You may recall a post I made way back in the beginning of 2013 where I examined how NCAA Tournament upsets happen. In the interest of keeping this post relatively short, please at least skim that one.
As you saw when you skimmed the previous version, there is a list of “upsets” in the last five years that is the basis for our exercise here. Even though there are situations (11) Minnesota -3 vs (6) UCLA, I’m defining an upset as a 6-seed or better losing in the Round of 64 or losing to a team seeded 7th or worse in the Round of 32. Here are the upsets from the last five years: Find out who the upset candidates are
One of my favorite topics of discussion in college hoops is what matters when evaluating a team. Is it the RPI? As you’ll see at the bottom of this post, I believe it’s not, while others believe it is. Is it advanced metrics like KenPom.com? Is it the strength of certain wins, or the weakness of certain losses? I’ll give you all the information and let you be the judge, but without the “brand names,” the results may surprise you.
To find out which teams are which, click here to open the answers in another window (but be sure you come back and read the rest).
So I was racking my brain on what my first post of the New Year, first post in a week’s time, and first college hoop-only post (as a Steelers fan, my NFL season is over; but I will roll out some NFL playoff predictions tomorrow). This post fits all of those three things and shouldn’t disappoint. With college hoop, few watch the beginning, but everyone watches the end. So the end is where we’ll begin. Confused yet?
I was reading Matt Norlander‘s every-morning post – the Wakeup Call - today and was guided to Luke Winn‘s fantastic Power Rankings column today, where I found something interesting in the Notre Dame section. Luke’s write-up for the Irish referenced KenPom.com rankings for Offensive Efficiency (OE) and Defensive Efficiency (DE). In the interest of word count, I’ll summarize:
On Friday, Seth Davis wrote an article which had content based on various conversations he had with two coaches – head coaches or assistants – from each of the six power conferences (although including the “Whack-12″ in that phrase is a mighty big stretch this season). Davis granted the coaches full anonymity to foster an environment where they’d be as honest as possible in their reports on each team. Davis centered much of his questioning around the problems or shortcomings of each team.
Reading the article got me thinking. Do the actual numbers back up the intuitions and observations from the coaches? Let’s go to our favorite treasure trove of statistics – KenPom.com – for analysis. For the sake of your time (and mine), I won’t copy the entire paragraph on each team, and we’ll only examine the teams I feel are Elite Eight (or beyond) contenders. Yesterday, we previewed Elite Eight-caliber teams from three conferences. Today, we’ll preview three more.
Today, we’ll lead off with the league from which I will highlight the most teams – the B1G.
Indiana: They have a lot of mistake makers and I don’t think they defend…they shoot the ball well from the three.
The Hoosiers are perhaps this year’s most surprising team. In terms of mistake-makers, they’re 104th as a team in Turnover % Offense. They don’t defend as well as the play offense, but they’re a respectable 44th in Adjusted Defensive Efficiency. As for shooting it well from three, that’s an understatement. The Hoosiers are 2nd nationally in Three Point Field Goal Percentage Offense.