Charlotte L 53 - 63
2004-07-31 @ Houston Comets L 54 - 62
2004-09-01 @ Washington Mystics W 75 - 58
2004-09-03 @ Minnesota Lynx W 69 - 61
2004-09-04 vs Washington Mystics W 69 - 42
2004-09-10 vs Las Vegas Aces L 65 - 82
2004-09-13 vs Seattle Storm L 70 - 76
2004-09-16 @ New York Liberty L 71 - 77
2004-09-19 @ Connecticut Sun L 60 - 80

2004 Roster

Counting stats use played regular-season games. PM and RAPM use their separate model samples; PM GP shows that sample's game count.

Minutes by Position

The surface stays filled across the five on-court roles. Use the labels or legend to isolate how each player absorbs guard-to-big minutes.

Player Pos GP MIN PTS REB AST STL BLK TO FGA Numbers PM PM GP PM/G PM/40 FG% 3P% FT% RAPM TS% eFG%
Tamika Catchings G 29 33.8 16.9 7.2 3.3 2.0 0.9 2.2 13.7 14.4 11 34 0.3 0.5 38.4 33.3 85.6 0.18 52.3 44.3
Natalie Williams C 29 28.5 10.6 6.8 1.7 1.1 0.7 2.0 8.7 10.2 -2 34 -0.1 -0.1 46.4 0.0 72.3 -0.16 51.8 46.4
Kelly Miller G 29 32.2 10.1 3.2 3.2 1.0 0.2 2.2 9.5 6.0 48 34 1.4 2.2 38.2 43.8 89.1 0.85 49.6 45.8
Kelly Schumacher F 27 19.7 7.4 3.3 0.9 0.3 1.0 1.7 6.3 5.0 55 32 1.7 3.3 47.9 45.5 76.7 0.66 53.2 49.4
Deanna Jackson G 29 23.0 6.6 3.0 1.8 0.7 0.2 1.5 7.1 3.6 21 34 0.6 1.4 37.2 0.0 73.1 0.36 41.8 37.2
Stephanie White G 20 20.6 4.3 1.4 2.5 1.2 0.1 1.4 3.2 4.9 56 22 2.5 5.9 40.0 33.3 71.9 0.41 55.0 49.2
Kristen Rasmussen F 28 20.0 4.3 3.3 1.3 0.6 0.3 1.0 3.8 5.1 32 33 1.0 1.6 41.9 40.0 80.6 0.59 51.0 45.7
Coretta Brown - 22 15.6 3.9 1.5 1.6 0.3 0.0 1.2 4.3 1.8 -22 26 -0.8 -1.9 33.0 35.4 50.0 0.22 42.8 42.0
Niele Ivey G 13 12.7 2.6 0.7 1.3 0.3 0.2 0.5 2.7 1.9 84 15 5.6 15.7 31.4 34.8 66.7 1.5 45.2 42.9
Ebony Hoffman F 26 11.4 2.1 2.9 0.7 0.5 0.2 1.0 2.8 2.6 -33 30 -1.1 -4.7 32.4 29.4 100.0 0.1 36.7 35.8
Astou Ndiaye-Diatta - 10 7.6 1.2 1.1 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.8 1.9 0.4 25 10 2.5 8.7 26.3 0 50.0 0.22 28.9 26.3
Kate Starbird - 8 6.9 0.5 1.0 0.4 0.6 0.0 0.2 1.5 0.8 55 12 4.6 14.8 8.3 0.0 100.0 0.84 15.5 8.3

Numbers/Game vs RAPM

X-axis = Numbers/Game (PTS+REB+AST+STL+BLK-TO-FGA), Y-axis = RAPM.

Advanced: Numbers = PTS+REB+AST+STL+BLK-TO-FGA, PM = total +/-, PM/G = per game, PM/40 = per 40 minutes, RAPM = Regularized Adj Plus-Minus, TS% = True Shooting, eFG% = Effective FG

2004 Shot Zones

1999 located field-goal attempts in 34 games (ESPN). Each zone is coloured by the player with the largest share of the team's made-shot points there (left) and of its misses there (right).

Williams28% Schumacher19% Catchings23% Miller25% Rasmussen26% Miller45% Catchings71% Miller34% Miller31% Catchings34%
Points: who the team's points here most likely come from
Williams28% Jackson21% Catchings26% Catchings24% Catchings22% Miller31% Catchings55% Catchings34% Catchings44% Catchings30%
Misses: who misses most here

Tamika CatchingsKelly MillerNatalie WilliamsKelly SchumacherDeanna JacksonKristen Rasmussen

Zone FGM-FGA FG% Pts Top scorer Runner-up Most misses Runner-up
Restricted area 332-644 51.6 664 Natalie Williams 28% (188 pts) Tamika Catchings 21% (138 pts) Natalie Williams 28% (86 misses) Tamika Catchings 18% (57 misses)
Paint (non-RA) 113-338 33.4 226 Kelly Schumacher 19% (44 pts) Natalie Williams 19% (44 pts) Deanna Jackson 21% (47 misses) Natalie Williams 19% (42 misses)
Mid-range left 73-227 32.2 146 Tamika Catchings 23% (34 pts) Kelly Miller 21% (30 pts) Tamika Catchings 26% (40 misses) Kelly Miller 19% (30 misses)
Mid-range center 32-81 39.5 64 Kelly Miller 25% (16 pts) Tamika Catchings 25% (16 pts) Tamika Catchings 24% (12 misses) Kelly Miller 22% (11 misses)
Mid-range right 70-230 30.4 140 Kristen Rasmussen 26% (36 pts) Kelly Schumacher 16% (22 pts) Tamika Catchings 22% (36 misses) Kelly Miller 18% (28 misses)
Left corner 3 20-52 38.5 60 Kelly Miller 45% (27 pts) Tamika Catchings 20% (12 pts) Kelly Miller 31% (10 misses) Tamika Catchings 28% (9 misses)
Right corner 3 7-29 24.1 21 Tamika Catchings 71% (15 pts) Coretta Brown 14% (3 pts) Tamika Catchings 55% (12 misses) Stephanie White 14% (3 misses)
Above-break 3 left 47-142 33.1 141 Kelly Miller 34% (48 pts) Tamika Catchings 34% (48 pts) Tamika Catchings 34% (32 misses) Kelly Miller 22% (21 misses)
Above-break 3 center 36-99 36.4 108 Kelly Miller 31% (33 pts) Tamika Catchings 31% (33 pts) Tamika Catchings 44% (28 misses) Kelly Miller 24% (15 misses)
Above-break 3 right 56-157 35.7 168 Tamika Catchings 34% (57 pts) Kelly Miller 20% (33 pts) Tamika Catchings 30% (30 misses) Kelly Miller 17% (17 misses)