Category: March Madness (Page 10 of 56)

Looking for updated numbers? Click here.

If you’ve read my annual March Madness bracket column or if you are a stathead in general, you’ll know what the title of this post means. If you don’t, check out my column and come back.

Here are the first 36 matchups representing the First Four and the first round of the NCAA Tournament. The Sagarin advantage represents the spread in Jeff Sagarin’s predictor ratings. If the number is positive, it means that Team A is the Sagarin favorite. If the number is negative, then it means Team B (and the lower seed) is actually the favorite.

The Pomeroy % represents the chances that Team A will win the game according to Ken Pomeroy’s Pythagorean calculation.

Over the last four years, teams with a 2+ point advantage in Sagarin’s “predictor” rating have won 156 of 198 games (78.7%). Over the last two years, if a team had at least a 65% expected win rate according to Pomeroy’s Pythagorean calculation, they won 61 of 76 games (80.2%).

I’ve also included the spread for the game at the World Sports Exchange. Oftentimes the spread is very close to the Sagarin spread.

I outlined all of my picks in my annual “Need help with your March Madness bracket?” column, but I know that there are more than a few of you out there in pools that emphasize picking upsets by rewarding points based on seed, and that can change things rather significantly.

In addition to the upsets I’ve already outlined — Marquette, Richmond, Old Dominion, Utah St. and Michigan St. — here are a few more to consider:

1. In addition to Old Dominion, pick #9-seeds Tennessee and Illinois. All of the 8/9 games are toss-ups, so we might as well go for that extra point. The only #8-seed that I like a lot is George Mason, so stick with the Patriots.

2. Take all four #12-seeds. I already have Richmond and Utah St. advancing, but there’s a good chance that West Virginia (vs. Clemson?) and Arizona (vs. Memphis) fall as well. ESPN’s Giant Killers blog thinks Memphis has a good shot to upset Arizona, and the Mountaineers are only a 2.4-point Sagarin favorite over Clemson, so it’s not worth taking the favorite.

3. Take Belmont over Wisconsin. I really wanted to make this pick in my official bracket, but the Badgers’ advantage is just outside the 3+ margin needed for confident (~80%) pick. The Bruins are #18 in Pomeroy Pythagorean rating and #27 in Sagarin rating so they are much better than their seed would indicate.

4. In addition to the Spartans, take #10-seeds Florida St. and Penn St. The only #7-seed I really like to advance is Washington, which is this year’s metrics darling. The Seminoles and Nittany Lions are in pick’em games, so we might as well go with the underdogs.

5. In addition to Marquette, take #11-seeds Gonzaga and Missouri. Again, these two teams are slight underdogs, but represent a 5-point bonus, so it’s better to take the bigger seed.

Complete list of first round upsets: Clemson (assuming they beat UAB), Marquette, Tennessee, Memphis, Missouri, Penn St., Illinois, Richmond, Florida St., Old Dominion, Utah St., Belmont, Gonzaga, Michigan St.

In the second round, I’d take Washington over UNC, Georgetown over Purdue, Belmont over Utah St., Gonzaga over BYU and Michigan St. over Florida.

In the Sweet Sixteen, I’d pick Washington over Syracuse, Texas over Duke, Georgetown over Notre Dame and Michigan St. over Gonzaga. Those would be the final upsets that I’d pick in this format. I still think we have a great chance to see three or four #1 seeds in the tournament…but anything can happen. (See how I covered myself there?)

When filling out your bracket, it’s not a bad idea to start with your Final Four picks and work backwards. I looked at the last seven Final Fours to get an idea of the profile of a Final Four team and discovered the following:

25 out of 28 FF teams (89%) finished the tournament with adjusted offensive and defensive efficiencies (i.e. points per possession adjusted for strength of schedule) in the Top 30 (LSU ’06, George Mason ’06, Butler ’10). Teams currently in the Top 30 in both categories: Ohio St., Duke, Kansas, Texas, Pitt, SDSU, Kentucky, Purdue and Syracuse. Teams that could play their way into a Top 30 ranking by the end of the tournament: Louisville, BYU, North Carolina, UConn, Belmont, Illinois, West Virginia.

24 of 28 FF teams (86%) finished the tournament with a Pythagorean win ranking in the Top 10 (#23 George Mason ’06, #14 Villanova ’09, #12 Butler ’10, #23 Michigan State ’10). Teams currently in the Top 10: Ohio St., Duke, Kansas, Texas, Pittsburgh, SDSU, Kentucky, Purdue, Wisconsin and Notre Dame. Teams that could play their way into the Top 10: Syracuse, Louisville, BYU, North Carolina, Washington, Utah St., UConn, Belmont and Florida.

23 of 28 FF teams (82%) were elite (in Top 7) in either offensive or defensive efficiency (George Mason ’06, Michigan State ’09, Villanova ’09, West Virginia ’10, Michigan State ’10). Teams currently in the Top 7 in either category: Ohio St., Duke, Kansas, Texas, Pitt, SDSU, Kentucky, Wisconsin, Notre Dame, Louisville, North Carolina and Utah St. Teams that could play their way into the Top 7: BYU, Washington, Clemson and Purdue.

Teams currently on all three lists: Ohio St., Duke, Kansas, Texas, Pitt, SDSU and Kentucky.

Teams that could play themselves onto all three lists: Purdue, BYU, Louisville and North Carolina.

When picking your Final Four teams, it would be wise to stick to these 11 teams. Moreover, five of the last seven overall winners were Top 5 in both offensive and defensive efficiency, while the other two were #1 in offensive efficiency. Only Ohio St. and Duke currently qualify for “overall winner status.” Kansas is #4 in offensive efficiency and #12 in defensive efficiency, so they could potentially play their way into Top 5 status in both categories (or the #1 overall offensive efficiency). Pittsburgh, Wisconsin, Notre Dame and Kentucky round out the Top 7 in offensive efficiency. In other words, you shouldn’t pick an overall winner that isn’t listed here.

Want to see who I picked?