Note: The majority of the numbers in this post come from kenpom.com. Some sections were written before the data from Sunday games were uploaded, so the ratings may look slightly different now. Everything should be close enough to support my points, at the very least.
My Rant at the Committee (In the Form of an Elegy for the Runnin' Utes)
If the committee said it's choosing the "best season achievement profiles" instead of just "best teams," I'd buy them each a donut.
— John Gasaway (@JohnGasaway) March 16, 2014
Snap judgment: Seems like, if anything, the committee utilized new team metrics less this year than the past.
— Kevin Pelton (@kpelton) March 16, 2014
I have a very odd tendency to start rooting for random college basketball teams for reasons even I can't always discern. This year, one of those teams was Utah, who is a pretty fun team to watch. Delon Wright is basically a better version of Rajon Rondo, and the rest of the team came together to be one of the most efficient units in the Pac-12. By most advanced metrics, Utah is one of the best 37 at-large teams. KenPom has them 37th, LMRC has them 46th, Sagarin has them 39th, and BPI has them 34th (remember than 10 or so of the teams ranked above them get automatic bids, so being in the thirties means you should be strongly considered). A season ending blow-out against Arizona didn't help these numbers, but they had built up enough good will to be a team worthy of inclusion.
And yet, the Utes didn't make the tournament field* and weren't particularly close according to most pundits, largely because of their terrible RPI (notice which stat sticks out as the outlier for Utah on Massey's composite ratings page). There are a lot of qualitative reasons they might be underrated: they were terrible the last couple of years, they're still perceived as a mid-major, and they play late at night on the East Coast. In the end though, it all comes down to the bad RPI.
*The small consolation is that Utah gets to play at St. Mary's in the NIT. St. Mary's tiny gym is one of my favorite venues in the sport, so that will be a fun little treat for a hoops nerd like me.
The two main reasons for their surprisingly low RPI are easily found on the front page of kenpom.com. First, Utah ranked 294th in luck. This shows that Utah lost a lot of close games (they went 0-3 in overtime, for example). If a couple of bounces would have gone their way, they could have easily won 2 or 3 more games and their record would more closely match their true talent level. Second, Utah ranked 350th in non-conference strength of schedule. There are only 351 teams. Whether they should or not, the committee (and thus, those that bracketologize) treats a bad non-conference schedule like the plague: You had better be otherwise sparkling or they're not going to let you into the dance.* I understand the desire to encourage good non-conference schedules, but in the end, this practice leads to the committee rewarding strong-scheduling ADs as opposed to strong-playing basketball teams.
*I know that the committee has shown a constant commitment to punishing teams with bad schedules, so missing the tournament should never come as a surprise to a coach/AD that schedules a poor slate. That said, when the richest teams have a guy whose job it is to manipulate the RPI, that should be a sign that maybe the system is a bit broken.
The common refrain that I hear from committee members is that they want to select the 37 best at large teams. While that sounds good on the surface, actions indicate that they don't actually mean it. From this article comes this telling quote: "It is just doing the best job that group possibly can to find the best teams based on the games they played, the games they won." Once again, this sounds a lot like the deserver argument I've detailed in the past: Because so and so teams won certain games, they deserve to be in the tournament regardless of whether or not they are actually one of the best at large teams.* What's most disappointing about this is that we live in an era where we can do better than this, and yet we choose not to.
*Of course, an RPI/resume based approach will overlap with a more advanced approach most of the time, so it's not like the end result of the selection process is completely terrible. But still, we can do better. Louisville is not a 4-seed.
Pro sports teams don't have this problem, because fans generally accept that the centralized scheduling and rules for qualifying for the playoffs are mostly fair. Sure, an 8-8 division champion may make the NFL playoffs occasionally, but there is so much transparency to the process that it is generally accepted. On the other hand, the non-centralized nature of college basketball permits us to select teams for the postseason based on them being the actual best teams. Because of the advances in sports analytics and the availability of advanced metrics, this is now a quite reasonable and even easy exercise. But rather than using that unique opportunity, the selection committee falls back towards evaluating profiles in a near-political manner, as though that's a rigorous and fair way to evaluate the best teams. I hope that in the future the NCAA and it's committee will become more enlightened, but for now we'll just have to accept things for the way they are. Luckily for us, the tournament is still pretty awesome as it is, even without Utah in it.
Some Specific Complaints About Non-Utah Teams
While I didn't have high hopes for Utah's inclusion in this year's tournament, there were some pretty disappointing picks at the back end of the tourney. SMU and Louisiana Tech didn't come from the best conferences, nor did they have flashy offenses. What they did have was two of the most punishing defenses in the land, which would have given them the ability to win multiple games with a favorable draw. After Middle Tennessee made last year's bracket with a very similar background, I was pretty surprised that the Mustangs and Bulldogs were passed over for a very average NC State team. The UAB and VCU picks from three years ago were a tad odd, but I think you have to go all the way back to Air Force in 2006 to find a more stupefying pick for the tournament.
I was also surprised that injuries appear to no longer have any bearing on tourney seeding. Colorado reverted to a pretty average team after the loss of Spencer Dinwiddie (they went from 31st to 64th in the KenPom ratings, and they sit 58th in Sagarin), yet they'll be wearing white against a strong Pittsburgh team. BYU was already a pretty marginal case before the loss of Kyle Collinsworth, so I am quite surprised they managed to avoid Dayton, let alone make the field. I understand how it seems unfair to penalize a team for losing a star player, but the committee needs to make those tough decisions. If a team isn't what they were when they were compiling their resume, then that should be reflected in the bracket.
*Speaking of NIT teams, I just watched the NIT selection show because I am a bracket junkie. At the end, Andy Katz spoke with the NIT selection committee chairman, who looked and sounded like a long lost cousin of Joe Lieberman. His reading off the list of teams that just missed out on the NIT in a quiet, sad voice was one of the most hilariously depressing things I've ever seen.
A Pretty Good Year for Mid-Majors
In a year in which prominent mid-majors like Creighton moved up to major conferences and the Mid-Majority readied to close its figurative doors, it might seem like the small conferences are in trouble. While there were a few signs of decay (eg. the Valley not having anyone remotely near the bubble), the season was actually an overall success for small schools. Of course, Wichita's amazing season got the majority of the limelight (deservedly), but a lot of other programs managed their best seasons in years. Thankfully, the majority of those schools passed their conference tournament tests and will get their chance to pull an FGCU and captivate the nation for a weekend.
In the past couple of years, I've always made note to comment on who made it and who got tripped up in their tourney. This year, I thought I would put everything in chart format to illustrate the good fortune we saw this year. While I think the 3-5 seed lines are pretty strong this year, they'll still face some good challenges from many of the following teams:
Note: A conference was included in this list if at least one team was in the top 100 of the KenPom ratings, and that team (or teams) had a level of separation from the rest of the league. That is why teams like Belmont and Toledo, for example, don't show up on this list.
For all of the complaints I had about the committee's work this year, they did a really good job of putting the mid-major teams in their proper order. There isn't a super strong 15 or a weak 13 like we've seen in previous years. As a result, a lot of the 4-13 and 5-12 matchups should be great.
Slow Tempo
Given that I watch a lot of basketball, it's only natural that I have developed a pet theory or two about how the game works. One such line of thought that came about during last year's tournament concerns teams that play at a very slow pace. As you might remember, last year's tournament was particularly memorable for a number of unlikely occurrences, the most notable being Florida Gulf Coast's run to the Sweet Sixteen and Wichita State's run to the Final Four. What you might not have noticed is that those runs started with games against teams that like to play quite slowly. To illustrate this, here are the five slowest teams that qualified for last year's tournament (for reference, the average tempo for the 2013 season was about 66 possessions per game):
If you are perceptive, then you will have already noticed that all of those teams landed seeds where they would be considered favorites in the first round. If you have a good memory, then will you have already noticed that all of those teams also lost in the opening round last year (To follow up on earlier references, Georgetown lost to FGCU, while Wichita knocked off Pitt in an absolutely loaded 8-9 game).
Of course, a five team sample is hardly conclusive. If I would have increased the sample to six teams, then it would include Florida, who made it all the way to the Elite Eight before running into a Michigan team that damn near won the title. That said, it's a little scary that the four teams atop that list are perhaps the four that are most associated with disappointing tournament results over the past decade. My theory behind this is pretty simple: Good teams that purposefully play fewer possessions leave themselves more vulnerable to losses to inferior opponents. If you have 5-10 fewer possessions to assert your dominance, then there is a greater chance that you could be upset.
I hope to do a little more digging into this in the offseason to see how real of a relationship this is. In the meantime, the slowest major conference teams in this year's field are Virginia, Syracuse, Baylor Michigan, and Cincinnati. Do with this information what you will.
One-sided teams
One aspect of basketball that I find preferable to football is that every player has to play both offense and defense. Sure, there may be three point specialists and such that can only do one thing well, but there are still contributions those people can make on the other side (eg. defensive big men can set screens on offense). Because of this, excellence in the sport requires supreme athleticism and versatility to a degree unparalleled in most other sports.
However, that line of thinking is being threatened a bit this season. While there have always been unbalanced teams (think 2012 Missouri), I've never seen the top of the rankings littered with so many teams that only excel on one side of the ball. Here are the top ten teams in efficiency for both offense and defense, and where they rank on the other side of the ball:
As you can see, many of the very best teams in the nation are surprisingly lopsided. This phenomenon hasn't limited itself to the best teams either. League doormats like Boston College (#30 offense, #298 defense) and Northwestern (#312 offense, #17 defense) tended to show an even stronger contrast.
I'm not exactly sure what the reasons behind this phenomenon might be, but I do know that the preponderance of one-sided teams means that there is a high chance that we'll have a champion that only excels on one side of the floor. In the first eleven years of the efficiency era, every single champion has had a top 25 offense and defense. Of course, those teams have six tournament wins baked into their final efficiency metrics, which probably skews those figures upwards. Still, we have a chance to see a truly mediocre offense or defense win a title this year. Be prepared.
One More Note About Creighton
I already spent some time talking about how awesome Creighton was this season, so let me try to keep this short. As you already know from the above section, Creighton led the nation in offensive efficiency this season. Their adjusted offensive rating was 125.7 (measured in points per 100 possessions, adjusted for opponent), which tops this year's Duke team and one of Chris Paul's Wake teams for the best offense of the last twelve years, according to KenPom. The reason for this is that the Jays are probably the best shooting team ever. And no, that is not an exaggeration. Against the 9th toughest defensive schedule in the nation, the Jays shot 42.2% from three (#1 nationally) and 56.2% from two (#3 nationally). There are a lot of reasons to be wary of picking the Jays for a deep run in the tournament, but their shooting will give them a very good chance of winning no matter who they play.
On Andrew Wiggins' Awesomeness
Coming into the season, there was a good deal of hype for the highest rated freshman class in years. And of those freshmen, none was more hyped than Kansas' Andrew Wiggins. As the season progressed, the hype died down a bit, and people began picking on supposed holes in his game. The narrative seemed to become that Wiggins was a disappointment, because he wasn't the next Kevin Durant. While I think holding a teenager to those kind of expectations is a little ridiculous, I also think he's not all that far behind where Durant was when he was a freshman. Here is a comparison of Wiggins' season with Durant's 2007 at Texas:
Upon examining those numbers, you will probably conclude that Durant was better as a freshman. I wouldn't argue with that, as Durant's combination of efficient shooting, high usage rate, and defensive skill is hard to match. That said, Wiggins isn't far behind, especially when you consider the different contexts in which they played. Wiggins has fewer rebounds and blocks in large part because he gets to play alongside Joel Embiid and Perry Ellis, who are both great post players. This means Wiggins is more free to roam the perimeter looking for his shot and setting up fast breaks. Durant, on the other hand, was often the tallest player on the floor for Texas, so he had to handle a lot of those duties for the Longhorns. Additionally, Durant found himself on a team full of freshmen and sophomores, so he was free to put up those high usage rates you see above. Wiggins joined a team with more talent in place and a better coach (Self>>>>Barnes), which means he didn't need to carry the same load as Durant.
In the end, Durant was better in 2007 than Wiggins in 2014, but it was closer than the narrative indicates, largely because Bill Self didn't need Wiggins to be Durant. The injury to Embiid may change that, which makes Kansas' tournament fate all the more interesting. If Wiggins can propel his team to a deep run, then his season at Kansas may just end up being the superior one. For this reason, Kansas might just be the most interesting team to watch this postseason.
Now, onto the brackets:
EAST
The East is probably the least "sexy" bracket, but there's still a lot here to like. Harvard is as good of a mid-major as you'll see, and they'll get their chance to win games in back to back tournaments against a potentially vulnerable Bearcat team. Shabazz Napier has the chance to finish off a brilliant career with a Kemba-tastic type run to the Final Four. Providence's Bryce Cotton was playing more than 40 minutes per game at one point of the season, so he will indubitably have a say in whether or not the Friars can upset the enigmatic Tar Heels. And Virginia and Villanova represent a couple of teams that surprised this season with fantastic, unselfish play. In a lot of ways, the East is the most wide open bracket, which could make for some fun times.
Best First Round Matchup: Iowa State vs. NC Central
It's pretty tough to pass up the slugfest between Cincy and Harvard, or the point guard-off between Bryce Cotton and Marcus Paige. Despite that, I'm sticking with my favorite mid-major champion in NC Central.* Even thought the MEAC has produced several first round upsets (including Hampton over Iowa State), this might be the best team the conference has ever put forward. In addition to liking the team, I also really like the matchup. NC Central isn't particularly tall, as is true of many MEAC teams. Luckily, Iowa State has even less effective height. Melvin Ejim and Georges Niang are great players, but they're both only 6'6". NC Central should have the option to try for points in the paint, should they so desire. I still think Iowa State will survive and advance, but this will be a strong test for the defense-challenged Cyclones.
*Coach LeVelle Moton tearing up at the end of the game that sealed his alma mater's first ever tourney berth might have been my favorite moment of Championship Fortnight.
Best Possible Matchup: Virginia vs. Michigan State
Virginia gets a reasonably easy draw in the East, which is odd considering they're probably the least deserving one seed. That said, they're still a great final four capable team, and Michigan State could pose a major threat if the Spartans continue their recent roll. Tony Bennett and Tom Izzo are two of the best coaches in the game, and they have teams that are versatile enough to create a back and forth of pure, unadulterated, coaching strategy. The player to watch here is Malcolm Brogdon, who just might be the most underrated player in the country. The sophomore doesn't have any one skill that sticks out; Rather, he plays solid defense, and acts as a bit of a second point guard for an offense that is sneakily one the best in the country. Finally, Joe and Gary Harris will get to fight for the most valuable Harris award, which I just made up.
The Pick for JerryWorld: Michigan State
The Spartans are a tricky team to get a handle on. On one hand, they've looked impressive at the beginning and end of the season, which is not coincidentally the times that they had their full complement of players. On the other hand, this team isn't as deep with talent as other Michigan State squads we've seen in the past. The drop-off in skill from Payne and Dawson to the bench is noticeable (especially on defense), which means the Spartans will have to look out for refs with loose whistles. Michigan State does give up more free throw attempts than it takes, so that's definitely my biggest worry about this team. Other than that, I don't see a lot of problems. The Spartan starting five has a blend of talent and experience that is unmatched in the bracket; As a result, I like them to conquer the region.
MIDWEST
Yes, Louisville being a four-seed is ridiculous. What makes it even more ridiculous are the two teams directly below them in the Midwest: Saint Louis and UMass. I love the Billikens and Chaz Williams is one of the most exciting players in the nation, but in no way do these teams deserve their seeds. As Nate Silver pointed out, it's all because of the RPI. For some reason, the American got pounded in the RPI this year, while the Atlantic-10 stood out (Both conferences had a collection of bad teams at the bottom, so we can't say that's the reason). The committee can talk about looking deeply at the resumes and watching games and such, but when a bracket like this is as nakedly seeded according to RPI, then it's hard to take them seriously.
All that said, this is probably the strongest bracket in the tournament. Wichita, Michigan, Duke, and Louisville make for a loaded top four that could go any which way, and Tennessee and Kentucky could make for a couple of fun spoilers. Yes, it seems a little unfair that a 34-0 season gets you such a tough draw, but the Shockers don't seem to mind tough draws, and the committee assigns teams to regions for geography as much as anything else:
Best First Round Matchup: Iowa vs. Tennessee
The 8/9 and 7/10 matchups are pretty underwhelming here, so I'm passing on those (I don't know of a way to quantify this, but Texas-Arizona State might be the game with the least impact on the outcome of the tournament). Though I like the pointsplosion potential of Duke-Mercer, I'm going to go with the only matchup that is actually considered the "first round." Tennessee may have lost a bunch of close games, and Iowa fell down hard at the end of the season, but these are still both top-30-or-so outfits that have legitimate Sweet Sixteen potential (I would complain about the committee again, but at least they got these teams in the tournament). This game is worth watching if only for the matchup between Jordan McRae and Roy Devyn Marble. Both are similar players, except McRae is a little more electric, while Marble is as smooth of a customer as you'll see on a basketball court. If I only give you one commandment for filling out your bracket, it is to pick the winner of this game to beat UMass. Just trust me.
Best Possible Matchup: Wichita State vs. Louisville
This was an amazing game in last year's Final Four, and I see no reason for that to be different this year. Louisville isn't quite as deep as last year's championship-winning behemoth, but Russ Smith is probably the best non-McDermott player in the land, and Chris Jones and Montrezl Harrell replaced Siva and Dieng nicely. On Wichita's side, the interplay between guards Fred Van Vleet, Ron Baker, and Tekele Cotton is special, and Cleanthony Early is the kind of athlete that a mid-major needs to take their team to the next level (And a 115 O-rating with 26% usage isn't too bad either). Duke-Michigan would give us the chance to see unprecedented offensive fireworks on the bottom half of this bracket, but when forced to choose, I'll take the slugfest every time.
Very close runner-up: Wichita vs. Kentucky. I had hoped to get this matchup two years ago, when Wichita was almost as good as they are now. I'm pretty excited to see Kentucky's dominance on the offensive glass go up against Wichita's defensive rebounding ability (#5 in the country). Because the Shockers can get rebounds and limit fouls, I think they matchup well against the Wildcats, but it should still be a great game.
The Pick for JerryWorld: Louisville
Michigan gets a reasonable draw on the bottom half of this bracket, but I'm not doubting the Cardinals after their performance over the past two seasons. The road for Rick Pitino will be tough, but it was tough last year, and they don't have to play someone as good as 2013 Colorado State in the round of 32. I really want to see the Shockers make a second straight run, but they have to clear a much tougher third-round hurdle in Kentucky, and they don't have any one player quite as good as Russ Smith.
SOUTH
The South is a very odd region. Kansas, Syracuse, and Ohio State are a trio of teams that looked like potential champions earlier in the season before injuries (Embiid) and poor play (CJ Fair, Aaron Craft) greatly diminished their chances. On the other hand, UCLA and VCU both snuck under the radar most of the season, but are fully deserving of their seeds. Add in Pitt and New Mexico and you have yourself a bracket that could go any number of ways.
Of course, I haven't mentioned that team at the top of the bracket that has a pretty good chance of making everything else in the South irrelevant. The Gators do just about everything well - their somewhat high turnover rate (17.8%) and poor free throw shooting (Patric Young) are about the only holes I can poke in their title chances. They don't have a free pass to the Final Four, but they have as a good of a chance as they could hope for at ending their three year streak of losing in the regional final.
Best First Round Matchup: New Mexico vs. Stanford
There aren't a bevy of fantastic matchups early in this bracket, so let's take the one that features some really tall guys. Led by Cam Bairstow and Alex Kirk, the Lobos check in at 7th in the nation in effective height (of tournament teams, only NM State and Kentucky are taller), while Stanford isn't far behind at 13th. Neither team is great at rebounding, so the main focus of the battle in the paint will be for points.
Best Possible Matchup: UCLA vs. VCU
It's an eternally fun exercise to imagine how well VCU's havoc defense will match up against potential opponents. UCLA might be the most fun opponent to imagine, primarily because of the brilliance of 6'9" point forward Kyle Anderson. While Anderson can't move particularly fast (his nickname is Slow-Mo after all), he is as smart with the ball as anyone in the country, and he should be able to simply pass over the top of most trapping defenders.
The Pick for JerryWorld: Florida
This was the easiest pick to make. Florida draws potentially tough matchups with Pittsburgh and VCU in the top part of the bracket, but the bottom half features an Embiid-less Kansas and a reeling Syracuse. There are still reasons to believe that any of the teams seeded two to seven could make a run if things go right. But while those teams need a lot to break right, Florida just needs to keep doing what they do. I trust that Billy Donavan knows how to make that happen.
WEST
The Midwest is the best bracket, but the West is probably the most fun bracket. The top half features a couple of punishing defenses (Arizona, San Diego State) getting tested by a bunch of top 25 offenses (Oklahoma, ND State, Oklahoma State). The bottom half however, is all about offense. The only two teams that crack the top 50 in defensive efficiency are Nebraska (30th) and 15-seed American (46th). So there's going to be some points. And likely a major clash of styles in the regional final. Awesome.
Note: Nowhere is the committee's goal of seeding to the region clear than in the West. Only one team (American) hails from the Eastern time zone.
Best First Round Matchup: Oklahoma vs. North Dakota State
Oklahoma State-Gonzaga is an awesome 8-9 tilt, and Baylor-Nebraska has the makings of a classic, but I'll take the offensive shootout between the Sooners and the Bison. Both teams feature top-25 offenses, but they go about achieving those results in completely different manners. Oklahoma likes to push the tempo (17th in the nation), and takes a reasonably high number of threes (led by Buddy Hield's 224 three point attempts). North Dakota State, on the other hand, likes to take it slow and prefers two-pointers (they're good at making them, too - 56%, which is good for 4th in the nation). In spite of shooting down low a lot, they never get blocked (5% - best in the nation), although in fairness, that's partially representative of the smaller athletes in Summit Conference.
Best Possible Matchup: Wisconsin vs. Creighton
Michigan and Duke have a good chance of putting on an offensive clinic in the Sweet Sixteen in the Midwest bracket. The potential matchup between Wisconsin and Creighton could be even better than that. Both teams like to operate on the perimeter, but this game might be decided down low. Creighton's interior defense leaves a lot to desire, but McDermott is more than capable of at least making things difficult for Frank Kaminsky and Nigel Hayes. At the same time, Doug is perfectly capable of driving to the hole, and smart passing from Austin Chatman and Grant Gibbs often leads to good looks near the basket. I would tend to favor Wisconsin because they're not going to turn the ball over, and they're not going to let Creighton get to the line, but Creighton's capable of putting on a shooting display that can overwhelm just about anyone.
The Pick for JerryWorld: Arizona
If Arizona is able to continue playing well enough without Brandon Ashley, they should roll. Much like Michigan State though, I worry about foul issues. Arizona only has six solid rotation players, so a foul-heavy game could take a special toll on them. That said, they've been pretty good at avoiding fouls this season (57th in the nation), so it's only a minor worry. In theory, they could get outscored by one of the teams on the bottom of the bracket, but I think they'll be able to find ways to score enough to win against whichever subpar defense they face.
FINAL FOUR
Last year, picking a champion was easy. Florida was extremely underrated (they were #1 in KenPom) and had an easy draw (they were a 3-seed and Georgetown was the corresponding 2-seed). While that didn't work out for me, I was still happy with my decision, as I was at least trying to zig while everyone else zagged. This year, the main title contenders seem a bit more obvious. Early returns show my Final Four teams all among the popular picks to win it all. Much like last year, I like Louisville a lot. However, they would have to come out of a tougher bracket, while Florida gets the easier half to navigate. Thus, I will go with Florida, for now. I might be changing this a few times over the next couple of days.
The fantasy portion of my Final Four picks is also difficult. For the second straight year, all of my favorite teams (Creighton, SLU, Wisconsin, and Wichita State) got put on the same side of the bracket. Thus, I can't dream of some awesome championship game matchup as I go to sleep tonight. That said, I've taken quite the shine to NC Central over the past couple of weeks, so I'll be rooting for Creighton over NC Central in the title game. Even though that matchup is the longest of longshots, there's a decent chance that we could see these Eagles at least make a little noise much like last year's Eagles.
No comments:
Post a Comment