Last week, I discussed what I thought
were the most vital statistics the NCAA tournament teams who advanced to the
Final Four possessed. The
historical averages for the last 40 Final Four teams were:
FG%;
47.7
Defensive FG%:
40.1
Rebound Margin:
+5.8
Turnover Margin:
+1.8
Rebound + Turnover Margin (R+T):
7.6
Scoring Margin:
13.3
Conference Strength: ACC, Big East
(includes former C-USA teams now in the Big East), Big 10, Big 12, SEC, PAC-10
I mentioned the teams that looked to
best fit the criteria. With the
field reduced to 16, exactly half of the remaining field possesses statistical
averages in the ball park of the standards I put forth in my hypothesis. Connecticut, Texas,
Florida, Washington, Memphis,
Boston
College, LSU, and UCLA are
still alive. Four teams, including
two number one seeds (Duke, Villanova, West
Virginia, and Gonzaga) are still alive even though they
do not meet the statistical expectations.
The remaining four teams (Bradley, George Mason, Wichita State, and Georgetown) fall in a gray area; they meet
several, but not all of the criteria or come from a mid-major conference. The last mid-majors to make the Final
Four were Penn and Indiana State in 1979. Indiana State fell in the category of mid-major
but top 5 team, just like Gonzaga this year.
Note: The Missouri Valley Conference is on the precipice of
becoming a Major conference once again.
Going back 40 to 60 years ago, this conference produced NCAA and NIT
champions as often as the ACC and Big 10.
MVC members Cincinnati and Bradley used to
be on par with today’s Connecticut and Villanova. Louisville, Drake, and Wichita State all advanced to the Final Four as
members of this league.
Indiana State and Memphis State made it to the championship game as
MVC members.
I am going to add one more statistic
to the hypothesis this week.
Average steals per game is an important stat to determine how much weight
to give to turnover margin. If a
team forces turnovers by picking off the ball, it gives more weight to those
turnovers forced. A steal holds
more weight than any other turnover or a defensive rebound. Steals are converted into a higher
percentage of points on average.
Defenses do not have the time to respond to this type of transition;
frequently the offense has a head start on its journey to the basket and almost
always has numbers or an even-numbered break opportunity following a
steal.
The magic numbers here are 10 and
7.5. A team that averages 10 steals
per game is in rarified air. A team
that averages at least 7.5 steal per game is one to worry about. Combine 7.5 steals with an R+T of at
least 7.5 as well, and you have a team that is 10 points better than opponents
with an R+T of 0 before any other
stat is involved. Those numbers
equate to five to 10 extra shots per game.
Today, I am going to break down the
numbers for each of the eight games to be played Thursday and Friday and the
expected four games on Saturday and Sunday.
Atlanta Region
Duke vs. LSU
FG%: Duke .494 to .430 for a difference of
6.4%
L S U .472 to .406 for a difference of
6.6%
Rebounds: Duke -2.7 LSU
+8.8
Turnovers: Duke +2.5 LSU
-0.7
R+T:
Duke -0.2
LSU
+8.1
Steals:
Duke 9.4 LSU 8.3
Scoring:
Duke +13.6 LSU +10.0
SOS:
Both teams come from historical Final Four
conferences
Duke has one of the toughest SOS’s in
the nation
LSU has an excellent but less impressive SOS than
Duke
Prediction: LSU is primed for the upset here if they do not
commit 18 or more turnovers and allow Duke to score easy baskets off
steals. The Blue Devils should find
themselves out-muscled in the paint.
Glen Davis and Tyrus Thomas should score enough on put backs to provide
the decisive margin. Shelden Williams and Josh McRoberts will not be able to
stop the two large Tiger stars.
J.J. Redick may score 20+ points in
this game, but I believe he will find the going tougher than he has in Duke’s
first two tournament games. He
could put up an 8 for 22 effort.
Darrel Mitchell and Garrett Temple have the quickness and the muscle to
contain Redick just enough to force Greg Paulus and Sean Dockery to contribute
25 combined points just to stay in the game.
In an upset, I pick LSU to win by 4 to 8
points.
West Virginia vs.
Texas
FG%:
West
Virginia
.445 to .448 for a difference of -0.3%
Texas
.466 to .381 for a difference of 8.5%
Rebounds: West Virginia -9.4 Texas +10.3
Turnovers: West
Virginia +7.2 Texas
+0.6
R+T:
West Virginia -2.2 Texas +10.9
Steals:
West Virginia 8.2 Texas 8.0
Scoring:
West Virginia 7.6 Texas 15.9
SOS:
Both teams come from historical Final Four
conferences
West Virginia clearly has a tougher SOS
than Texas
Prediction: I smell a blowout here. West Virginia will have to shoot lights out
from behind the arc and get to the foul line enough to score about 10 more
points there. I just don’t see it
happening. Texas is clearly better
by leaps and bounds and should dominate this game. LaMarcus Aldridge, P. J. Tucker, and
Brad Buckman are just too big and strong for the Mountaineers. The Longhorn frontcourt trio is quick
enough to contain Kevin Pittsnogle, Mike Gansey, and Frank Young. The backcourt isn’t as big of a
mismatch, but the ‘Horns have the advantage here as well. I think turnovers will be close to even,
while Texas
controls the boards by a large number, maybe as much as
15.
This all adds up to a huge win for
the Longhorns—the type that allows Coach Rick Barnes to give his starters a
little rest prior to Saturday’s Region Final.
I pick Texas to win by 15 to 22
points.
Region Final: Texas over LSU by 7 to 10
points.
Oakland Region
Memphis vs.
Bradley
FG%: Memphis .453 to .382 for
a difference of 7.1%
Bradley
.442 to .400 for a difference of 4.2%
Rebounds: Memphis +6.7
Bradley +3.2
Turnovers: Memphis +2.3 Bradley
+1.7
R+T:
Memphis
+9.0 Bradley
+4.9
Steals:
Memphis
+9.8 Bradley +9.1
Scoring:
Memphis
+15.1 Bradley +7.1
SOS:
Neither team comes from historical Final Four
conferences
Memphis qualifies based on their top 5
ranking
Bradley actually has a much better
SOS than Memphis
Prediction: This game may be interesting, at least for a
while. Bradley has the talent to
challenge for a Final Four berth if the ball bounces just right for them. The Braves have a credible inside game
with big Patrick O’Bryant and Marcellus Sommerville.
The problem is the Braves may be
quick enough and strong enough to contend with most NCAA-caliber teams, but they
don’t have the overall quickness and other abilities to do so with a Memphis squad if the
Tigers plays up to normal standards.
Rodney Carney and Darius Washington
are more athletic than the Braves can handle. Eventually, the Tigers will assume
control of this game and win going away.
Don’t overlook the Memphis defense. When you hold opponents to 38.2%
shooting, you are one of the best.
This Tiger team can win the national title if they bring their “A” game
four more times. If not, they may
only advance one more round.
I pick Memphis to win by 12 to 16
points.
Gonzaga vs. UCLA
FG%: Gonzaga .478 to .433 for
a difference of 4.5%
UCLA
.483 to .418 for a difference of 6.5%
Rebounds: Gonzaga +3.6
UCLA
+4.9
Turnovers: Gonzaga +0.5 UCLA -0.2
R+T:
Gonzaga +4.1 UCLA
+4.7
Steals:
Gonzaga +7.2 UCLA +5.8
Scoring:
Gonzaga +7.6
UCLA
+10.0
SOS:
UCLA comes from a historical Final Four
conference
Gonzaga qualifies based on their top 5
rating
UCLA has a somewhat stronger SOS
Prediction:
Neither team has a
commanding advantage over the other team, so this should be a close ball
game. Adam Morrison has the flu,
and as a diabetic, there can always be complications with the immune
system. It is unsure how much he
will be able to contribute; some players actually play better with a slight
fever, while some players have difficulty putting on their shoes when they are
sick.
Even if Morrison is near full
strength, I expect him to struggle against the Bruin defense. Jordan Farmar and Arron Afflalo get so
much publicity about their offensive skills, their excellent defensive skills
often get overlooked. The Uclan
backcourt can slow the national scoring leader and keep him under 20
points.
Where Gonzaga has the advantage is in
the low post. J. P. Batista can
score 20 points and pull down 10 rebounds against any other post player. He can do it so efficiently, that
opponents, commentators, and fans don’t realize he has hit five quick baskets in
five to eight minutes of action.
Bruin center Ryan Hollins will have his hands
full.
Where I think UCLA will win this game
is on the offensive end. The Bruin
guards can penetrate the Gonzaga defense and either score, dish to open
teammates, or draw fouls. Gonzaga
doesn’t have a defensive answer for Farmar and
Afflalo.
I pick UCLA to win by 8 to 12 points.
Region Final: Memphis edges UCLA by 2 to 5
points.
Washington, D.C. Region
Connecticut vs.
Washington
FG%: UConn .472 to .378 for a difference of
9.4%
Washington .472 to .433 for a difference of
3.9%
Rebounds: UConn +10.1
Washington +6.3
Turnovers: UConn -0.4
Washington
+3.0
R+T:
UConn +9.7
Washington
+9.3
Steals:
UConn +6.6
Washington +7.9
Scoring:
UConn +15.4
Washington +12.7
SOS:
Both teams come from historical Final Four
conferences
UConn has a considerably stronger SOS
Prediction: For my money, this is the most exciting match up
in the Sweet 16 round. The winner
of this game will be a huge favorite to make it to the Final Four on
Saturday. Both teams have the
talent and statistics to cut down the nets in Indianapolis.
Connecticut has not played up to their standards since the
end of the regular season victory over Villanova. They looked lackluster in wins over
South Florida and Louisville in the Big East
Tournament, and they looked more like the number six seed in wins over Albany and Kentucky to advance to this point. If Connecticut doesn’t play the way they are capable of
playing, Washington will send them back to
Storrs.
The Pac-10 Huskies are more than just
all-American guard Brandon Roy.
Washington has excellent sixth and seventh men
in forward Jamaal Williams and guard Ryan
Appleby.
The Big East Huskies have the top mix
of talent in the Big Dance. Forward
Rudy Gay is the Roberto Clemente of college basketball. He isn’t the best at any one facet of
the game, but he is among the top 10 in all of them. Forward Josh Boone compliments Gay
well. With Rashad Anderson coming
off the bench, UConn probably has the best sixth man left in the
tournament.
So, the 64,000 dollar question is,
“Will UConn return to their regular season form?” If the answer is “yes,” then we know who
the national champion will be. If
the answer is “no,” then warm up the plane for a return trip to The Constitution
State. It’s anybody’s guess, but I
sense that UConn lays another egg and gets beat.
I pick Washington to pull off the upset by 3 to 5
points.
George Mason vs. Wichita State
FG%: GMU
.484 to .386 for a difference of 9.8%
Wichita St. .445 to .401 for a difference
of 4.4%
Rebounds: GMU +2.9 Wichita
St.
+5.5
Turnovers: GMU +0.7 Wichita
St.
-0.6
R+T:
GMU +3.6 Wichita
St.
+4.9
Steals:
GMU +7.2 Wichita
St.
+5.3
Scoring:
GMU +10.4 Wichita St. +7.8
SOS:
Neither team comes from historical Final Four
conferences
Neither team qualifies based on ranking
Wichita
State has a slight SOS
advantage
Prediction:
So, you missed the Bracket
Buster a month ago, hmm? Well,
here’s your chance to see it again.
This time, the Colonials get a tiny bit of home team advantage. GMU won at Wichita in February’s
Bracket Buster, and that is more than likely why they earned an at-large ticket
to the dance.
When you look at the statistical
data, GMU looks like a team capable of getting to the Elite Eight. They are clearly a better team than the
Kent
State team that made its
way to the Elite Eight a few years back and made a household name of Coach Stan
Heath.
GMU’s defense is interesting to
watch. Coach Jim Larranaga is one
of the foremost advocates of the scramble defense. The Colonials can trap out of their
half-court man-to-man as well as any other team. It frequently takes opponents out of
their normal offense and can disrupt most disciplined
teams.
Wichita State has had a chance to face GMU’s scramble defense,
so the Shockers should be better prepared to attack it and get the ball inside
to Paul Miller, P.J. Couisnard, and Kyle Wilson. Guard Matt Braeur has the passing skills
to render most traps useless.
The only thing keeping me from taking
Wichita
State in the rematch is the
fact that GMU will be playing less than 30 miles from home. Give GMU about three points for home
team advantage.
I pick George Mason to win in a squeaker reminiscent of their previous
battle with Wichita State.
Region Final: Washington over George Mason by 6 to 10
points.
Note: If Connecticut returns to form, they waltz to the
Final Four with two double-digit wins.
I just have a gut feeling they will continue to play sub-standard
ball.
Minneapolis Region
Villanova vs. Boston College
FG%: Nova .426 to .420 for a difference of
0.6%
B C .485 to .429 for a
difference of 5.6%
Rebounds: Nova +1.5 B C +3.8
Turnovers: Nova +4.4 B C +0.2
R+T:
Nova +5.9 B C +4.0
Steals:
Nova +7.7 B C +6.2
Scoring:
Nova +11.4 B C
+8.3
SOS:
Both teams come from historical Final Four
conferences
Villanova has a much stronger SOS
Prediction:
I thought Villanova would
be the first number one seed to be sent packing, but the Wildcats survived a
tough game with Arizona.
The Wildcats may survive for yet another round Friday night, because I
don’t think Boston
College has the horses to
match ‘Nova man for man.
Three of the four Villanova guards
(Allan Ray, Randy Foye, and Mike Nardi) can knock down the long-range jumper and
penetrate to the hoop. All four
(add Kyle Lowry to the group) are deadly at the foul line.
Boston College has the inside power to counter the Villanova
attack. Forwards Craig Smith and
Jared Dudley are both multi-skilled big men who can dominate a game inside and
step outside and hit the jumper.
The Eagles can win by successfully isolating the tandem inside and
letting them score against smaller defenders.
Where Villanova has a huge advantage
is in overall speed and quickness.
The smaller Wildcats may be quick enough to keep the ball away from the
low post and force enough turnovers to enjoy a large advantage in fast break
points and points off turnovers. I
think ‘Nova survives for one more round.
I pick Villanova to win by 5 to 8
points.
Florida vs.
Georgetown
FG%: Florida
.508 to .405 for a difference of 10.3%
Georgetown
.471 to .420 for a difference of 5.1%
Rebounds: Florida +3.5
Georgetown +3.9
Turnovers: Florida +1.6
Georgetown +0.6
R+T:
Florida +5.1
Georgetown +4.5
Steals:
Florida +8.0
Georgetown +6.0
Scoring:
Florida +15.0
Georgetown +7.4
SOS:
Both teams come from historical Final Four
conferences
Georgetown has a considerably stronger
SOS
Prediction:
Florida has looked as good as anybody in their current
seven game winning streak. The
Gators are good on both sides of the ball.
Florida has the look of a Final Four team and possible
National Title contender, but they have an Achilles heel. Point guard Taurean Green has lapses in
nearly every ball game. He almost
cost his team the Southeastern Conference Tournament Championship with some
unwise shots in the final minute.
Put South Carolina’s Tre Kelley with the
other four Gator starters, and Florida would be
right up there with Connecticut and Texas.
Georgetown doesn’t have the talent of two decades ago, but
the Hoyas are not too far away from being that good once again. The problem in this game is that
Florida loves
to play against teams that run “The Princeton” offense. Ask Vanderbilt how effective Florida’s pressure defense was at stopping their version
of the Princeton
offense.
Look for Florida to make at least one big run in this game, where
they score eight or more points, while Georgetown fails to get a basket. That will be the
difference.
I pick Florida to win by 8 to 14
points.
Region Final: Florida over Villanova by 6 to 10
points
How The Computers See The Sweet 16
and Elite 8
The computers really fall short
during the NCAA Tournament. They
have the teams closely bunched together creating unlikely predictive
outcomes. Nearly every game is
expected to be decided by two or three points.
Therefore, I have done something a
little unorthodox this week. Rather
than throw out the ratings that seem to be out on a tangent when compared to the
rest, I am going to include them at equal weighting.
Sweet 16
Round
Duke 77 LSU 70
Texas 74
West
Virginia 69
Memphis 80
Bradley 69
UCLA 70 Gonzaga
62
Connecticut 84
Washington 74
George Mason 69 Wichita State 68
Villanova 72 Boston College 66
Florida 65
Georgetown 60
Elite 8
Round
Duke 77 Texas 73
Memphis 73
UCLA 68
Connecticut 79
George Mason 66
Villanova 74 Florida 71
How did Vanderbilt compare with these 16 teams
statistics-wise?
Field Goal %: Vandy shot .460 and
allowed .443 for a difference of 1.7%
Rebounding: Vandy was out-rebounded
by 1.2 per game
Turnovers: Vandy enjoyed a +0.9
turnover margin
R+T: Vandy recorded a disappointing
-0.3
Steals: Vandy averaged 6.1 steals per
game
Scoring Margin: Vandy outscored
opponents by 3.1 points per game
SOS: Vandy’s schedule was among the
20 most difficult
What the Commodores must do
statistically to get back to the Big Dance in
2007:
Field Goal %: Vandy’s offensive
percentage was adequate this season, and it would not need to improve by more
than one percent. Defensively, the
Commodores surrendered too many easy shots. They must lower their .443 allowed to at
least .429 next year.
Rebounding: This may be an even
bigger liability next year unless Alan Metcalfe and Ross Neltner emerge as
monsters on the boards. Vandy needs
to out-rebound their opponents by at least one half board per
game.
Turnover Margin: Vandy needs to force two to three more
turnovers per game next year. With
even more depth on the perimeter next year, there is reason to believe the
occasional full court pressure we saw at the end of this year will be used more
frequently next season.
R+T: Plain and simple, this must
improve to the positive side and top at least 5.0.
Steals: This is how Vandy can improve
its R+T. The Commodores haven’t
enjoyed much success in this department in the 21st century. Next year, the Gold Men should have the
talent to top eight steals per game and get more fast break points off these
forced turnovers.
Scoring Margin: The Commodores had great difficulty this
year in putting opponents away after gaining the lead. This must be rectified next season. Vandy needs to outscore opponents by at
least five points per game and preferably eight points per
game.