For so many years, there was a chance that the two two rivals in college basketball would meet in the Final Four.
Personally, in 1982, I held 4 tickets to the Mideast Regional at Vanderbilt University when the NCAA Selection Committee had placed Kentucky and Louisville on a collision course in the second round after Kentucky dismissed Middle Tennessee State in the first round. The two Bluegrass rivals had not met for 25 years, and here they were just two days away from the most colossal game in the tournament since Houston and UCLA played in 1968. Alas, tiny MTSU upset Kentucky, and the value of those four tickets went from new car purchase to nice dinner purchase.
What does that have to do with this game in New Orleans? Absolutely nothing, but it allows me to stall a bit. This game is not easy to figure. Duke has the overall most efficient offense in college basketball, while Carolina is in the top 20 in offensive efficiency but since February, the Tar Heels are in the top five. Carolina’s defense is marginally better than Duke’s, but it isn’t all that much. Carolina has a little better offense at forcing fouls on the defense and a little better R+T Rating, but how much extra do you give Duke for trying to send Coach K out a winner?
In 1975, Kentucky clearly had better overall talent and should have beaten UCLA, but the Bruins played close to their top potential for the retiring Coach Wooden. The last time these two teams played, Carolina spoiled Coach K’s final game at Cameron Indoor Stadium. Additionally, the Tar Heels did not win the regular season or conference tournament in the ACC, while Duke won the regular season title. PiRate Bracketnomics values a conference champion over a non-champion in tossup games, so the edge goes to Duke to make it to the Championship Game on Monday night.
Kansas vs. Villanova
The PiRate Bracketnomics System correctly picked Kansas and Villanova to make the Final Four before the tournament began. We also picked Kansas to cut down the nets in New Orleans, so you know who we are selecting in this game.
Now, let’s look at why. First, Villanova is missing a key player in Justin Moore from an already small playing rotation. Now for the numbers. Kansas has a very slim advantage in offensive efficiency, offensive rebounding rate, defensive 2-point field goal percentage, and R+T Ratings. Strength of schedule is basically dead even, so with the injury to Moore, KU becomes a 4 or 5 point favorite.
Comments Off on PiRate Ratings College Basketball–Final Four
Analytics Based Bracket Picking Method–Updated for 2022
Welcome to the PiRate Ratings Bracket Picking Analysis for the 2022 NCAA Tournament. If you read yesterday’s tutorial post and earned your PhD in Bracketnomics, then you are ready to see all the numbers and pick the brackets in your own way. We will show you our picks as well, but you might do better using our data than we do.
Let’s get right to it with the table of all the numbers. We have divided the numbers into the most important, the moderately important, the the extras used to find the winner in very close matchups.
37+ 3pt = The 3-point shooting percentage where 37% or above is the key number
OReb% = Offensive rebounding rate where 37% or above it also the key number
-45% vs. 2pt = Defensive 2-point field goal percentage where less than 45% is the key number FT Rate = the percentage of free throw attempts per field goal attempts, where again, above 37% is the key number
Team Moderately Important
R + T New Rate
Old R+T
Score Marg
FG% Diff
Win Strk
Pre25
Champions
Akron
6.4
12.1
8.4
3.8
8
T
Alabama
4.9
7.5
3.6
0.6
4
Yes
x
Arizona
7.0
17.9
17.1
10.9
11 & 9
R T
Arkansas
7.1
12.8
8.4
2.9
9 & 9
Yes
x
Auburn
5.9
12.5
11.7
5.5
19
Yes
R
Baylor
11.4
17.4
12.9
3.9
15
Yes
R
Boise St.
11.2
15.0
7.9
2.2
14
R T
Bryant
1.7
6.4
5.2
2.4
9 & 7
T
Cal St. Fullerton
4.3
8.5
4.1
0.9
8
T
Chattanooga
8.7
15.2
10.1
4.6
5 & 5
R T
Colgate
1.7
8.5
9
5.1
15
R T
Colorado St.
-2.1
6.1
8
5.8
11
x
Connecticut
12.1
19.6
10
3.5
5 & 5
Yes
x
Creighton
-1.8
4.0
3.1
5.5
6
x
Davidson
2.7
12.1
6.8
6.4
15
R
Delaware
-3.6
1.3
3.9
4.1
5
T
Duke
4.1
12.7
13.1
7.2
7 & 7
Yes
R
Georgia St.
7.8
11.9
5.8
-1
10
T
Gonzaga
7.2
21.8
22.5
14.8
17 & 6
Yes
R T
Houston
14.3
22.2
16.9
9.6
12 & 6
Yes
R T
Illinois
7.7
12.8
8.2
3.7
6
Yes
R
Indiana
1.8
7.8
5.6
6.8
6
x
Iowa
4.8
11.7
12.5
2.6
7 & 5
T
Iowa St
1.2
3.8
3.5
1.1
12
x
Jacksonville St.
3.4
10.6
7.1
6.4
10
R
Kansas
5.2
12.1
10.5
6.3
8 & 5
Yes
R T
Kentucky
15.7
24.1
13.5
7.4
7 & 6
Yes
x
Longwood
14.9
20.3
11.2
2.6
11 & 8
T
Loyola (Chi.)
3.1
11.2
12.1
7.4
10
T
LSU
5.9
12.2
9.6
5.3
12
x
Marquette
-9.8
-4.5
3.5
4.3
7
x
Memphis
6.7
11.7
7
7.5
6 & 6
Yes
x
Miami (Fla.)
-5.0
1.3
3.8
1.2
9
x
Michigan
7.8
12.5
4.9
2.1
3
Yes
x
Michigan St.
3.0
8.5
3.7
4.1
9
x
Montana St.
4.9
11.4
8.5
5.4
11 & 6
R T
Murray St.
15.2
24.0
17
6.9
20 & 7
R T
New Mexico St.
8.1
14.5
8.3
6.6
10 & 5
R T
Norfolk St.
4.9
14.2
11.4
9.2
6 & 6
R T
North Carolina
10.0
15.7
5.8
1.9
6 & 5
Yes
x
Notre Dame
-2.5
3.8
5.7
3.1
6 & 5
x
Ohio St.
-1.0
6.0
8.3
5.5
5
Yes
x
Providence
2.1
7.4
4.8
2.6
8 & 8
R
Purdue
12.1
19.2
11
6.6
8 & 6
Yes
x
Richmond
-3.4
1.5
3.4
0
6
T
Rutgers
3.4
7.6
2.1
2.9
4
x
Saint Mary’s
7.3
13.2
9.3
3.7
7 & 6
x
Saint Peter’s
5.0
9.0
5.1
4.8
7
T
San Diego St.
4.4
10.5
7.6
5.1
6 & 5
x
San Francisco
8.7
14.2
10.1
3.3
10
x
Seton Hall
5.2
10.1
6.6
2.4
6 & 6
x
South Dakota St.
2.3
13.2
13.3
8.7
21
R T
TCU
12.5
16.9
3.1
1.8
7
x
Tennessee
8.5
13.9
10.4
3
7 & 5
Yes
T
Texas
7.2
10.1
8.7
2.9
6 & 5
Yes
x
Texas A&M-CC
10.2
15.8
7
2.8
8
T
Texas Southern
4.7
8.4
3.7
4.1
6
T
Texas Tech
9.6
17.5
11.4
9.4
6
x
UAB
10.7
19.2
14.4
5.5
7
T
UCLA
5.7
17.3
11.6
3.4
6 & 5
Yes
x
USC
6.3
12.8
6.7
6.5
13 & 6
x
Vermont
7.8
17.9
14.6
8.3
14 & 8
R T
Villanova
4.8
11.5
9.5
2.9
6 & 5
Yes
T
Virginia Tech
2.4
7.4
8.4
4.2
6 & 5
T
Wisconsin
3.4
7.3
4.2
-1.4
7 & 6
R
Wright St.
1.8
5.3
4.4
1.5
7 & 5
T
Wyoming
1.4
8.7
7.5
4.4
8 & 6
x
Yale
-0.7
3.6
3.5
2.1
7
T
R+T New Rate =The new R+T rating using rate stats over counting stats (still experimental)
Old R+T = The original R+T Rating where anything over 17.5 is exceptional, 15 to 17.5 is quite good, 12.5 to 15 is good, 8-12.5 is okay, 5-8 is fair, under 5 is poor, and negative is a loser
Score Marg = Scoring margin where over 8 is very good and over 10 is great
FG% Diff = Field Goal Percentage difference (Offense FG% – Defense FG%) where over 7 is very good and over 10 is exceptional
Win Strk = Best winning streak or streaks during the season (if a team didn’t win 6 in a row in the regular season, how will they do it against the best teams?)
Pre25 = Preseason Top 25 pick (almost every past national champion was in the preseason top 25)
Champions (R = regular season conference champion/co-champion & T = Conference Tournament Champion)
Team–Extras
Coach Exp.
Seniors 8
Juniors 8
1/3 Clutch?
F/C 12/7?
2 F/C 20/12?
Dbl Fig#
Akron
3
0
2
3
Y
Y
3
Alabama
4
2
2
1
N
N
3
Arizona
0
1
1
1
Y
Y
4
Arkansas
4 E8
5
1
1
N
N
4
Auburn
10 F4
1
3
1
Y
Y
4
Baylor
9 CH
2
3
x
N
N
3
Boise St.
2
5
1
1
N
Y
3
Bryant
0
5
1
1
N
N
3
Cal St. Fullerton
1
4
2
1
N
Y
2
Chattanooga
0
5
1
1
N
N
3
Colgate
2
4
2
3
N
N
5
Colorado St.
0
2
4
1
N
N
2
Connecticut
3
4
1
3
Y
N
3
Creighton
9 E8
3
1
x
Y
Y
3
Davidson
9 E8
3
2
3
Y
Y
4
Delaware
0
3
2
x
N
N
4
Duke
35 CH
2
1
1
Y
Y
5
Georgia St.
1
4
1
1
N
N
3
Gonzaga
21 2R
2
2
1
Y
Y
5
Houston
17 F4
5
3
N
N
Y
5
Illinois
5
4
1
1
Y
Y
4
Indiana
0
4
2
1
Y
Y
3
Iowa
10
2
1
1
Y
Y
3
Iowa St
3
4
3
1
N
N
2
Jacksonville St.
3
4
3
1
N
N
3
Kansas
22 CH
5
2
1
N
Y
4
Kentucky
20 CH
2
4
1
Y
Y
5
Longwood
0
3
2
1
N
N
3
Loyola (Chi.)
0
5
2
1
N
N
2
LSU
0
2
0
1
Y
Y
4
Marquette
8 F4
2
1
1
Y
N
2
Memphis
0
3
2
x
Y
Y
3
Miami (Fla.)
9 F4
3
1
1
N
N
4
Michigan
1 E8
3
0
1
Y
Y
4
Michigan St.
23 CH
3
3
x
N
N
1
Montana St.
0
4
2
x
N
N
3
Murray St.
2
1
2
1
Y
Y
3
New Mexico St.
2
3
2
1
N
Y
2
Norfolk St.
1
3
4
1
N
N
3
North Carolina
0
2
1
3
Y
Y
4
Notre Dame
14 E8
6
0
1
Y
Y
3
Ohio St.
6 E8
4
1
1
Y
Y
2
Providence
5
6
1
3
N
Y
4
Purdue
13 E8
3
1
1
Y
Y
4
Richmond
2 S16
6
1
1
Y
Y
3
Rutgers
2
4
1
1
N
N
3
Saint Mary’s
7 S16
4
2
x
N
N
4
Saint Peter’s
1
2
5
x
N
N
2
San Diego St.
2
5
1
1
N
N
1
San Francisco
0
4
1
3
Y
N
3
Seton Hall
4
4
3
1
N
N
1
South Dakota St.
1
1
3
1
N
N
2
TCU
12 E8
1
3
1
N
N
3
Tennessee
25 F4
1
3
1
N
N
2
Texas
4 2R
6
2
x
N
N
3
Texas A&M-CC
0
4
4
x
Y
Y
2
Texas Southern
4
7
1
x
N
N
0
Texas Tech
0
5
3
x
N
N
1
UAB
2
3
4
1
N
N
4
UCLA
12 F4
4
3
1
N
N
4
USC
4 E8
2
4
1
Y
Y
4
Vermont
3
6
2
1
N
Y
2
Villanova
17 CH
4
3
1
N
N
4
Virginia Tech
6
3
2
1
N
Y
3
Wisconsin
3 S16
2
2
1
N
N
3
Wright St.
4
0
5
3
Y
N
3
Wyoming
0
3
0
1
Y
Y
3
Yale
2
2
4
1
N
N
2
Coach Exp = The number of past NCAA Tournament appearances for the head coach and if he got to the Sweet 6, Elite 8, Final 4, CHampionship or Runnerup
Seniors8/Juniors8 = The number of seniors or juniors among the current top 8 players (not as important with the extra Covid year)
1/3Clutch? = Does the team have 1 go to guy or 3 co-go to guys that can hit the crucial basket to win?
F/C 12/7 or 2F/C 20/12 = Does the team have an inside player that averages 12 points and 7 rebounds per game or two that combine for 20 points and 12 rebounds per game?
DblFig# = The number of double figure scorers
Here is the PiRate Ratings Bracket
The event you’ve all been waiting for: I wish I could say it’s this feature, but your madness is directed at the actual games in March (and April). Hopefully, this guide will guide you in filling out your brackets as we show you our analysis of the pertinent data. Some of you will take our information and perform better with it making your own analysis. Feel free to do so; we sometimes cannot see the forest for the trees.
Using our system laid out in Monday’s tutorial, we isolated on seven teams with National Championship Resumes in the 2022 NCAA Tournament plus one more team on the cusp.
Arizona
Baylor
Gonzaga
Houston
Kansas
Kentucky
UCLA
Almost National Championship Resume (1)
Auburn
It has been 31 tournaments since a team from outside the power conferences has won the national championship. The Power Conference teams with the best resumes are:
Arizona
Baylor
Kansas
Kentucky
UCLA
Houston is a borderline power conference representative, but the American Athletic Conference is not what it once was. With Marcus Sasser and Tramon Mark, the Cougars would be close to Gonzaga in overall power, but they have not been the same since their season-ending injuries.
Here is our take on the first round of the Tournament. It is how we will fill out our bracket. Every year, we receive a comment from somebody telling us how they used our data to outperform our bracket.
First Round NCAA Tournament Matchups
West Region
Gonzaga vs. Georgia St.: Not much to discuss here. This should be a major blowout win for Gonzaga. Georgia State will struggle to score points until the Bulldog reserves get mop-up duty, while the Zags could score close to 1.5 points per possession before the starters come out.
Boise St. vs. Memphis: As most 8/9 games should be, this is an interesting game where the two teams are evenly matched. Memphis has oh so better key stats, and in close games, if the predicted weaker team has a considerably superior R+T rating, we will go with the underdog. Boise State’s R+T is better but not by much. We’ll go with Memphis is a close one.
Connecticut vs. New Mexico St.: New Mexico State coach Chris Jans is our current number one mid-major head coach ready to be offered a big time job. He has twice taken the Aggies to near major upsets in the opening round. The last time NMSU was in this situation, they came within a blown referee’s call of upsetting Auburn. The Tigers went to the Final Four that year.
However, this matchup with Connecticut is not favorable. We are always leery of the Huskies. They are the one school that has won the National Championship without having the proper analytical resume, and they have done it twice! Their resume this year is very similar to the two times they won the title. They are superior in all respects to the Aggies and should win by double digits.
Arkansas vs. Vermont: This game could be a lot closer than expected. Vermont’s offense is just as efficient as Arkansas’s, and the Catamounts have a considerably better R+T rating. A 12.5 points per game tougher schedule favors Arkansas by enough juice to emerge victorious, but it may be by single digits.
Alabama vs. Rutgers/Notre Dame: You get to wait until Thursday morning to submit your brackets, so you will know the winner of all the First Four games. We can only predict it today. We think Rutgers has a slight edge in the game in Dayton, because Notre Dame’s R+T rating is too low. In early games, it doesn’t matter as much if the opponent’s R+T isn’t a good one, and Rutgers’ R+T is okay but not great.
When it comes to playing Alabama Friday, this may be one of the hardest games to figure. Alabama plays like Tarzan one game and like Jane the next. The Tide can score points when they are clicking, but they fail to click one game out of three. Their R+T Rating is mediocre, and they don’t defend well in the paint. The one superior factor in favor of the Tide is the nation’s strongest schedule. Whichever team Bama plays in this game, they will have faced a stronger team in at least a dozen prior games. We don’t expect Alabama to advance far in this tournament, but they should get out of this round with a win.
Texas Tech vs. Montana St.: They key to winning college basketball at the highest level is to have a superior offense and very good defense. Texas Tech has the best defense in the nation with an average offense. We don’t expect the Red Raiders to contend for the Final Four, but in early rounds, their resume is scary against teams not in power conferences.
Montana State may stay in this game a little longer than expected, as Tech might struggle offensively at the start of the game until the nerves settle down. Once Tech hits their stride, they will hold MSU to less than .8 points per possession for the middle 20-25 minutes of the game. It might not look pretty, but TTU will eventually run away from the Bobcats.
Michigan St. vs. Davidson: Davidson has a little more overall talent now than they had when Steph Curry led the Wildcats to the Elite 8. The difference is this Davidson team lacks the overall quickness to replicate the former success. Additionally, they face a team that plays the same type of game as they do but with overall better athletes.
Michigan State has been upset early by teams that were quicker and unable to take advantage of the quickness. DC cannot do this. The Wildcats’ only chance is to hope to dominate in the paint both in points and rebounds, and The Spartans are not the team that will allow this. Even though this is not the best inside presence during Tom Izzo’s reign in East Lansing, Sparty has just a little too much power for Davidson. Michigan State will win by five to 12 points.
Duke vs. Cal St. Fullerton: Coach K’s last team is really not talented enough to get to New Orleans this year, but the Blue Devils will likely play above their talent level until they are put out. In this first game, the Blue Devils will score points rapidly against a weak team defense. Fullerton won’t be able to keep the Blue Devil offense from getting easy shots inside of six feet. Look for the Blue Devils to top their scoring average and coast to an easy victory in this round.
East Region
Baylor vs. Norfolk St.: The MEAC representative has won opening round games in the Big Dance before, but it was as a #15 seed against a #2. Norfolk State was oh so close to getting a #15 seed at the expense of Delaware, but they came up short. In most recent years, the MEAC champ has been placed in Dayton. Had NSU been put there this year, they would have been prohibitive favorites over any other 16-seed.
The question now becomes, “can Nofolk State do what UMBC did against Virginia?” The answer is “no”, because Baylor isn’t Virginia. They are the defending champs, and even though the Bears are not as good as last year, they still have Final Four talent. BU will win by around 20-25 points, more if the starters stay in longer than needed.
North Carolina vs. Marquette: We can make this short and sweet–Marquette’s R+T is an eliminator. ‘Nuf Sed. They would be our pick to lose even if they were a top four seed. Our number one rule is to play against a team with a negative R+T rating.
Saint Mary’s vs. Wyoming/Indiana: Like the region above, you will know who Saint Mary’s will be playing on Thursday. Ironically, this play-in game may be the most exciting game before the Sweet 16. There is very little difference between the Hoosiers and Cowboys. Only because Indiana won’t travel very far to play this game will we give the nod to the Hoosiers.
On Thursday, Saint Mary’s will have a tough time avoiding the upset, because they are a tad weak offensively in the low post area. Playing at home, the Gaels were able to withstand Gonzaga’s great inside presence, but in the WCC Tournament in Las Vegas, the Bulldogs exploited SMC over and over again in a double-digit win. We will stil pick Saint Mary’s to win this game, because their opponent will have to fly from Dayton to Portland and play less than 48 hours after they played in Dayton.
UCLA vs. Akron: UCLA has national championship talent, but the Bruins have liabilities that can be exploited. Unfortunately for the Zips, they do not have the necessary inside strength to exploit the Bruins. They do have characteristics needed to keep a game with UCLA close for some time, but the Bruins will advance.
Texas vs. Virginia Tech: Texas is the most vulnerable 6-seed in the tournament. The Longhorns have not adjusted to Chris Beard’s system in year one, and there may be a little dissension within the ranks. Virginia Tech is the exact opposite. Mike Young was one of our A+ Mid-major coaches ready for the Big Time when he was at Wofford, and he has not disappointed in his short time in Blacksburg. Virginia Tech’s players have totally bought in to the system and are peaking at the right time.
Our criteria shows this game to be close to a tossup. The Hokies have the superior offense, but the Longhorns have the superior defense with more superiority than Va. Tech’s offensive superiority. Texas has the edge in schedule strength and R+T rating, so we will pick the Longhorns in a squeaker, but this one is ripe for an upset if you are the type that goes for more upsets than average.
Purdue vs. Yale: Yale caught Princeton on a cold shooting day and upset the Tigers to get a ticket to the Dance. Their ticket is for one game. Short of hitting about 15 three-point shots in 25 attempts, there is no way the Bulldogs can stop the inside dominance of the Boilermakers. The two-headed monster in the low post will likely score 40 points and pull down 15-20 rebounds unless Coach Matt Painter goes to his third team. While former Gene Keady assistants have never made it to the Final Four, and neither did Keady, those teams from the past did not have the R+T rating that this Purdue team has. This is PU’s best chance to go to the Final Four since they did so under Lee Rose in 1980.
Murray St. vs. San Francisco: Now it’s time to upset a lot of people in the Bluegrass. There are a lot of fans heading up to Indianapolis for the weekend hoping to see the two top teams from the Commonwealth face off. Our criteria shows the Dons to be a slightly better team than the Racers, mostly because Murray State’s schedule was suspect. USF played a schedule almost as strong as a Power Conference team, and they have multiple wins over teams in this tournament. Murray State’s biggest win was against Memphis, when the Tigers were not playing well. Their other big game was a double-digit loss to Auburn, when Auburn was getting ready to go on a run.
We think the schedule strength makes USF’s numbers superior, and we will go with the 10-seed to win in what will be considered an upset. We think the Dons should be favored.
Kentucky vs. Saint Peter’s: One team in this game had a weak schedule, a weak offense, and a weak inside defense. The other team had one of the strongest schedules in the nation, one of the best defenses, a very good offense, and the best inside presence in college basketball since Bill Walton. I bet you can predict what the prediction is here–Kentucky by as many as Coach Cal wants to win by before he removes his key players.
South Region
Arizona vs. Wright St./Bryant: We expect Wright State to win the play-in game, but even if Bryant wins, the outcome of this game will remain the same. Arizona is much too talented to lose this game, even if the Wildcats play their worst game of the season Friday. The Wednesday night winner must fly from Dayton to San Diego on short notice to play a UA team that is well-rested and playing just a short flight from home.
Seton Hall vs. TCU: This one is another great tossup between the 8 and 9 seeds. TCU has the superior R+T rating, and it may be where the game is decided—with one late spurt in the second half. We’ll take the Horned Frogs in a close one.
Houston vs. UAB: Poor UAB. The Blazers actually have the talent and resume to get to the Sweet 16 as long as they have the right bracket. This one is not the right bracket. Even without two former starters that were injured weeks ago, Houston has enough talent to get to the Sweet 16, with a good chance to make the Elite 8, and a possible chance to return to the Final Four. If they still had their two stars, they would be a strong Final Four selection. The Cougars match up perfectly well with UAB and can neutralize the Blazers’ key attackers.
Illinois vs. Chattanooga: The Mocs have been the darling upset pick of a lot of national media members, but we’re here to say it isn’t going to happen. Chattanooga enjoyed an incredible season in winning the regular and tournament championships. They just don’t have the inside defense to slow down the Illini in the paint, and they are not likely to get the Illinois frontcourt into foul trouble. The Mocs don’t have a pressing defense strong enough to force Illinois into turnovers, so the Illini should have little difficulty winning this game by double digits.
Colorado St. vs. Michigan: Here’s another 11-seed that is clearly better than the 6-seed. Colorado State’s R+T rating is too low, especially for a Mid-major team playing a Power Conference opponent. Only a complete meltdown by the Maize and Blue will prevent the Wolverines from advancing.
Tennessee vs. Longwood: Volunteer Head Coach Rick Barnes has been to 25 previous NCAA Tournaments with one Final Four appearance. He believes his current team has what it takes to go to the Final Four this year. Tennessee’s resume should get them to the Sweet 16, but they have vulnerabilities that other teams in the South Region can exploit. Longwood isn’t one of them. Their schedule strength is much too low to be a factor in this game, but if they hit a bunch of three-pointers, where they are better than average, they could keep the outcome under 20 points.
Ohio St. vs. Loyola (Chi.): Before looking at this game, be advised that Ohio State is really banged up with multiple injuries, and it is unsure if they will have their full roster available. Also, understand that Loyola will have had 12 days between games and will be fully rested but possibly a little rusted.
Loyola’s offense will find the holes in the Buckeyes’ defense, especially if Ohio State has to play a short rotation that will tire in the second half. The Ramblers’ defense is good enough to give Ohio State’s superior offense some trouble. It may come down to spurtability, and Loyola is the hands-down superior team in R+T. We think Sister Jean will be smiling.
Villanova vs. Delaware: We told you yesterday that usually there is one Final Four team that gets there from outside of the perfect resume world. It was UCLA last year. This year’s UCLA could easily be Villanova. The Wildcats just barely miss out on having a Final Four resume, and they quite frankly have about the best possible bracket arrangement to boot.
Delaware is disqualified from potential upset possibilities in multiple ways–R+T rating, defense on the perimeter and in the paint, schedule strength, no inside scoring dominance, etc.
Midwest Region
Kansas vs. Texas Southern/Texas A&M-CC: Even though it does not matter in your bracket contests, we believe Texas Southern will run Texas A&M-CC into the ground in Dayton. TAMCC has the weakest schedule strength of any NCAA Tournament team in the last 22 years! Texas Southern is playing much better basketball in March than they did before New Year’s, and they are 18-5 in their last 23 games. So, we are previewing TSU against Kansas in this game.
Okay, suspense over. KU will blow out either Texas team in this game. Neither of the 16-seeds has enough defense to stop the Jayhawks from running up a fat score.
San Diego St. vs. Creighton: In all but one key metric, these teams are fairly evenly matched. That key metric is the R+T rating, and the Aztecs have a considerable advantage. We’ll take SDSU to win thanks to a late run.
Iowa vs. Richmond: Two happy teams on Sunday, but there will only be one happy team Thursday after these two play. Richmond will have to slow this game down to about a 60 possession game to have a chance to sneak away with an upset, but the Spiders’ R+T rating doesn’t measure up to being a winner. Iowa will cruise to a double-digit win.
Providence vs. South Dakota St.: Providence is the better overall team in the criteria, but South Dakota State has the one ace up their sleeve in an offense that can score a lot of points in a hurry. If the Friars come out a little tight and aren’t playing the type of basketball they normally play, they could find themselves down by a lot of points early in the game and then struggle to get in synch and get back in the game. SDSU has the type of team that comes out loose and ready to play no matter what the stage. If this game was in Oklahoma City or Denver, we’d take the underdog. Buffalo will be almost like a home game for Providence, so we think the Friars sneak away with a close win.
LSU vs. Iowa St.: LSU has to go with an interim head coach for the second time in the now concluded Will Wade era. It pains me to say that I (the Captain) was Wade’s youth coach in the early 1990’s.
It is rare for a team that finished four games under .500 to make the NCAA Tournament, but the Big 12 was quite strong this year. Cyclone Coach T.J. Otzelberger made the South Dakota State job what it is today, and he should eventually turn the corner in Ames. Making the Big Dance this quickly is quite an accomplishment. Doing damage in the Dance may be a year away. Even with an interim coach, albeit one with lots of years experience as a head coach, LSU has superior numbers and should win by around ten points.
Wisconsin vs. Colgate: This is almost a home game for the Badgers. It’s one thing to put a Duke or Carolina in Charlotte or Greensboro when either is a number one seed, but to put the Badgers less than 100 miles from home in Milwaukee as a 3-seed is totally different. Poor Colgate. The Raiders are actually one of a small handful of Low Major teams that have some talent with an outside chance at an upset, but not playing UW in Milwaukee. Colgate may hit some three-pointers to keep the game within shouting distance, but the Badgers will take the cheese in this one.
USC vs. Miami (Fla.): Even though Miami has a short flight, while USC most go from the Pacific to the Atlantic Ocean, there is a factor that can never be parsed. Miami’s R+T rating is too poor to predict the Hurricanes to advance. USC figures to have a double-digit spurt in this game, and the Trojans will advance.
Auburn vs. Jacksonville St.: There is only one fly in the ointment in saying this game should be a 30-point blowout. JSU will be playing way over their heads to face off against an in-state rival that won’t play them in the regular season. Coach Ray Harper is a strict disciplinarian, and his teams play intelligently and force the opponent to play that way or be exploited.
Auburn is not all that exploitable here. The Tigers have been having shooting trouble as of late, but with the great front line, maybe the second best to Gonzaga’s, the Tigers will get numerous second and third shots on many possessions, and JSU will eventually fall by a lot of points.
Here’s how the rest of our bracket-picking goes.
Round of 32
Gonzaga over Memphis
Connecticut over Arkansas
Texas Tech over Alabama
Duke over Michigan St.
Baylor over North Carolina
UCLA over Saint Mary’s
Purdue over Texas
Kentucky over San Francisco
Arizona over TCU
Houston over Illinois
Tennessee over Michigan
Villanova over Loyola (Chi.)
Kansas over San Diego St.
Iowa over Providence
Wisconsin over LSU
Auburn over USC
Sweet 16
Gonzaga over Connecticut
Texas Tech over Duke
Baylor over UCLA
Kentucky over Purdue
Arizona over Houston
Villanova over Tennessee
Kansas over Iowa
Auburn over Wisconsin
Elite 8
Gonzaga over Texas Tech
Kentucky over Baylor
Villanova over Arizona
Kansas over Auburn
Final 4
Gonzaga over Kentucky
Kansas over Villanova
National Championship
Kansas over Gonzaga
Comments Off on PiRate Ratings Bracketnomics Analysis 2022
2013 NCAA Tournament— Semifinal Round, April 6, 2013
Ttimes Eastern Daylight
Site: Georgia Dome in Atlanta
Network: CBS
Time
Favorite
Underdog
Line
6:09 PM
Louisville (33-5)
Wichita St. (30-8)
10
8:49 PM
Michigan (30-7)
Syracuse (30-9)
2
Elite 8 Record: 2-2
Tournament Total: 38-22
Teams Remaining In Bracket: 1 of 4 (But Louisville was our pick to go all the way)
PiRate Ratings Criteria Formula Statistics
Criteria
Louisville
Michigan
Syracuse
Wichita St.
Scoring Margin
16.2
12.6
12.2
8.9
FG% Margin
6.4
6.2
7.2
4.8
Rebound Margin
3.7
3.1
3.7
8.0
Turnover Margin
6.0
2.8
3.2
0.4
Steals
10.9
6.2
9.1
7.5
R+T
13.08
7.70
9.36
9.98
SOS
59.41
55.94
59.29
53.79
RD W%
81.8
68.4
65.0
71.4
Qualifiers
6
3
5
5
PiRate #
85.27
57.09
67.73
53.74
Modified
124.97
65.59
106.43
42.94
PiRate Criteria Means for 2000-2012 National Champions
Criteria
Champ Avg.
Scoring Margin
15.5
FG% Margin
8.7
Rebound Margin
6.2
Turnover Margin
1.3
Steals
7.8
R+T
9.29
SOS
57.09
RD W%
73.8
Qualifiers
7
PiRate #
75.88
Modified
94.78
Louisville vs. Wichita State
Roster—Louisville
#
NAME
HT
WT
POS
CL
HOMETOWN (PREVIOUS SCHOOL)
2
Russ Smith
6-00
165
G
JR
Brooklyn, N.Y. (Archbishop Molloy/South Kent)
3
Peyton Siva
6-00
185
G
SR
Seattle, Wash. (Franklin)
5
Kevin Ware
6-02
175
G
SO
Bronx, N.Y. (Rockdale County (Ga.))
10
Gorgui Dieng
6-11
245
C
JR
Kebemer, Senegal (Covenant/Huntington Prep)
11
Luke Hancock
6-06
200
F
JR
Roanoke, Va. (George Mason)
12
Mangok Mathiang
6-10
200
C
FR
Melbourne, Australia (IMG Academy (Fla.))
14
Logan Baumann
6-00
165
G
FR
Hartford, Ky. (Ohio County)
15
Tim Henderson
6-02
195
G
JR
Louisville, Ky. (Christian Academy)
20
Wayne Blackshear
6-05
230
G/F
SO
Chicago, Ill. (Morgan Park)
21
Chane Behanan
6-06
250
F
SO
Cincinnati, Ohio (Bowling Green)
22
Jordan Bond
6-00
165
G
FR
Louisville, Ky. (duPont Manual)
24
Montrezl Harrell
6-08
235
F
FR
Tarboro, N.C. (Hargrave Military Academy)
25
Zach Price
6-10
250
C
SO
Cleveland, Ohio (Jeffersontown)
32
Michael Baffour
6-02
170
G
JR
Lexington, Ky. (Bryan Station)
33
Mike Marra
6-05
215
G
SR
Smithfield, R.I. (Northfield Mt. Hermon School)
44
Stephan Van Treese
6-09
245
F
SR
Indianapolis, Ind. (Lawrence North)
Coach: Rick Pitino 12th year at UL: 308-111
28 seasons overall: 662-239
(Hawaii, Boston U, Providence, Kentucky, Louisville)
Roster—Wichita St.
#
Name
Ht.
Wt.
Pos.
Yr.
Hometown (Prev School)
0
Chadrack Lufile
6-09
251
F
Jr.
Burlington, Ontario, Canada (Coffeyville CC)
1
Derail Green
6-07
199
F
Fr.
Houston, Texas (Klein Forest HS)
2
Malcolm Armstead
6-00
205
G
Sr.
Florence, Ala. (Chipola JC) (Central Park Prep)
3
Evan Wessel
6-05
201
G
So.
Wichita, Kan. (Heights HS)
5
Demetric Williams
6-02
178
G
Sr.
Las Vegas, Nev. (Cheyenne HS)
11
Cleanthony Early
6-08
215
F
Jr.
Middletown, N.Y. (Sullivan JC)
15
Nick Wiggins
6-06
187
G
Jr.
Toronto, ON (Wabash Valley [Ill.] College)
20
Kadeem Coleby
6-09
251
C
Sr.
Nassau, Bahamas (Louisiana-Lafayette)
21
Ehimen Orukpe
7-00
250
C
Sr.
Lagos, Nigeria, (Three Rivers [Mo.])
22
Carl Hall
6-08
238
F
Sr.
Cochran, Ga. (NW Florida St.)
23
Fred Van Vleet
5-11
190
G
Fr.
Rockford, Ill. (Auburn HS)
31
Ron Baker
6-03
218
G
Fr.
Scott City, Kan. (Scott City HS)
32
Tekele Cotton
6-02
202
G
So.
Marietta, Ga. (Whitefield Academy)
33
Zach Bush
6-06
175
F
Fr.
Wichita, Kan. (Goddard Eisenhower HS)
50
Jake White
6-08
232
F
So.
Chaska, Minn. (Chaska HS)
Coach: Gregg Marshall 6th year at WSU: 139-69
15 seasons overall: 333-152
(Winthrop, Wichita St.)
Team Stats—Louisville
Player
G
GS
Min
FG
FGA
FG%
3pt
3ptA
3pt%
FT
FTA
Russ Smith
38
35
1143
223
527
.423
57
172
.331
215
261
Gorgi Dieng
31
30
959
121
227
.533
0
0
.000
73
112
Peyton Siva
38
38
1177
132
320
.413
38
125
.304
74
86
Chane Behanan
37
35
961
143
283
.505
1
12
.083
69
131
Wayne Blackshear
37
32
754
102
242
.421
43
135
.319
43
62
Luke Hancock
38
8
836
86
211
.408
55
148
.372
55
71
Montrezl Harrell
38
3
626
92
163
.564
0
0
.000
32
63
Kevin Ware
37
1
616
59
132
.447
15
37
.405
34
51
Stephan Van Treese
35
1
402
26
40
.650
0
0
.000
12
17
Zach Price
16
7
123
8
15
.533
0
0
.000
4
8
Tim Henderson
25
0
88
6
20
.300
4
17
.235
0
0
Logan Baumann
4
0
11
0
4
.000
0
0
.000
2
2
Michael Baffour
6
0
12
0
3
.000
0
2
.000
2
4
Jordan Bond
5
0
17
0
3
.000
0
2
.000
0
0
Totals
38
38
7725
998
2190
.456
213
650
.328
615
868
Opponents
38
38
7725
778
1987
.392
207
658
.315
444
681
Player
FT%
F
DQ
Ast
TO
Bk
Stl
Reb
Avg
Pts
Avg
Russ Smith
.824
95
0
111
100
2
81
129
3.4
718
18.9
Gorgi Dieng
.652
77
3
60
56
78
43
296
9.5
315
10.2
Peyton Siva
.860
99
3
220
102
6
84
87
2.3
376
9.9
Chane Behanan
.527
63
0
40
60
16
52
233
6.3
356
9.6
Wayne Blackshear
.694
92
0
24
24
10
33
120
3.2
290
7.8
Luke Hancock
.775
78
1
50
39
3
36
100
2.6
282
7.4
Montrezl Harrell
.508
48
0
7
22
27
20
141
3.7
216
5.7
Kevin Ware
.667
58
1
31
42
4
39
66
1.8
167
4.5
Stephan Van Treese
.706
42
0
9
13
10
17
111
3.2
64
1.8
Zach Price
.500
23
0
0
5
5
1
22
1.4
20
1.3
Tim Henderson
.000
5
0
3
6
1
6
10
0.4
16
0.6
Logan Baumann
1.000
1
0
0
1
0
0
3
0.8
2
0.5
Michael Baffour
.500
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0.2
2
0.3
Jordan Bond
.000
1
0
1
0
0
1
3
0.6
0
0.0
Team
7
84
2.2
Totals
.709
682
8
556
477
162
413
1406
37.0
2824
74.3
Opponents
.652
731
X
385
707
128
216
1264
33.3
2207
58.1
Team Stats—Wichita St.
Player
G
GS
Min
FG
FGA
FG%
3pt
3ptA
3pt%
FT
FTA
Cleanthony Early
38
21
942
176
390
.451
45
144
.313
123
156
Carl Hall
31
25
886
141
262
.538
0
2
.000
106
158
Malcolm Armstead
38
38
1085
146
363
.402
61
172
.355
61
76
Ron Baker
17
14
436
42
104
.404
27
78
.346
35
43
Demetric Williams
38
26
966
97
252
.385
32
114
.281
62
81
Tekele Cotton
38
27
896
88
200
.440
23
64
.359
44
82
Evan Wessel
8
8
152
16
33
.485
11
24
.458
1
1
Nick Wiggins
35
1
460
58
133
.436
31
73
.425
27
37
Fred Van Vleet
38
0
607
59
149
.396
20
47
.426
26
36
Jake White
36
0
399
51
109
.468
3
27
.111
25
35
Ehimen Orukpe
35
30
538
39
83
.470
0
0
.000
17
42
Chadrack Lufile
29
0
233
19
34
.559
0
0
.000
8
20
Totals
38
38
7600
932
2112
.441
253
745
.340
535
767
Opponents
38
38
7600
775
1971
.393
229
714
.321
534
745
Player
FT%
F
DQ
Ast
TO
Bk
Stl
Reb
Avg
Pts
Avg
Cleanthony Early
.788
97
3
23
61
34
29
202
5.3
520
13.7
Carl Hall
.671
73
0
22
41
55
14
213
6.9
388
12.5
Malcolm Armstead
.803
86
0
150
86
2
74
146
3.8
414
10.9
Ron Baker
.814
35
0
32
22
5
14
50
2.9
146
8.6
Demetric Williams
.765
84
2
86
63
1
44
98
2.6
288
7.6
Tekele Cotton
.537
78
1
65
43
6
39
149
3.9
243
6.4
Evan Wessel
1.000
15
0
15
5
1
2
14
1.8
44
5.5
Nick Wiggins
.730
29
0
11
21
6
10
63
1.8
174
5.0
Fred Van Vleet
.722
42
1
86
43
2
35
71
1.9
164
4.3
Jake White
.714
48
0
10
28
0
7
107
3.0
130
3.6
Ehimen Orukpe
.405
71
0
8
46
56
11
155
4.4
95
2.7
Chadrack Lufile
.400
22
0
9
12
8
5
52
1.8
46
1.6
Team
10
141
3.7
Totals
.698
680
7
517
481
176
284
1461
38.4
2652
69.8
Opponents
.717
680
X
400
496
113
212
1157
30.4
2313
60.9
Schedule—Louisville
Opponent
Score
MANHATTAN
79-51
SAMFORD
80-54
MIAMI (OH)
80-39
vs NORTHERN IOWA (Bahamas)
51-46
vs MISSOURI (Bahamas)
84-61
vs DUKE (Bahamas)
71-76
ILLINOIS STATE
69-66
at COLLEGE OF CHARLESTON
80-38
MISSOURI-KANSAS CITY
99-47
at MEMPHIS
87-78
FIU
79-55
vs WESTERN KENTUCKY (Nashville)
78-55
KENTUCKY
80-77
PROVIDENCE
80-62
at SETON HALL
73-58
USF
64-38
at CONNECTICUT
73-58
SYRACUSE
68-70
at VILLANOVA
64-73
at GEORGETOWN
51-53
PITTSBURGH
64-61
MARQUETTE
70-51
at RUTGERS
68-48
at NOTRE DAME
101-104
ST. JOHN‘S
72-58
at USF
59-41
SETON HALL
79-61
at DEPAUL
79-58
at SYRACUSE
58-53
CINCINNATI
67-51
NOTRE DAME
73-57
vs VILLANOVA (BE Tourn.)
74-55
vs NOTRE DAME (BE Tourn.)
69-57
vs SYRACUSE (BE Tourn.)
78-61
vs NORTH CAROLINA A&T (ncaa)
79-48
vs COLORADO STATE (ncaa)
82-56
vs OREGON (ncaa)
77-69
vs DUKE (ncaa)
85-63
Schedule—Wichita St.
Opponent
Score
North Carolina Central
71-57
at Virginia Commonwealth
53-51
Western Carolina (Cancun Challenge)
79-63
Howard (Cancun Challenge)
69-50
(n) DePaul (Cancun)
75-62
(n) Iowa (Cancun)
75-63
Tulsa
86-60
at Air Force (MVC/MWC Challenge)
72-69
Northern Colorado
80-54
at Tennessee
60-69
Charleston Southern
65-53
Southern Mississippi
59-51
Northern Iowa
66-41
at Drake
75-63
at Bradley
69-63
Southern Illinois
82-76
at Evansville
67-71
Illinois St.
74-62
Crieghton
67-64
at Missouri St.
62-52
Bradley
73-39
Indiana St.
55-68
at Northern Iowa
52-57
at Southern Illinois
62-64
Missouri St.
79-50
Drake
71-56
at Illinois St.
68-67
at Indiana St.
66-62
Detroit (Bracketbuster)
94-79
Evansville
56-59
at Creighton
79-91
Missouri St. (mvc–St. Louis)
69-59
Illinois St. (mvc–St. Louis)
66-51
Crieghton (mvc–St. Louis)
65-68
(n) Pittsburgh ncaa
73-55
(n) Gonzaga ncaa
76-70
(n) La Salle ncaa
72-58
(n) Ohio St. ncaa
70-66
Vital Statistics
FG% Margin: Louisville by 1.6%
Rebound Margin: Wichita St. by 4.3
Turnover Margin: Louisville by 5.6
R+T Margin: Louisville by 3.1 extra possessions
SOS: Louisville by 5.6 points per game
PiRate Pick: Louisville 73 Wichita State 61
Other: Louisville winning the national championship one year after their rival Kentucky won it would not be something new. It has happened before. In 2010, Duke won the title a year after North Carolina. In 1993, North Carolina won the title a year after Duke. In 1983, North Carolina State won the title a year after North Carolina. In 1961, Cincinnati won the title a year after Ohio State, and to make it sweeter, the Bearcats beat the Buckeyes in the championship game (and repeated that victory the following season. Ohio State had refused to play Cincinnati in the regular season.
Cincinnati comes into play on Wichita State’s side as well. The Bearcats were members of the Missouri Valley Conference when they won those back-to-back titles. The MVC has four national championship teams from the past. In addition to Cinti, Oklahoma A&M (now Oklahoma State) won back-to-back titles in 1945 and 1946, while in the Valley. The Cowboys moves to the Big 8 for the 1958-59 season.
Michigan vs. Syracuse
Roster—Michigan
#
Name
Ht.
Wt.
Pos.
Year
Hometown (High School)
1
Glenn Robinson III
6-06
210
F
FR
St. John, Ind. (Lake Central)
2
Spike Albrecht
5-11
170
G
FR
Crown Pt., Ind. (Northfield Mt. Hermon Prep MA)
3
Trey Burke
6-01
190
G
SO
Columbus, Ohio (Northland)
4
Mitch McGary
6-10
250
F
FR
Chesterton, Ind. (Brewster Academy [N.H.])
5
Eso Akunne
6-02
225
G
SR
Ann Arbor, Mich. (Gabriel Richard)
10
Tim Hardaway Jr.
6-06
205
G
JR
Miami, Fla. (Palmetto Senior)
11
Nik Stauskas
6-06
190
G
FR
Mississauga, Ontario (St. Mark’s School MA)
13
Matt Vogrich
6-04
200
G
SR
Lake Forest, Ill. (Lake Forest)
15
Jon Horford
6-10
250
F
SO
Grand Ledge, Mich. (Grand Ledge)
20
Josh Bartelstein
6-03
210
G
SR
Highland Pk., Ill. (Phillips Exeter Acad. [N.H.])
22
Blake McLimans
6-10
240
F
SR
Hamburg, N.Y. (Worcester Academy [Mass.])
23
Caris LeVert
6-05
170
G
FR
Pickerington, Ohio (Central)
32
Corey Person
6-03
210
G
GS
Kalamazoo, Mich. (Central)
44
Max Bielfeldt
6-07
245
F
FR
Peoria, Ill. (Notre Dame)
52
Jordan Morgan
6-08
250
F
JR
Detroit, Mich. (University of Detroit Jesuit)
Coach: John Beilein 6th year at UM: 121-84
35 seasons overall: 672-402
(Erie CC, Nazareth, LeMoyne, Canisius, Richmond, West Virginia, Michigan)
Roster—Syracuse
#
Name
HT.
WT.
POS.
CL.
HOMETOWN / HIGHSCHOOL
0
Michael Gbinije
6-07
200
F
So.
Richmond, Va. / Benedictine College Prep
1
Mchl. Carter-Williams
6-06
185
G
So.
Hamilton, Mass. / St. Andrews School, R.I.
3
Jerami Grant
6-08
203
F
Fr.
Hyattsville, Md. / DeMatha Catholic
4
Nolan Hart
5-10
152
G
Jr.
Albany, N.Y. / Albany Academy
5
C.J. Fair
6-08
215
F
Jr.
Baltimore, Md. / City College HS/Brewster Acad.
10
Trevor Cooney
6-04
195
G
So.
Wilmington, Del. / Sanford School
12
Baye Moussa Keita
6-10
215
C
Jr.
Saint Louis, Senegal / Oak Hill Academy
13
Griffin Hoffmann
6-01
178
G
Sr.
New York, N.Y. / York Prep
14
Matt Lyde-Cajuste
6-05
215
F
Sr.
Mt. Vernon, N.Y. / Iona Prep
20
Brandon Triche
6-04
210
G
Sr.
Jamesville, N.Y. / Jamesville-DeWitt
21
Noel Jones
6-06
230
F
Jr.
Halifax, N.S. / Halifax Grammer School
23
Russ DeRemer
6-05
203
G
Jr.
Wrentham, Mass./Worcester Academy
25
Rakeem Christmas
6-09
242
F
So.
Philadelphia, Pa. / Academy of the New Church
32
DaJuan Coleman
6-09
288
F
Fr.
Jamesville, N.Y. / Jamesville-DeWitt
33
Albert Nassar
6-06
195
F
So.
Stuart, Fla. / South Fork
43
James Southerland
6-08
215
F
Sr.
Bayside, N.Y. / Cardozo/N. Dame Prep (Mass.)
Coach: Jim Boeheim 37th year at SU: 920-313
Team Stats: Michigan
Player
G
GS
Min
FG
FGA
FG%
3pt
3ptA
3pt%
FT
FTA
Trey Burke
37
37
1314
251
541
.464
72
189
.381
122
151
Tim Hardaway, Jr.
36
36
1250
192
431
.445
70
181
.387
73
105
Nik Stauskas
37
31
1153
137
291
.471
79
176
.449
74
87
Glenn Robinson, III
37
37
1239
159
281
.566
23
69
.333
65
97
Mitch McGary
37
6
704
127
210
.605
0
0
.000
21
46
Jordan Morgan
34
27
560
70
120
.583
0
0
.000
21
39
Jon Horford
30
4
272
33
57
.579
0
0
.000
17
24
Caris LeVert
31
1
323
25
84
.298
11
39
.282
7
14
Spike Albrecht
37
0
285
20
48
.417
12
26
.462
9
9
Eso Akunne
18
0
51
8
26
.308
4
12
.333
1
2
Max Bielfeldt
20
0
106
9
20
.450
0
2
.000
5
12
Matt Vogrich
26
6
125
9
27
.333
5
19
.263
3
4
Corey Person
13
0
43
3
7
.429
2
3
.667
2
3
Blake McLimans
16
0
20
4
15
.267
2
11
.182
1
2
Josh Bartelstein
6
0
10
0
1
.000
0
0
.000
0
2
Totals
37
37
7455
1047
2159
.485
280
727
.385
421
597
Opponents
37
37
7455
890
2105
.423
231
715
.323
318
469
Player
FT%
F
DQ
Ast
TO
Bk
Stl
Reb
Avg
Pts
Avg
Trey Burke
.808
67
0
253
81
18
59
115
3.1
696
18.8
Tim Hardaway, Jr.
.695
70
0
84
68
17
25
166
4.6
527
14.6
Nik Stauskas
.851
23
0
50
43
9
20
113
3.1
427
11.5
Glenn Robinson, III
.670
43
0
41
29
10
39
203
5.5
406
11.0
Mitch McGary
.457
84
0
18
43
25
41
228
6.2
275
7.4
Jordan Morgan
.538
50
1
13
32
3
15
153
4.5
161
4.7
Jon Horford
.708
44
0
9
14
16
8
68
2.3
83
2.8
Caris LeVert
.500
37
0
23
8
2
5
29
0.9
68
2.2
Spike Albrecht
1.000
23
0
28
12
1
12
29
0.8
61
1.6
Eso Akunne
.500
4
0
5
1
0
0
12
0.7
21
1.2
Max Bielfeldt
.417
8
0
3
3
1
3
31
1.6
23
1.2
Matt Vogrich
.750
8
0
5
3
0
2
23
0.9
26
1.0
Corey Person
.667
4
0
2
1
0
0
1
0.1
10
0.8
Blake McLimans
.500
4
0
1
1
1
1
13
0.8
11
0.7
Josh Bartelstein
.000
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0.0
0
0.0
Team
118
3.2
Totals
.705
470
1
536
339
103
231
1302
35.2
2795
75.5
Opponents
.678
564
8
463
451
117
193
1186
32.1
2329
62.9
Team Stats—Syracuse
Player
G
GS
Min
FG
FGA
FG%
3pt
3ptA
3pt%
FT
FTA
C. J. Fair
39
39
1357
208
442
.471
29
61
.475
114
151
Brandon Triche
39
39
1312
181
436
.415
49
168
.292
122
164
Mchl. Carter-Williams
39
39
1373
154
388
.397
35
118
.297
129
186
Rakeem Christmas
39
39
810
85
161
.528
0
0
.000
30
51
DaJuan Coleman
24
20
305
42
96
.438
0
0
.000
30
65
James Southerland
33
10
976
159
349
.456
83
206
.403
45
57
Jerami Grant
39
9
555
52
114
.456
6
15
.400
41
73
Baye Moussa Keita
39
0
655
53
87
.609
0
0
.000
39
65
Trevor Cooney
38
0
431
46
143
.322
27
103
.262
11
15
Albert Nasser
5
0
3
1
1
1.000
1
1
1.000
0
0
Noel Jones
6
0
8
1
2
.500
0
0
.000
0
0
Matt Lyde-Cajuste
13
0
22
1
6
.167
0
3
.000
0
0
Nolan Hart
11
0
15
1
6
.167
0
3
.000
0
1
Griffin Hoffman
12
0
15
0
5
.000
0
4
.000
1
4
Russ DeRemer
11
0
13
0
2
.000
0
1
.000
0
0
Totals
39
39
7850
984
2238
.440
230
683
.337
562
832
Opponents
39
39
7850
773
2101
.368
238
843
.282
502
742
Player
FT%
F
DQ
Ast
TO
Bk
Stl
Reb
Avg
Pts
Avg
C. J. Fair
.755
60
0
28
63
41
44
272
7.0
559
14.3
Brandon Triche
.744
81
2
136
107
5
50
134
3.4
533
13.7
Mchl. Carter-Williams
.694
87
4
290
131
19
109
190
4.9
472
12.1
Rakeem Christmas
.588
99
3
8
34
72
18
178
4.6
200
5.1
DaJuan Coleman
.462
30
0
4
23
9
13
95
4.0
114
4.8
James Southerland
.789
76
2
36
38
29
49
173
5.2
446
13.5
Jerami Grant
.562
54
1
17
26
16
17
111
2.8
151
3.9
Baye Moussa Keita
.600
95
2
6
22
45
21
147
3.8
145
3.7
Trevor Cooney
.733
32
0
23
19
3
28
31
0.8
130
3.4
Albert Nasser
.000
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0.2
3
0.6
Noel Jones
.000
2
0
0
0
1
0
6
1.0
2
0.3
Matt Lyde-Cajuste
.000
0
0
1
1
2
1
4
0.3
2
0.2
Nolan Hart
.000
0
0
1
6
0
1
3
0.3
2
0.2
Griffin Hoffman
.250
1
0
0
4
0
3
1
0.1
1
0.1
Russ DeRemer
.000
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0.2
0
0.0
Team
10
154
3.9
Totals
.675
618
14
550
485
242
355
1502
38.5
2760
70.8
Opponents
.677
714
9
521
608
125
270
1357
34.8
2286
58.6
Schedule—Michigan
Opponent
Score
vs. Slippery Rock
100-62
vs. IUPUI TV (nit)
91-54
vs. Cleveland State (nit)
77-47
(n) Pittsburgh (nit)
67-62
(n) Kansas State (nit)
71-57
vs. No. 18 North Carolina State
79-72
at Bradley
74-66
vs. Western Michigan
73-41
vs. Arkansas
80-67
vs. Binghamton
67-39
(n) West Virginia (Brooklyn)
81-66
vs. Eastern Michigan
93-54
vs. Central Michigan
88-73
at Northwestern
94-66
vs. Iowa
95-67
vs. Nebraska
62-47
at No. 15 Ohio State
53-56
at No. 9 Minnesota
83-75
vs. Purdue
68-53
at Illinois
74-60
vs. Northwestern
68-46
at No. 3 Indiana
73-81
vs. No. 10 Ohio State
76-74 ot
at Wisconsin
62-65 ot
at Michigan State
52-75
vs. Penn State
79-71
vs. Illinois
71-58
at Penn State
78-84
vs. No. 9 Michigan State
58-57
at Purdue
80-75
vs. No. 2 Indiana
71-72
vs. Penn State (B10)
83-66
vs. No. 22 Wisconsin (B10)
59-68
vs. South Dakota State ncaa
71-56
vs. VCU ncaa
78-53
vs. No. 3 Kansas ncaa
87-85 ot
vs. No. 14 Florida ncaa
79-59
Schedule—Syracuse
Opponent
Score
at San Diego St. (Onboard Midway)
62-49
Wagner
88-57
Princeton
73-53
Colgate
87-51
at Arkansas (SEC/Big East)
91-82
Eastern Michigan
84-48
Long Beach St.
84-53
Monmouth
108-56
Canisius (Gotham Classic)
85-61
Detroit (Gotham Classic)
72-68
(n) Temple (MSG) (Gotham Classic)
79-83
Alcorn St. (Gotham Classic)
57-36
Central Connecticut
96-62
Rutgers
78-53
at South Florida
55-44
at Providence
72-66
Villanova
72-61
at Louisville
70-68
Cincinnati
57-55
at Villanova
71-75 ot
at Pittsburgh
55-65
Notre Dame
63-47
St. John’s
77-58
at Connecticut
58-66
at Seton Hall
76-65
Providence
84-59
Georgetown
46-57
at Marquette
71-74
Louisville
53-58
DePaul
78-57
at Georgetown
39-61
(n) Seton Hall (MSG) (BE)
75-63
(n) Pittsburgh (MSG) (BE)
62-59
(n) Georgetown (MSG) (BE)
58-55 ot
(n) Louisville (MSG (BE)
61-78
(n) Montana ncaa
81-34
(n) California ncaa
66-60
(n) Indiana ncaa
61-50
(n) Marquette ncaa
55-39
Vital Statistics
FG% Margin: Syracuse by 1.0%
Rebound Margin: Syracuse by 0.6
Turnover Margin: Syracuse by 0.4
R+T Margin: Syracuse by 1.7 extra possessions
SOS: Syracuse by 3.4 points per game
PiRate Pick: Syracuse 76 Michigan 70
Other: If Syracuse plays Louisville for the national title, it will be the fourth time conference opponents have faced each other in the championship game. In 1988, Kansas beat Oklahoma in a big upset. In 1985, Villanova beat Georgetown in an even bigger upset. In 1976, Indiana beat Michigan to complete the last undefeated season of a national champion.
Michigan and Louisville or Michigan and Wichita State would continue a tradition of recent Midwest dominance in the Championship Game. We consider Louisville and Lexington to be more Midwest than South. There have been 11 Midwest schools in the 13 title games of the 2000’s. There have been 9 teams from the South, 4 from the Mid-Atlantic/Northeast area, and 2 from the West.
The Big Ten has placed five teams in the Championship Game this century, but only one member one—Michigan State in 2000. The Big East is 3-0 in 21st Century National Championship Games.
Comments Off on Bracketnomics 2013: Final Four Saturday–April 6, 2013
Welcome back to the PiRate Ratings’ Bracketnomics. A quick tutorial about Bracketnomics: We have studied numerous statistical factors of all Final Four Teams from the 1950’s until 2011. We isolated the statistical similarities of those teams and found certain shared statistical characteristics. For the last eight years, we have been applying it to the NCAA teams trying to discover which ones shared these same statistics as the Final Four teams of yesteryear. In five of the last seven years, we were pretty spot on with our selections. For instance, in 2009, whenKentucky,Kansas, andOhioStatewere listed as the heavy tri-favorites, our system showed Duke to be the top-rated team. We went with Duke even though the Blue Devils were not being highly considered. Now admittedly, we did not seeButlercoming through to the Finals that year, or last year either, but we did rateButleras one to watch to get to the Elite 8.
Kentucky will take advantage of the size difference and force Louisville to take too many shots outside of their comfort zone. The Wildcats will hold Louisville under 40% from the field, and they will control the boards to keep the Cardinals from getting many second chance shots.
Louisville must try to force Kentucky to turn the ball over, and the Cardinals will have to apply pressure while at the same time trying to force the ball out of the paint. While the Cats may turn the ball over a little more than they normally do, Kentucky will get some easy stuff shots and close-in crips to counter.
#2MW Kansas (31-6) vs. #2E Ohio State (31-7)
Kansas Jayhawks
No. Player Pos Ht Wt Yr HomeTown(Last Team)
0 Thomas Robinson F 6-10 237 JR Washington, D.C./Brewster [N.H.] Academy
1 Naadir Tharpe G 5-11 170 FR Worcester, Mass./Brewster [N.H.] Academy
2 Conner Teahan G 6-06 212 SR Leawood, Kan./Rockhurst HS
4 Justin Wesley F 6-09 220 SO Fort Worth,Texas/North CrowleyHS/Lamar
5 Jeff Withey C 7-00 235 JR San Diego, Calif./Horizon HS
10 Tyshawn Taylor G 6-03 185 SR Hoboken, N.J./St. Anthony HS
15 Elijah Johnson G 6-04 195 JR Las Vegas,Nev./CheyenneHS
20 Niko Roberts G 5-11 175 SO Huntington, N.Y./Saint Anthony’s HS
21 Christian Garrett G 6-03 170 FR Los Angeles,Calif./IMGAcademy
22 Merv Lindsay G 6-07 195 FR MorenoValley,Calif./CanyonSpringsHigh School
23 Ben McLemore G 6-05 185 FR St. Louis,Mo./ChristianLifeCenter[Texas]
24 Travis Releford G 6-06 207 JR Kansas City,Mo./Bishop Miege HS
25 Jordan Juenemann G 6-03 195 SR Hays, Kan./Hays HS
31 Jamari Traylor F 6-08 215 FR Chicago,Ill./IMGAcademy[Fla.]
40 Kevin Young F 6-08 185 JR Perris,Calif./Perris High School/Loyola Marymount
Coaches
Bill Self – Head Coach
Joe Dooley – Assistant Coach
Kurtis Townsend – Assistant Coach
Danny Manning – Assistant Coach
Results
Opponent
KU
Att.
Towson
100
54
(n) Kentucky
65
75
(n) Georgetown
67
63
(n) UCLA
72
56
(n) Duke
61
68
Florida Atlantic
77
54
South Florida
70
42
Long Beach St.
88
80
Ohio State
78
67
(n) Davidson
74
80
at Southern Cal
63
47
Howard
89
34
North Dakota
84
58
Kansas State
67
49
at Oklahoma
72
61
at Texas Tech
81
46
Iowa State
82
73
Baylor
92
74
at Texas
69
66
Texas A&M
64
54
at Iowa State
64
72
Oklahoma
84
62
at Missouri
71
74
at Baylor
68
54
Oklahoma State
81
66
at Kansas State
59
53
Texas Tech
83
50
at Texas A&M
66
58
Missouri
87
86
at Oklahoma State
70
58
Texas
73
63
vs.Texas A&M
83
66
vs. Baylor
72
81
ncaaDetroit
65
50
ncaa Purdue
63
60
ncaa North Carolina State
60
57
ncaa North Carolina
80
67
Statistics
Player
gp-gs
min
avg
fg-fga
fg%
3fg-fga
3fg%
ft-fta
ft%
Thomas Robinson
37-37
1169
31.6
247-482
.512
7-14
.500
154-226
.681
Tyshawn Taylor
37-36
1230
33.2
215-446
.482
57-148
.385
131-192
.682
Elijah Johnson
37-36
1190
32.2
137-322
.425
65-194
.335
32-46
.696
Jeff Withey
37-37
902
24.4
109-199
.548
0-0
.000
123-155
.794
Travis Releford
37-36
1138
30.8
113-226
.500
24-77
.312
63-98
.643
Conner Teahan
37-2
784
21.2
67-181
.370
50-147
.340
26-31
.839
Kevin Young
36-0
410
11.4
47-96
.490
3-9
.333
33-49
.673
Jordan Juenemann
15-1
47
3.1
8-18
.444
1-6
.167
2-6
.333
Justin Wesley
37-0
324
8.8
17-30
.567
0-0
.000
11-26
.423
Merv Lindsay
12-0
26
2.2
5-9
.556
1-3
.333
0-1
.000
Naadir Tharpe
32-0
175
5.5
11-38
.289
6-22
.273
1-2
.500
Niko Roberts
7-0
14
2.0
0-4
.000
0-1
.000
0-2
.000
Christian Garrett
7-0
15
2.1
0-0
.000
0-0
.000
0-0
.000
Anthony West
1-0
1
1.0
0-0
.000
0-0
.000
0-0
.000
Total……….
37
7425
200.7
976-2051
.476
214-621
.345
576-834
.691
Opponents……
37
7425
200.7
783-2061
.380
222-658
.337
490-685
.715
Player
Reb-O
Reb-D
Reb-Tot
Fl-DQ
a
to
blk
stl
pts
Thomas Robinson
105
333
438
104-2
71
101
34
41
655
Tyshawn Taylor
7
77
84
75-0
174
128
6
50
618
Elijah Johnson
14
100
114
87-2
134
65
2
54
371
Jeff Withey
77
153
230
93-1
28
44
129
22
341
Travis Releford
60
97
157
77-0
67
37
7
43
313
Conner Teahan
24
55
79
62-1
38
36
1
27
210
Kevin Young
48
58
106
57-0
23
27
14
20
130
Jordan Juenemann
1
7
8
4-0
2
2
1
1
19
Justin Wesley
26
33
59
69-1
1
11
14
6
45
Merv Lindsay
0
3
3
3-0
1
0
1
1
11
Naadir Tharpe
3
7
10
12-0
21
22
0
7
29
Niko Roberts
0
2
2
4-0
3
2
0
2
0
Christian Garrett
1
1
2
0-0
1
1
0
0
0
Anthony West
0
0
0
0-0
0
0
0
0
0
Team
60
40
100
Total……….
426
966
1392
647-7
564
480
209
274
2744
Opponents……
397
786
1183
686-x
413
510
119
242
2278
Player
Scoring
Rebounding
Thomas Robinson
17.7
11.8
Tyshawn Taylor
16.7
2.3
Elijah Johnson
10.0
3.1
Jeff Withey
9.2
6.2
Travis Releford
8.5
4.2
Conner Teahan
5.7
2.1
Kevin Young
3.6
2.9
Jordan Juenemann
1.3
0.5
Justin Wesley
1.2
1.6
Merv Lindsay
0.9
0.3
Naadir Tharpe
0.9
0.3
Niko Roberts
0.0
0.3
Christian Garrett
0.0
0.3
Anthony West
0.0
0.0
Team
2.7
Total……….
74.2
37.6
Opponents……
61.6
32.0
Ohio State Buckeyes
NO
NAME
POS
HT
WT
CLASS
HOMETOWN
0
Jared Sullinger
F
6-9
265
SO
Columbus,OH
1
Deshaun Thomas
F
6-7
225
SO
Fort Wayne,IN
2
Jordan Sibert
G
6-4
185
SO
Cincinnati,OH
3
Shannon Scott
G
6-1
180
FR
Alpharetta,GA
4
Aaron Craft
G
6-2
190
SO
Findlay,OH
10
LaQuinton Ross
F
6-8
225
FR
Jackson,MS
12
Sam Thompson
F
6-7
190
FR
Chicago,IL
14
Alex Rogers
G
6-2
195
JR
Cincinnati,OH
15
J.D. Weatherspoon
F
6-6
215
SO
Columbus,OH
23
Amir Williams
C
6-11
220
FR
Birmingham,MI
30
Evan Ravenel
F
6-8
260
JR
Tampa,FL
32
Lenzelle Smith, Jr.
G
6-4
205
SO
Zion,IL
44
William Buford
G
6-6
220
SR
Toledo,OH
55
Trey McDonald
C
6-8
225
FR
Battle Creek,MI
Coaches
Thad Matta – Head Coach
Dave Dickerson – Associate Head Coach
Jeff Boals – Assistant Coach
Chris Jent – Assistant Coach
Results
Date
OSU
Opp
Wright State
73
42
Florida
81
74
Jackson State
85
41
North Florida
85
50
VMI
107
74
Valparaiso
80
47
Duke
85
63
Texas-Pan American
64
35
at Kansas
67
78
USC-Upstate
82
58
at South Carolina
74
66
Lamar
70
50
Miami (O)
69
40
Northwestern
87
54
at Indiana
70
74
Nebraska
71
40
at Iowa
76
47
at Illinois
74
79
Indiana
80
63
at Nebraska
79
45
Penn State
78
54
Michigan
64
49
at Wisconsin
58
52
Purdue
87
84
Michigan State
48
58
at Minnesota
78
68
at Michigan
51
56
Illinois
83
67
Wisconsin
60
63
at Northwestern
75
73
at Michigan State
72
70
Purdue
88
71
(n) Michigan
77
55
(n) Michigan State
64
68
ncaa Loyola (Md.)
78
59
ncaa Gonzaga
73
66
ncaa Cincinnati
81
66
ncaa Syracuse
77
70
Statistics
Player
gp-gs
min
avg
fg-fga
fg%
3fg-fga
3fg%
ft-fta
ft%
Jared Sullinger
36-35
1084
30.1
223-420
.531
16-38
.421
172-224
.768
Deshaun Thomas
38-38
1201
31.6
240-453
.530
49-138
.355
81-109
.743
William Buford
38-38
1285
33.8
199-479
.415
59-168
.351
90-109
.826
Aaron Craft
38-38
1215
32.0
111-219
.507
21-61
.344
91-128
.711
Lenzelle Smith, Jr
38-38
958
25.2
86-181
.470
29-77
.377
53-87
.609
Evan Ravenel
38-3
383
10.1
46-85
.541
0-0
.000
41-59
.695
J.D. Weatherspoon
25-0
157
6.3
29-47
.617
0-2
.000
18-31
.581
Jordan Sibert
24-0
273
11.4
24-79
.304
13-50
.260
10-18
.556
Sam Thompson
38-0
401
10.6
34-69
.493
1-14
.071
12-22
.545
LaQuinton Ross
9-0
35
3.9
5-15
.333
2-8
.250
6-7
.857
Amir Williams
28-0
188
6.7
19-36
.528
0-0
.000
10-28
.357
Shannon Scott
36-0
382
10.6
20-71
.282
1-18
.056
2-9
.222
Trey McDonald
13-0
38
2.9
1-6
.167
0-0
.000
0-0
.000
Total……….
38
7600
200.0
1037-2160
.480
191-574
.333
586-831
.705
Opponents……
38
7600
200.0
815-2006
.406
231-710
.325
408-585
.697
Player
Reb-O
Reb-D
Reb-Tot
Fl-DQ
a
to
blk
stl
pts
Jared Sullinger
110
219
329
106-1
44
69
36
42
634
Deshaun Thomas
98
107
205
61-0
34
46
9
15
610
William Buford
33
154
187
68-0
103
81
9
32
547
Aaron Craft
22
104
126
94-2
178
82
7
95
334
Lenzelle Smith, Jr
51
125
176
74-0
76
46
5
34
254
Evan Ravenel
31
51
82
69-1
9
28
8
10
133
J.D. Weatherspoon
16
11
27
8-0
4
8
4
6
76
Jordan Sibert
5
28
33
21-0
18
14
1
11
71
Sam Thompson
10
30
40
34-0
27
19
14
7
81
LaQuinton Ross
0
4
4
5-0
1
3
0
0
18
Amir Williams
27
35
62
23-0
2
8
23
4
48
Shannon Scott
4
34
38
47-0
60
36
2
18
43
Trey McDonald
3
3
6
3-0
1
4
0
0
2
Team
45
50
95
3
3
Total……….
455
955
1410
613-4
557
447
118
274
2851
Opponents……
315
802
1117
717-16
383
562
109
187
2269
Player
Scoring
Rebounding
Jared Sullinger
17.6
9.1
Deshaun Thomas
16.1
5.4
William Buford
14.4
4.9
Aaron Craft
8.8
3.3
Lenzelle Smith, Jr
6.7
4.6
Evan Ravenel
3.5
2.2
J.D. Weatherspoon
3.0
1.1
Jordan Sibert
3.0
1.4
Sam Thompson
2.1
1.1
LaQuinton Ross
2.0
0.4
Amir Williams
1.7
2.2
Shannon Scott
1.2
1.1
Trey McDonald
0.2
0.5
Team
2.5
Total……….
75.0
37.1
Opponents……
59.7
29.4
PiRate Criteria Scores
PiRate Criteria
KU
Pts
OSU
Pts
Scoring Margin
12.6
6.3
15.3
7.7
Field Goal % Margin
9.6
4.8
7.4
3.7
Rebounding Margin
5.6
3.4
7.7
4.6
Turnover Margin
0.8
0.4
3.0
1.5
Steals
7.4
7.2
R + T *
8.04
3.2
12.74
5.1
Strength of Schedule ^
.5858
3.6
.5890
3.9
Road W-L #
71.4
2.0
72.2
2.0
TOTAL
KU:
23.7
OSU:
28.5
Prediction: Ohio State 75 Kansas 69
We expect this game to stay close for most of the 40 minutes. These teams are evenly matched, and Ohio State enjoys only subtle advantages in this game. The Buckeyes are a tad better at rebounding and turnover margin, and we show OSU with about five extra scoring opportunities in this game
* R+T is the PiRate Ratings’ estimate of the margin of extra scoring opportunities per game for each team. The formula is: (Rebounding Margin) + (0.2 * Avg. Steals Per Game) + (1.2 * Turnover Margin). The result shows how many more scoring opportunities the team gets than its opponents. If the R+T is 10, that means a team averages 10 more scoring opportunities per game over its opponents.
^ Strength of Schedule is taken from the RPI ratings from CBS Sports.
# Road W-L% includes true road games and neutral site games.
Comments Off on NCAA Tournament–Final Four Preview
Welcome back to the PiRate Ratings’ Bracketnomics. A quick tutorial about Bracketnomics: We have studied numerous statistical factors of all Final Four Teams from the 1950’s until 2011. We isolated the statistical similarities of those teams and found certain shared statistical characteristics. For the last eight years, we have been applying it to the NCAA teams trying to discover which ones shared these same statistics as the Final Four teams of yesteryear. In five of the last seven years, we were pretty spot on with our selections. For instance, in 2009, when Kentucky, Kansas, and Ohio State were listed as the heavy tri-favorites, our system showed Duke to be the top-rated team. We went with Duke even though the Blue Devils were not being highly considered. Now admittedly, we did not see Butler coming through to the Finals that year, or last year either, but we did rate Butler as one to watch to get to the Elite 8.
Six of the eight remaining teams in the Big Dance own 30 or more wins. All of the sleepers are gone, and this is one of the strongest quarterfinals in years.
Here are the PiRate Criteria Scores for each of the Elite 8
Team
Pts
FG% Diff
Reb
TO
R+T
SOS
Rd W-L
Total
Baylor
5.0
2.70
3.3
0.2
3.0
3.6
4.0
21.8
Florida
5.7
1.90
1.7
0.9
2.5
2.2
0.5
15.4
Kansas
6.5
4.95
3.4
0.4
3.2
3.6
2.0
24.0
Kentucky
8.8
5.85
4.4
0.2
3.6
2.2
4.5
29.5
Louisville
3.8
2.30
1.0
0.6
1.9
3.8
2.5
15.8
North Carolina
7.6
3.35
6.2
0.9
5.5
4.5
4.0
32.0
Ohio St.
7.8
4.00
4.6
1.5
5.0
3.9
2.0
28.8
Syracuse
7.0
4.15
-0.9
2.9
2.9
2.4
4.5
23.0
All times Eastern Daylight Time
Saturday, March 24
East Regional: Boston
Announcers: Verne Lundquist, Bill “Man-to-Man” Raftery, and Lesley Visser
Network: CBS
4:30 PM
#1 Syracuse (34-2) vs. #2 Ohio State (30-7)
PiRate Criteria Score: Syr 20.5 OSU 28.8
Syracuse criteria score now includes the loss of Fab Melo
Syracuse will feel the effect of not having Melo for this game. Ohio State will enjoy a decisive advantage on the boards, and the Buckeyes will be able to take care of the ball, thus thwarting Syracuse’s number one asset.
We do not see this game getting out of hand, and we believe the Orangemen will stay within contention. However, the Buckeyes are too strong inside, and this game will be decided in the paint.
Prediction: Ohio State 74 Syracuse 69
West Regional: Phoenix
Announcers: Kevin Harlan, Reggie Miller, Len Elmore, and Marty Snider
Network: TBS
7:05 PM
#4 Louisville (29-9) vs. #7 Florida (26-10)
PiRate Criteria Score: UL 15.8 Florida 15.4
It’s teacher vs. student in this pure tossup game. The PiRate Criteria scores differ by just 0.4, which means we believe this game to be a 50-50 proposition. The only reason we are going with the Cardinals is that they are the team with the 0.4 point advantage.
Both teams share minor advantages in different Criteria areas. Florida has a small advantage in scoring margin, rebounding margin, and turnover margin. Louisville has a small advantage in field goal margin, steals, strength of schedule, and record away from home.
Prediction: Louisville 65 Florida 64 OT
Friday, March 23, 2012
South Regional: Atlanta
Announcers: Jim Nantz, Clark Kellogg, and Tracy Wolfson
Network: CBS
2:20 PM
#1 Kentucky (35-2) vs. #3 Baylor (30-7)
PiRate Criteria Score: UK 29.5 BU 21.8
Baylor actually matches up quite well with Kentucky, but with North Carolina not at 100%, the Wildcats are the class of the remaining octet.
Both teams own double-digit scoring margins, but Kentucky has the highest in the field at 17.6. The Wildcats’ field goal margin difference is +11.7, which is very indicative of a Final Four team. The Blue Misters’ rebounding margin is 7.3, to 5.5 for Baylor. Turnover margin is the same for both teams, while Baylor owns a slight advantage in the steals department and a slightly tougher strength of schedule.
Prediction: Kentucky 80 Baylor 71
Midwest Regional: St. Louis
Announcers: Marv “Yessss” Albert, Steve Kerr, and Craig Sager
Network: TBS
5:05 PM
#1 North Carolina (32-5) vs. #2 Kansas (30-6)
PiRate Criteria Score: UNC 32.0 * KU 24.0
* Without Kendall Marshall, the Tar Heels’ score drops by 12.5 points to 19.5; this assumes that John Henson has no ill effects left from his injury.
As of this writing on late Friday night, it does not look like Kendall Marshall will be able to play in this game, and even if he plays, he will not dish for 10 assists, and he will commit a couple of extra turnovers.
Even if Marshall plays, we are going with the Jayhawks to beat the team we picked to win it all before the tournament started. Missing a 100% Marshall is like the New York Giants playing in the Super Bowl without Eli Manning.
Prediction: Kansas 69 North Carolina 62
Comments Off on NCAA Men’s Tournament Elite 8 Preview
Tip Time: Approximately 9:23 PM EDT (but expect it to be a couple minutes late)
Location: Reliant Stadium, Houston (Home of the Houston Astros)
Television: CBS
Radio: Westwood One
It has happened before. A team that lost in the National Championship Game one year has returned to the title game a year later. It has happened thrice. Two times, the team in question lost again. In 1983 and 1984, Houston lost to North Carolina State and Georgetown. In 1992 and 1993, Michigan lost to Duke and North Carolina.
In 1990, Duke was embarrassed by UNLV in the biggest Championship Game loss in history, but the Blue Devils came back in 1991 to beat Kansas for all the marbles.
Butler Bulldogs
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Conference: Horizon League
Record: 28-9
Butler Bulldogs–Starters in Bold
No.
Name
Pos.
Class
Ht
Wt
PPG
RPG
Other
1
Shelvin Mack
G
Jr
6-03
215
16.1
4.4
3.5 Ast
2
Shawn Vanzant
G
Sr
6-00
172
8.2
3.2
41.7% 3-pt, 1.7 Ast
3
Zach Hahn
G
Sr
6-01
176
5.1
1.2
85.7% FT
4
Erik Fromm
F
Fr
6-09
220
0.8
0.5
26 G, 3.4 min
5
Ronald Nored
G
Jr
6-00
174
5.1
3.1
2.4 Ast, 1.1 Stl, A+ defender
11
Alex Anglin
G/F
Sr
6-05
177
0.7
0.7
18 G, 4.3 min
20
Chrishawn Hopkins
G
Fr
6-01
165
1.6
0.5
20 G, 6.1 min
22
Grant Leiendecker
G
Sr
6-05
182
1.2
0.3
15 G, 2.3 min
23
Khyle Marshall
F
Fr
6-07
210
5.9
3.9
51.7% FG, 15.4 min
30
Emerson Kampen
C
So
6-09
189
0
0.1
15 G, 1.9 min
32
Garrett Butcher
F
Jr
6-07
209
1.6
1.3
29 G, 7.4 min
33
Chase Stigall
G
So
6-04
195
3.8
1.7
16.2 min
44
Andrew Smith
C
So
6-11
239
8.6
5.5
61% FG
54
Matt Howard
F
Sr
6-08
230
16.7
7.8
1.5 Ast, 1.1 Stl
Head Coach
Brad Stevens
Assistant
Matthew Graves
Assistant
Terry Johnson
Assistant
Micah Shrewsberry
Team Stats
Butler
Opp
Points Per Game
72.1
64.4
Field Goal %
44.1
42.6
3-point %
35.5
32.8
FT %
72.9
66.8
Rebounds Per Game
35.0
31.5
Turnovers Per Game
11.1
12.5
Steals Per Game
5.9
R + T (*)
5.48
SOS
55
Road Win %
70
PiRate Criteria #
6
(*) R+T= [R+({.2S}*{1.2T})], where R is reb. margin, T=Turnover margin, S=Steals per game
If turnover margin is negative, then adjust it to: R+T= [R+({.2S}+{1.2T})]
Connecticut Huskies
Location: Storrs, CT
Conference: Big East
Record: 31-9
Connecticut Huskies–Starters in Bold
No.
Name
Pos.
Class
Ht
Wt
PPG
RPG
Other
1
Enosch Wolf
C
Fr
7-01
260
1.0
0.9
7 G, 3.7 min
2
Donnell Beverly
G
Sr
6-04
190
1.7
1.3
8.6 min
3
Jeremy Lamb
G/F
Fr
6-05
185
11.1
4.4
1.6 Ast
4
Jamal Coombs-McDaniel
F
So
6-07
210
5.8
2.7
80% FT
5
Niels Giffey
G/F
Fr
6-07
210
2.2
1.3
9.5 min
10
Tyler Olander
F
Fr
6-09
225
1.5
1.8
9.7 min
13
Shabazz Napier
G
Fr
6-00
170
7.9
2.4
3.1 Ast, 1.6 Stl
15
Kemba Walker
G
Jr
6-01
172
23.7
5.4
81.8% FT, 4.6 Ast, 1.9 Stl
21
Kyle Bailey
G
Sr
6-03
170
0.0
0.0
6 G, 1.0 min
22
Roscoe Smith
F
Fr
6-08
205
6.5
5.2
1.2 Blk
23
Benjamin Stewart
F
Jr
6-05
205
0.5
0.5
4 G, 1.0 min
34
Alex Oriakhi
F/C
So
6-09
240
9.6
8.7
1.6 Blk
35
Charles Okwandu
C
Sr
7-00
255
2.9
2.7
1.3 Blk
Head Coach
Jim Calhoun
Assistant
George Blaney
Assistant
Andre LaFleur
Assistant
Kevin Ollie
Team Stats
U Conn
Opp
Points Per Game
72.8
65.4
Field Goal %
43.6
39.8
3-point %
33.3
32.9
FT %
76.1
68.2
Rebounds Per Game
39.3
35.2
Turnovers Per Game
11.4
11.7
Steals Per Game
6.4
R + T (*)
4.56
SOS
61
Road Win %
78
PiRate Criteria #
11
Player Matchups
5: Butler—Andrew Smith vs. Connecticut—Charles Okwandu
Smith is quicker and more agile than Okwandu. Smith can force Okawandu outside of the low post, while Okwandu does not have to be guarded when he is more than 10 feet away from the hoop. In the paint, Okwandu has a strength advantage, but much of this advantage can be neutralized by Smith’s superior mobility.
Advantage: Smith by a little
4: Butler—Matt Howard vs. Connecticut—Alex Oriakhi
This is one of two keys to the game. Howard can turn the tide of this game if he is on target from outside. Oriakhi is a key rebounder for UConn, and if he is forced to stay outside to keep Howard from getting open looks, much of Connecticut’s rebounding advantage will dissipate. Oriakhi can dominate Howard inside, and he has a chance to be a surprise hero in this game.
When UCLA was dominating the Championship Game, the Bruins always had a surprise showing from a player that had not been expected to shine. Memories of Steve Patterson almost single-handedly defeating Villanova in 1971 come to mind. Ironically, that game was played next door at the Astrodome.
Advantage: Howard, but it needs to be a decided advantage and it may not
3: Butler—Chase Stigall vs. Connecticut—Roscoe Smith
Smith has a big size advantage, but he is not a major contributor. Stigall starts, but he does not play half the time. He will split minutes with Khyle Marshall and others.
Look for Smith to win this positional battle for the Huskies, but it shouldn’t be what swings this game.
Advantage: Smith, but by an inconsequential amount.
2. Butler—Shawn Vanzant vs. Connecticut—Jeremy Lamb
Lamb has the potential to be the game-decider if Butler forgets he is capable of scoring 15-18 points in a game where 60 points might win the title. He has a size and quickness advantage over Vanzant.
Vanzant is a better outside shooter, and if he could drain a couple of threes in the first half, it could mean a lot for Butler.
Advantage: Lamb, and the amount of advantage could be the difference in this game
1. Butler—Shelvin Mack vs. Connecticut—Kemba Walker
Walker would have the advantage over every other guard in the nation, so this is not really up for discussion. However, if Mack could force Walker to take a few more shots to get his average and force his passes wide, Butler could in essence win this positional battle.
Walker absolutely must have a typical or better than typical game. He will lead the Huskies in scoring; he will dish out four or five assists, and he will come up with a couple of steals.
Mack could match Walker point-for-point in this game, but if that happens, Butler will not win this game. Mack’s ability to get the ball in low for easy shots is more important than his scoring ability. We do not mean to say that he should forego shooting; we refer to Mack’s trying to score 25 points to match Walker. If he scores 15 points and dishes out an equal amount of assists to Walker, then he will have done his job.
Advantage: Walker, but will it be enough?
Bench: Butler—Zach Hahn, Ronald Nored, Khyle Marshall vs. Connecticut—Jamal Coombs-McDaniel, Niels Giffey, Tyler Olander, Shabazz Napier
Butler’s three bench players each brings something different to the table. Hahn is probably the best shooter in this game. He is a rhythm shooter. If he hits his first three, the opponent has to change its defense to keep from being shot out of the gym.
Nored is the best defender in this game, and he will be called on to temper Walker. Going back to our 1971 UCLA comparison, he is the Kenny Heitz of Butler.
Marshall can come in and produce instant inside offense, and he plays tough defense in the lane. He will see as much playing time as Stigall.
Connecticut goes nine-deep, but there is not more quality in their additional quantity. The Husky bench is rather weak, with Napier and Coombs-McDaniel the two best reserves. Neither should be much of a factor in this game.
Advantage: Butler by enough to matter if the game is strenuous.
Our Prediction: We see this game playing out in a similar manner to last year’s Championship Game. Connecticut has the talent to win this game by double digits, but Butler plays so intelligently and can keep this game close with a chance to win at the end.
If Walker has a big night, we do not believe Mack and Nored can come up with enough stops to prevent him from scoring 20-25 points in a limited possession game. If Walker tries to be a superhero and commits five turnovers while shooting too many off-balance shots, then he could still score 20 points but give up more than 20 points to Butler.
Upon reviewing all the players’ abilities and tendencies, we believe this game will be decided at the four position. If Howard goes out with a career night, Butler will cut down the nets. If he has a typical night, this game will still be in doubt after the final TV timeout. If he has an off night, Connecticut will win by eight to 12 points.
We tend to believe this will be just as memorable as last year’s game with the strong possibility that the team that scores the last points will win the game. We believe there is a good chance this game could still be undecided after 40 minutes. There have been few overtime games in the championship.
The first OT title game came in 1944 when Utah edged Dartmouth 42-40 at Madison Square Garden. In 1957, North Carolina defeated Kansas and Wilt Chamberlain in triple OT 54-53. Cincinnati appeared in two OT title games; the first was a happy ending with a 70-65 OT thriller over in-state rival and defending national champ Ohio State. In 1963, Loyola of Chicago upset Bearcats 60-58 in OT. Michigan edged Seton Hall in OT 80-79 in the 1989 title game. In 1997, Arizona pulled off a big upset over defending national champ Kentucky by a score of 84-79 , and Kansas defeated Memphis in OT in 2008 by a score of 75-68.
Predicted Score: Connecticut 69 Butler 66 in double OT!
Comments Off on The 2011 NCAA Basketball Championship Game Preview
UNCLE!!! Yes, we cry uncle. Our PiRate Criteria failed to predict a Final Four team for the first time since we began predicting for the media six years ago. In backtests, it isolated at least one Final Four every year back to the advent of the 64-team tournament.
PiRate Criteria Rating in (parentheses)
All Games on CBS Television and Westwood One Radio
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Final Four Site: Reliant Stadium, Houston
6:09 PM EDT—Virginia Commonwealth 28-11 (1) vs. Butler 27-9 (6)
Virginia Commonwealth Rams–Starters in Bold
No.
Name
Pos.
Class
Ht
Wt
PPG
RPG
Other
5
Juvonte Reddic
F
Fr
6-09
225
3.5
1.9
0.5 Stl, 11.2 min
10
Darius Theus
G
So
6-03
190
3.1
1.5
2.1 Ast, 1.1 Stl, 15.4 min
12
Joey Rodriguez
G
Sr
5-10
175
10.5
3.3
81.6% FT, 5.1 Ast, 1.5 Stl
20
Bradford Burgess
G
Jr
6-06
225
14.3
6.2
42.8% 3pt, 1.1 Stl
21
Jamie Skeen
F
Sr
6-09
240
15.4
7.4
51.6% FG, 1.6 Ast
23
Rob Brandenberg
G
Fr
6-02
170
5.1
1.7
13.9 min
30
Troy Daniels
G
So
6-04
195
2.1
0.8
26 G, 4.8 min
31
Toby Veal
F
Jr
6-08
235
2.4
2.2
29 G, 9.9 min
32
Brandon Rozzell
G
Sr
6-02
185
11.8
2.3
40.4% 3pt, 1.5 Ast. 1.4 Stl
33
D. J. Haley
C
Fr
7-00
250
1.1
1.6
53.1% FG, 7.8 min
34
David Hinton
F
So
6-09
235
0.7
0.2
18 G, 3.7 min
50
Ed Nixon
G
Sr
6-04
210
7.1
2.6
1.9 Ast, 1.2 Stl
Head Coach
Shaka Smart
Assistant
Will Wade
Assistant
Mike Rhoades
Assistant
Mike Jones
Team Stats
VCU
Opp
Points Per Game
71.8
66.7
Field Goal %
43.6
44.4
3-point %
37.0
33.5
FT %
71.6
67.4
Rebounds Per Game
32.3
36.1
Turnovers Per Game
11.3
14.7
Steals Per Game
8.3
R + T (*)
2.97
SOS
55
Road Win %
68
PiRate Criteria #
1
(*) R+T= [R+({.2S}*{1.2T})], where R is reb. margin, T=Turnover margin, S=Steals per game
If turnover margin is negative, then adjust it to: R+T= [R+({.2S}+{1.2T})]
Butler Bulldogs–Starters in Bold
No.
Name
Pos.
Class
Ht
Wt
PPG
RPG
Other
1
Shelvin Mack
G
Jr
6-03
215
15.9
4.3
3.6 Ast
2
Shawn Vanzant
G
Sr
6-00
172
8.1
3.2
42.0% 3-pt, 1.7 Ast
3
Zach Hahn
G
Sr
6-01
176
5.0
1.1
85.7% FT
4
Erik Fromm
F
Fr
6-09
220
0.8
0.5
26 G, 3.4 min
5
Ronald Nored
G
Jr
6-00
174
5.3
3.1
2.5 Ast, 1.2 Stl, A+ defender
11
Alex Anglin
G/F
Sr
6-05
177
0.7
0.7
18 G, 4.3 min
20
Chrishawn Hopkins
G
Fr
6-01
165
1.6
0.5
20 G, 6.1 min
22
Grant Leiendecker
G
Sr
6-05
182
1.2
0.3
15 G, 2.3 min
23
Khyle Marshall
F
Fr
6-07
210
5.9
3.8
52.4% FG, 15.2 min
30
Emerson Kampen
C
So
6-09
189
0.0
0.1
15 G, 1.9 min
32
Garrett Butcher
F
Jr
6-07
209
1.6
1.3
29 G, 7.4 min
33
Chase Stigall
G
So
6-04
195
3.9
1.7
16.3 min
44
Andrew Smith
C
So
6-11
239
8.8
5.4
62.1% FG
54
Matt Howard
F
Sr
6-08
230
16.7
7.7
1.5 Ast, 1.1 Stl
Head Coach
Brad Stevens
Assistant
Matthew Graves
Assistant
Terry Johnson
Assistant
Micah Shrewsberry
Team Stats
Butler
Opp
Points Per Game
72.1
64.5
Field Goal %
44.3
42.7
3-point %
35.5
32.6
FT %
72.7
66.8
Rebounds Per Game
34.7
31.5
Turnovers Per Game
11.1
12.6
Steals Per Game
5.9
R + T (*)
5.32
SOS
55
Road Win %
68
PiRate Criteria #
6
Virginia Commonwealth is the first team with a negative PiRate Criteria rating to win an Elite Eight round game. The results of that game elevated their number into positive territory, but we still wonder about their rebounding difficulties. VCU has won five games in this tournament, and four were not all that close. The Rams have maintained a hot shooting touch from outside, and their 3-point percentage has been much higher in the postseason than it was during the regular season.
The VCU press has had its moments during the Big Dance as well, as a couple of opponents had trouble with it. Can the Rams survive to the final round? It is possible, but we tend to believe that their shooting prowess will eventually regress to the norm. The Rams are overdue for a bad outside shooting game, and in a baseball domed stadium, the sightlines will not be like anything they have seen before.
Butler has the experience here. They are the most seasoned of the teams left, and the Bulldogs can no longer be considered a Cinderella team. In fact, we tend to see Butler very much like a 21st Century version of Marquette during the Al McGuire years. This team can continue to be a serious player in the national tournament scene.
Butler will be able to handle the VCU press. They will inbound the ball quickly and return it quickly to the inbound passer who will have an opening to break the press with numbers. The Bulldogs can run when they need to, and a couple of easy baskets and/or fouls early could force VCU to panic. The Butler perimeter defense will cover the VCU shooters tightly, and Nored will make life miserable for any opponent trying to shoot from outside.
This is a must-see game. It should be close, and we do not see Butler pulling away to win by a big margin. VCU could still have a chance to win with one quick spurt, and the Rams are capable of going on a quick spurt. Ask Kansas about that.
Prediction: Butler 65 VCU 61
Approximately 8:49 PM—Kentucky 29-8 (18) vs. Connecticut 30-9 (11)
Kentucky Wildcats–Starters in Bold
No.
Name
Pos.
Class
Ht
Wt
PPG
RPG
Other
1
Darius Miller
G
Jr
6-07
225
11.1
4.6
44.9% 3-pt, 86.4% FT, 1.7 Ast
2
Stacey Poole
G
Fr
6-04
195
0.3
0.5
16 G, 2.8 min
3
Terrence Jones
F
Fr
6-08
244
15.8
8.7
1.9 Blk, 1.1 Stl
4
Jon Hood
G
So
6-07
202
0.8
0.7
33 G, 4.8 min
5
Jarrod Polson
G
Fr
6-02
185
0.4
0.1
17 G, 1.8 min
12
Brandon Knight
G
Fr
6-03
185
17.3
3.9
4.2 Ast
20
Doron Lamb
G
Fr
6-04
195
12.3
2.0
48.1% 3-pt, 1.7 Ast
30
Eloy Vargas
F
Jr
6-11
250
1.5
1.9
7.7 min
34
DeAndre Liggins
G
Jr
6-06
210
8.8
4.1
40.2% 3-pt, 2.5 Ast, 1.2 Stl
55
Josh Harrellson
F
Sr
6-10
275
7.6
8.8
61.4% FG, 1.5 Blk
Head Coach
John Calipari
Assistant
John Robic
Assistant
Orlando Antigua
Assistant
Kenny Payne
Team Stats
UK
Opp
Points Per Game
75.4
63.7
Field Goal %
46.3
39.3
3-point %
40.0
32.8
FT %
71.6
72.2
Rebounds Per Game
37.4
33.7
Turnovers Per Game
10.7
12.0
Steals Per Game
5.4
R + T (*)
5.38
SOS
61
Road Win %
64
PiRate Criteria #
18
Connecticut Huskies–Starters in Bold
No.
Name
Pos.
Class
Ht
Wt
PPG
RPG
Other
1
Enosch Wolf
C
Fr
7-01
260
1.0
0.9
7 G, 3.7 min
2
Donnell Beverly
G
Sr
6-04
190
1.8
1.3
8.8 min
3
Jeremy Lamb
G/F
Fr
6-05
185
11.1
4.3
1.5 Ast
4
Jamal Coombs-McDaniel
F
So
6-07
210
5.8
2.7
81.5% FT
5
Niels Giffey
G/F
Fr
6-07
210
2.2
1.3
9.5 min
10
Tyler Olander
F
Fr
6-09
225
1.5
1.8
9.8 min
13
Shabazz Napier
G
Fr
6-00
170
8.0
2.4
3.0 Ast, 1.6 Stl
15
Kemba Walker
G
Jr
6-01
172
23.9
5.3
81.8% FT, 4.5 Ast, 1.9 Stl
21
Kyle Bailey
G
Sr
6-03
170
0.0
0.0
6 G, 1.0 min
22
Roscoe Smith
F
Fr
6-08
205
6.5
5.2
1.2 Blk
23
Benjamin Stewart
F
Jr
6-05
205
0.5
0.5
4 G, 1.0 min
34
Alex Oriakhi
F/C
So
6-09
240
9.6
8.6
1.6 Blk
35
Charles Okwandu
C
Sr
7-00
255
2.9
2.7
1.3 Blk
Head Coach
Jim Calhoun
Assistant
George Blaney
Assistant
Andre LaFleur
Assistant
Kevin Ollie
Team Stats
U Conn
Opp
Points Per Game
73.3
65.7
Field Goal %
43.5
40.0
3-point %
33.7
32.9
FT %
76.0
68.9
Rebounds Per Game
39.4
35.1
Turnovers Per Game
11.3
11.7
Steals Per Game
6.4
R + T (*)
4.91
SOS
61
Road Win %
77
PiRate Criteria #
11
Connecticut won five games in five days at the Big East Tournament and parlayed that into four more wins in the NCAA Tournament. The Huskies have a chance to begin and end the season with separate double-digit game winning streaks. In Kemba Walker, U Conn has the best player in the Final Four, but one player cannot do it alone. The Huskies are anything but a one person team. They can pound it inside with Alex Oriakhi and Charles Okwandu, and when Walker drives the lane, Jeremy Lamb is frequently open outside. This Connecticut team is not as strong as the two national championship teams from Calhoun’s past, but the Huskies have enough talent to win a third for Calhoun.
Kentucky is the one team left in the tournament with a PiRate Criteria rating similar of past national champions. Their 18 rating is actually better than Indiana in 1981, North Carolina State in 1983, Villanova in 1985, Kansas in 1988, and Arizona in 1997. The Wildcats have very little depth with only seven players used unless the game is a major blowout. With the extra long timeout lengths, this should not be a factor at all this weekend. Although none of the players have Final Four experience, every game Kentucky plays is about as pressure-packed as a Final Four game. We believe the Wildcats will not be affected or intimidated in this game. However, the weird sightlines could make their outside shooting game suffer.
These two teams met in Hawaii in November, and Connecticut won 84-67. In that game, the Huskies quickly opened a 20-point lead in the first half and went to the locker room at the half up 50-29. Connecticut couldn’t miss, while Kentucky couldn’t buy a basket. Knight and Liggins were a combined 0-10 from three-point land, and Josh Harrellson did not score. Walker scored 29 points for the winners, while Oriakhi recorded a double-double with 18 points and 11 rebounds.
This game will have a much different look. This season, Kentucky has dominated teams that they have already played during the season. They are 7-0 against teams that they played a second or third time. We see this trend continuing.
Prediction: Kentucky 72 Connecticut 66
Comments Off on PiRate Ratings Final Four Viewing Guide and Preview, Saturday, April 2, 2011
It hasn’t been pretty for our PiRate Criteria Ratings this year. We are down to one team left in our Final Four bracket, but at least it is the team we picked to win it all. Kansas is our last hope, but if the Jayhawks can get by Virginia Commonwealth, they will be two wins away from keeping our successful record of picking the national champion before the tournament begins intact.
We are shocked that a team with a negative PiRate Criteria score is still around, and even more surprised that the team has had to win one extra game to get to this point. We are almost as shocked to see Arizona in the Elite Eight with a score of just four points, and we are semi-surprised to see Butler back in the Elite Eight with a rating of four. The Bulldogs’ 2010 PiRate Criteria score was 10 points higher than it is today, and they were actually favored to beat Syracuse in the Sweet 16 by our ratings.
PiRate Criteria Rating in (parentheses)
All Games on CBS
Saturday, March 26, 2011
4:30 PM EDT—Southeast Regional Final @ New Orleans
#2 Florida 29-7 (15) vs. #8 Butler 26-9 (4)
Position
Florida
Butler
Coach
Billy Donovan
Brad Stevens
Center
(32) Vernon Macklin 6-10 Sr.–11.2/5.4 58.4% FG
(44) Andrew Smith 6-11 So.–8.9/5.4 62.2% FG ***Probable***
Forward
(23) Alex Tyus 6-8 Sr.–8.9/6.1
(54) Matt Howard 6-8 Sr.–16.8/7.8 44.4% 3pt
Forward
(25) Chandler Parsons 6-10 Sr.–11.5/7.8 3.8 ast
(33) Chase Stigall 6-4 So.–4.0/1.8
Guard
(1) Kenny Boynton 6-2 So.–14.1/1.4 82.1% FT
(1) Shelvin Mack 6-3 Sr.–15.6/4.3 3.6 ast
Guard
(11) Erving Walker 5-8 Jr.–14.8/3.0 3.4 ast
(2) Shawn Vanzant 6-0 Sr.–8.1/3.1 42.3% 3 pt
6th
(4) Patric Young 6-9 Fr. F/C–3.4/3.8 56.8% FG
(23) Khyle Marshall 6-7 Fr. F–5.8/3.7
7th
(5) Scottie Wilbekin 6-2 Fr. G–2.5/1.5 1.7 ast
(5) Ronald Nored 6-0 Jr.–5.3/3.0 2.5 ast
PiRate Criteria Stats
Team
Florida
Butler
Pts
9.1
7.8
FG%
4.2
1.5
Reb
6.0
2.9
TO
0.3
1.7
Stl
5.9
6.0
R+T
6.42
5.35
SOS
60
54
Road%
79
67
PiRate #
15
4
Can Butler do it again? It does not appear highly probable, but then the Bulldogs have made a science out of making the improbable probable.
If the Bulldogs are to have any chance in this game, big man Andrew Smith must be able to play at close to 100%. Smith sprained his ankle in the Sweet 16 win over Wisconsin, and after he exited the game, Butler almost blew a 20-point lead. It is the emergence of Smith as a key player that has fueled Butler’s long winning streak. He has led the team in both steals and blocked shots in the winning streak.
When Smith is patrolling under the basket, Matt Howard and Shelvin Mack get more open looks. The duo will need to combine for 40+ points in this game, and they will need to connect on better than 50% of their two-point shots and better than 40% of their three-point shots for Butler to advance to the Final Four for the second consecutive year.
When Florida won the National Championship in 2007, their toughest game may have been their Sweet 16 game against Butler. That Gator team benefitted from having five starters that could score 20 points in a game. Coach Donovan’s club moves the ball quickly and the players without the ball keep their defender occupied. Not the most consistent team defensively, the Gators tend to play in spurts. At times, they are tough on opponents, and at times, opponents get a lot of open looks.
To beat Florida, the key is to penetrate the perimeter defense and take a lot of shots in the 5-10 foot range. Butler may lack the quickness to get into that inside zone, especially if Smith is not able to occupy 1 ½ defenders.
The Southeastern Conference was supposed to be down again this year, and the early NCAA Tournament exits of Tennessee, Georgia, and Vanderbilt supposedly proved this point. However, the SEC could very well place two teams in the Final Four this year.
Prediction: Florida 69 Butler 60
7:05 PM EDT—West Regional Final @ Anaheim
#3 Connecticut 29-9 (11) vs. #5 Arizona 30-7 (4)
Position
Connecticut
Arizona
Coach
Jim Calhoun
Sean Miller
Center
(35) Charles Okwandu 7-0 Sr.–2.9/2.8
(23) Derrick Williams 6-8 So.–19.5/8.4 60.2% FG/60.3% 3pt
(12) Lamont Jones 6-0 So.–9.7/1.6 2.5 Ast/82.8% FT
6th
(13) Shabazz Napier 6-0 Fr. G–7.9/2.3 3.1 Ast
(3) Kevin Parrom 6-6 So. G/F–7.8/3.4 2.0 Ast/42.2% 3pt
7th
(4) Jamal Coombs-McDaniel 6-7 So. F–6.0/2.7 81.5% FT
(42) Jamelle Horne 6-7 Sr. F–6.2/3.3 40.8% 3pt
PiRate Criteria Stats
Team
Connecticut
Arizona
Pts
7.7
8.7
FG%
3.5
2.5
Reb
4.8
3.6
TO
0.3
-0.1
Stl
6.5
5.2
R+T
5.27
4.52
SOS
60
55
Road%
76
67
PiRate #
11
4
Two teams with one dominant player and a host of above-average complimentary players should make for an interesting game. Unfortunately, the teams’ key players will not face off against each other, as Walker is the play-maker for UConn, and Williams is the big man for ‘Zona.
On closer inspection, we took a look at Connecticut’s season in three parts. The Huskies looked like a Final Four team in two of those three parts. They began the season 10-0, including a blowout win over Kentucky in Hawaii. They had a lackluster 11-9 middle. Then, they caught lightning in a bottle, winning five games in five days to take the Big East Tournament title and won three games in the Big Dance to come into this game riding an eight-game winning streak. Once again, they have looked like a Final Four team.
Arizona entered this tournament with a 4-3 mark in its final seven games. The Wildcats narrowly escaped with wins over Memphis and Texas in the first week, but then they blew defending champion Duke off the floor Thursday night. They dominated the Blue Devils inside and forced Duke to beat them from over the top. Duke could not get enough good outside shots in the second half, and Arizona cruised to an easy win.
We believe that Connecticut’s backcourt is not that far from Duke’s in total talent, but the Huskies are much stronger inside where it counts. Connecticut should win the battle of the boards in this game and pound on Derrick Williams enough to throw him off his game. Arizona has overachieved getting to this point. The Wildcats will be back in 2011-12 as a top contender for the Final Four, but they will have to settle for Elite Eight this year.
Prediction: Connecticut 74 Arizona 66
Sunday, March 27, 2011
2:20 PM EDT—Southwest Regional Final @ San Antonio
#1 Kansas 35-2 (23) vs. #11 Virginia Commonwealth 27-11 (-1)
(12) Joey Rodriguez 5-10 Sr.–10.6/3.2 5.1 Ast/81.8% FT
6th
(32) Josh Selby 6-2 Fr. G–8.2/2.3 2.2 Ast
(23) Rob Brandenburg 6-2 Fr. G–5.2/1.8
7th
(00) Thomas Robinson 6-9 So.–7.8/6.6 60.1% FG
(10) Darius Theus 6-3 So. G–3.1/1.6 2.1 Ast
PiRate Criteria Stats
Team
Kansas
V C U
Pts
17.1
3.9
FG%
11.8
2
Reb
7.9
2.1
TO
0.8
-0.6
Stl
7.8
8.3
R+T
9.4
0.9
SOS
59
54
Road%
95
66
PiRate #
23
-1
This looks like an even bigger mismatch than Kansas’s Sweet 16 game, but VCU plays a feisty brand of basketball and can pull games out at the end with their pressure and herky-jerky style of play.
We anointed Kansas as our pick for the National Champion when the brackets came out two weeks ago, and the Jayhawks are the final power team we have left in the tournament. KU possesses the same criteria as most of the past national champions. The last team not to meet our minimum criteria that eventually won the national championship was this very same Kansas team in 1988. We believe that on Sunday, the Jayhawks will restore some normalcy to this season’s Big Dance and prove to be the one Fred Astaire among a bunch of wannabes.
Kansas will not wilt under the pressure defense applied by VCU. In fact, it will lead to a bunch of easy looks and a high shooting percentage. The Jayhawks pass the ball like teams from the past, and they know how to hit open shots. With Josh Selby possibly coming out of his shooting slump, we just cannot see another team defeating them this season.
For VCU, their real challenge will begin after the season ends. Shaka Smart is certain to be in the mix in a number of vacant coaching jobs. Tennessee, Missouri, North Carolina State, Georgia Tech, and others will be interested.
Prediction: Kansas 77 VCU 62
Sunday, March 27, 2011
5:05 PM EDT—East Regional Final @ Newark
#2 North Carolina 29-7 (16) vs. #4 Kentucky 28-8 (16)
(12) Brandon Knight 6-3 Fr.–17.2/3.8 4.2 Ast/79.9% FT
6th
(2) Leslie McDonald 6-4 So. G–7.1/2.2
(20) Doron Lamb 6-4 Fr. G–12.4/2.0 1.7 Ast
7th
(25) Justin Knox 6-9 Sr. F–4.5/3.2
(30) Eloy Vargas 6-10 Fr. F/C–1.6/2.0
PiRate Criteria Stats
Team
N. Carolina
Kentucky
Pts
9
12.2
FG%
4.7
6.9
Reb
6.5
4
TO
0.7
1.5
Stl
6.1
5.3
R+T
7.52
5.91
SOS
60
60
Road%
66
61
PiRate #
16
16
What we have here is the basketball equivalent of the Dodgers versus the Yankees. Two of the top programs of all time face off for the second time this season. In December, North Carolina edged the Wildcats by a deuce in Chapel Hill.
The Criteria score shows this game to be a tossup, but all five of us at the PiRate Ratings believe Kentucky is the clear-cut choice in this game. John Calipari is on the verge of getting his third different school into the Final Four. His teams always play better against an opponent once they have faced that opponent. Against Florida, they learned after the first game how to slow down the Gators. They learned how to stop them cold after the second game, and in the event they see them a fourth time, they will repeat it again. That is getting a bit too far ahead.
North Carolina lacks the quickness to stop the Kentucky penetration, and if the Blue Mist hits at least 35% of their three-pointers in this game, they will advance to the Final Four.
North Carolina has a decided depth advantage, but the Tar Heels are not as deep as they once were. With the longer time outs in this tournament, Kentucky can get by with six key players.
We see this game as one of spurts. The Tar Heels will have two or three spurts, but Kentucky will have three or four. We believe that UK will take the lead for good with five or six minutes left in the game.
Prediction: Kentucky 78 North Carolina 72
Comments Off on PiRate Ratings Elite Eight Preview For Saturday-Sunday, March 26-27, 2011
PiRate Criteria Numbers Updated To Reflect 1st Three Round Results
Thursday, March 24, 2011
7:15 PM on CBS
West Regional @ Anaheim
#2 San Diego State 34-2 (19) vs. #3 Connecticut 28-9 (11)
Connecticut faces the first team in the tournament that has the defensive capacity to slow down Kemba Walker. If Walker has a below-average game, the Huskies’ shooting percentage will head too far south, because UConn does not shoot all that well.
The Aztecs can make life miserable on opposing shooters, so if they contain Walker, SDSU has the advantage at the other four positions on the floor. Kawhi Leonard and Malcolm Thomas remind us somewhat of former UCLA greats Sidney Wicks and Curtis Rowe.
The Aztecs’ eventual downfall may come when they are exploited by a defense that forces them to beat them from outside. Connecticut just may be able to pull that off, so this game cannot be considered a slam dunk for the #2 seed Aztecs.
Prediction: San Diego State 67 Connecticut 61
7:27 PM on TBS
Southeast Regional @ New Orleans
#2 Florida 28-7 (15) vs. #3 Brigham Young 32-4 (18)
This one should be interesting, as Florida tries to get revenge for a first round overtime loss to BYU last year.
We did not have much faith in the Cougars after Brandon Davies was dismissed for the season. BYU recovered in the second and third rounds, and the 22-point win over Gonzaga was quite impressive.
Still, we discount the Cougars by three points with the absence of Davies. This makes this game a tossup in our eyes.
Florida is playing inspired ball, but we still do not believe the Gators are on par with their prior two national champion teams. Offensively, the Gators spread the ball around, and all five starters typically score double figure points. Defensively, they are underneath, and they frequently find ways to pressure the ball out front. However, the top defender, Kenny Boynton, may not be 100% in this game. He has an important assignment.
That assignment happens to be guarding Jimmer Fredette. If Fredette tops 30 points without taking 30 shots to do so, the Cougars could easily give the Mountain West Conference a second team in the Elite Eight.
We are split on this game, and we did not come to a conclusion which way to go. So, we will stick with the higher-rated PiRate Criteria score and go with the Cougars.
Prediction: B Y U 82 Florida 78
9:45 PM on CBS
West Regional @ Anaheim
#1 Duke 32-4 (17) vs. #5 Arizona 29-7 (4)
With Kyrie Irving back in the fold, Duke has the best eight-deep roster in the nation. We believe the Blue Devils are the third best team in the Sweet 16 with Irving back. He scored 25 points in the two games in Charlotte in just 41 minutes, and he picked up some rebounds as well.
The Blue Devils’ only thing close to a liability is their defense at forward. Kyle Singler, Miles Plumlee, and Ryan Kelly have trouble against sneaky fast opponents.
Arizona’s forwards have that quickness. Derrick Williams is as important to the Wildcats as Kemba Walker and Jimmer Fredette are to their teams. Jesse Perry only averages seven points per game, but he can take it to the basket against a slower defender.
Arizona’s weakness is their defense against power offense. Duke’s slower forwards as well as center Mason Plumlee can take advantage of the Wildcats’ defensive deficiencies.
Coach K deserves to be compared with John Wooden. Wooden’s UCLA teams won four games in the NCAA Tournament to win the championship in a field of 22-25 teams. Krzyzewski’s have been forced to win six in a field of 64, 65, and 68. We believe he is worth an extra five to 10 points, and we will select Duke to make it to the Elite Eight.
Prediction: Duke 77 Arizona 68
9:57 PM on TBS
Southeast Regional @ New Orleans
#4 Wisconsin 25-8 (9) vs. #8 Butler 25-9 (4)
Pick against Butler at your own risk. If the Bulldogs can beat Pittsburgh, there is no reason to believe they cannot return to the Final Four.
We did not believe Wisconsin could make it to the Sweet 16 either. As many readers know, we have ties to U Dub, and this group of Badgers did not look strong enough to us to make it to the second week of the tournament.
The PiRate Criteria indicates that Wisconsin is the favorite, but with our internal numbers that we do not advertise, we rate this game as a 50-50 affair.
Butler has the experience in close games. They keep finding a way to win. However, Wisconsin is one of those tough teams that can neutralize what has been working for Coach Brad Stevens’ Bulldogs.
This game could very well come down to the final few possessions, and the winner may struggle to top 55 points. We do not see any more than 100 field goal attempts, and as few as eight players could score points in this game.
Matt Howard can force Wisconsin to bring a big man outside, and that will allow Andrew Smith to work with a little more clearance inside. If Shelvin Mack keeps his hot streak going, Butler can win this one.
If Howard is not on target, and the Badgers do not have to respect his outside shooting ability, Coach Bo Ryan’s team will pack it in, control the boards, and then work patiently to set up Jordan Taylor and Jon Leuer. The tandem could score 40 points with the rest of the team adding just 15, and it could be enough to win this game.
Prediction: Wisconsin 55 Butler 54
Friday, March 25, 2011
7:15 PM on CBS
East Regional @ Newark
#2 North Carolina 28-7 (16) vs. #11 Marquette 22-14 (3)
We do not believe the Tar Heels are Final Four candidates this season. No matter which team wins the game in the adjacent bracket, we see the Tar Heels losing in the Elite Eight. However, the margin should be slim.
This is the Sweet 16 game, and Coach Roy Williams’ team is more than talented enough to advance to Sunday. With the outside shooting of Kendall Marshall and Leslie McDonald combined with the take-it-to-the-hoop skills of Harrison Barnes and John Henson and the mandatory doubling down on big center Tyler Zeller, North Carolina will score a lot of points in this game.
Marquette’s only hope is for three players to be hot from the field, because Buzz Williams’ Golden Eagles will have to outscore North Carolina to win this game.
Marquette cannot go head-to-head inside and win this game. They will have to hit 50% from the field to keep this game close. From among Jimmy Butler, Darius Johnson-Odom, Jae Crowder, and Dwight Buycks three of these players will need to score 15-25 points each. We see the Golden Eagles coming up short in this one.
Prediction: North Carolina 82 Marquette 79
7:27 PM on TBS
Southwest Regional @ San Antonio
#1 Kansas 34-2 (23) vs. #12 Richmond 29-7 (3)
Richmond apparently was seeded a few spots to low. The Spiders have shown that the Atlantic 10 Conference is just below the top six or seven conferences in the nation and well above the average mid-major league.
Chris Mooney’s team can shoot the ball and prevent the opponent from shooting the ball. With an inside-outside punch in big forward Justin Harper and sharpshooting guard Kevin Anderson, Richmond can score points consistently, albeit at a slower pace.
Two things will do the Spiders in Friday night. They are vulnerable against power teams and teams that can get on the boards for offensive rebounds. Xavier and Old Dominion showed the blueprint for beating Richmond.
Kansas can take that blueprint and build a super foundation. The Jayhawks are the best passing team in the tournament, and Coach Bill Self’s big men know how to move and get open to receive those passes. Marcus and Markieff Morris can hit the boards at both ends, and Brady Morningstar and Tyshawn Taylor know how to get the ball to them. KU will advance to play for a spot in the Final Four on Sunday.
Prediction: Kansas 73 Richmond 62
9:45 PM on CBS
East Regional @ Newark
#1 Ohio State 34-2 (23) vs. #4 Kentucky 27-8 (16)
This is the first contest in the tournament where both teams are rated worthy of making the Elite Eight.
Ohio State has actually moved a couple of percentage points ahead of Kansas for the top overall Criteria score. The Buckeyes are strong where Kentucky is strong, but Coach Thad Matta’s team also has strength were Kentucky has been vulnerable. Tough perimeter defense forced George Mason to wilt in the Round of 32, and in William Buford, Jon Diebler, and David Lighty, Ohio State can cut off the perimeter game of most teams.
With the great Jared Sullinger roaming the low post and baseline areas, Kentucky has to dedicate a big man to roam with him. That will be the Wildcats’ downfall Friday night. If Terrence Jones is forced to guard Sullinger, expect Josh Harrellson to have a hard time defending the paint against Ohio State’s quicker forwards and slashing guards. If Harrellson goes out to guard Sullinger, he will have a hard time guarding the nation’s top big man. Coach John Calipari will have to pick his poison.
Kentucky will need a great night from Brandon Knight and Doron Lamb. If the two players and Darius Miller do not combine for 50 points, Kentucky will be heading back to Lexington, and the sports fans in the Commonwealth can turn their attention to Uncle Mo and the first Saturday in May.
Prediction: Ohio State 76 Kentucky 69
9:57 PM on TBS
#10 Florida State 23-10 (5) vs. #12 Virginia Commonwealth 25-11 (-1)
This game guarantees that one double-digit seed will make it to the Elite Eight, and Kansas fans must be quite happy about it.
We have two teams that have found a new gear in their engine at the most opportune time. VCU was not even supposed to be in this tournament after failing to win the Colonial Athletic Association Tournament. Instead, the Rams just became the first team to win three NCAA Tournament games in less than a week since Texas Western in 1966. Texas Western went on to upset Kentucky and win the National Championship. VCU is not Texas Western. That TWU (Now UTEP) team was rated in the top five in the nation.
Florida State has not been to the Final Four since Hugh Durham took the Seminoles to the 1972 National Title game. This team is not in that FSU team’s league.
So, what do we have here? Florida State is a team that in most years would have been fortunate to win one game. VCU is a team that in most years would probably be playing this week for a trip to Madison Square Garden and the NIT semi-finals.
VCU has a negative PiRate Criteria score, but it is moving close to zero. Still, we cannot recall a negative criteria score making it to the Elite Eight.
Note: Both FSU Coach Leonard Hamilton and VCU Coach Shaka Smart are being mentioned as possible candidates for the vacant Tennessee job.
Prediction: Florida State 65 Virginia Commonwealth 60
Coming Saturday Morning: We will preview the Southeast and West Regional Final games.
Marjorie Miller Designs
Our favorite handmade jewelry artisan (art critics call her designs “Wearable Masterpieces”)
The Bracket Matrix
The PiRate Ratings (Pi) are included in the best college basketball bracketology site on the Internet. Check out the Bracket Project Blog at: https://bracketproject.blogspot.com/
The PiRate Ratings
See the most current PiRate Ratings and Spreads for college and NFL football