PiRate Ratings For NCAA Tournament Round of 64

Thursday, March 17
Higher Seed	Lower Seed	Red	White	Blue
Kansas	Austin Peay	22	23	31
Colorado	Connecticut	-3	-2	-4
Arizona	Wichita St.	1	4	1
Miami	Buffalo	12	13	14
Baylor	Yale	3	3	11
Duke	UNC-Wilmington	6	8	12
North Carolina	Florida Gulf Coast	19	21	25
USC	Providence	1	1	3
Indiana	Chattanooga	10	8	11
Kentucky	Stony Brook	11	10	10
Virginia	Hampton	20	25	33
Texas Tech	Butler	-1	-1	-2
Purdue	UALR	6	7	17
Iowa St.	Iona	8	10	13
Seton Hall	Gonzaga	1	-1	-1
Utah	Fresno St.	7	8	15
Friday, March 18
Higher Seed	Lower Seed	Red	White	Blue
Maryland	South Dakota St.	6	7	8
California	Hawaii	5	6	11
Iowa	Temple	8	6	9
Villanova	UNC-Asheville	13	14	22
Oregon	Holy Cross	22	25	35
St. Joseph’s	Cincinnati	1	-2	1
Texas	Northern Iowa	5	6	10
Texas A&M	Green Bay	9	12	18
Oregon St.	VCU	-2	-4	-4
Oklahoma	Cal State Bakersfield	11	13	20
Notre Dame	Michigan	2	3	1
West Virginia	Stephen F. Austin	6	8	12
Wisconsin	Pittsburgh	1	1	-1
Xavier	Weber St.	13	13	17
Dayton	Syracuse	-1	-1	2
Michigan St.	Middle Tennessee	16	16	21

Bracketnomics 505–The Advanced Level Course in Bracket Picking

Welcome to Bracketnomics 505 for 2016–The Advanced Level Course in Picking NCAA Tournament winners. The best way to describe our PiRate Ratings NCAA Tournament Bracket-Picking formula is to call it the Past Performances of the teams. If you are familiar with the Daily Racing Form or other thoroughbred horse racing publications, you probably know how to read the PPS of the horses in each race.
If you have followed our statistical releases for the past 16 years, you will see only minor changes this year, as the PiRate Ratings have added only one minor statistical detail to our repertoire.
Here is a description of all the pertinent information you need to pick your brackets. We will explain each important statistic and tell you how it applies to the NCAA Tournament. Then, we will apply it to all 68 teams in the Big Dance and let you use what you want to fill out your brackets.

Remember one important bit of information–this process deals a lot with past tendencies trying to predict future outcomes. It is mechanical and has no real subjective data. It will not include information such as how your team’s star player may have the flu this week, so if you have other information, by all means include this in your selections.

THE FOUR FACTORS
Statistician and author Dean Oliver created this metric. He did for basketball what the incredible Bill James did for baseball. Oliver wrote the excellent book Basketball on Paper, where he showed that NBA winners could break down four separate statistical metrics to show how the winner won and the loser lost. Later experimentation showed that this metric works for college basketball when strength of schedule is factored into the metric.

The four factors are: Effective Field Goal Percentage, Rebound Rate, Turnover Rate, and Free Throw Rate. Each of these four factors apply to both offense and defense, so in essence, there are really eight factors.

Each Factor has a formula that can be calculated if you have the statistics. We have all the statistics for all 68 teams, and we did this for you.

Effective FG% = (FGM + (.5 * 3ptM))/FGA where FGM is field goals made, 3ptM is three-pointers made, and FGA is field goals attempted.

If a team made 800 FG, 250 3-pointers and attempted 1750 field goals, their EFG% is:
(800+(.5*250))/1750 = .529 or 52.9%
Rebound Rate = Offensive Rebounds/(Offensive Rebounds + Opponents’ Defensive Rebounds)
If a team has 500 offensive rebounds and their opponents have 850 defensive rebounds, their Rebound Rate is:
500/(500+850) = .370 or 37.0%

Turnover Rate = Turnovers per 100 possessions. Possessions can be estimated with incredible accuracy by this formula:
(FGA + (.475*FTA)-OR+TO)/G, where FGA is field goal attempts, FTA is free throw attempts, OR is offensive rebounds, TO is turnovers, and G is games played.

If a team has 1700 FGA, 650 FTA, 425 OR, and 375 TO in 30 games played, their average possessions per game is:
(1700+(.475*650)-425+375)/30 = 65.3, and thus, their TO Rate would be:

Turnovers per game / possessions per game * 100
((425/30)/65.3) * 100 = 21.7

Free Throw Rate: Oliver and others determined that getting to the line was actually more important than making the foul shots, so they did not include made free throws in their equation.

Their formula was simply: FTA/FGA, as they believed that getting the other team in foul trouble was the most important part.
Later statisticans changed this formulas to FT Made/FGA, which included made free throws, but it also erred by making teams that do not attempt many field goals but lead late in games look much better than they really were. If a team like Northern Iowa attempted just 50 field goals per game and won a lot of games by three or four points, going to the foul line many times late in the game, they would pad this stat by making a lot of FT in the final minutes when the opponent was forced to foul.
A third group of statisticians, including we here at the PiRate Ratings, believe that free throws made per 100 possessions is a better metric, and thus we go with this rating, which we call FT*:

If the team above with 65.3 possessions per game averages 17 made free throws per game, then their FT Rate is:
17 / 65.3 * 100 = 26.0

The PiRate Specific Statistics
For 15 years, the PiRate Ratings have relied on specific back-tested data that showed us what stats were important in selecting Final Four teams. We looked back in history to see how previous Final Four teams dominated in certain statistical areas while not dominating in other areas. Here is what we found.

Scoring Margin
For general bracket picking, look for teams that outscored their opponents by an average of 8 or more points per game. Over 85% of the Final Four teams since the 1950’s outscored their opponents by an average of 8 or more points per game.
More than 80% of the final four teams in the last 50 years outscored their opponents by double digit points per game. When you find a team with an average scoring margin in excess of 15 points per game, and said team is in one of the six power conferences, then you have a team that will advance deep into the tournament.
This is an obvious statistic here. If team A outscores opponents by an average of 85-70 and their team B opponent outscores similar opposition by an average of 75-70, and the teams played comparable schedules, then team A figures to be better than team B before you look at any other statistics.
In the days of the 64 to 68-team field, this statistic has become even more valuable. It’s very difficult and close to impossible for a team accustomed to winning games by one to seven points to win four times in a row, much less six or seven consecutive games.
This statistic gives the same significance and weighting to a team that outscores its opposition 100-90 as it does to a team that outscores its opposition 60-50.

Last year, the four Final Four Teams had scoring margins of 21, 16, 15, and 9.

Field Goal Percentage Differential
Take each team’s field goal percentage minus their defensive field goal percentage to calculate this statistic. Look for teams that have a +7.5% or better showing. 50% to 42% is no better or no worse than 45% to 37%. A difference of 7.5% or better is all that matters. Teams that have a large field goal percentage margin are consistently good teams. Sure, a team can win a game with a negative field goal percentage difference, but in the Big Dance, they certainly are not going to win six games, and they have no real chance to win four games. Two games are about the maximum for these teams.
This statistic holds strong in back-tests of 50 years. Even when teams won the tournament with less than 7.5% field goal percentage margins, for the most part, these teams just barely missed (usually in the 5.5 to 7.5% range). In the years of the 64 to 68-team tournament, this stat has become a more accurate predictor. In the 21st Century, the teams with field goal percentage margins in the double digits have dominated the field. For example, if you see a team that shoots better than 48% and allows 38% or less, that team is going to be very hard to beat in large arenas with weird sight lines.

Last year, the Final Four Teams had FG% Differentials of 11.4, 8.5, 7.3, and 6.1%

Rebound Margin
This statistic holds up all the way back to the early days of basketball, in fact as far back to the days when rebounds were first recorded. The teams that consistently control the boards are the ones that advance past the first week in the tournament. What we’re looking for here are teams that out-rebound their opposition by five or more per game. In the opening two rounds, a difference of three or more is just as important.
There are complete rebounding statistics back to 1954, and in the 61 NCAA Tournaments between 1954 and 2014, the National Champion outrebounded their opponents 61 times! Yes, no team with a negative rebound margin has ever won the title.
The reason this statistic becomes even more important in mid-March is that teams do not always shoot as well in the NCAA Tournament for a variety of reasons (better defense, abnormal sight lines and unfamiliar gymnasiums, nerves, new rims and nets, more physical play with the refs allowing it, etc.). The teams that can consistently get offensive put-backs are the teams that go on scoring runs in these games. The teams that prevent the opposition from getting offensive rebounds, holding them to one shot per possession, have a huge advantage. Again, there will be some teams that advance that were beaten on the boards, but as the number of teams drop from 64 to 32 to 16 to eight, it is rare for one of these teams to continue to advance. West Virginia in 2005 made it to the Elite Eight without being able to rebound, but not many other teams have been able to do so.

There have been years where all four Final Four participants were in the top 20 in rebounding margin, and there have been many years where the champion was in the top 5 in rebounding margin.

Last year, the Final Four Teams had positive Rebounding Margins of 7.4, 6.8, 6.2, and 6.0.

Turnover Margin & Steals Per Game
Turnover margin can give a weaker rebounding team a chance to advance. Any positive turnover margin is good here. If a team cannot meet the rebounding margin listed above, they can get by if they have an excellent turnover margin. Not all turnover margins are the same though. A team that forces a high number of turnovers by way of steals is better than a team that forces the same amount of turnovers without steals. A steal is better than a defensive rebound, because most of the time, a steal leads to a fast-break basket or foul. When a team steals the ball, they are already facing their basket, and the defense must turn around and chase. Many steals occur on the perimeter where the ball-hawking team has a numbers advantage.
The criteria to look for here is any positive turnover margin if the team out-rebounds its opposition by three or more; a turnover margin of three or better if the team out-rebounds its opposition by less than three; and a turnover margin of five or more if the team does not out-rebound its opponents. Give more weight to teams that average 7 or more steals per game, and give much more weight to teams that average double figure steals per game. A team that averages more than 10 steals per game will get a lot of fast-break baskets and foul shots. In NCAA Tournament play, one quick spurt can be like a three-run homer in the World Series, and teams that either steal the ball or control the boards are the ones who will get that spurt.

Last year, the Final Four Teams had Turnover Margins of +3.4, +2.6, +1.3, and -0.5 and average steals per game of 6.6, 5.7, 5.3, and 4.5. It was the fewest average steals per game for a Final Four group since steals have been kept as official statistics.

The All-Important R+T Margin
Consider this the basketball equivalent of baseball’s OPS (On Base % + Slugging %) or even better, the “Moneyball Formula.” The formula has undergone a couple of changes in recent years, including this season, and we think it will be slightly adjusted in the future based on changes in how the game is played.
The R+T Formula for 2016 is: (R * 2) + (S * .5) + (6 – Opp S) + T, where R is rebounding margin, S is average steals per game (Opp S is opponents steals per game), and T is turnover margin. The numbers are all rounded to one digit.

Look for teams with R+T ratings at 15 or above. These are the teams that will get several additional opportunities to score points and go on scoring runs that put opponents away

When this stat is 7.5 to 15, you have a team that can overcome a few other liabilities to win and cut down the nets in Indianapolis if they don’t run into a team from the 15+ R+T range with similar shooting percentages and defense.

When this stat is 4.5 to 7.5, you have a team good enough to win early and get to the Sweet 16 or lite 8 but not advance past that round, unless said team has a large field goal percentage difference margin.

When this stat is 0 to 4.5, you have a team that better enjoy a large field goal margin advantage, or they will be one and done or two and out.

When this stat is negative, you have a team that will be eliminated quickly, even if they are playing a lower seed. We have isolated many early round upsets due to this statistic, and we have eliminated many teams expected to perform well that bombed in the opening round.

A few years ago, Georgetown had a negative R+T rating but was a prohibitive favorite against Ohio U. The Bobcats had a positive R+T rating and decent numbers in the other PiRate factors. We called for Ohio to upset Georgetown in the first round, and Ohio won by double digits.

The same thing occurred again a couple years later when Georgetown had a negative R+T rating as the Hoyas faced unknown Florida Gulf Coast. FGCU not only pulled off the upset, they blew GU off the floor.

Last year’s Final Four Teams had R+T ratings of 22.9, 18.8, 17.7, and 16.0, making this the most accurate predictor for the season, like it has for most every season. There were two Power Conference teams with negative R+T numbers last year, Oklahoma State and St. John’s. We pegged these teams to lose immediately as 9-seeds against 8-seeds with positive R+T ratings, and they did just that.

Power Conference Plus Schedule Strength
Up to this point you might have been thinking that it is much easier for Stephen F. Austin or Stony Brook to own these gaudy statistics than it is for Baylor or Miami. And, of course, that is correct. We have to adjust this procedure so that teams that play tougher schedules get rewarded and teams that play softer schedules get punished.
Basically, the cut-off line for a Final Four team is 54.00, although there have been a few long shots like George Mason and Virginia Commonwealth that were below that mark. While the lowest National Champ was Florida in 2007 at 54.30, the average for the last dozen champions has been just over 58. Also, bear in mind that of the 16 winners since 2000, 6 came from the ACC, 4 from the Big East (none who are current members), 3 from the SEC, and one each from the American, Big 12, and Big Ten. The Pac-12 has not produced the national champion since Arizona in 1997.

Won-Loss percentage Away From Home Floor
This should be obvious. Except in the rarest of instances (like Dayton playing in a First Round Game last year), all NCAA Tournament games are played on neutral courts. Some teams play like titans on their home floor but become pansies when playing away from home. It is one thing to accumulate great statistics by scheduling 19 home games, three neutral site games, and eight away games and then going 18-1 at home, 1-2 on the neutral site, and 3-5 on the road to finish 22-8. However, we need to locate the teams that continue to dominate away from home. Combine the road and neutral games played and look at that percentage. When you find a team with a 75% or better win percentage away from home, this team is a legitimate contender in the Big Dance. When this number tops 85%, you have a tough team capable of winning four consecutive games and advancing to the Final Four.

New For 2016, Winning Streaks
We should have included this years ago. The NCAA Tournament Championship requires one team to win six consecutive games (seven if in the First Four) to become the champion. It requires the other Final Four teams to win four or five times to get to the Final Four. How often does a team get to the Final Four or win the title without having a long winning streak during the regular season? Not often , or to put it a better way, hardly ever.
When a team wins 10 consecutive games in the heart of their schedule, or to be more exact, against serious competition, or when they win 6 to 10 consecutive games more than once during the season, and the rest of our criteria shows them to be a contender (especially R+T and Schedule Strength), then this is one dangerous squad. Be wary picking against them in the early rounds and then go against them only when the other team looks lethal as well.

These are the basic PiRate criteria. You might be shocked to see that there are some key statistics that are not included. Let’s look at some of these stats that the PiRates do not rely upon.

Assists and Assists to Turnover Ratio
While assists can reveal an excellent passing team (and we love great passing teams), they also can hide a problem. Let’s say a team gets 28 field goals and has 21 assists. That may very well indicate this team can pass better than most others. However, it may also mean two other things. First, this team may not have players who can create their own offense and must get by on exceptional passing. That may not work against the best defensive teams in the nation (like the type that get into the Dance). Second, and even more importantly, it may indicate that this team cannot get offensive put-backs. As explained earlier, the offensive rebound is about as important as any stat can be in the NCAA Tournament. So, consider this stat only if you must decide on a toss-up after looking at the big seven stats. We would much rather go with a team that has 15 offensive rebound potential than a team that has assists on 80% of its made field goals. The NCAA Tournament is full of tough defenses, weird site lines, tight rims, and even tighter nerves, and the offensive put-back is an even more potent weapon, especially in the Round of 64, the Sweet 16, and the Final Four games. The Round of 32 and Elite 8 rounds tend to be less tense, because it is the second game on the playing floor for the participants.

Free Throw Shooting
You might say we are contradicting the Four Factors with this, but we are not. It is the least important of the Four Factors, and we only apply this caveat to the NCAA Tournament.
Of course, free throw shooting in the clutch decides many ball games. However, history shows a long line of teams making it deep into the tournament with poor free throw shooting percentages, and teams that overly rely on free throws may find it tough getting to the line with the liberalized officiating in the tournament.

Let’s say a team shoots a paltry 60% at the foul line while their opponent hits a great 75% of their foul shots. Let’s say each team gets to the foul line 15 times in the game, with five of those chances being 1&1, three being one shot after made baskets, and seven being two shot fouls. For the 60% shooting team, they can be expected to hit 3 of 5 on the front end of the 1&1 and then 1.8 of the 3 bonus shots; they can be expected to hit 1.8 of 3 on the one foul shot after made baskets; and they can be expected to hit 8.4 of 14 on the two shot fouls for a total of 15 out of 25. The 75% shooting team can be expected to connect on 3.75 of 5 on the front end of the 1&1 and then 2.8 of 3.75 on the bonus shot; they can be expected to hit 2.3 of 3 on the one foul shot after made baskets; and they can be expected to connect on 10.5 of 14 on the two shot fouls for a total of 19.35 out of 25.75.

A team with one of the top FT% only scores 4.35 more points at the foul line than a team with one of the worst. That is not a lot of points to make up, and when you consider that this is about the maximum possible difference, this stat is not all that important. Also consider that teams that shoot 60% of their foul shots and make the NCAA Tournament are almost always the teams that have the top R+T ratings, which is vitally important after the Ides of March.

Teams that make the NCAA Tournament with gaudy free throw percentages frequently get there by winning close games at the line. In the NCAA Tournament, fouls just don’t get called as frequently as in the regular season. The referees let the teams play. So, looking at superior free throw percentage can almost lead you down the wrong path.

Ponder this: The 1973 UCLA Bruins are considered to be the best college basketball team ever. That team connected on just 63% of its free throws. They had a rebounding margin of 15.2, and they forced many turnovers via steals thanks to their vaunted 2-2-1 zone press. In the great UCLA dynasty from 1964 through 1973 when the Bruins won nine titles in 10 years, they never once connected on 70% of their free throws and averaged just 66% during that stretch.

3-point shooting
You have to look at this statistic two different ways and consider that it is already part of field goal percentage and defensive field goal percentage. Contrary to popular belief, you do not count the difference in made three-pointers and multiply by three to see the difference in points scored. If Team A hits eight treys, while their Team B opponents hit three, that is not a difference of 15 points; it’s a difference of five points. Consider made three-pointers as one extra point because they are already figured as made field goals. A team with 26 made field goals and eight treys has only one more point than a team with 26 made field goals and seven treys.

The only time to give three-point shots any weight in this criteria is when you are looking at a toss-up game, and when you do look at this stat, look for the team that does not rely on them to win, but instead uses a credible percentage that prevents defenses from sagging into the 10-12-foot area around the basket. If a team cannot throw it in the ocean from behind the arc, defenses can sag inside and take away the inside game. It doesn’t play much of a role in the NCAA Tournament. A team that must hit 10 threes per game in order to win is not going to be around after the first weekend. To put it another way, teams that live and die by the outside shot will almost always die before they can get to the Final Four, if they cannot dominate inside.

One Big Star or Two Really Good Players
Teams that get to the Dance by riding one big star or a majority of scoring from two players are not solid enough to advance very far. Now, this does not apply to a team with one big star and four really good players. I’m referring to a team with one big star and four lemons or two big scorers with three guys who are allergic to the ball. Many times a team may have one big scorer or two guys who score 85% of the points, but the other three starters are capable of scoring 20 points if they are called on to do so. These teams are tough to stop. Usually, it is the mid-major teams that appear to be sleeper teams that could beat a favored opponent because they have one big talent that falls under this category. For instance, Stony Brook’s Jameel Warney this year fits that category.

If you have a team with five double figure scorers, they will be harder to defend and will be more consistent on the attack side. It is hard for all five players to slump at once.

We hope this primer will help you when you fill out your brackets this year.
Here is a list of all the statistics for the Big Dance teams for 2015-2016.

Offensive Stats

Team	FG	FGA	3pt	3ptA	FT	FTA	OReb	DReb	Reb	To	Stl	Pts
Arizona	926	1922	215	562	613	848	384	944	1328	423	162	2680
Austin Peay	920	1988	219	630	602	899	407	882	1289	490	242	2661
Baylor	903	1935	204	556	536	737	453	781	1234	425	260	2546
Buffalo	892	2037	253	750	600	845	417	913	1330	465	236	2637
Butler	868	1864	220	569	542	741	354	775	1129	317	210	2498
CSU Bakersfield	849	1881	174	506	465	712	401	825	1226	391	257	2337
California	867	1881	233	632	512	780	374	945	1319	403	136	2479
Chattanooga	869	1904	259	712	581	793	372	846	1218	422	265	2578
Cincinnati	823	1925	242	701	454	645	432	828	1260	354	254	2342
Colorado	842	1979	250	637	575	779	437	963	1400	442	172	2509
Connecticut	900	1959	239	660	457	581	322	920	1242	378	194	2496
Dayton	818	1780	215	620	491	730	317	919	1236	418	189	2342
Duke	826	1789	274	708	527	728	363	735	1098	293	190	2453
Fair. Dickinson	906	1958	230	633	451	645	338	736	1074	414	242	2493
Florida G. Coast	949	1991	176	493	466	720	392	935	1327	406	218	2540
Fresno St.	900	2073	212	620	549	793	404	874	1278	364	280	2561
Gonzaga	929	1910	258	682	514	676	350	957	1307	372	167	2630
Green Bay	1027	2294	246	703	648	984	451	909	1360	423	334	2948
Hampton	793	1911	203	659	529	805	438	853	1291	433	168	2318
Hawaii	843	1824	230	704	567	833	342	856	1198	423	252	2483
Holy Cross	737	1785	236	721	446	644	269	725	994	362	213	2156
Indiana	934	1864	316	762	449	621	385	811	1196	437	222	2633
Iona	888	1947	320	860	451	633	339	842	1181	409	242	2547
Iowa	855	1898	255	667	456	634	369	821	1190	323	211	2421
Iowa St.	998	1990	265	697	358	507	291	863	1154	370	197	2619
Kansas	951	1926	274	649	516	737	356	900	1256	408	225	2692
Kentucky	971	2029	236	637	531	777	442	876	1318	376	191	2709
Maryland	876	1794	252	673	506	666	304	867	1171	425	192	2510
Miami	837	1756	219	599	527	702	310	802	1112	341	194	2420
Michigan	898	1926	326	849	404	548	267	822	1089	333	188	2526
Michigan St.	979	2024	310	715	444	608	419	1005	1424	325	181	2712
Middle Tenn.	857	1902	260	673	425	689	341	879	1220	399	205	2399
North Carolina	1047	2187	183	583	520	705	477	916	1393	371	234	2797
Northern Iowa	801	1751	278	742	432	574	183	839	1022	334	193	2312
Notre Dame	869	1844	235	637	450	612	349	805	1154	311	179	2423
Oklahoma	884	1928	334	784	471	647	343	899	1242	415	221	2573
Oregon	933	1997	234	670	580	813	399	830	1229	393	259	2680
Oregon St.	786	1783	211	570	451	672	330	743	1073	355	231	2234
Pittsburgh	860	1871	201	578	512	679	410	812	1222	374	159	2433
Providence	833	1974	234	729	541	744	385	822	1207	380	219	2441
Purdue	934	1980	259	703	516	695	397	995	1392	406	145	2643
Seton Hall	872	1937	202	573	524	787	425	896	1321	457	240	2470
South Dakota St.	853	1891	245	686	566	766	370	881	1251	388	164	2517
Southern	887	1990	208	590	497	743	356	868	1224	382	254	2479
St. Joseph’s	926	2038	238	728	548	769	345	967	1312	344	175	2638
S. F. Austin	926	1915	254	691	477	653	380	750	1130	398	290	2583
Stony Brook	913	1917	217	584	415	618	400	866	1266	365	198	2458
Syracuse	766	1796	280	776	435	637	378	759	1137	388	259	2247
Temple	792	1957	251	739	362	529	358	818	1176	293	171	2197
Texas	789	1828	223	657	482	725	352	753	1105	332	165	2283
Texas A&M	906	2016	261	745	508	755	436	887	1323	401	235	2581
Texas Tech	760	1700	178	517	546	732	320	739	1059	371	182	2244
Tulsa	796	1793	216	656	486	717	313	773	1086	335	211	2294
UALR	836	1827	249	641	420	572	302	815	1117	347	216	2341
UNC-Asheville	877	1916	190	586	552	795	384	863	1247	430	307	2496
UNC-Wilm.	898	1971	219	651	520	741	384	819	1203	365	241	2535
USC	954	2085	260	675	500	737	396	906	1302	403	209	2668
Utah	928	1898	259	713	524	734	328	942	1270	418	183	2639
Vanderbilt	841	1826	270	695	504	721	304	930	1234	374	138	2456
VCU	953	2116	247	694	472	684	425	845	1270	389	299	2625
Villanova	905	1936	291	847	516	664	315	896	1211	378	229	2617
Virginia	849	1743	198	489	426	565	296	756	1052	310	181	2322
Weber St.	887	1831	287	768	548	810	291	983	1274	451	169	2609
West Virginia	927	2050	206	627	633	945	541	791	1332	476	338	2693
Wichita St.	801	1846	234	710	507	710	373	826	1199	318	231	2343
Wisconsin	751	1748	211	590	491	694	366	751	1117	351	188	2204
Xavier	876	1938	243	672	608	832	418	894	1312	408	234	2603
Yale	744	1580	181	484	436	658	379	752	1131	375	162	2105

Defensive Stats

Team	FG	FGA	3pt	3ptA	FT	FTA	OReb	DReb	Reb	To	Stl	Pts
Arizona	829	2007	201	626	415	587	313	711	1024	383	178	2274
Austin Peay	955	2088	269	824	450	640	365	830	1195	470	244	2629
Baylor	797	1794	228	622	463	664	306	666	972	452	220	2285
Buffalo	882	2044	251	740	540	756	368	861	1229	450	192	2555
Butler	764	1773	222	655	456	642	298	724	1022	407	141	2206
CSU Bakersfield	668	1708	187	585	499	722	339	758	1097	490	170	2022
California	762	1940	180	513	508	721	325	772	1097	321	170	2212
Chattanooga	829	1910	225	694	382	566	337	764	1101	484	216	2265
Cincinnati	722	1849	231	648	337	498	365	742	1107	444	165	2012
Colorado	829	1980	206	580	469	693	313	793	1106	365	246	2333
Connecticut	737	1931	232	709	439	667	379	785	1164	415	175	2145
Dayton	740	1829	234	671	392	595	284	782	1066	398	154	2106
Duke	817	1865	179	536	321	466	384	711	1095	367	134	2134
Fair. Dickinson	834	1845	239	676	597	854	409	825	1234	492	202	2504
Florida G. Coast	823	1986	217	719	462	676	361	800	1161	406	217	2325
Fresno St.	785	1879	245	743	580	837	355	882	1237	510	150	2395
Gonzaga	795	1992	198	666	398	565	333	734	1067	341	185	2186
Green Bay	981	2198	271	746	555	779	421	991	1412	590	202	2788
Hampton	794	1874	203	615	498	688	319	813	1132	388	179	2289
Hawaii	719	1806	199	632	491	691	310	740	1050	472	190	2128
Holy Cross	803	1755	264	724	429	593	305	872	1177	434	182	2299
Indiana	821	1859	200	583	363	545	327	637	964	418	195	2205
Iona	812	1929	247	696	486	699	383	816	1199	451	184	2357
Iowa	788	1901	228	735	326	479	375	773	1148	407	165	2130
Iowa St.	903	2075	249	740	344	502	382	776	1158	397	179	2399
Kansas	758	1913	208	631	508	705	356	729	1085	438	201	2232
Kentucky	782	1954	192	582	565	808	407	726	1133	420	145	2321
Maryland	798	1956	223	693	368	526	363	695	1058	370	207	2187
Miami	790	1839	184	548	374	529	330	708	1038	372	163	2138
Michigan	844	1896	240	695	366	504	296	826	1122	406	138	2294
Michigan St.	741	1966	193	639	480	669	320	707	1027	325	181	2155
Middle Tenn.	767	1799	213	620	507	757	298	848	1146	445	194	2254
North Carolina	838	2046	262	728	425	608	389	723	1112	447	196	2363
Northern Iowa	794	1884	239	740	312	431	307	849	1156	401	164	2139
Notre Dame	821	1918	246	655	371	515	367	715	1082	311	167	2259
Oklahoma	819	2024	241	709	375	553	382	780	1162	407	227	2254
Oregon	836	1970	243	670	435	623	375	744	1119	488	158	2350
Oregon St.	739	1732	222	675	469	678	355	786	1141	420	157	2169
Pittsburgh	781	1791	218	612	393	593	303	682	985	370	180	2173
Providence	850	1956	211	658	390	544	355	860	1215	482	196	2301
Purdue	794	2029	210	670	398	563	302	728	1030	320	204	2196
Seton Hall	790	1971	206	652	451	664	397	788	1185	450	238	2237
South Dakota St.	766	1843	198	599	507	709	307	766	1073	399	187	2237
Southern	814	1960	225	709	494	795	412	870	1282	469	179	2347
St. Joseph’s	875	2110	270	872	357	517	337	875	1212	389	156	2377
S. F. Austin	719	1642	165	511	418	637	309	711	1020	596	174	2021
Stony Brook	737	1824	208	636	348	489	293	722	1015	409	176	2030
Syracuse	759	1835	225	739	360	540	413	769	1182	434	208	2103
Temple	785	1884	189	601	399	539	347	877	1224	355	137	2158
Texas	754	1801	201	586	469	675	359	792	1151	400	145	2178
Texas A&M	783	1930	251	763	411	626	381	810	1191	488	172	2228
Texas Tech	758	1777	237	674	412	586	356	689	1045	396	197	2165
Tulsa	733	1760	235	647	459	613	338	808	1146	445	164	2160
UALR	664	1710	206	672	434	633	339	774	1113	464	132	1968
UNC-Asheville	802	1897	192	677	431	616	353	819	1172	519	222	2227
UNC-Wilmington	729	1748	171	507	657	933	362	808	1170	485	159	2286
USC	899	2153	239	740	430	613	424	825	1249	411	191	2467
Utah	873	2112	253	689	352	488	359	759	1118	355	216	2351
Vanderbilt	762	1974	176	603	455	675	388	804	1192	319	180	2155
VCU	818	1859	187	556	465	688	326	853	1179	525	194	2288
Villanova	764	1910	240	716	398	600	360	787	1147	471	199	2166
Virginia	687	1630	212	608	383	550	264	671	935	398	174	1969
Weber St.	850	2053	195	564	378	567	326	801	1127	373	197	2273
West Virginia	709	1658	199	599	648	909	295	750	1045	617	229	2265
Wichita St.	602	1565	187	577	505	705	260	791	1051	495	150	1896
Wisconsin	732	1705	189	499	413	584	295	722	1017	389	169	2066
Xavier	787	1894	241	766	458	651	319	753	1072	452	195	2273
Yale	625	1536	166	525	352	506	237	584	821	349	187	1768

 

The Four Factors

Team	EFG	DEFG	OR%	DOR%	TO%	DTU%	FT*	DFT*	Streaks
Arizona	53.8	46.3	35.1	24.9	17.9	16.3	25.9	17.6	8	6
Austin Peay	51.8	52.2	32.9	29.3	19.6	18.8	24.1	18.0	6	2
Baylor	51.9	50.8	40.5	28.2	18.8	20.0	23.7	20.5	7	4
Buffalo	50.0	49.3	32.6	28.7	18.7	18.1	24.1	21.7	4	4
Butler	52.5	49.4	32.8	27.8	14.5	18.6	24.9	20.9	8	3
Cal State Bakersfield	49.8	44.6	34.6	29.1	17.7	22.3	21.0	22.7	6	6
California	52.3	43.9	32.6	25.6	17.7	14.1	22.5	22.3	12	3
Chattanooga	52.4	49.3	32.7	28.5	18.1	20.8	24.9	16.4	9	8
Cincinnati	49.0	45.3	36.8	30.6	16.4	20.5	21.1	15.6	7	4
Colorado	48.9	47.1	35.5	24.5	18.8	15.5	24.4	19.9	11	3
Connecticut	52.0	44.2	29.1	29.2	16.5	18.2	19.9	19.2	5	4
Dayton	52.0	46.9	28.8	23.6	18.8	17.9	22.0	17.6	9	5
Duke	53.8	48.6	33.8	34.3	14.2	17.7	25.5	15.5	7	5
Fairleigh Dickinson	52.1	51.7	29.1	35.7	17.7	21.1	19.3	25.6	5	3
Florida Gulf Coast	52.1	46.9	32.9	27.9	17.3	17.3	19.9	19.6	7	3
Fresno St.	48.5	48.3	31.4	28.9	15.1	21.0	22.8	23.9	9	5
Gonzaga	55.4	44.9	32.3	25.8	16.5	15.0	22.8	17.5	7	6
Green Bay	50.1	50.8	31.3	31.7	15.5	21.6	23.7	20.3	4	4
Hampton	46.8	47.8	35.0	27.2	18.9	17.1	23.1	21.9	6	5
Hawaii	52.5	45.3	31.6	26.6	18.4	20.6	24.6	21.4	8	6
Holy Cross	47.9	53.3	23.6	29.6	16.6	20.0	20.4	19.8	4	3
Indiana	58.6	49.5	37.7	28.7	19.8	18.9	20.3	16.4	12	5
Iona	53.8	48.5	29.4	31.3	17.6	19.4	19.5	20.9	8	5
Iowa	51.8	47.4	32.3	31.4	15.0	18.8	21.2	15.1	9	4
Iowa St.	56.8	49.5	27.3	30.7	16.0	17.0	15.5	14.8	9	3
Kansas	56.5	45.1	32.8	28.3	17.5	18.8	22.2	21.8	13	13
Kentucky	53.7	44.9	37.8	31.7	16.1	17.9	22.8	24.0	7	5
Maryland	55.9	46.5	30.4	29.5	19.0	16.7	22.7	16.6	8	5
Miami	53.9	48.0	30.5	29.2	16.1	17.4	24.9	17.5	8	5
Michigan	55.1	50.8	24.4	26.5	14.8	18.1	17.9	16.3	6	4
Michigan St.	56.0	42.6	37.2	24.2	14.6	14.2	20.0	21.0	13	9
Middle Tennessee	51.9	48.6	28.7	25.3	17.4	19.3	18.6	22.0	6	6
North Carolina	52.1	47.4	39.8	29.8	15.4	18.7	21.5	17.8	12	5
Northern Iowa	53.7	48.5	17.7	26.8	15.4	18.4	19.9	14.3	6	6
Notre Dame	53.5	49.2	32.8	31.3	14.8	14.8	21.5	17.6	4	3
Oklahoma	54.5	46.4	30.5	29.8	18.0	17.6	20.4	16.2	12	4
Oregon	52.6	48.6	34.9	31.1	16.5	20.5	24.4	18.3	8	6
Oregon St.	50.0	49.1	29.6	32.3	16.7	19.8	21.2	22.1	4	4
Pittsburgh	51.3	49.7	37.5	27.2	17.3	17.3	23.7	18.4	10	4
Providence	48.1	48.8	30.9	30.2	16.4	20.6	23.3	16.7	8	6
Purdue	53.7	44.3	35.3	23.3	17.5	13.8	22.2	17.2	11	5
Seton Hall	50.2	45.3	35.0	30.7	19.5	19.2	22.4	19.3	7	4
South Dakota St.	51.6	46.9	32.6	25.8	17.1	17.6	24.9	22.3	6	6
Southern	49.8	47.3	29.0	32.2	16.1	19.6	21.0	20.6	8	5
St. Joseph’s	51.3	47.9	28.3	25.8	14.3	16.2	22.8	14.8	7	7
Stephen F. Austin	55.0	48.8	34.8	29.2	17.7	26.7	21.3	18.7	20	5
Stony Brook	53.3	46.1	35.7	25.3	16.8	18.8	19.1	16.0	18	3
Syracuse	50.4	47.5	33.0	35.2	18.4	20.5	20.6	17.0	6	5
Temple	46.9	46.7	29.0	29.8	13.7	16.5	16.9	18.6	5	4
Texas	49.3	47.4	30.8	32.3	15.4	18.5	22.4	21.7	6	4
Texas A&M	51.4	47.1	35.0	30.0	17.1	20.9	21.7	17.6	10	8
Texas Tech	49.9	49.3	31.7	32.5	17.7	18.9	26.0	19.7	10	5
Tulsa	50.4	48.3	27.9	30.4	15.5	20.6	22.5	21.3	5	4
UALR	52.6	44.9	28.1	29.4	16.2	21.7	19.6	20.3	10	6
UNC-Asheville	50.7	47.3	31.9	29.0	18.4	22.0	23.6	18.3	5	5
UNC-Wilmington	51.1	46.6	32.2	30.7	15.8	21.0	22.6	28.4	11	5
USC	52.0	47.3	32.4	31.9	16.5	16.9	20.5	17.7	7	5
Utah	55.7	47.3	30.2	27.6	17.9	15.2	22.4	15.0	9	5
Vanderbilt	53.5	43.1	27.4	29.4	16.7	14.3	22.5	20.4	5	4
VCU	50.9	49.0	33.3	27.8	16.2	22.0	19.6	19.5	12	3
Villanova	54.3	46.3	28.6	28.7	16.3	20.4	22.3	17.3	9	7
Virginia	54.4	48.7	30.6	25.9	15.3	19.7	21.0	18.9	11	7
Weber St.	56.3	46.2	26.6	24.9	19.0	15.7	23.1	16.0	8	6
West Virginia	50.2	48.8	41.9	27.2	19.6	25.6	26.0	26.9	8	7
Wichita St.	49.7	44.4	32.0	23.9	14.9	23.2	23.8	23.7	12	6
Wisconsin	49.0	48.5	33.6	28.2	17.0	18.7	23.8	19.9	7	4
Xavier	51.5	47.9	35.7	26.3	17.6	19.3	26.2	19.6	12	5
Yale	52.8	46.1	39.4	24.0	19.9	18.5	23.1	18.6	12	5

 

PiRate Criteria

Team	PPG	DPPG	Mar.	FG-M	Rb-M	TO-M	R+T	WLRd	SOS
Arizona	81.2	68.9	12.3	6.9	9.2	-1.2	20.3	8-7	54.69
Austin Peay	76.0	75.1	0.9	0.5	2.7	-0.6	7.3	11-10	48.15
Baylor	77.2	69.2	7.9	2.2	7.9	0.8	20.0	8-6	59.49
Buffalo	77.6	75.1	2.4	0.6	3.0	-0.4	9.3	10-9	53.77
Butler	80.6	71.2	9.4	3.5	3.5	2.9	14.6	8-7	54.61
Cal State Bakersfield	73.0	63.2	9.8	6.0	4.0	3.1	15.9	10-7	44.72
California	75.1	67.0	8.1	6.8	6.7	-2.5	13.9	5-10	58.52
Chattanooga	75.8	66.6	9.2	2.2	3.4	1.8	12.3	16-4	48.07
Cincinnati	73.2	62.9	10.3	3.7	4.8	2.8	17.2	8-7	54.70
Colorado	76.0	70.7	5.3	0.7	8.9	-2.3	16.6	6-10	56.45
Connecticut	73.4	63.1	10.3	7.8	2.3	1.1	9.4	9-7	55.70
Dayton	73.2	65.8	7.4	5.5	5.3	-0.6	14.1	11-4	55.73
Duke	79.1	68.8	10.3	2.4	0.1	2.4	7.3	7-6	58.97
Fairleigh Dickinson	77.9	78.3	-0.3	1.1	-5.0	2.4	-4.1	9-8	45.04
Florida Gulf Coast	77.0	70.5	6.5	6.2	5.0	0.0	12.8	4-9	45.65
Fresno St.	75.3	70.4	4.9	1.6	1.2	4.3	12.4	9-7	51.24
Gonzaga	79.7	66.2	13.5	8.7	7.3	-0.9	16.5	15-3	52.35
Green Bay	84.2	79.7	4.6	0.1	-1.5	4.8	6.8	12-9	48.08
Hampton	74.8	73.8	0.9	-0.9	5.1	-1.5	11.7	12-8	43.76
Hawaii	77.6	66.5	11.1	6.4	4.6	1.5	14.8	10-2	47.33
Holy Cross	65.3	69.7	-4.3	-4.5	-5.5	2.2	-5.2	6-13	45.37
Indiana	82.3	68.9	13.4	5.9	7.3	-0.6	17.3	8-7	53.79
Iona	79.6	73.7	5.9	3.5	-0.6	1.3	4.2	11-8	50.33
Iowa	78.1	68.7	9.4	3.6	1.4	2.7	9.5	8-8	56.69
Iowa St.	81.8	75.0	6.9	6.6	-0.1	0.8	4.1	7-9	58.96
Kansas	81.6	67.6	13.9	9.8	5.2	0.9	14.6	12-4	60.22
Kentucky	79.7	68.3	11.4	7.8	5.4	1.3	16.7	9-8	57.45
Maryland	76.1	66.3	9.8	8.0	3.4	-1.7	7.8	9-7	56.77
Miami	75.6	66.8	8.8	4.7	2.3	1.0	9.5	10-6	58.22
Michigan	74.3	67.5	6.8	2.1	-1.0	2.1	4.9	9-8	55.96
Michigan St.	79.8	63.4	16.4	10.7	11.7	0.0	26.7	15-3	55.75
Middle Tennessee	72.7	68.3	4.4	2.4	2.2	1.4	9.1	13-6	50.23
North Carolina	82.3	69.5	12.8	6.9	8.3	2.2	22.4	13-5	57.74
Northern Iowa	68.0	62.9	5.1	3.6	-3.9	2.0	-1.9	11-9	53.34
Notre Dame	75.7	70.6	5.1	4.3	2.3	0.0	8.1	7-9	57.25
Oklahoma	80.4	70.4	10.0	5.4	2.5	-0.3	7.1	11-6	58.74
Oregon	78.8	69.1	9.7	4.3	3.2	2.8	14.4	10-6	60.01
Oregon St.	72.1	70.0	2.1	1.4	-2.2	2.1	2.4	5-9	58.77
Pittsburgh	76.0	67.9	8.1	2.4	7.4	-0.1	17.5	6-7	56.86
Providence	74.0	69.7	4.2	-1.3	-0.2	3.1	6.0	10-6	55.71
Purdue	77.7	64.6	13.1	8.0	10.6	-2.5	20.9	9-7	56.54
Seton Hall	74.8	67.8	7.1	4.9	4.1	-0.2	10.5	12-5	56.24
South Dakota St.	76.3	67.8	8.5	3.5	5.4	0.3	13.9	14-7	51.07
Southern	72.9	69.0	3.9	3.0	-1.7	2.6	3.6	10-11	42.66
St. Joseph’s	77.6	69.9	7.7	4.0	2.9	1.3	11.2	15-3	55.49
Stephen F. Austin	80.7	63.2	17.6	4.6	3.4	6.2	18.2	13-5	47.18
Stony Brook	76.8	63.4	13.4	7.2	7.8	1.4	20.7	11-5	48.19
Syracuse	70.2	65.7	4.5	1.3	-1.4	1.4	2.2	6-9	56.21
Temple	68.7	67.4	1.2	-1.2	-1.5	1.9	3.3	10-8	54.61
Texas	71.3	68.1	3.3	1.3	-1.4	2.1	3.3	6-9	59.88
Texas A&M	75.9	65.5	10.4	4.4	3.9	2.6	14.7	9-7	55.70
Texas Tech	72.4	69.8	2.5	2.0	0.5	0.8	4.3	5-9	58.94
Tulsa	74.0	69.7	4.3	2.7	-1.9	3.5	3.8	8-8	54.97
UALR	70.9	59.6	11.3	6.9	0.1	3.5	9.1	15-4	47.45
UNC-Asheville	75.6	67.5	8.2	3.5	2.3	2.7	11.2	11-8	47.21
UNC-Wilmington	79.2	71.4	7.8	3.9	1.0	3.8	10.6	13-5	51.21
USC	80.8	74.8	6.1	4.0	1.6	0.2	6.8	5-10	56.79
Utah	77.6	69.1	8.5	7.6	4.5	-1.9	9.4	10-7	59.33
Vanderbilt	76.8	67.3	9.4	7.5	1.3	-1.7	3.4	5-11	56.44
VCU	77.2	67.3	9.9	1.0	2.7	4.0	14.0	9-8	55.24
Villanova	77.0	63.7	13.3	6.7	1.9	2.7	10.0	14-4	58.54
Virginia	70.4	59.7	10.7	6.6	3.5	2.7	13.2	11-7	60.05
Weber St.	76.7	66.9	9.9	7.0	4.3	-2.3	9.0	13-7	45.32
West Virginia	79.2	66.6	12.6	2.5	8.4	4.1	25.3	13-6	58.59
Wichita St.	73.2	59.3	14.0	4.9	4.6	5.5	19.7	10-7	52.52
Wisconsin	68.9	64.6	4.3	0.0	3.1	1.2	11.1	7-7	58.14
Xavier	81.3	71.0	10.3	3.6	7.5	1.4	19.9	12-4	56.82
Yale	75.2	63.1	12.0	6.4	11.1	-0.9	23.4	10-6	49.48

If this data is a little overbearing, fret not Bracketaholics.  We will select bracket winners for you Tuesday afternoon so you can fill them out with some science and mathematics backing you up.

 

And, if you are like many of our old-time readers, some of who prefer to use our data when visiting Las Vegas (and who have to buy new shirts after they lose the one they had), we will have our Red-White-Blue computer-rated picks for the First Four games late tonight, and then the picks for the second round late Wednesday night after the last First Four game has concluded.

 

Bracketnomics 505–The Advanced Level Course in Bracket Picking

Welcome to Bracketnomics 505 for 2015–The Advanced Level Course in Picking NCAA Tournament winners.  The best way to describe our PiRate Ratings NCAA Tournament Bracket-Picking formula is to call it the Past Performances of the teams.  If you are familiar with the Daily Racing Form or other thoroughbred horse racing publications, you probably know how to read the PPS of the horses in each race.  

If you have followed our statistical releases for the past 15 years, you will see a noticeable difference this year, as the PiRate Ratings have incorporated the infamous “Four Factors” into our bracket selection tutorial.

Here is a description of all the pertinent information you need to pick your brackets.  We will explain each important statistic and tell you how it applies to the NCAA Tournament.  Then, we will apply it to all 68 teams in the Big Dance and let you use what you want to fill out your brackets.  Remember one important bit of information–this process deals a lot with past tendencies trying to predict future outcomes.  It is mechanical and has no real subjective data.  It will not include information such as how your team’s star player may have the flu this week, so if you have other information, by all means include this in your selections.

THE FOUR FACTORS

Statistician and author Dean Oliver created this metric.  He did for basketball what the incredible Bill James did for baseball.  Oliver wrote the excellent book Basketball on Paper, where he showed that NBA winners could break down four separate statistical metrics to show how the winner won and the loser lost.  Later experimentation showed that this metric works for college basketball when strength of schedule is factored into the metric.

The four factors are: Effective Field Goal Percentage, Rebound Rate, Turnover Rate, and Free Throw Rate.  Each of these four factors apply to both offense and defense, so in essence, there are really eight factors.

Each Factor has a formula that can be calculated if you have the statistics.  We have all the statistics for all 68 teams, and we did this for you.

Effective FG% =  (FGM + (.5 * 3ptM))/FGA  where FGM is field goals made, 3ptM is three-pointers made, and FGA is field goals attempted.

If a team made 800 FG, 250 3-pointers and attempted 1750 field goals, their EFG% is:

(800+(.5*250))/1750 = .529 or 52.9%

Rebound Rate = Offensive Rebounds/(Offensive Rebounds + Opponents’ Defensive Rebounds)

If a team has 500 offensive rebounds and their opponents have 850 defensive rebounds, their Rebound Rate is:

500/(500+850) = .370 or 37.0%

Turnover Rate = Turnovers per 100 possessions.  Possessions can be estimated with incredible accuracy by this formula:

(FGA + (.475*FTA)-OR+TO)/G, where FGA is field goal attempts, FTA is free throw attempts, OR is offensive rebounds, TO is turnovers, and G is games played.

If a team has 1700 FGA, 650 FTA, 425 OR, and 375 TO in 30 games played, their average possessions per game is:

(1700+(.475*650)-425+375)/30 = 65.3, and thus, their TO Rate would be:

Turnovers per game / possessions per game * 100

((425/30)/65.3) * 100 = 21.7

Free Throw Rate: Oliver and others determined that getting to the line was actually more important than making the foul shots, so they did not include made free throws in their equation.  Their formula was simply:

FTA/FGA, as they believed that getting the other team in foul trouble was the most important part.

Later statisticans changed this formulas to FT Made/FGA, which included made free throws, but it also erred by making teams that do not attempt many field goals but lead late in games look much better than they really were.  If a team like Virginia attempted just 42 field goals and led an opponent by three or four points late in the game, they would pad this stat by making a lot of FT in the final minutes when the opponent was forced to foul.

A third group of statisticians, including the PiRate Ratings, believe that free throws made per 100 possessions is a better metric, and thus we go with this rating, which we call FT*:

If the team above with 65.3 possessions per game averages 17 made free throws per game, then their FT Rate is:

17 / 65.3 * 100 = 26.0

The PiRate Specific Statistics

For 15 years, the PiRate Ratings have relied on specific back-tested data that showed us what stats were important in selecting Final Four teams.  We looked back in history to see how previous Final Four teams dominated in certain statistical areas while not dominating in other areas.  Here is what we found.

1. Scoring Margin

For general bracket picking, look for teams that outscored their opponents by an average of 8 or more points per game.  Over 85% of the Final Four teams since the 1950’s outscored their opponents by an average of 8 or more points per game.

More than 80% of the final four teams in the last 50 years outscored their opponents by double digit points per game.  When you find a team with an average scoring margin in excess of 15 points per game, and said team is in one of the six power conferences, then you have a team that will advance deep into the tournament.

This is an obvious statistic here.  If team A outscores opponents by an average of 85-70 and their team B opponent outscores similar opposition by an average of 75-70, and the teams played comparable schedules, then team A figures to be better than team B before you look at any other statistics.

In the days of the 64 to 68-team field, this statistic has become even more valuable.  It’s very difficult and close to impossible for a team accustomed to winning games by one to seven points to win four times in a row, much less six or seven consecutive games.

This statistic gives the same significance and weighting to a team that outscores its opposition 100-90 as it does to a team that outscores its opposition 60-50.

2. Field Goal Percentage Differential

Take each team’s field goal percentage minus their defensive field goal percentage to calculate this statistic.  Look for teams that have a +7.5% or better showing.  50% to 42% is no better or no worse than 45% to 37%.  A difference of 7.5% or better is all that matters.  Teams that have a large field goal percentage margin are consistently good teams.  Sure, a team can win a game with a negative field goal percentage difference, but in the Big Dance, they certainly are not going to win six games, and they have no real chance to win four games. Two games are about the maximum for these teams.

This statistic holds strong in back-tests of 50 years.  Even when teams won the tournament with less than 7.5% field goal percentage margins, for the most part, these teams just barely missed (usually in the 5.5 to 7.5% range).  In the years of the 64 to 68-team tournament, this stat has become a more accurate predictor.  In the 21st Century, the teams with field goal percentage margins in the double digits have dominated the field.  For example, if you see a team that shoots better than 48% and allows 38% or less, that team is going to be very hard to beat in large arenas with weird sight lines.

3. Rebound Margin

This statistic holds up all the way back to the early days of basketball, in fact as far back to the days when rebounds were first recorded.  The teams that consistently control the boards are the ones that advance past the first week in the tournament.  What we’re looking for here are teams that out-rebound their opposition by five or more per game.  In the opening two rounds, a difference of three or more is just as important.

There are complete rebounding statistics back to 1954, and in the 61 NCAA Tournaments between 1954 and 2014, the National Champion outrebounded their opponents 61 times!  Yes, no team with a negative rebound margin has ever won the title.

The reason this statistic becomes even more important in mid-March is that teams do not always shoot as well in the NCAA Tournament for a variety of reasons (better defense, abnormal sight lines and unfamiliar gymnasiums, nerves, new rims and nets, more physical play with the refs allowing it, etc.).  The teams that can consistently get offensive put-backs are the teams that go on scoring runs in these games.  The teams that prevent the opposition from getting offensive rebounds, holding them to one shot per possession, have a huge advantage.  Again, there will be some teams that advance that were beaten on the boards, but as the number of teams drop from 64 to 32 to 16 to eight, it is rare for one of these teams to continue to advance.  West Virginia in 2005 made it to the Elite Eight without being able to rebound, but not many other teams have been able to do so.  There have been years where all four Final Four participants were in the top 20 in rebounding margin, and there have been many years where the champion was in the top 5 in rebounding margin.

4. Turnover Margin & Steals Per Game

Turnover margin can give a weaker rebounding team a chance to advance.  Any positive turnover margin is good here.  If a team cannot meet the rebounding margin listed above, they can get by if they have an excellent turnover margin.  Not all turnover margins are the same though.  A team that forces a high number of turnovers by way of steals is better than a team that forces the same amount of turnovers without steals.  A steal is better than a defensive rebound, because most of the time, a steal leads to a fast-break basket or foul.  When a team steals the ball, they are already facing their basket, and the defense must turn around and chase.  Many steals occur on the perimeter where the ball-hawking team has a numbers advantage.

The criteria to look for here is a positive turnover margin if the team out-rebounds its opposition by three or more; a turnover margin of three or better if the team out-rebounds its opposition by less than three; and a turnover margin of five or more if the team does not out-rebound its opponents.  Give more weight to teams that average 7.5 or more steals per game, and give much more weight to teams that average double figure steals per game.  A team that averages more than 10 steals per game will get a lot of fast-break baskets and foul shots.  In NCAA Tournament play, one quick spurt can be like a three-run homer in the World Series, and teams that either steal the ball or control the boards are the ones who will get that spurt.

5. The All-Important R+T Margin: Consider this the basketball equivalent of baseball’s OPS (On Base % + Slugging %) or even better, the “MoneyballFormula.”  The formula has undergone a couple of changes in recent years, including this season, and we think it will be slightly adjusted in the future based on changes in how the game is played.

The R+T Formula for 2015 is: (R * 2) + (S * .5) + (6 – Opp S) + T, where R is rebounding margin, S is average steals per game (Opp S is opponents steals per game), and T is turnover margin.  The numbers are all rounded to one digit.

Look for teams with R+T ratings at 15 or above.  These are the teams that will get several additional opportunities to score points and go on scoring runs that put opponents away

When this stat is 7.5 to 15, you have a team that can overcome a few other liabilities to win and cut down the nets in Indianapolis if they don’t run into a team from the 15+ R+T range with similar shooting percentages and defense.

When this stat is 4.5 to 7.5, you have a team good enough to win early and get to the Sweet 16 or lite 8 but not advance past that round, unless said team has a large field goal percentage difference margin.

When this stat is 0 to 4.5, you have a team that better enjoy a large field goal margin advantage, or they will be one and done or two and out.

When this stat is negative, you have a team that will be eliminated quickly, even if they are playing a lower seed.  We have isolated many early round upsets due to this statistic, and we have eliminated many teams expected to perform well that bombed in the opening round.

A few years ago, Georgetown had a negative R+T rating but was a prohibitive favorite against Ohio U.  The Bobcats had a positive R+T rating and decent numbers in the other PiRate factors.  We called for Ohio to upset Georgetown in the first round, and Ohio won by double digits.

The same thing occurred again a couple years later when Georgetown had a negative R+T rating as the Hoyas faced unknown Florida Gulf Coast.  FGCU not only pulled off the upset, they blew GU off the floor.

6. Power Conference Plus Schedule Strength

Up to this point you might have been thinking that it is much easier for Stephen F. Austin or Wofford to own these gaudy statistics than it is for Iowa St. or Notre Dame.  And, of course, that is correct.  We have to adjust this procedure so that teams that play tougher schedules get rewarded and teams that play softer schedules get punished.  We use three different SOS ratings to come up with an average, and then we plug it into a formula that gives extra points for teams with tough schedules, while taking away points from teams with easy schedules.

7. Won-Loss percentage Away From Home Floor

This should be obvious.  Except in the rarest of instances (like Dayton playing in a First Round Game this year), all NCAA Tournament games are played on neutral courts.  Some teams play like titans on their home floor but become pansies when playing away from home.  It is one thing to accumulate great statistics by scheduling 19 home games, three neutral site games, and eight away games and then going 18-1 at home, 1-2 on the neutral site, and 3-5 on the road to finish 22-8.  However, we need to locate the teams that continue to dominate away from home.  Combine the road and neutral games played and look at that percentage.  When you find a team with a 75% or better win percentage away from home, this team is a legitimate contender in the Big Dance.  When this number tops 85%, you have a tough team capable of winning four consecutive games and advancing to the Final Four.

These are the basic PiRate criteria.  You might be shocked to see that there are some key statistics that are not included.  Let’s look at some of these stats not to rely upon.

1. Assists and Assists to Turnover Ratio

While assists can reveal an excellent passing team (and we love great passing teams), they also can hide a problem.  Let’s say a team gets 28 field goals and has 21 assists.  That may very well indicate this team can pass better than most others. However, it may also mean two other things.  First, this team may not have players who can create their own offense and must get by on exceptional passing.  That may not work against the best defensive teams in the nation (like the type that get into the Dance).  Second, and even more importantly, it may indicate that this team cannot get offensive put-backs.  As explained earlier, the offensive rebound is about as important as any stat can be in the NCAA Tournament.  So, consider this stat only if you must decide on a toss-up after looking at the big seven stats.

2. Free Throw Shooting

You might say we are contradicting the Four Factors with this, but we are not.  It is the least important of the Four Factors, and we only apply this to the NCAA Tournament.

Of course, free throw shooting in the clutch decides many ball games.  However, history shows a long line of teams making it deep into the tournament with poor free throw shooting percentages, and teams that overly rely on free throws may find it tough getting to the line with the liberalized officiating in the tournament.

Let’s say a team shoots a paltry 60% at the foul line while their opponent hits a great 75% of their foul shots.  Let’s say each team gets to the foul line 15 times in the game, with five of those chances being 1&1, three being one shot after made baskets, and seven being two shot fouls.  For the 60% shooting team, they can be expected to hit 3 of 5 on the front end of the 1&1 and then 1.8 of the 3 bonus shots; they can be expected to hit 1.8 of 3 on the one foul shot after made baskets; and they can be expected to hit 8.4 of 14 on the two shot fouls for a total of 15 out of 25.  The 75% shooting team can be expected to connect on 3.75 of 5 on the front end of the 1&1 and then 2.8 of 3.75 on the bonus shot; they can be expected to hit 2.3 of 3 on the one foul shot after made baskets; and they can be expected to connect on 10.5 of 14 on the two shot fouls for a total of 19.35 out of 25.75.

A team with one of the top FT% only scores 4.35 more points at the foul line than a team with one of the worst.  That is not a lot of points to make up, and when you consider that this is about the maximum possible difference, this stat is not all that important.  Also consider that teams that shoot 60% of their foul shots and make the NCAA Tournament are almost always the teams that have the top R+T ratings, which is vitally important after the Ides of March.

Teams that make the NCAA Tournament with gaudy free throw percentages frequently get there by winning close games at the line.  In the NCAA Tournament, fouls just don’t get called as frequently as in the regular season.  The referees let the teams play.  So, looking at superior free throw percentage can almost lead you down the wrong path.

Ponder this:  The 1973 UCLA Bruins are considered to be the best college basketball team ever.  That team connected on just 63% of its free throws.  They had a rebounding margin of 15.2, and they forced many turnovers via steals thanks to their vaunted 2-2-1 zone press.  In the great UCLA dynasty from 1964 through 1973 when the Bruins won nine titles in 10 years, they never once connected on 70% of their free throws and averaged just 66% during that stretch.

3. 3-point shooting

You have to look at this statistic two different ways and consider that it is already part of field goal percentage and defensive field goal percentage.  Contrary to popular belief, you do not count the difference in made three-pointers and multiply by three to see the difference in points scored.  If Team A hits eight treys, while their Team B opponents hit three, that is not a difference of 15 points; it’s a difference of five points.  Consider made three-pointers as one extra point because they are already figured as made field goals.  A team with 26 made field goals and eight treys has only one more point than a team with 26 made field goals and seven treys.

The only time to give three-point shots any weight in this criteria is when you are looking at a toss-up game, and when you do look at this stat, look for the team that does not rely on them to win, but instead uses a credible percentage that prevents defenses from sagging into the 10-12-foot area around the basket.  If a team cannot throw it in the ocean from behind the arc, defenses can sag inside and take away the inside game.  It doesn’t play much of a role in the NCAA Tournament.  A team that must hit 10 threes per game in order to win is not going to be around after the first weekend.

4. One Big Star or Two Really Good Players

Teams that get to the Dance by riding one big star or a majority of scoring from two players are not solid enough to advance very far.  Now, this does not apply to a team with one big star and four really good players.  I’m referring to a team with one big star and four lemons or two big scorers with three guys who are allergic to the ball.  Many times a team may have one big scorer or two guys who score 85% of the points, but the other three starters are capable of scoring 20 points if they are called on to do so.  If you have a team with five double figure scorers, they will be harder to defend and will be more consistent on the attack side.  It is hard for all five players to slump at once.

We hope this primer will help you when you fill out your brackets this year.

Here is a list of all the statistics for the Big Dance teams.  Hopefully, they will align properly on your computer, as we had issues getting the alignment to work here.  Our provider is not really set up for tabular posts, and that is our problem and not theirs.

Offense Statistics

Team	FG	FGA	3pt	3pta	FT	FTa	OR	DR	TO	Stl
Albany	706	1605	197	547	487	640	320	756	374	181
Arizona	908	1855	172	478	611	874	368	898	381	244
Arkansas	932	2083	227	648	562	776	442	774	399	264
Baylor	794	1831	229	607	476	710	485	808	413	261
Belmont	831	1746	321	841	400	579	301	763	439	205
Boise St.	809	1768	291	738	426	581	286	800	339	201
Buffalo	817	1878	193	567	573	794	412	818	361	244
Butler	777	1771	184	514	488	718	390	785	364	204
BYU	948	2032	85	734	660	859	415	895	402	257
Cincinnati	716	1581	161	483	403	598	351	744	409	210
Coastal Carolina	808	1841	221	621	529	769	440	873	393	232
Davidson	877	1861	337	849	386	543	325	789	297	170
Dayton	750	1620	213	605	538	789	245	796	379	230
Duke	944	1880	250	648	522	755	401	831	371	237
E. Washington	951	1981	335	832	509	704	341	814	367	216
Georgetown	750	1650	181	521	511	728	347	742	392	240
Georgia	728	1673	180	524	551	800	348	869	408	179
Georgia St.	854	1778	163	492	504	693	309	773	352	300
Gonzaga	973	1856	242	593	502	726	347	940	359	211
Hampton	753	1847	187	615	523	802	404	820	469	220
Harvard	650	1493	141	399	420	589	304	695	342	204
Indiana	899	1930	308	764	451	631	395	792	379	167
Iowa	758	1776	181	545	524	703	401	805	361	211
Iowa St.	916	1908	257	703	497	714	314	870	364	209
Kansas	822	1869	198	528	579	804	402	888	435	222
Kentucky	883	1884	185	529	596	825	439	859	361	223
Lafayette	851	1744	257	622	415	542	272	720	351	179
Louisville	783	1827	181	595	468	709	413	808	378	266
LSU	868	1902	184	543	438	636	388	865	468	235
Manhattan	733	1686	209	615	561	808	333	691	464	259
Maryland	741	1693	241	647	570	753	302	855	397	160
Michigan St.	901	1912	256	663	386	610	390	891	395	181
N. C. St.	820	1875	219	606	464	679	400	849	347	131
New Mexico St.	788	1692	160	435	524	755	414	756	459	209
North Carolina	1019	2144	167	484	522	746	488	948	444	233
North Dakota St.	714	1659	220	579	417	602	271	803	312	153
North Florida	872	1858	308	788	522	721	326	851	417	213
Northeastern	811	1670	200	515	510	703	284	843	467	181
Northern Iowa	735	1523	242	609	445	613	239	778	346	196
Notre Dame	945	1853	281	716	509	688	283	831	319	234
Ohio St.	916	1886	225	605	445	656	372	811	373	257
Oklahoma	818	1874	216	629	450	612	351	868	388	221
Oklahoma St.	706	1607	216	618	459	632	238	730	380	245
Ole Miss	788	1850	207	612	541	695	397	805	363	211
Oregon	937	2031	248	688	447	588	359	877	401	195
Providence	808	1830	161	520	540	761	398	791	391	238
Purdue	801	1768	191	571	515	752	388	810	432	180
Robert Morris	802	1798	211	555	462	647	344	759	454	282
San Diego St.	756	1805	178	556	411	653	413	784	386	236
SMU	812	1695	138	384	529	750	378	833	417	226
St. John’s	808	1831	195	552	468	676	329	803	342	239
S.F. Austin	894	1819	257	666	577	786	402	745	464	252
Texas	779	1787	206	607	478	659	410	900	420	124
Texas Southern	794	1789	180	562	550	831	386	788	445	209
UAB	820	1907	187	563	514	694	403	841	461	225
UC-Irvine	830	1799	212	544	368	539	320	849	382	189
UCLA	849	1927	205	564	473	700	406	847	392	226
Utah	788	1624	247	611	484	692	296	821	366	190
Valparaiso	817	1780	224	593	446	658	386	859	413	198
VCU	872	2076	283	828	510	778	431	809	372	338
Villanova	861	1833	306	787	565	777	351	819	369	265
Virginia	761	1644	162	449	407	563	329	829	304	179
West Virginia	813	1975	213	669	527	798	539	638	418	350
Wichita St.	784	1756	224	619	439	638	380	758	301	225
Wisconsin	860	1793	237	663	487	638	322	823	252	154
Wofford	800	1745	215	572	463	672	310	792	371	223
Wyoming	726	1573	200	620	445	629	212	813	380	189
Xavier	885	1870	214	613	517	713	340	844	411	207

Defense

Team	FG	FGA	3pt	3pta	FT	FTa	OR	DR	TO	Stl
Albany	672	1600	243	666	340	486	259	665	399	153
Arizona	686	1752	181	581	440	636	258	710	481	159
Arkansas	824	1914	212	600	525	736	402	800	543	188
Baylor	716	1782	191	637	368	570	367	663	404	211
Belmont	828	1832	232	675	363	514	319	726	411	212
Boise St.	710	1712	188	611	381	544	276	729	419	158
Buffalo	773	1831	230	697	409	618	358	774	436	197
Butler	701	1684	175	571	381	561	260	708	403	175
BYU	858	1972	211	643	540	770	354	788	449	224
Cincinnati	654	1678	184	560	277	427	347	589	390	177
Coastal Carolina	691	1766	231	718	422	604	305	722	394	191
Davidson	779	1769	175	582	405	636	337	749	365	159
Dayton	731	1738	181	571	367	541	309	768	449	172
Duke	829	1931	171	534	335	483	357	670	415	188
E. Washington	876	1953	268	697	484	676	353	796	417	187
Georgetown	650	1614	203	566	501	709	338	665	420	192
Georgia	707	1826	200	647	440	626	353	729	355	194
Georgia St.	667	1749	237	735	482	683	398	704	500	154
Gonzaga	737	1917	191	589	406	615	372	669	395	191
Hampton	744	1801	188	546	568	827	367	826	461	178
Harvard	587	1471	159	486	327	484	268	623	368	156
Indiana	875	1925	194	591	413	617	359	724	357	200
Iowa	701	1788	211	652	367	522	354	718	400	195
Iowa St.	842	2012	245	697	357	488	358	786	427	186
Kansas	780	1977	195	631	444	664	415	751	398	216
Kentucky	651	1836	156	570	377	581	398	647	478	159
Lafayette	850	1864	263	698	415	542	370	687	354	190
Louisville	676	1740	160	547	393	603	362	763	463	191
LSU	796	1986	180	575	395	597	427	753	439	262
Manhattan	710	1630	145	450	595	846	351	740	531	221
Maryland	756	1910	223	713	352	533	374	733	372	180
Michigan St.	728	1821	208	643	492	686	312	738	377	194
N. C. St.	757	1877	195	588	450	640	370	770	331	176
New Mexico St.	727	1725	120	409	384	557	329	618	434	179
North Carolina	818	2056	227	763	531	773	416	734	435	234
North Dakota St.	697	1668	206	556	369	497	237	771	338	146
North Florida	851	1971	172	549	430	633	389	767	420	217
Northeastern	848	1905	191	555	323	470	289	674	342	240
Northern Iowa	641	1638	197	624	167	221	287	652	372	163
Notre Dame	847	1984	213	647	325	463	384	725	384	176
Ohio St.	743	1833	221	694	350	502	370	718	484	166
Oklahoma	727	1888	197	637	357	546	399	785	443	209
Oklahoma St.	646	1620	176	519	464	678	349	722	426	185
Ole Miss	708	1771	245	703	499	729	374	740	405	161
Oregon	853	2025	215	652	484	697	399	790	395	190
Providence	742	1762	210	631	467	679	331	730	430	188
Purdue	724	1807	196	560	485	696	365	684	385	228
Robert Morris	778	1835	222	664	457	690	424	756	482	216
San Diego St.	659	1750	172	567	317	456	339	748	451	184
SMU	671	1768	258	803	372	548	350	632	423	220
St. John’s	768	1895	221	675	407	619	431	822	423	165
S.F. Austin	712	1627	150	451	555	800	312	656	571	196
Texas	686	1862	200	575	421	637	367	668	298	209
Texas Southern	850	1930	188	550	405	629	410	749	419	220
UAB	824	1960	206	635	447	653	411	780	452	210
UC-Irvine	716	1823	179	527	445	644	373	746	375	191
UCLA	779	1866	259	729	428	611	331	793	416	207
Utah	643	1681	152	477	384	569	313	640	373	176
Valparaiso	670	1762	219	667	397	565	319	687	404	223
VCU	794	1835	223	648	482	694	359	928	566	205
Villanova	752	1856	186	603	380	563	369	724	483	192
Virginia	578	1600	177	584	289	447	267	641	341	163
West Virginia	697	1488	173	473	572	833	285	778	628	185
Wichita St.	617	1551	161	469	391	576	272	698	426	127
Wisconsin	742	1771	170	442	254	373	256	686	339	135
Wofford	715	1715	170	551	433	613	292	762	435	180
Wyoming	692	1725	210	612	309	444	290	733	370	178
Xavier	814	1862	242	693	430	641	314	746	440	221

Four Factors

Team	EFG	DEFG	OR%	DOR%	TO%	DTO%	FT*	DFT*
Albany	50.1	49.6	32.5	25.5	19.1	20.2	24.8	17.3
Arizona	53.6	44.3	34.1	22.3	16.7	21.1	26.8	19.3
Arkansas	50.2	48.6	35.6	34.2	16.6	22.6	23.3	21.8
Baylor	49.6	45.5	42.2	31.2	19.7	19.3	22.7	17.6
Belmont	56.8	51.5	29.3	29.5	20.3	19.0	18.5	16.7
Boise St.	54.0	47.0	28.2	25.7	16.2	19.8	20.3	18.0
Buffalo	48.6	48.5	34.7	30.4	16.4	19.8	26.0	18.6
Butler	49.1	46.8	35.5	24.9	17.4	19.3	23.4	18.2
BYU	48.7	48.9	34.5	28.3	16.6	18.5	27.2	22.2
Cincinnati	50.4	44.5	37.3	31.8	21.3	20.3	21.0	14.4
Coastal Carolina	49.9	45.7	37.9	25.9	18.2	18.4	24.5	19.7
Davidson	56.2	49.0	30.3	29.9	14.2	17.4	18.5	19.3
Dayton	52.9	47.3	24.2	28.0	17.8	21.0	25.3	17.2
Duke	56.9	47.4	37.4	30.1	16.8	18.7	23.6	15.1
E. Washington	56.5	51.7	30.0	30.2	15.7	17.8	21.7	20.7
Georgetown	50.9	46.6	34.3	31.3	19.2	20.7	25.0	24.6
Georgia	48.9	44.2	32.3	28.9	19.3	16.7	26.1	20.7
Georgia St.	52.6	44.9	30.5	34.0	16.4	23.0	23.4	22.2
Gonzaga	58.9	43.4	34.2	28.4	16.2	17.7	22.7	18.2
Hampton	45.8	46.5	32.8	30.9	20.5	20.2	22.8	24.8
Harvard	48.3	45.3	32.8	27.8	18.9	20.4	23.2	18.2
Indiana	54.6	50.5	35.3	31.2	17.1	16.1	20.4	18.6
Iowa	47.8	45.1	35.8	30.5	17.4	19.2	25.3	17.6
Iowa St.	54.7	47.9	28.5	29.2	15.8	18.5	21.6	15.4
Kansas	49.3	44.4	34.9	31.8	19.0	17.5	25.4	19.5
Kentucky	51.8	39.7	40.4	31.7	16.4	21.8	27.1	17.2
Lafayette	56.2	52.7	28.4	33.9	16.9	16.8	19.9	19.7
Louisville	47.8	43.4	35.1	30.9	17.8	21.8	22.0	18.5
LSU	50.5	44.6	34.0	33.0	20.5	19.2	19.2	17.3
Manhattan	49.7	48.0	31.0	33.7	21.1	24.0	25.5	26.9
Maryland	50.9	45.4	29.2	30.4	18.5	17.2	26.6	16.3
Michigan St.	53.8	45.7	34.6	25.9	17.9	17.0	17.5	22.2
N. C. St.	49.6	45.5	34.2	30.4	16.2	15.5	21.6	21.0
New Mexico St.	51.3	45.6	40.1	30.3	21.9	20.7	25.0	18.3
North Carolina	51.4	45.3	39.9	30.5	18.1	17.8	21.3	21.7
North Dakota St.	49.7	48.0	26.0	22.8	15.7	16.9	21.0	18.4
North Florida	55.2	47.5	29.8	31.4	18.2	18.2	22.8	18.7
Northeastern	54.6	49.5	29.6	25.5	21.4	15.7	23.3	14.8
Northern Iowa	56.2	45.1	26.8	26.9	18.0	20.4	23.2	9.1
Notre Dame	58.6	48.1	28.1	31.6	14.4	17.4	23.0	14.7
Ohio St.	54.5	46.6	34.1	31.3	17.0	22.1	20.2	16.0
Oklahoma	49.4	43.7	30.9	31.5	17.6	20.2	20.4	16.3
Oklahoma St.	50.7	45.3	24.8	32.3	18.5	21.1	22.4	23.0
Ole Miss	48.2	46.9	34.9	31.7	16.9	18.9	25.2	23.2
Oregon	52.2	47.4	31.2	31.3	17.0	16.8	19.0	20.6
Providence	48.6	48.1	35.3	29.5	17.9	19.7	24.7	21.4
Purdue	50.7	45.5	36.2	31.1	19.9	17.8	23.7	22.5
Robert Morris	50.5	48.4	31.3	35.8	20.5	21.7	20.9	20.6
San Diego St.	46.8	42.6	35.6	30.2	18.5	21.7	19.7	15.3
SMU	52.0	45.2	37.4	29.6	19.9	20.1	25.3	17.7
St. John’s	49.5	46.4	28.6	34.9	15.8	19.4	21.6	18.7
S.F. Austin	56.2	48.4	38.0	29.5	20.6	25.2	25.6	24.5
Texas	49.4	42.2	38.0	29.0	19.9	14.2	22.7	20.1
Texas Southern	49.4	48.9	34.0	34.2	19.8	18.7	24.5	18.1
UAB	47.9	47.3	34.1	32.8	20.1	19.6	22.4	19.3
UC-Irvine	52.0	44.2	30.0	30.5	18.0	17.6	17.4	20.9
UCLA	49.4	48.7	33.9	28.1	17.5	18.6	21.1	19.1
Utah	56.1	42.8	31.6	27.6	18.1	18.5	23.9	19.1
Valparaiso	52.2	44.2	36.0	27.1	19.5	19.1	21.0	18.8
VCU	48.8	49.3	31.7	30.7	15.6	23.9	21.4	20.3
Villanova	55.3	45.5	32.7	31.1	16.6	21.6	25.4	17.0
Virginia	51.2	41.7	33.9	24.4	16.1	18.1	21.6	15.3
West Virginia	46.6	52.7	40.9	30.9	18.7	28.2	23.6	25.7
Wichita St.	51.0	45.0	35.3	26.4	15.2	21.5	22.2	19.8
Wisconsin	54.6	46.7	31.9	23.7	12.4	16.7	24.0	12.5
Wofford	52.0	46.6	28.9	26.9	17.5	20.2	21.8	20.1
Wyoming	52.5	46.2	22.4	26.3	18.6	18.4	21.8	15.3
Xavier	53.0	50.2	31.3	27.1	18.0	19.2	22.7	18.8

PiRate Ratings Essential Information For Bracketnomicss

Pos = Possessions Per game (and Defensive Possessions)

PM = Scoring Margin

FGM = Field Goal % Margin

RbM = Rebound Margin

TOM = Turnover Margin

RT = R + T Score

Rd = Won-Loss away from home

SOS = Strength of Schedule (ESPN’s version)

Team	Pos	DPos	PPG	D PPG	PM	FGM	RbM	TOM	RT	Rd	W-L	SOS
Albany	61.3	61.6	65.5	60.2	5.3	2.0	4.8	0.8	14.3	12-5	24-8	43.3
Arizona	67.2	67.0	76.4	58.6	17.8	9.8	8.8	2.9	25.4	8-3	31-3	58.4
Arkansas	70.8	70.7	78.0	70.1	7.9	1.7	0.4	4.2	9.4	7-5	26-8	64.2
Baylor	63.5	63.3	69.5	60.3	9.2	3.2	8.0	-0.3	19.2	6-5	24-9	65.1
Belmont	67.5	67.8	74.5	70.3	4.1	2.4	0.6	-0.9	2.9	7-8	22-10	45.6
Boise St.	63.5	64.0	70.8	60.3	10.5	4.3	2.5	2.4	11.6	9-5	25-8	51.9
Buffalo	68.9	68.8	75.0	68.3	6.7	1.3	3.1	2.3	12.1	10-7	23-9	57.2
Butler	65.2	65.4	69.6	61.2	8.4	2.2	6.5	1.2	17.9	7-4	22-10	66.4
BYU	71.4	71.6	77.7	72.6	5.1	3.1	4.9	1.4	14.5	8-3	25-9	58.9
Cincinnati	60.1	60.1	62.4	55.3	7.1	6.3	5.0	-0.6	13.1	6-5	22-10	57.8
Coastal Carolina	65.4	64.9	71.7	61.7	10.0	4.8	8.7	0.0	21.1	8-7	24-9	40.2
Davidson	67.4	67.7	79.9	69.0	10.9	3.1	0.9	2.2	7.6	9-4	24-7	56.5
Dayton	64.5	64.7	68.2	60.9	7.3	4.2	-1.1	2.1	4.2	6-7	25-8	60.3
Duke	66.9	67.2	80.6	65.6	15.0	7.3	6.2	1.3	17.7	10-2	29-4	62.0
E. Washington	68.9	68.8	80.8	73.6	7.1	3.2	0.2	1.5	5.5	11-6	26-8	42.5
Georgetown	65.8	65.6	70.7	64.6	6.1	5.2	2.8	0.9	10.1	7-5	21-10	68.9
Georgia	66.0	66.4	68.3	64.2	4.2	4.8	4.2	-1.7	9.5	8-5	21-11	68.3
Georgia St.	65.2	65.9	72.0	62.2	9.8	9.9	-0.6	4.5	9.2	10-8	24-9	46.9
Gonzaga	65.1	65.7	79.1	60.9	18.2	14.0	7.2	1.1	19.0	13-1	32-2	56.3
Hampton	69.5	69.3	67.2	68.0	-0.8	-0.5	0.9	-0.2	5.6	7-12	16-17	37.0
Harvard	62.4	62.1	64.2	57.2	6.9	3.6	3.7	0.9	12.5	9-4	22-7	49.3
Indiana	67.1	67.2	77.5	71.4	6.1	1.1	3.2	-0.7	8.1	4-7	20-13	64.8
Iowa	64.7	65.1	69.4	61.9	7.5	3.5	4.2	1.2	12.8	7-4	21-11	63.7
Iowa St.	69.6	70.1	78.4	69.3	9.1	6.2	1.2	1.9	7.9	7-5	25-8	67.7
Kansas	67.2	66.9	71.2	64.7	6.5	4.5	3.6	-1.1	9.1	6-6	26-8	71.2
Kentucky	64.6	64.5	74.9	54.0	20.9	11.4	7.4	3.4	22.9	14-0	34-0	58.5
Lafayette	65.0	65.8	74.2	74.3	-0.1	3.2	-2.0	0.1	-1.1	9-7	20-12	44.0
Louisville	66.5	66.5	69.2	59.5	9.7	4.0	3.0	2.7	12.8	8-3	24-8	66.7
LSU	71.4	71.3	73.7	67.7	6.0	5.6	2.3	-0.9	5.1	8-5	22-10	62.7
Manhattan	68.8	69.1	69.9	67.5	2.4	-0.1	-2.1	2.1	1.0	8-9	19-13	46.0
Maryland	65.0	65.5	69.5	63.2	6.2	4.2	1.5	-0.8	5.2	9-4	27-6	65.0
Michigan St.	64.9	65.1	71.9	63.4	8.5	7.1	6.8	-0.5	16.0	9-6	23-11	65.0
N. C. St.	65.0	64.9	70.4	65.4	5.0	3.4	3.3	-0.5	8.8	7-9	20-13	66.8
New Mexico St.	63.5	63.5	68.5	59.3	9.2	4.4	6.8	-0.8	16.5	7-8	23-10	44.1
North Carolina	70.1	69.8	77.9	68.4	9.5	7.7	8.2	-0.3	18.7	11-5	24-11	68.6
North Dakota St.	62.1	62.7	64.5	61.5	3.0	1.3	2.1	0.8	8.8	7-9	23-9	42.6
North Florida	67.4	67.7	75.7	67.8	7.9	3.8	0.6	0.1	4.1	11-9	23-11	41.1
Northeastern	64.3	64.2	68.6	65.0	3.6	4.0	4.8	-3.7	7.6	13-8	23-11	49.5
Northern Iowa	58.2	55.4	65.4	49.9	15.5	9.1	2.4	0.8	9.5	12-3	30-3	55.6
Notre Dame	65.2	64.8	78.8	65.6	13.2	8.3	0.1	1.9	6.5	11-2	29-5	61.1
Ohio St.	66.6	66.2	75.8	62.3	13.5	8.0	2.9	3.4	14.0	5-8	23-10	63.4
Oklahoma	68.8	68.5	71.9	62.8	9.2	5.1	1.1	1.7	6.8	6-7	22-10	66.7
Oklahoma St.	66.1	65.1	67.3	62.3	5.0	4.1	-3.3	1.5	-1.2	4-9	18-13	65.8
Ole Miss	67.1	67.1	72.6	67.5	5.1	2.6	2.8	1.3	11.1	10-4	20-12	65.7
Oregon	69.2	69.2	75.6	70.7	4.8	4.0	1.4	-0.2	5.9	7-6	25-9	63.7
Providence	66.2	66.2	70.2	65.5	4.7	2.0	3.9	1.2	12.8	8-6	22-11	68.1
Purdue	65.7	65.4	69.9	64.5	5.4	5.2	4.5	-1.4	9.4	7-8	21-12	66.0
Robert Morris	67.1	67.3	69.0	67.7	1.3	2.2	-2.3	0.8	-0.1	9-8	19-14	43.6
San Diego St.	61.4	61.1	61.8	53.1	8.6	4.2	3.2	1.9	12.4	10-6	26-8	56.1
SMU	63.3	63.7	69.4	59.8	9.7	10.0	6.9	0.2	16.8	10-4	27-6	58.1
St. John’s	67.7	68.2	71.2	67.6	3.6	3.6	-3.8	2.5	-0.5	5-8	21-11	63.7
S.F. Austin	68.3	68.7	79.5	64.5	14.9	5.4	5.4	3.2	18.0	14-3	29-4	43.6
Texas	63.9	63.5	67.9	60.4	7.5	6.8	8.3	-3.7	14.5	6-8	20-13	67.6
Texas Southern	66.0	65.8	68.2	67.4	0.7	0.3	0.4	-0.8	2.7	13-11	22-12	40.5
UAB	67.5	68.0	68.9	67.7	1.2	1.0	1.6	-0.3	6.0	3-8	19-15	52.4
UC-Irvine	64.2	64.6	67.9	62.3	5.6	6.9	1.5	-0.2	5.9	7-9	21-12	50.8
UCLA	68.0	67.9	72.0	68.0	4.0	2.3	3.9	0.7	11.7	4-12	20-13	65.9
Utah	63.2	62.9	72.1	56.9	15.2	10.3	5.1	0.2	13.9	8-7	24-8	59.0
Valparaiso	64.2	64.1	69.8	59.3	10.5	7.9	7.2	-0.3	16.5	13-4	28-5	46.4
VCU	68.2	67.8	72.5	65.5	7.0	-1.3	-1.3	5.5	7.8	14-5	26-9	63.4
Villanova	65.3	65.8	76.3	60.9	15.4	6.5	2.3	3.4	12.1	15-2	32-2	59.8
Virginia	59.0	58.9	65.3	50.7	14.7	10.2	7.8	1.2	20.5	14-2	29-3	61.2
West Virginia	69.8	69.6	73.9	66.8	7.1	-5.7	3.6	6.6	19.4	11-6	23-9	65.8
Wichita St.	61.9	61.8	69.7	55.8	13.9	4.9	5.3	3.9	20.0	13-4	28-4	56.1
Wisconsin	59.6	59.7	71.9	56.1	15.8	6.1	6.0	2.6	18.8	16-2	31-3	59.9
Wofford	62.5	63.2	67.0	59.8	7.2	4.2	1.4	1.9	8.7	15-5	28-6	47.5
Wyoming	60.0	59.3	61.7	56.0	5.7	6.0	0.1	-0.3	3.4	8-7	25-9	48.8
Xavier	67.0	67.4	73.6	67.6	5.9	3.6	3.6	0.9	10.7	8-10	21-13	66.4

Coming tomorrow, we look at each game in the opening round and round two, picking the winners and then picking the entire bracket.

Bracketnomics 2013: NCAA First and Second Rounds

We hope you read our informational posting about Bracketnomics.  In that post, we explained how we have back-tested certain data to find best fits for past national champions and Final Four participants.

 

We have all the data we need going back to the first year of the 64-team field.  We have sufficient data going back to the days of the 22 to 25-team fields of the 1960’s, and we have nominal data going back to the beginning of the NCAA Tournament 74 years ago.

 

In a nutshell, there are certain statistical trends that point to a team advancing deeper and deeper in the tournament.  As statistical information has become more easily obtainable, and the field has expanded to 64, 65, and now 68, this information has become much more accurate.

 

First and foremost, we look for teams that played better than average schedules.  It is obvious that a team can play 20 patsies and run up some really gaudy stats.

 

Second, we look for teams that can win away from home.  If a team goes 22-8, with a home record of 18-1 and a record away from home (away and neutral games) of 4-7, this team is not ready to win six consecutive games, or even four, away from home.

 

Once we have isolated the teams that have played an above average schedule and have enjoyed some success away from home, we look at these vital statistics:

 

1. Scoring Margin—anything that is 8 or more is important.  We really like a scoring margin at 10 or more, as all but one of the 21^st Century champions have entered the Big Dance with a double digit scoring margin.  If a team has a 15-point or better scoring margin, and they satisfy the strength of schedule and road won-loss criteria, then watch out!

 

2. Field Goal Percentage Margin—this is a team’s offensive field goal percentage minus their defensive field goal percentage times 100.  The key stat here is +7.5% or better.

 

3. Rebounding Margin—a team with a rebounding margin of 5.0 or more has a chance to overcome a bad shooting game or a turnover-prone game.

 

4. Turnover Margin—similar to rebounding margin, but we have a weighted scale here.  If a team out-rebounds its opponents by 3.0 or more, then any positive turnover margin is sufficient.  If a team out-rebounds is opponents by 0.1 to 2.9, then a turnover margin of 3.0 or better is required.  And, if a team does not out-rebound its opponents, they must have a turnover margin of 5.0 or more.

 

5. Average Steals Per Game—if the rebound is gold, the steal is platinum.  We consider a steal to be worth 1.3 rebounds (reasons given in Bracketnomics 2013 posted on Sunday, March 17, 2013).  Any team that averages 7.5 or more steals per game will have several cheap basket opportunities.  Any team with double digit steals per game will be monsters in the tournament.

 

6. The PiRate R+T Rating—if rebound margin is gold, and steals per game are platinum, then our R+T rating is rhodium.  This rating combines rebounding margin, turnover margin, and steals per game into one sabrmetric-type rating, similar to any of several baseball ratings (like Wins Above Replacement).  The current formula is in Sunday’s post, but you don’t have to bother with trying to figure these out for all 68 teams.  We have done that for you.  What we isolate are the teams with an R+T rating of 5.0 or better, paying extra attention to 10.0 or better.  If a team has a negative R+T rating, they are going home quickly even if they are a number 3 seed playing a number 14 seed, which is exactly what happened in 2010, when Georgetown had a negative R+T rating and not only was upset by Ohio U in the opening round, they were blown out of the gym.

 

The 2013 Field of 68

1. Which teams qualify on all stat requirements?

 

None of the 68 teams qualify on all eight statistical requirements.  Two teams came close with seven of eight.

 

Gonzaga qualifies in all statistical categories, except schedule strength, and that is a killer.  The Bulldogs may advance to the Elite Eight, but with their lower than average SOS, we do not see this as their breakthrough season, even as a one-seed.

 

Indiana qualifies in all statistical categories except won-loss percentage away from Assembly Hall.  The Hoosiers’ won-loss percentage away from home is 71.4%, which misses qualifying by one game.

 

2. Which teams failed to qualify in even one statistical category?

 

We almost broke a record this year in “nullsville.”  11 teams failed to meet at least one of the statistical criteria and will not need reservations past the second round (what used to be the first round).

 

Albany, Florida Gulf-Coast, Harvard, Iona, Liberty, Long Island, Montana, North Carolina A&T, Pacific, and Western Kentucky come as no surprise to most.  These teams are not expected to win in this tournament, although either North Carolina A&T or Liberty must win one game, because they face off in the First Four in Dayton.

 

However, one major conference team is going to surprise you.  That team is: Notre Dame!  The Fighting Irish just missed out in scoring margin, rebounding margin, and strength of schedule, while their turnover margin and average steals missed by a long shot.  Keep this in mind when looking at upsets in the second round.

 

3. Which teams have a negative R+T rating and can be immediately eliminated from consideration?

 

Only one team has a negative R+T rating, and that is Liberty.  However, several teams have R+T ratings just above zero, and you should look at these teams as the type that will not get enough extra scoring opportunities to win.

 

4. Which of the teams expected to win or be competitive in a tossup game have these low R+T numbers?

 

California is a “sexy 12-seed” that many feel got the shaft in the seeding process.  A lot of experts are calling for the Golden Bears to benefit from playing in San Jose and upset 5-seed UNLV.  However, Cal has an R+T rating of 2.68, while the Runnin’ Rebels’ R+T rating is 6.88.  If you considered a game to be a tossup and then gave one team four additional possessions, which team would you expect to win?

 

La Salle is a 13-seed playing 4-seed KansasState.  The Explorers’ R+T rating is 2.46, while the Wildcats have a 7.86 rating.  Don’t count on the lads from Philly beating the lads from the other Manhattan.

 

5. Who will advance to the Final Four?

We’re glad you asked, because we have an opinion to proffer.

 

Normally, we find just one or at most two number one seeds worthy of making it to the final weekend.  The only year where we saw three 1-seeds advancing to the tournament was 2008, when we selected Kansas, Memphis, and North Carolina to advance to the Final Four as one-seeds.  That indeed happened, but we missed out on one-seed UCLA making it the one and only time that all four one-seeds won their respective regions.

 

This year, we are going with the chalk in three regions once again.  We believe Louisville, Indiana, and Kansas will win their regions.  We do not believe Gonzaga will make it four for four.  In fact, we have a dark horse candidate as our West Regional winner.  We believe six-seed Arizona will upset 2-seed OhioState in the Sweet 16 and then win again in the Elite Eight to be the surprise winner of the Regional.

 

6. So, who do we pick for the National Champion?

This is a very close call.  The top two teams, Indiana and Louisville are separated by just a hair the way we rate the teams.  It is a tossup, so we have to go to extracurricular information to figure out a winner.

 

Remember what we said were the rhodium, platinum, and gold ratings?  Both teams are in the top grouping in R+T rating.  Indiana dominates in rebounding margin, while Louisville is on the top rung in steals per game.  We have to go outside our formula to come up with a winner, and we are going with experience.  Rick Pitino has been to six Final Fours as a head coach.  Our official pick for NCAA Champion is Louisville.

 

Here are our picks for the first two rounds.  Of course, we will update the ratings and pick anew after round two with picks for Saturday on Friday night and picks for Sunday on Saturday night.

 

Opening Round (First 4 @ Dayton)

North Carolina A&T over Liberty

Middle Tennessee over St. Mary’s

Long Island over James Madison

BoiseState over La Salle

 

Second Round

Midwest

Louisville over North Carolina A&T

ColoradoState over Missouri

Oregon over OklahomaState

St. Louis over New MexicoState

Memphis over Middle Tennessee

MichiganState over Valparaiso

Cincinnati over Creighton

Duke over Albany

 

West

Gonzaga over Southern

Pittsburgh over WichitaState

Wisconsin over Ole Miss

KansasState over BoiseState

Arizona over Belmont

New Mexico over Harvard

IowaState over Notre Dame

OhioState over Iona

 

South

Kansas over Western Kentucky

North Carolina over Villanova

VirginiaCommonwealth over Akron

Michigan over South DakotaState

Minnesota over UCLA

Florida over Northwestern State

San DiegoState over Oklahoma

Georgetown over FloridaGulfCoast

 

East

Indiana over Long Island

North CarolinaState over Temple

UNLV over California

Syracuse over Montana

Bucknell over Butler (big upset pick)

Marquette over Davidson (closest game in this round according to our ratings)

Colorado over Illinois

Miami over Pacific

 

Third Round (Will be updated on Friday and Saturday for those that get to pick every round)

 

Midwest

Louisville over ColoradoState

Oregon over St. Louis

MichiganState over Memphis

Duke over Cincinnati

 

West

Gonzaga over Pittsburgh

Wisconsin over KansasState

Arizona over New Mexico

OhioState over IowaState

 

South

Kansas over North Carolina

Michigan over VirginiaCommonwealth (very close)

Florida over Minnesota

Georgetown over San DiegoState

 

East

Indiana over North CarolinaState

Syracuse over UNLV

Bucknell over Marquette (our Cinderella team in the Sweet 16)

Miami over Colorado

 

Sweet 16

Midwest

Louisville over Oregon

MichiganState over Duke

 

West

Gonzaga over Wisconsin

Arizona over OhioState

 

South

Kansas over Michigan

Florida over Georgetown

 

East

Indiana over Syracuse

Miami over Bucknell

 

Elite 8

Midwest

Louisville over MichiganState

 

West

Arizona over Gonzaga

 

South

Kansas over Florida

 

East

Indiana over Miami

 

Final 4

Louisville over Arizona

Indiana over Kansas

 

Championship

Louisville over Indiana

 

Here is a look at our raw stats:

Team	PPG	Opp	Diff	FG%	D FG%	Diff	Reb	Opp	Diff	TO	Opp TO	Diff	Stl	R+T	SOS	RW-L
Akron	72.7	62.0	10.7	.457	.390	6.7	37.9	32.0	5.9	13.6	13.8	0.2	7.2	7.58	51.34	68.8
Albany	64.8	60.6	4.2	.436	.422	1.4	34.0	30.4	3.6	13.5	12.5	-1.0	5.3	3.46	45.63	64.7
Arizona	73.3	63.7	9.6	.450	.415	3.5	36.2	30.3	5.9	13.1	13.8	0.7	6.9	8.12	57.27	68.8
Belmont	77.2	64.0	13.2	.494	.410	8.4	32.2	33.0	-0.8	13.5	17.4	3.9	9.8	5.84	54.17	68.4
Boise St.	73.3	65.0	8.3	.459	.431	2.8	33.9	29.7	4.2	12.1	13.5	1.4	6.7	7.22	55.64	43.8
Bucknell	67.3	57.5	9.8	.456	.378	7.8	36.2	30.3	5.9	9.5	9.2	-0.3	3.6	6.26	48.45	77.8
Butler	69.7	63.7	6.0	.455	.417	3.8	36.6	28.9	7.7	13.2	11.2	-2.0	5.7	6.44	56.61	70.6
California	67.5	64.4	3.1	.446	.396	5.0	37.2	34.0	3.2	12.5	11.1	-1.4	5.8	2.68	56.35	60.0
Cincinnati	66.6	58.8	7.8	.402	.385	1.7	40.0	33.5	6.5	12.8	13.2	0.4	7.0	8.38	57.16	60.0
Colorado	68.2	63.8	4.4	.436	.404	3.2	37.2	33.8	3.4	13.3	12.9	-0.4	7.0	4.32	57.40	52.9
Colorado St.	73.1	62.9	10.2	.448	.409	3.9	40.4	28.4	12.0	10.8	11.1	0.3	4.9	13.34	56.44	56.3
Creighton	75.4	63.1	12.3	.508	.407	10.1	35.2	30.3	4.9	12.3	10.6	-1.7	5.0	3.86	54.46	70.6
Davidson	73.7	62.2	11.5	.463	.412	5.1	33.8	31.4	2.4	10.9	12.3	1.4	5.7	5.22	48.49	70.0
Duke	78.3	65.4	12.9	.476	.418	5.8	33.8	35.0	-1.2	10.7	14.4	3.7	6.5	4.54	60.79	68.8
Florida	71.6	53.7	17.9	.481	.377	10.4	35.1	30.3	4.8	11.1	14.0	2.9	7.0	9.68	57.28	61.1
FloridaGulfCoast	73.1	66.7	6.4	.460	.406	5.4	36.6	35.4	1.2	14.7	15.9	1.2	9.0	4.44	47.87	50.0
Georgetown	64.6	55.7	8.9	.456	.376	8.0	32.9	31.7	1.2	12.7	14.2	1.5	7.5	4.50	57.95	64.3
Gonzaga	78.0	59.7	18.3	.503	.382	12.1	37.4	30.0	7.4	11.3	13.9	2.6	8.0	12.12	54.72	93.8
Harvard	68.9	63.9	5.0	.482	.440	4.2	29.4	30.4	-1.0	13.5	13.8	0.3	7.4	0.84	48.79	42.9
Illinois	69.1	65.3	3.8	.416	.427	-1.1	33.5	34.9	-1.4	11.5	14.4	2.9	6.9	3.46	58.79	55.6
Indiana	80.0	62.5	17.5	.486	.390	9.6	38.6	30.9	7.7	13.0	14.4	1.4	7.5	10.88	58.69	71.4
Iona	80.7	75.8	4.9	.457	.449	0.8	36.0	35.9	0.1	12.2	14.1	1.9	6.6	3.70	50.69	42.9
Iowa St.	79.6	71.2	8.4	.455	.427	2.8	38.7	34.0	4.7	13.3	13.2	-0.1	6.5	5.88	56.13	37.5
James Madison	65.2	64.4	0.8	.420	.427	-0.7	32.7	34.2	-1.5	11.2	13.8	2.6	7.9	3.20	45.92	50.0
Kansas	75.4	61.5	13.9	.480	.360	12.0	39.1	32.5	6.6	13.7	12.9	-0.8	7.2	7.08	57.80	75.0
Kansas St.	69.2	60.4	8.8	.436	.418	1.8	35.3	32.1	3.2	11.6	14.3	2.7	7.1	7.86	56.31	62.5
La Salle	72.4	66.0	6.4	.448	.456	-0.8	31.7	34.7	-3.0	11.7	14.9	3.2	8.1	2.46	54.70	53.3
Liberty	69.1	69.9	-0.8	.429	.419	1.0	35.7	36.3	-0.6	13.4	10.8	-2.6	5.5	-2.62	44.38	35.0
Long Island	79.5	76.4	3.1	.484	.468	1.6	35.4	33.6	1.8	14.4	13.0	-1.4	6.8	1.48	45.45	43.8
Louisville	73.6	58.0	15.6	.445	.388	5.7	37.5	33.9	3.6	12.7	18.7	6.0	10.7	12.94	59.42	77.8
Marquette	69.0	62.7	6.3	.467	.405	6.2	35.0	30.6	4.4	13.6	12.9	-0.7	6.7	4.90	58.24	46.7
Memphis	75.9	65.1	10.8	.479	.405	7.4	37.8	32.9	4.9	14.6	15.5	0.9	9.0	7.78	54.81	81.3
Miami	69.9	60.7	9.2	.460	.399	6.1	35.8	32.5	3.3	10.9	11.9	1.0	6.3	5.76	59.20	72.2
Michigan	75.2	62.9	12.3	.484	.419	6.5	35.1	32.2	2.9	9.2	12.1	2.9	6.0	7.58	56.00	60.0
Michigan St.	68.2	59.3	8.9	.460	.394	6.6	37.3	30.5	6.8	13.4	12.8	-0.6	8.1	7.70	59.69	53.3
Middle Tennessee	71.2	57.8	13.4	.463	.394	6.9	36.8	30.8	6.0	13.8	15.8	2.0	7.1	9.82	51.62	70.6
Minnesota	68.4	61.7	6.7	.442	.396	4.6	38.8	30.6	8.2	13.8	12.8	-1.0	7.6	8.52	59.67	33.3
Missouri	76.2	66.2	10.0	.460	.401	5.9	41.4	31.8	9.6	13.2	12.0	-1.2	6.8	9.52	56.00	37.5
Montana	71.1	65.0	6.1	.474	.427	4.7	31.2	32.4	-1.2	12.1	12.2	0.1	5.9	0.10	46.85	66.7
N.C.State	77.5	70.1	7.4	.494	.418	7.6	36.8	33.9	2.9	12.4	11.6	-0.8	6.6	3.26	56.64	47.1
New Mexico	67.4	60.4	7.0	.425	.388	3.7	35.2	33.1	2.1	11.5	12.7	1.2	6.1	4.76	60.31	77.8
New Mexico St.	68.0	62.1	5.9	.461	.398	6.3	37.6	31.1	6.5	14.4	12.4	-2.0	5.6	5.22	52.46	50.0
North Carolina	77.2	69.1	8.1	.444	.422	2.2	38.9	36.5	2.4	12.2	15.3	3.1	8.2	7.76	58.63	55.6
North Carolina A&T	62.4	61.4	1.0	.398	.383	1.5	35.4	36.6	-1.2	15.1	16.1	1.0	7.1	1.42	43.39	40.9
Northwestern St.	81.0	71.2	9.8	.461	.424	3.7	39.3	38.9	0.4	14.0	17.0	3.0	9.8	5.96	48.32	58.8
Notre Dame	70.4	63.1	7.3	.463	.418	4.5	36.2	32.1	4.1	11.1	10.4	-0.7	5.1	4.28	55.83	53.3
Ohio St.	69.2	57.9	11.3	.454	.395	5.9	35.5	31.8	3.7	10.6	13.2	2.6	6.8	8.18	58.31	66.7
Oklahoma	71.1	66.2	4.9	.436	.417	1.9	36.7	34.9	1.8	11.8	13.3	1.5	6.5	4.90	57.40	47.1
Oklahoma St.	72.4	62.8	9.6	.440	.390	5.0	36.4	34.6	1.8	12.4	14.8	2.4	7.5	6.18	56.26	64.3
Ole Miss	77.9	67.3	10.6	.438	.410	2.8	38.7	37.7	1.0	11.4	15.6	4.2	8.4	7.72	51.73	58.8
Oregon	72.5	62.9	9.6	.451	.406	4.5	37.9	30.9	7.0	15.1	15.7	0.6	8.8	9.48	53.29	60.0
Pacific	67.5	68.1	-0.6	.452	.444	0.8	32.3	31.9	0.4	11.1	11.3	0.2	5.6	1.76	50.38	47.4
Pittsburgh	69.6	55.4	14.2	.475	.393	8.2	35.3	28.3	7.0	10.9	13.5	2.6	6.7	11.46	54.91	64.3
San Diego St.	69.2	60.7	8.5	.438	.388	5.0	36.8	33.4	3.4	11.9	12.7	0.8	6.9	5.74	57.98	47.1
South Dakota St.	73.9	65.5	8.4	.470	.442	2.8	34.9	30.7	4.2	10.5	11.2	0.7	5.0	6.04	48.89	55.0
Southern	67.7	57.1	10.6	.434	.365	6.9	35.2	35.3	-0.1	10.9	13.7	2.8	7.5	4.76	40.21	55.0
St. Louis	68.7	58.1	10.6	.448	.412	3.6	32.8	32.5	0.3	11.5	15.2	3.7	7.5	6.24	55.73	69.2
St. Mary’s	75.5	63.5	12.0	.474	.419	5.5	37.1	28.4	8.7	12.0	11.7	-0.3	6.3	9.60	53.70	68.8
Syracuse	71.3	60.1	11.2	.440	.377	6.3	38.7	34.6	4.1	12.6	15.5	2.9	8.9	9.36	59.30	56.3
Temple	72.8	68.1	4.7	.430	.434	-0.4	34.5	35.8	-1.3	11.0	13.7	2.7	8.0	3.54	55.35	60.0
U C L A	74.7	68.9	5.8	.455	.422	3.3	36.3	38.1	-1.8	11.1	14.1	3.0	8.2	3.44	57.71	62.5
U N L V	71.7	63.0	8.7	.439	.388	5.1	40.1	33.5	6.6	14.0	13.0	-1.0	7.4	6.88	57.99	50.0
V C U	77.3	64.8	12.5	.449	.444	0.5	34.8	34.8	0.0	11.8	19.9	8.1	11.8	12.08	55.72	64.7
Valparaiso	71.7	62.2	9.5	.489	.414	7.5	32.9	28.5	4.4	14.5	12.8	-1.7	6.7	3.70	49.76	66.7
Villanova	67.8	64.7	3.1	.415	.402	1.3	36.3	33.2	3.1	15.7	15.2	-0.5	7.7	4.04	57.43	47.1
Western Kentucky	67.2	65.7	1.5	.431	.422	0.9	36.2	33.0	3.2	15.1	13.9	-1.2	6.1	2.98	49.50	45.0
Wichita St.	69.4	60.7	8.7	.443	.400	4.3	38.4	30.0	8.4	12.8	13.2	0.4	7.5	10.38	53.84	64.7
Wisconsin	65.5	55.9	9.6	.425	.394	3.1	36.7	32.9	3.8	9.7	11.2	1.5	5.7	6.74	58.11	50.0

 

Here is a look at the stats of the NCAA Champions since 2000:

Team	PPG	Opp	Diff	FG%	D FG%	Diff	Reb	Opp	Diff	TO	Opp TO	Diff	Stl	R+T	SOS	RW-L
12 Kentucky	76.7	59.0	17.7	.483	.368	11.5	39.1	31.9	7.2	11.4	11.9	0.5	6.3	9.06	56.84	87.5
11 Uconn	72.4	64.9	7.5	.434	.393	4.1	39.7	35.3	4.4	11.4	11.5	0.1	6.3	5.78		72.2
10 Duke	77.0	61.0	16.0	.440	.401	3.9	39.0	32.8	6.2	11.1	14.2	3.1	6.7	11.26		70.6
09 North Carolina	89.8	72.0	17.8	.480	.410	7.0	42.0	35.7	6.3	12.4	15.9	3.5	8.6	12.22		82.4
08 Kansas	80.5	61.5	19.0	.508	.379	12.9	38.7	30.8	7.9	13.2	15.6	2.4	8.9	12.56		78.6
07 Florida	79.6	62.6	17.0	.526	.407	11.9	37.6	29.1	8.5	14.1	12.8	-1.3	6.7	8.28		68.8
06 Florida	78.3	63.5	14.8	.500	.399	10.1	35.9	32.3	3.6	14.4	15.5	1.1	7.6	6.44		73.3
05 North Carolina	88.0	70.3	17.7	.499	.401	9.8	40.5	33.0	7.5	16.1	17.8	1.7	9.8	11.50		75.0
04 Connecticut	78.8	63.9	14.9	.480	.369	11.1	44.7	34.9	9.8	13.6	12.2	-1.4	6.0	9.32		66.7
03 Syracuse	79.6	69.6	10.0	.475	.390	8.5	40.7	38.1	2.6	14.1	14.9	0.8	8.5	5.26		58.3
02 Maryland	85.0	70.9	14.1	.482	.399	8.3	41.1	37.4	3.7	13.8	15.4	1.6	8.4	7.30		73.3
01 Duke	90.7	70.5	20.2	.481	.416	6.5	38.6	37.5	1.1	13.6	19.1	5.5	10.5	9.80		88.9
00 Michigan St.	74.1	58.9	15.2	.474	.394	8.0	39.0	27.3	11.7	14.6	13.7	-0.9	6.6	11.94		63.2

 

2012 NCAA Tournament Play-in and Second Round Game Previews

All over the country, you can feel the symptoms coming on.  By Tuesday afternoon, millions of Americans will start to feel a little run down.  By Thursday morning, millions will call in sick with that mysterious illness that strikes every March.  Yes, March Madness Syndrome is about to hit epidemic proportions again.

 

Welcome back to the PiRate Ratings’ Bracketnomics.  If you are unfamiliar with PiRate Bracketnomics, refer to our Bracketnomics 505, 2012 edition at: https://piratings.wordpress.com/2012/03/10/bracketnomics-505-2012-edition/

 

There is a lot to cover, so let’s get right to it.

 

1. Which teams satisfy all the mechanical criteria?

A. Outscored their opponents by 8 or more points per game

B. FG% Differential of 7.5% or better

C. Outrebounded their opponents by 5 or more per game

D. Either a positive turnover margin if they outrebounded their opponents by 3 or more; a turnover margin of +3 or more, if they outrebounded their opponents by less than 3; or a turnover margin of +5 if they did not outrebound their opponents.

E. 7.5 or more steals per game

F. An R+T Rating of 5 or more

G. A strength of schedule better than .5500 (from CBS Sportsline)

H. A road+neutral court W-L% of 70% or better.

 

Answer—Five teams this year match all the criteria above, meaning they have statistical resumes similar to the average National Champions of the past 50 years. These five are (in alphabetical order): Georgetown, Kansas, Kentucky, Ohio State, and Wichita State.

 

2. Which teams fail to meet any of the mechanical criteria?

 

Answer—Eight teams fail to satisfy any of the minimal mechanical criteria.  It should come as no surprise that Western Kentucky, with a losing record, misses the boat.  Colorado State and Long Island are not powerhouses as well.  However, how about these five teams?  Michigan, Notre Dame, Temple, Vanderbilt, and Xavier fail to meet any of the minimum requirements in any of the criteria (not counting strength of schedule).

 

3. Which teams score the highest point totals?

 

Answer—Nine teams rate at 20 or more points, while a dozen scored 18.3 or higher.  All of the national champions since Kansas in 1988 have scored 18.3 or higher using the 2012 criteria.  Since 2000, the average score for the National Champion has been 27.7, as shown below.

 

2011 UConn—18.3

2010 Duke—29.2

2009 North Carolina—31.8

2008 Kansas—34.9

2007 Florida—29.2

2006 Florida—25.2

2005 North Carolina—31.7

2004 Connecticut—29.5

2003 Syracuse—18.8

2002 Maryland—24.6

2001 Duke—30.2

2000 Michigan State—29.4

12 Champion Avg. = 27.7

 

The nine teams with scores in excess of 20 are: Baylor, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan State, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio State, Syracuse, and Wichita State.

 

The three teams between 18.3 and 20 are: Duke, Georgetown, and Missouri.

 

Three teams come in with ratings above the 12-year average.  Kentucky, North Carolina, and Ohio State are the top three.

 

We strongly believe that one of these 12 teams will be your 2012 National Champion, with the top three having the best chance of all.

 

Here is a list of all 68 teams with their PiRate technical scores:

 

Team	Pts	FG% Diff	Reb	TO	R+T	SOS	Rd W-L	Total
North Carolina	7.6	3.40	6.5	0.8	5.63	4.26	3	31.1
Kentucky	8.9	5.75	4.3	0.3	3.62	1.84	4.5	29.1
Ohio St.	7.9	3.85	4.4	1.7	5.17	3.45	1.5	28.0
Michigan St.	6.5	4.90	4.8	0.0	3.74	6.05	1.5	27.4
Kansas	6.6	5.10	3.5	0.4	3.29	3.69	1.5	24.0
Wichita St.	7.7	4.65	4.0	0.4	3.52	0.28	3	23.5
Syracuse	7.1	4.00	-0.8	3.1	3.14	2.43	4	22.9
Baylor	5.4	3.15	2.9	0.3	2.82	3.62	4	22.1
New Mexico	7.1	4.15	4.0	0.5	3.71	-1.19	3	21.2
Duke	4.7	1.35	1.6	0.4	1.96	5.38	4.5	19.9
Missouri	7.3	3.15	0.4	2.1	2.90	-0.76	4	19.1
Georgetown	5.0	3.80	3.4	0.2	2.97	3.10	0	18.4
Memphis	6.1	5.50	0.9	0.7	1.86	2.66	0.5	18.2
Wisconsin	5.5	2.05	1.4	1.0	2.30	2.95	2	17.2
Saint Mary’s	6.3	2.40	4.3	0.2	3.63	-2.33	2.5	17.0
BYU	5.8	2.80	2.6	1.3	3.65	-2.28	2.5	16.3
Gonzaga	5.4	2.95	3.9	-0.2	3.00	-1.06	2	16.0
New Mexico St.	5.3	2.35	5.2	0.0	3.98	-2.91	2	15.8
Louisville	3.8	2.30	1.1	0.6	2.06	3.83	2	15.7
Marquette	4.9	2.65	-0.2	1.7	2.22	2.76	1.5	15.5
Creighton	5.3	3.55	3.7	-1.0	1.91	-2.32	4	15.1
UNLV	5.4	2.65	2.0	0.9	2.81	1.13	0	14.8
Florida St.	3.7	3.85	2.0	-0.6	1.44	3.79	0.5	14.8
Indiana	5.9	3.30	1.4	0.4	1.82	1.90	0	14.7
St. Louis	5.9	2.05	1.0	1.9	2.98	-1.47	2	14.2
Murray St.	6.5	2.80	1.1	1.3	2.59	-5.12	5	14.1
San Diego St.	4.0	2.80	2.9	0.2	2.51	0.16	1.5	14.0
Kansas St.	3.9	1.75	2.9	0.9	3.27	0.33	1	14.0
Florida	5.2	1.40	1.3	1.1	2.37	2.37	0	13.6
West Va.	2.7	-0.25	4.1	0.3	3.53	2.74	0	13.1
Vanderbilt	4.0	2.05	0.7	-0.2	0.72	3.75	2	12.9
Virginia	4.7	3.20	1.9	0.8	2.52	-1.28	1	12.8
N. Car. St.	2.7	2.25	2.6	-0.2	2.13	2.21	1	12.7
Alabama	3.4	3.20	1.6	0.4	2.00	1.85	0	12.4
Belmont	7.1	3.00	1.8	1.1	2.80	-6.41	2.5	11.8
Southern Miss.	3.3	-1.30	2.8	1.7	3.90	0.63	0.5	11.5
Harvard	5.3	3.05	2.7	0.0	2.33	-6.07	4	11.4
Davidson	5.3	1.10	4.0	0.4	3.46	-5.53	2.5	11.2
Long Beach St.	5.2	2.50	1.7	1.1	2.79	-3.22	1	11.1
Iona	5.3	2.70	0.6	1.8	2.66	-4.55	2.5	11.0
Connecticut	2.4	3.55	1.9	-0.8	0.94	4.95	-2	10.8
California	5.0	3.40	2.6	0.4	2.48	-1.33	-2	10.5
Temple	3.1	1.75	0.7	0.5	1.45	0.39	2	9.7
Texas	3.2	1.10	1.8	0.6	2.27	2.74	-2	9.6
Cincinnati	3.7	0.40	0.1	1.8	2.41	-0.52	1.5	9.3
Purdue	3.1	-0.25	-0.4	2.1	2.25	1.98	0	8.8
Michigan	2.6	1.50	-0.6	0.9	0.82	3.36	0	8.5
Iowa St.	3.3	0.70	2.8	-0.3	2.02	1.13	-2	7.6
V C U	4.3	-0.65	-0.9	3.3	3.38	-5.02	3	7.4
S. Dakota St.	5.4	1.00	1.4	1.3	2.70	-5.95	1.5	7.3
Colorado	2.6	1.95	1.9	-0.1	1.62	-0.91	0	7.0
Ohio	4.2	0.85	0.1	2.3	2.99	-5.32	1.5	6.5
Lamar	4.3	0.80	3.1	1.2	3.85	-7.18	0.5	6.5
St. Bonaventure	2.9	2.10	3.3	-0.9	1.84	-3.03	0	6.2
Xavier	1.7	2.75	1.2	0.0	1.29	1.32	-2	6.2
Colorado St.	1.3	2.00	0.6	-0.2	0.64	3.76	-2	6.1
Lehigh	5.6	1.80	1.3	1.6	2.95	-9.91	2.5	5.7
S. Florida	1.2	2.40	2.2	-1.3	0.72	1.90	-2	5.1
UNC-Asheville	5.0	2.00	0.8	1.3	2.49	-6.95	0.5	5.1
Montana	4.5	3.05	-0.3	1.2	1.52	-6.93	2	5.0
Notre Dame	2.5	1.00	-0.3	0.4	0.60	1.14	-2	3.3
Detroit	2.6	0.75	1.3	1.3	2.69	-5.53	0	3.1
Loyola (MD)	1.9	0.00	2.2	0.4	2.44	-7.10	2.5	2.3
Vermont	3.4	1.75	2.2	0.2	2.17	-9.11	1.5	2.1
Norfolk St.	1.5	1.90	1.2	-0.6	0.82	-10.75	3	-2.9
Long Island	2.3	1.50	1.5	-1.2	0.34	-8.36	0.5	-3.4
Western Kentucky	-1.5	-1.70	-0.1	-0.2	0.14	-4.31	-2	-9.7
Miss. Valley	-0.2	-1.75	0.1	0.9	1.56	-10.96	0	-10.4

 

Here is the same list in Alphabetical Order:

Team	Pts	FG% Diff	Reb	TO	R+T	SOS	Rd W-L	Total
Alabama	3.4	3.20	1.6	0.4	2.00	1.85	0	12.4
Baylor	5.4	3.15	2.9	0.3	2.82	3.62	4	22.1
Belmont	7.1	3.00	1.8	1.1	2.80	-6.41	2.5	11.8
BYU	5.8	2.80	2.6	1.3	3.65	-2.28	2.5	16.3
California	5.0	3.40	2.6	0.4	2.48	-1.33	-2	10.5
Cincinnati	3.7	0.40	0.1	1.8	2.41	-0.52	1.5	9.3
Colorado	2.6	1.95	1.9	-0.1	1.62	-0.91	0	7.0
Colorado St.	1.3	2.00	0.6	-0.2	0.64	3.76	-2	6.1
Connecticut	2.4	3.55	1.9	-0.8	0.94	4.95	-2	10.8
Creighton	5.3	3.55	3.7	-1.0	1.91	-2.32	4	15.1
Davidson	5.3	1.10	4.0	0.4	3.46	-5.53	2.5	11.2
Detroit	2.6	0.75	1.3	1.3	2.69	-5.53	0	3.1
Duke	4.7	1.35	1.6	0.4	1.96	5.38	4.5	19.9
Florida	5.2	1.40	1.3	1.1	2.37	2.37	0	13.6
Florida St.	3.7	3.85	2.0	-0.6	1.44	3.79	0.5	14.8
Georgetown	5.0	3.80	3.4	0.2	2.97	3.10	0	18.4
Gonzaga	5.4	2.95	3.9	-0.2	3.00	-1.06	2	16.0
Harvard	5.3	3.05	2.7	0.0	2.33	-6.07	4	11.4
Indiana	5.9	3.30	1.4	0.4	1.82	1.90	0	14.7
Iona	5.3	2.70	0.6	1.8	2.66	-4.55	2.5	11.0
Iowa St.	3.3	0.70	2.8	-0.3	2.02	1.13	-2	7.6
Kansas	6.6	5.10	3.5	0.4	3.29	3.69	1.5	24.0
Kansas St.	3.9	1.75	2.9	0.9	3.27	0.33	1	14.0
Kentucky	8.9	5.75	4.3	0.3	3.62	1.84	4.5	29.1
Lamar	4.3	0.80	3.1	1.2	3.85	-7.18	0.5	6.5
Lehigh	5.6	1.80	1.3	1.6	2.95	-9.91	2.5	5.7
Long Beach St.	5.2	2.50	1.7	1.1	2.79	-3.22	1	11.1
Long Island	2.3	1.50	1.5	-1.2	0.34	-8.36	0.5	-3.4
Louisville	3.8	2.30	1.1	0.6	2.06	3.83	2	15.7
Loyola (MD)	1.9	0.00	2.2	0.4	2.44	-7.10	2.5	2.3
Marquette	4.9	2.65	-0.2	1.7	2.22	2.76	1.5	15.5
Memphis	6.1	5.50	0.9	0.7	1.86	2.66	0.5	18.2
Michigan	2.6	1.50	-0.6	0.9	0.82	3.36	0	8.5
Michigan St.	6.5	4.90	4.8	0.0	3.74	6.05	1.5	27.4
Miss. Valley	-0.2	-1.75	0.1	0.9	1.56	-10.96	0	-10.4
Missouri	7.3	3.15	0.4	2.1	2.90	-0.76	4	19.1
Montana	4.5	3.05	-0.3	1.2	1.52	-6.93	2	5.0
Murray St.	6.5	2.80	1.1	1.3	2.59	-5.12	5	14.1
N. Car. St.	2.7	2.25	2.6	-0.2	2.13	2.21	1	12.7
New Mexico	7.1	4.15	4.0	0.5	3.71	-1.19	3	21.2
New Mexico St.	5.3	2.35	5.2	0.0	3.98	-2.91	2	15.8
Norfolk St.	1.5	1.90	1.2	-0.6	0.82	-10.75	3	-2.9
North Carolina	7.6	3.40	6.5	0.8	5.63	4.26	3	31.1
Notre Dame	2.5	1.00	-0.3	0.4	0.60	1.14	-2	3.3
Ohio	4.2	0.85	0.1	2.3	2.99	-5.32	1.5	6.5
Ohio St.	7.9	3.85	4.4	1.7	5.17	3.45	1.5	28.0
Purdue	3.1	-0.25	-0.4	2.1	2.25	1.98	0	8.8
S. Dakota St.	5.4	1.00	1.4	1.3	2.70	-5.95	1.5	7.3
S. Florida	1.2	2.40	2.2	-1.3	0.72	1.90	-2	5.1
Saint Mary’s	6.3	2.40	4.3	0.2	3.63	-2.33	2.5	17.0
San Diego St.	4.0	2.80	2.9	0.2	2.51	0.16	1.5	14.0
Southern Miss.	3.3	-1.30	2.8	1.7	3.90	0.63	0.5	11.5
St. Bonaventure	2.9	2.10	3.3	-0.9	1.84	-3.03	0	6.2
St. Louis	5.9	2.05	1.0	1.9	2.98	-1.47	2	14.2
Syracuse	7.1	4.00	-0.8	3.1	3.14	2.43	4	22.9
Temple	3.1	1.75	0.7	0.5	1.45	0.39	2	9.7
Texas	3.2	1.10	1.8	0.6	2.27	2.74	-2	9.6
UNC-Asheville	5.0	2.00	0.8	1.3	2.49	-6.95	0.5	5.1
UNLV	5.4	2.65	2.0	0.9	2.81	1.13	0	14.8
V C U	4.3	-0.65	-0.9	3.3	3.38	-5.02	3	7.4
Vanderbilt	4.0	2.05	0.7	-0.2	0.72	3.75	2	12.9
Vermont	3.4	1.75	2.2	0.2	2.17	-9.11	1.5	2.1
Virginia	4.7	3.20	1.9	0.8	2.52	-1.28	1	12.8
West Va.	2.7	-0.25	4.1	0.3	3.53	2.74	0	13.1
Western Kentucky	-1.5	-1.70	-0.1	-0.2	0.14	-4.31	-2	-9.7
Wichita St.	7.7	4.65	4.0	0.4	3.52	0.28	3	23.5
Wisconsin	5.5	2.05	1.4	1.0	2.30	2.95	2	17.2
Xavier	1.7	2.75	1.2	0.0	1.29	1.32	-2	6.2

 

 

All Times Eastern Daylight Time

 

1^st Round Preview (Play-in Games)

Tuesday, March 13, 2012

6:40 PM truTV #16 Seeding

Mississippi Valley State (21-12) vs. Western Kentucky (15-18)

PiRate Criteria Score: MVSU -9.7  WKU -10.4

These are the two weakest teams in the Tournament, and they should not have been paired against each other.  Both teams were outscored by their opposition.  Both teams were less accurate from the field than their opponents.  Western Kentucky’s schedule was about six points more difficult.  So, we will go with the Hilltoppers to top MVSU in a close, low-scoring game.

 

Prediction: Western Kentucky 55  Mississippi Valley St. 50

 

9:00 PM truTV #14 Seeding

Brigham Young (25-8) vs. Iona (25-7)

PiRate Criteria Score: BYU 16.3  Iona 11.0

 

Following the two weakest teams in the tournament, these two do not deserve to be in the play-in.  Both are talented enough to advance to the third round, but one will be eliminated.

 

These two teams like to move the ball and push the tempo, so this game should be interesting for the average fan. 

 

Iona is one of three teams in the field that shot above 50% from the field, but BYU allowed just 41% against their opponents.

 

Prediction: BYU 82  Iona 75

 

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

6:40 PM truTV #16 Seeding

Lamar (23-11) vs. Vermont (23-11)

PiRate Criteria Score: Lamar 6.5  Vermont 2.1

 

These teams match up well, and we see another defensive struggle in Dayton Wednesday evening.  Lamar is a little better defensively, but Vermont has the better offense.  Lamar has been hot in the last month, and we believe Coach Pat Knight’s troops will survive.

 

Prediction: Lamar 67  Vermont 60

 

9:00 PM truTV #12 Seeding

California (24-9) vs. South Florida (20-13)

PiRate Criteria Score: Cal 10.5  USF 5.1

 

The so-called experts did not give much credit to the Pac-12 this year, and some even predicted one bid.  Cal is not headed to the Elite Eight, but the Bears are talented enough to make the Sweet 16. 

 

South Florida ranks dead last among the 68 teams in the Big Dance.  The Bulls average just 59 points per game, but they give up just 57 points per game.

 

Prediction: California 64  S. Florida 58

 

Thursday, March 15, 2012

12:15 PM CBS—West Regional

#6 Murray State (30-1) vs. #11 Colorado State (20-11)

PiRate Criteria Score: MSU 14.1  CSU 6.1

 

Colorado State’s schedule on average was almost 10 points better than the schedule Murray State played, but 10 points is not enough to make up the difference between these two teams.  The Racers are the best low-major team in the tournament, and they are actually the Las Vegas favorite in this game.

 

The Rams are one of the handful of teams that fail to meet the minimum requirements in any of the PiRate Criteria.  Teams like that do not advance past the first weekend, and we do not see CSU bucking that trend.

 

Prediction: Murray State 74  Colorado State 65

 

12:40 PM truTV—East Regional

#8 Kansas State (21-10) vs. #9 Southern Mississippi (25-8)

PiRate Criteria Score: KSU 14.0  USM 11.5

 

Kansas State is a physical team that relies on muscle with just a touch of finesse to win.  When they play a team that is soft inside, they usually win.  When they play a team that can pound the ball inside, they do not fare so well.

 

Southern Mississippi is not physical enough inside to put a scare into the Wildcats.  The Golden Eagles have troubles getting open shots inside, and this will doom them to a quick exit in the tournament.

 

Prediction:  Kansas State 69  Southern Miss. 57

 

1:40 PM TBS—West Regional

#4 Louisville (26-9) vs. #13 Davidson (25-7)

PiRate Criteria Score: UL 15.7  Dav. 11.2

 

This game could be quite exciting.  Louisville plays tenacious defense, and they have to stop the opponent’s offense, because the Cardinals’ cannot score a lot of points. 

 

Davidson can score points—a lot of them.  The Wildcats defeated Kansas in the regular season and almost knocked off Vanderbilt.  Don’t be surprised if they take Pitino’s troops to the wire with a chance to win in the final minutes.

 

Prediction: Louisville 68  Davidson 65

 

2:10 PM TNT—East Regional

#4 Wisconsin (24-9) vs. #13 Montana (25-6)

PiRate Criteria Score: UW 17.2  Mont. 5.0

 

Wisconsin has the number one scoring defense in the nation at just under 53 points per game, while the Badgers average 11 points more per game.  Opponents hit only 38.3% from the field against UW.  Coach Bo Ryan employs a deliberate style of play, where his team may hold onto the ball for 30 seconds on many possessions.  Opponents get frustrated and tend to rush their offense, which plays right into Wisconsin’s gameplan.

 

Montana has the talent to keep this game close, but we do not believe the Grizzlies can maintain their composure for 40 minutes of tranquilizer ball.  UW will commit fewer than 10 turnovers and take no more than three or four ill-advised shots.  Montana will force their offense a few too many times, and that will be their downfall.

 

Prediction: Wisconsin 65  Montana 51

 

2:45 PM CBS—West Regional

#3 Marquette (25-7) vs. #14 BYU or Iona

PiRate Criteria Score: Marq 15.5  BYU 16.3 or Iona 11.0

 

This could be a trap game.  If BYU is the opponent, the Cougars have a better PiRate Criteria score than Marquette.  Iona is not that much weaker than the Golden Eagles, so Marquette would have a tough game if they have to play the Gaels.

 

Marquette’s one big weakness is rebounding, where opponents best them by a small amount. 

 

Prediction: BYU 74  Marquette 69 (or Marquette 69  Iona 63)

 

3:10 PM truTV—East Regional

#1 Syracuse (31-2) vs. #16 UNC-Asheville (24-9)

PiRate Criteria Score: Syr 22.9  UNCA 5.1

 

What we have here is a classic mismatch.  UNC-Asheville is an offense first team.  The Bulldogs surrendered 71.3 points per game and allowed 44.4% shooting from the field against teams that were on average nine points weaker than the opponents Syracuse played.

 

Syracuse will find little trouble scoring inside with Fab Melo being seven inches taller than the man that will guard him.

 

Prediction: Syracuse 84  UNCA 62

 

4:10 PM CBS—West Regional

#5 New Mexico (27-6) vs. #12 Long Beach State (25-8)

PiRate Criteria Score: UNM 21.2  LBSU 11.1

 

Long Beach State didn’t catch a break in their bracket.  New Mexico is a sleeper to make it past the first weekend. 

 

The Lobos have an excellent combination of size and speed, as well as quality depth and excellent coaching.  On the other hand, the 49ers have an excellent starting five that will not be intimidated by New Mexico.  LBSU played a tough schedule that included games against Kansas, Xavier, North Carolina, San Diego State, Louisville, and Kansas State.

 

The infamous #12 seed produced a lot of upsets in past years, and this looks like one that is possible.  However, New Mexico is capable of making a run to the Final Four, and we will call for a Lobo win.

 

Prediction: New Mexico 76  Long Beach State 70

 

4:40 PM TNT—East Regional

#5 Vanderbilt (24-10) vs. #12 Harvard (26-4)

PiRate Criteria Score: VU 12.9  Harv 11.4

 

In the early 1980’s DePaul was a number one or two seed for three consecutive years and lost in their first tournament game (before there were 64 teams and #16 seeds).  Each year, underdogs upset them in the final minutes.

 

Vanderbilt has endure the same history in the 21^st Century, losing first round games three times in a row to Siena, Murray State, and Richmond.

 

Harvard may be better than the three teams that upset the Commodores in the first round.  The Crimson are another dubious 12-seed looking to pull off the upset, and Tommy Amaker’s crew has the talent to pull it off.

 

Vanderbilt failed to meet even one of the minimal PiRate Criteria stats, although they missed by a whisker on point differential (7.9).

 

Harvard has no weakness.  The only area where they are inferior to the Commodores is in schedule strength, where Vandy’s schedule was 10 points per game harder. 

 

Both teams have something going against them in this game.  Harvard will have not played for 12 days, while Vanderbilt will have to travel to Albuquerque three days after beating Kentucky in New Orleans, their third game in three days.

 

Prediction: Vanderbilt 62  Harvard 59

 

6:50 PM TBS—South Regional

#1 Kentucky (32-2) vs. #16 Mississippi Valley State or Western Kentucky

PiRate Criteria Score: UK 29.1  MVSU -9.7  or WKU -10.4

 

Kentucky’s players will begin the tournament with chips on their shoulders.  They will be out for blood, at least in the first 10 minutes of this game.

 

Regardless of the opponent, this game will be over by the under 12:00 minute media timeout.  Kentucky could double the score if Coach John Calipari left his starters in long enough. 

 

Prediction: Kentucky 89  Mississippi Valley 60  or Kentucky 83  Western Kentucky 52

 

7:15 PM CBS—South Regional

#5 Wichita State (27-5) vs. #12 Virginia Commonwealth (28-6)

PiRate Criteria Score: Wich 23.5  VCU 7.4

 

This should be an interesting game.  Wichita State  has an excellent half-court game with expertise both inside and outside.  Virginia Commonwealth is a full-court terror, but they cannot compete on the boards.

 

VCU will force a lot of turnovers and pick up a lot of steals, but Wichita State will not wilt and fall apart.  The Shockers do not turn the ball over all that much, and they can dominate on the glass.

 

This game will come down to a test of shooting accuracy.  WSU has much better shooters, and they will end any chance of the Rams making another huge run.

 

Prediction: Wichita State 77  Virginia Commonwealth 72

 

7:20 PM TNT—East Regional

#7 Gonzaga (25-6) vs. #10 West Virginia (19-13)

PiRate Criteria Score: Gonz. 16.0  WVU 13.1

 

The field of 64 or second round has several interesting games this year, and this will definitely be one of them.  Gonzaga is the second best team from the West this year, but the Bulldogs have a few holes.  They can be stopped by physical inside teams or teams that play an excellent zone defense.

 

West Virginia has a rebuilding team this year, but Coach Bob Huggins has produced the maximum out of a young squad; defense has gotten the job done.

 

We saw two years ago that the Mountaineers could play an awesome zone defense to upset Kentucky.  Expect a combination of zone and sagging man-to-man, and WVU should control the inside game.

 

As for Gonzaga, the Bulldogs have a couple of outside shooters that can get hot and shoot an opponent out of the gym.  They can run the fast break and get a dozen “cheap points” in a game.

 

We believe this is close to a 50-50 toss-up game. 

 

Prediction: Gonzaga 72  West Virginia 70

 

7:27 PM truTV—South Regional

#3 Baylor (27-7) vs. #14 South Dakota State (27-7)

PiRate Criteria Score: Bay 22.1  SDSU 7.3

 

The Bears are a dark horse team.  Three Big 12 teams could advance deep into the tournament, and Baylor is one of them.  This is a team capable of going on big runs, outscoring opponents 12-2 in a five-minute stretch.

 

South Dakota State is not a pushover.  The Jackrabbits can pass, shoot, and rebound.  Their weakness is on the defensive side, and Baylor will be able to exploit it for a couple of big runs.

 

Prediction: Baylor 74  South Dakota State 60

 

9:20 PM TBS—South Regional

#8 Iowa State (22-10) vs. Connecticut (20-13)

PiRate Criteria Score: ISU 7.6  UConn 10.8

 

Neither team is going to advance to the Sweet 16, as the winner will be fodder for Kentucky on Saturday.

 

Iowa State was the surprise of the Big 12 under first year coach Fred Hoiberg.  Royce White is a player to watch; he can do it all.

 

Connecticut has some rough edges, but the Huskies have the parts to compete with the Kentucky’s and Syracuse’s of the world.  However, this is not last year’s team, and nobody on the roster can carry them for six games.

 

Prediction: Connecticut 68  Iowa State 63

 

9:45 PM CBS—South Regional

#4 Indiana (25-8) vs. #13 New Mexico State (26-9)

PiRate Criteria Score: IU 14.7  NMSU 15.8

 

We smell an upset here.  New Mexico State dominates on the glass, and the Aggies should neutralize Indiana post man Cody Zeller.  NMSU has been turnover prone at times this year, but Indiana has not been a ball-hawking team this year. 

 

Both teams shoot the ball well, and both are fairly good on defense.  What concerns us is that Indiana relies too much on the three-point shot, and in unfamiliar gyms, outside shooting can be a problem in the first half. 

 

Prediction: New Mexico State 71  Indiana 66

 

9:50 PM TNT—East Regional

#2 Ohio State (27-7) vs. #15 Loyola (Md) (24-8)

PiRate Criteria Score: OSU 28.0  Loy 2.3

 

How can we entice you to watch this game?  How about this tidbit of information?  Loyola played Kentucky in Lexington in December.  They lost by 24 points, but until the end of the first half, the Greyhounds were within a couple of points.

 

Ohio State will eventually run the Greyhounds out of the gym, but we believe this game could be exciting for 10-15 minutes.

 

Prediction: Ohio State 76  Loyola (Md) 54

 

9:57 PM truTV—South Regional

#6 U N L V (26-8) vs. #11 Colorado (23-11)

PiRate Criteria Score: UNLV 14.8  CU 7.0

 

Here is another excellent study of contrasts.  UNLV passes the ball like a team from the 1980’s.  The Runnin’ Rebels are not that far away from being considered an Elite 8 contender.  They shoot, rebound, and play good defense. 

 

Colorado won the Pac-12 Tournament with a swarming defense and an ability to hit the glass.  The Buffs do not have enough offense to make a long stay this year. 

 

Prediction: UNLV 70  Colorado 59

 

Friday, March 16, 2012

12:15 PM CBS—East Regional

#6 Cincinnati (24-10) vs. #11 Texas (20-13)

PiRate Criteria Score: Cinti 9.3  UT 9.6

 

According to the PiRate Criteria score, this game should be close and could go to overtime.

 

Unlike Bearcat teams of yore, this Cincinnati squad is not an overpowering inside monster.  UC relies on tenacious defense and a strong perimeter game with one good inside presence in Yancy Gates.  Teams have difficulty matching the Bearcats’ 4-out, 1-in offense.

 

Texas just barely qualified as an at-large in what is a rebuilding process for Coach Rick Barnes.  The Longhorns are almost a one-man team.  If J’Covan Brown does not score 20 points, the burnt orange don’t win.

 

Flip a coin for this one; it could come down to the last shot of the game.

 

Prediction: Cincinnati 69  Texas 68

 

12:40 PM truTV—Midwest Regional

#6 San Diego State (26-7) vs. #11 North Carolina State (22-12)

PiRate Criteria Score: SDSU 14.0  NCSU 12.7

 

Here is yet another interesting game that should be close.  The Aztecs were not expected to return to the Dance for the second consecutive year, but Coach Steve Fisher reloaded rather than rebuilt.  SDSU’s starting five is high quality similar to the talent the Wolf Pack face in the ACC.  The Aztec bench is lacking, and teams can wear their starters down.

 

North Carolina State has better depth, but the starting five is not as strong as the Aztec starting five.  Defense can be a problem at times, and one spurt allowed in a close game can be fatal.

 

Because the timeouts are longer in the NCAA Tournament, we believe fatigue will not be a major problem in this game, and SDSU will benefit from one big spurt.

 

Prediction: San Diego State 75  North Carolina State 68

 

1:40 PM TBS—Midwest Regional

# 8 Creighton (28-5) vs. #9 Alabama (21-11)

PiRate Criteria Score: Crei. 15.1  Ala. 12.4

 

Here is another great study in contrasts.  Creighton is all about offense, while Alabama is all about defense.

 

The Blue Jays have the best offensive threat in the tournament in Doug McDermott, the 21^st Century Larry Bird. 

 

Crimson Tide coach Anthony Grant suspended four players in February, and eventually reinstated three of the quartet.  Since that time, ‘Bama lost four of their last 10 games, following a 15-7 start.  The Tide never fully recovered, and they enter this tournament playing more like a team that should be in the NIT.

 

Prediction: Creighton 70  Alabama 62

 

2:10 PM TNT—West Regional

#7 Florida (23-10) vs. #10 Virginia (22-9)

PiRate Criteria Score: Fla. 13.6  Virginia 12.8

Yet another “yin-yang” game, Florida has the shooters, and Virginia has the defenders.  Florida is one of the best three-point shooting teams in the nation, while Virginia is one of the best three-point defensive teams.

 

Both teams enter the tournament with injury issues.  Virginia may only be able to use two off the bench, but the Cavaliers will slow the game down and rely on the longer timeouts to keep from getting winded.

 

Florida coach Billy Donovan will try to speed up the pace and press.  If the Cavs can handle the Gator pressure, UVa will win.  If not, then the Gator chomp will be seen in Omaha around 3:00 PM local time.

 

Prediction: Florida 62  Virginia 56

 

2:45 PM CBS—East Regional

#3 Florida State (24-9) vs. #14 St. Bonaventure (20-11)

PiRate Criteria Score: FSU 14.8  SBU 6.2

 

Not many, if any, teams have defeated North Carolina and Duke two times each in a year where both powers were top 10 teams.  The Seminoles can defend and rebound.  They have a tendency to turn the ball over a bit too much, and they are not the most fluent team on offense.

 

St. Bonaventure is a smaller mirror of FSU.  They defend well, rebound tenaciously, and turn the ball over too much.  Their offense tends to stall at times.

 

We’ll go with the bigger fish in this game.

 

Prediction: Florida State 65  St. Bonaventure 55

 

3:10 PM truTV—Midwest Regional

#3 Georgetown (23-8) vs. #14 Belmont (27-7)

PiRate Criteria Rating: GU 18.4  BU 11.8

 

In recent years, Georgetown lacked the rebounding and ball-hawking ability to advance very far in the Tournament.  This year is completely different.  This Hoya team has the talent to make it to New Orleans.

 

This Hoya team can shoot the ball, and like all Georgetown teams, they can force off-target shots and can block shots.  GU can rebound like the old Alonzo Mourning-Dikembe Mutombo and Pat Ewing teams.  While they don’t force a lot of turnovers, they don’t commit many either.

 

Belmont has twice given Mike Krzyzewski a nervous stomach, losing by one in the NCAA Tournament a few years ago and by one in Durham this year.  The Bruins rely on a lot of three-point shots, and that style of play rarely works in the Big Dance.  Big men Scott Saunders and Mick Hedgepath will be neutralized by Georgetown’s deep inside presence, and this game will not be all that close.

 

Prediction: Georgetown 71  Belmont 51

 

4:10 TBS—Midwest Regional

#1 North Carolina (29-5) vs. #16 Lamar or Vermont

PiRate Criteria Score: UNC 31.1  Lam. 6.5  VT 2.1

 

The Tar Heels have the highest criteria score, but they do not meet the minimum requirements in every category.  They just miss on field goal percentage margin with a margin of 6.8%.  However, they are the most dominating rebounding team in the nation, and they can monopolize on those rebounds with a devastating fast break.

 

The injury to forward John Henson will not stop UNC in the first weekend.  If he recovers fully, this team could finish the season on a six-game winning streak.

 

The play-in winner will be overwhelmed and intimidated by the most explosive team in the Dance.  This game will be over within five to eight minutes.  UNC will have a comfortable lead by the second media timeout. 

 

Prediction: North Carolina 102  Lamar 67 or North Carolina 89  Vermont 50

 

4:40 TNT—West Regional

#2 Missouri (30-4) vs. #15 Norfolk State (25-9)

PiRate Criteria Score: MO 19.1  Norf. -2.9

 

Okay, there is nothing we can do to encourage you to watch this game.  It could be the biggest mismatch of the second round.  Missouri likes to run, and the Tigers can score a lot of points in a little time.  Even though the Tigers are up-tempo, they take care of the ball and do not turn it over.  Their one weakness comes inside against teams that can control the tempo and be physical in the paint.

 

Norfolk State actually has a huge size advantage, but the Spartans lack the talent to exploit Missouri’s liability.  NSU turns the ball over too much, and Missouri will take advantage of these miscues with several easy baskets.

 

Prediction: Missouri 92  Norfolk State 66

 

6:50 PM TBS—West Regional

#8 Memphis (26-8) vs. #9 St. Louis (25-7)

PiRate Criteria Score: Mem 18.2 Stl 14.2

 

These former rivals once again feature dissimilar assets.  Coach Josh Pastner has Memphis playing much like his former mentor Lute Olsen’s Arizona teams.  The Tigers move the ball with meaning and get a lot of open shots.  MU’s field goal accuracy is a hair under 50%, and it has been improving as of late.  The Tigers grudgingly yield baskets, holding opponents to 38.4% from the field.

 

For the Billikens, it’s defense first, second, and third.  SLU holds opponents to 57.5 points a game, and they force a goodly amount of turnovers for the pace they play.  Coach Rick Majerus has enjoyed success against the “Arizona offense” in the past, but this is not the past.  SLU does not have the talent to go head-to-head with the Tigers for 40 minutes. 

 

Prediction: Memphis 67  St. Louis 58

 

7:15 PM CBS—South Regional

#2 Duke (27-6) vs. #15 Lehigh (26-7)

PiRate Criteria Score: Duke 19.9  Leh. 5.7

 

In Durham, even when Duke is not up to its normal standards, the Blue Devils are still contenders to advance to the Final Four.  While we believe the Blue Devils will fall in the second weekend this year, the first weekend is no problem.  They have the horses to win the two claiming races they will play in Greensboro.

 

Lehigh is one of the better Patriot League representatives to come along in recent years, but this is not Bucknell vs. Kansas of a few years ago.

 

Prediction: Duke 82  Lehigh 58

 

7:20 TNT—Midwest Regional

#4 Michigan (24-9) vs. #13 Ohio U (27-7)

PiRate Criteria Score: Mich. 8.5  Ohio 6.5

 

It is our opinion that Michigan is ripe for the picking this weekend.  The Wolverines win games with the jump shot.  They lack any rebounding strength, yet they do not force enough turnovers to get extra scoring opportunities.  If their outside shooting is on target, they can compete with most of the teams in the tournament.  If their outside shooting is not on target, the Ohio’s of the tournament can beat them and even beat them handily.

 

The Bobcats are strong on defense, and they can limit the Wolverines’ outside shooting.  If they had any legitimate offensive threat, we would go with Ohio in this game.  However, this team may not have the offensive power to take advantage of a cold Wolverine shooting night.

 

Prediction: Michigan 66  Ohio 62

 

7:27 truTV—Midwest Regional

#7 Saint Mary’s (27-5) vs. #10 Purdue (21-12)

PiRate Criteria Score: SMU 17.0  PU 8.8

 

Saint Mary’s is the top team in the West, and the Gaels have a legitimate chance to advance to the Elite 8 if injured big guard Stephen Holt can return from an injury to his knee.

 

Purdue knows all about injuries to the knee.  Star forward Robbie Hummel missed two seasons.  Like Alabama, Purdue has suffered since a former starter was booted from the team.  The Boilermakers are not going to make it through the first weekend, and we see them being one and done.

 

Prediction: Saint Mary’s 75  Purdue 65

 

9:20 PM TBS—West Regional

#1 Michigan State (27-7) vs. #16 Long Island (25-8)

PiRate Criteria Score: MSU 27.4  LIU -3.4

 

Michigan State can be defeated by a team that can force turnovers and change the pace of the game.  Not many opponents that try to go head-to-head with them in an inside power game will come away happy.  The Spartans can hoist the big banner if they catch a break and avoid teams like Missouri and Syracuse.

 

Long Island might have been more competitive against MSU had this been last year, but the Blackbirds just don’t have the talent to pull off an upset or even keep this game close.

 

Look for Michigan State to gradually pull ahead and lengthen their lead until Coach Tom Izzo empties the bench.

 

Prediction: Michigan State 72  Long Island 50

 

9:45 PM CBS—South Regional

#7 Notre Dame (22-11) vs. #10 Xavier (21-12)

PiRate Criteria Score: ND 3.3  Xav. 6.2

 

Neither team is all that impressive, and the winner will be gone Sunday after losing to Duke.

 

Notre Dame is a poor shooting team overall, but the Irish defense is strong.  Coach Mike Brey wants a snail’s pace, half-court game, because his players cannot get into a running game and win. 

 

Xavier’s chances for a big year went down the drain in a melee against in-town rival Cincinnati.  The Musketeers have been a .500 team since that brawl, and they were undefeated when it happened.  Had performance in the last 10 games still counted, the Selection Committee would have selected someone else and left Xavier to the NIT.

 

Xavier’s Tu Holloway should guide his team to a victory, but that’s as far as Xavier is going.

 

Prediction: Xavier 60  Notre Dame 56

 

9:50 TNT—Midwest Regional

#5 Temple (24-7) vs. #12 California or South Florida

PiRate Criteria Score: TU 9.7  Cal 10.5  USF 5.1

 

If Coach Mike Montgomery’s Bears win the play-in game, a second round Temple-Cal match would be one of the best of the day.  Both teams feature excellent perimeter play with just enough inside presence to keep defenses honest.

 

If USF beats Cal, a second round game with Temple will be a different kettle of fish.  It will be more of a dull, grind-it-out affair.  We believe the Owls will have little trouble defeating this style of play.

 

Prediction: California 73  Temple 69 or Temple 64  South Florida 54

 

9:57 truTV—Midwest Regional

#2 Kansas (27-6) vs. #15 Detroit (22-13)

PiRate Criteria Score: KU 24.0 Det. 3.1

 

This will not be the basketball version of “Remember The Titans.”  These Titans from Detroit are just happy to be here.  They will be home Saturday morning. 

 

Kansas is liable to double up on the rebounding numbers in this game.  A two to one edge on the boards is a certain victory.  Thomas Robinson could outrebound Detroit’s starting five!

 

Look for a quick and easy blowout in this game, but make no mistake about this: Kansas is vulnerable after this weekend.

 

Prediction: Kansas 79  Detroit 55

 

 

Starting Times and Networks For NCAA Rounds One and Two

Here is a list in order of starting times of the First Four and Second Round of the 2011 NCAA Tournament.

All Times EDT
Tuesday’s Games
Time	Team	Team	Network
6:30 PM	UNC-Asheville	Arkansas-Little Rock	truTV
9:00 PM	Alabama-Birmingham	Clemson	truTV
Wednesday’s Games
6:30 PM	Texas-San Antonio	Alabama State	truTV
9:00 PM	Southern Cal	Virginia Commonwealth	truTV
Thursday’s Games
Time	Team	Team	Network
12:15 PM	West Virginia	U A B/Clemson Winner	CBS
12:40 PM	Butler	Old Dominion	truTV
1:40 PM	Louisville	Morehead State	TBS
2:10 PM	Temple	Penn State	TNT
2:45 PM	Kentucky	Princeton	CBS
3:10 PM	Pittsburgh	UNCA/UALR Winner	truTV
4:10 PM	Vanderbilt	Richmond	TBS
4:50 PM	San Diego State	Northern Colorado	TNT
6:50 PM	Florida	U C-Santa Barbara	TBS
7:15 PM	Brigham Young	Wofford	CBS
7:20 PM	Connecticut	Bucknell	TNT
7:27 PM	Wisconsin	Belmont	truTV
9:20 PM	U C L A	Michigan State	TBS
9:45 PM	St. John’s	Gonzaga	CBS
9:50 PM	Cincinnati	Missouri	TNT
9:57 PM	Kansas State	Utah State	truTV
Friday’s Games
Time	Team	Team	Network
12:15 PM	Texas	Oakland	CBS
12:40 PM	Michigan	Tennessee	truTV
1:40 PM	Notre Dame	Akron	TBS
2:10 PM	George Mason	Villanova	TNT
2:45 PM	Arizona	Memphis	CBS
3:10 PM	Duke	Hampton	truTV
4:10 PM	Texas A&M	Florida State	TBS
4:40 PM	Ohio State	UTSA-Alabama State Winner	TNT
6:50 PM	Kansas	Boston U	TBS
7:15 PM	North Carolina	Long Island	CBS
7:20 PM	Purdue	St. Peter’s	TNT
7:27 PM	Xavier	Marquette	truTV
9:20 PM	U N L V	Illinois	TBS
9:45 PM	Washington	Georgia	CBS
9:50 PM	Georgetown	USC/VCU Winner	TNT
9:57 PM	Syracuse	Indiana State	truTV