Bracketology Lesson Three: I Can Narrow Down Your List of Possible Champions
Source of information for this is a CBS article written by Pete Tiernan.
In order to winnow down your list of possible champions, you can use the criteria Pete Tiernan set forth in his article. I'll run down the list here for you with this season's stats:
Criteria One: A top 4 seed, score over 76 ppg and beat opponents by 10 points on average.
The "top 4 seed" requirement eliminates 75% of the field automatically (only a 6 or an 8 seed have ever been the exception). If you are playing the percentages, this helps out tremendously. The scoring & scoring margin requirements knock out 1-seed Louisville, 2-seeds Michigan State and Memphis, 3-seeds Villanova and Syracuse, and 4-seeds Xavier and Washington.
Historically, 22 of the 24 champions have had these attributes. This narrows our list of possible champions to Wake Forest, Kansas, UConn, Missouri, Pittsburgh, Duke, North Carolina, Gonzaga and Oklahoma.
Criteria Two: Been to the previous tournament
This eliminates Wake Forest and Missouri. 21 of the 24 champions have had this attribute in addition to meeting the first criteria.
That means by using those 4 measuring sticks, you could whittle this year's possible champions down to a list of 7 teams: Kansas, Connecticut, Oklahoma, Gonzaga, North Carolina, Duke and Pittsburgh. Notice that the Sooners are on the list, despite being picked everywhere as a big upset pick. Additionally, based on the history of the tournament, you could be about 85% confident that the champion would be from those 7 teams.
Of course, this sets up many problems in your bracket when choosing. 1/7 is still only about 14% odds. If you want to whittle it down further, you could get it to 5 teams with:
Criteria Three: Increase scoring to 77 ppg, increase scoring margin to 11 ppg, be from a "big six" conference, and have a coach that's been to the tournament for at least 5 trips.
70% of the champions and 16 of the last 18 have met those criteria. This eliminates Oklahoma and Gonzaga. So it is still fairly likely that the champion will be from Kansas, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Duke or North Carolina. You would have about a 20% chance of correctly picking the champion.
In any event, those little nuggets should help you decide which teams to advance far in your bracket. Be warned though that usually 2 or 3 of the original list of teams will go down earlier than you expect, sometimes even from the pool of teams after it's been whittled down for awhile. It's not an absolute way to determine the champion, but it's a good way to make an educated guess.
Also, a warning, the pool of teams you find is also not guaranteed to make the Final Four, although usually 2 or 3 do. These criteria help you find the strongest teams in America, so it's more likely that those teams will find their way to the Final Four.
Do what you want on your bracket, but consider picking Pitt, Duke, UNC, UConn or Kansas as a champion. And don't eliminate those teams, or Oklahoma, Gonzaga, Mizzou or Wake Forest too early.
0 recs |
4 comments
|
Comments
Here's a tip...and i joined just to comment
never, ever, ever invest in the stock market….
past performances do not garutee future performance my friend.
This sort of statistical analysis is a bunch of bull.
First of all it’s only 75 percent “accurate”. All this does is look at random things that winners have in common. You could do a completely different screen, get the same “accuracy” and have different teams. What you choose to screen for, is inherently biased.
by tiimbitz4786 on Mar 17, 2009 8:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
while this is true
Generally tournament trends hold. The first criteria has identified 22 of 24 champions over the years, and the criteria makes sense. Obviously, if a team gets a 1, 2, 3, or 4 seed they are a solid team that is immediately a contender.
Then, teams that have scored over 76ppg and have over a 10 point scoring margin tend to score in bunches, have explosive offenses that can’t be shut down easily by pesky teams that like to press in the tournament, and have enough firepower to take down other top teams.
These aren’t random rules that I just pulled out of thin air. In fact, if you picked a team that wasn’t a 1,2, 3, or 4 seed, I would say that you’re probably crazy and you shouldn’t be investing in the stock market, just like if you bet on a team that struggles offensively and can be slown down by pressing defenses.
Again, these aren’t random attributes. Most tournament champions are 1,2, 3 or 4 seeds, are from a power conference, have some tournament experience and can score the ball. Sure there have been 1 or 2 oddballs through the years, but betting on one would be ridiculous. And it’s nice to think that everyone has a fighting chance in the tournament, but there are usually only a few heavyweight contenders.
And if you still feel it’s a “bunch of bull”, you’re certainly entitled to that opinion.
by dishingoutdimes on Mar 17, 2009 11:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sold on Missouri...
they may meet criteria #1, but they did a lot of that damage in Columbia on their home floor and the last time I checked the NCAA tournament will not be held there.
by Sooner71 on Mar 17, 2009 11:08 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree
But they are in a weak pod, so Sweet 16 or Elite 8 is certainly possible.
by dishingoutdimes on Mar 17, 2009 11:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs










