One housekeeping note: The Duke\/Miami game from the ACC Tourney was not in my possession stats database yesterday. I added it this morning, and that’s why UConn swapped spots with Duke in the Pythagorean order.<\/p>\n
It’s been a few weeks since I’ve been able to respond to every e-mail. But yesterday my e-mail volume exploded. I got a lot<\/i> of e-mail, which was a record. Most of it like this:<\/p>\n Can you tell me how I can use you system to make predictions?<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n or<\/p>\n Can you explain the numbers on your website?<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n or<\/p>\n Can you fill out my bracket for me?<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n While I love the attention, I do not have the time nor inclination to answer these questions this week. And really, you should have showed up about two months ago. If you dig a little you’ll find the answers to most of your questions here, or at other sites (see links to the right). Or pick up this week’s issue of Sports Illustrated.<\/p>\n One question I will answer in this spot is how to make a tempo prediction: Multiply the adjusted tempos of the opposing teams and divide by 68.<\/p>\n Now on to the fun stuff.<\/p>\n Our pal Sean McGrath hooked us up with log5-based tourney odds. Seeing these numbers has forced me to re-examine just what the Pythagorean winning percentage means and how a hypothetical probability between two teams should be derived. As I mentioned yesterday, the log5 formula clearly gives too much credit to the underdog and thus the favorites’ chances of winning are truly a little higher than listed below. With that in mind, here’s a region-by-region look at the bracket.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Atlanta<\/u><\/p>\n <\/b><\/p>\n Atlanta presents the most obvious regional final in the bracket, with a Duke\/Texas rematch seemingly inevitable. (Although, LSU may have a say in that.) Those of you that feel Duke should win based on its earlier 31-point drubbing of the Longhorns are using one game as evidence at the exclusion of the other 25-30 which say that this game would be at least a tossup. Interesting that the 12-seed comes in as the fifth-likeliest team to get to Indy. I think that speaks more to the weakness of seeds 5+ in the bracket.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Oakland<\/u><\/p>\n <\/b><\/p>\n Perhaps the truest test of the adjusted efficiency formula comes in Oakland, where Memphis rates the third-most likely team to get to the Final Four (and fourth-best to win it all). Kansas would be the favorite to win the region except that they got hosed in the draw. Bradley could give them problems, and a Pitt\/Kansas game would easily be the most compelling 2nd round game, with the two of them in the top 10 in Pythagorean win %. And how about the Hogs as a sleeper? Seriously, if you’re trying to win something enormous like the ESPN contest, picking Arkansas to go all the way isn’t a bad idea. Sure they’re a longshot, but not as much as most people think.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Washington<\/u><\/p>\n <\/b><\/p>\n In radio apearances over the past three or four weeks, I have been selling Washington as a Cinderella. Much to my surprise, the Huskies have been the trendy pick to fall in the first round. I’m a little puzzled by this. This isn’t November anymore. They’ve adjusted from the loss of last year’s stellar backcourt. Sure, they have a shaky freshman point guard, but nobody seems to hold that against Duke. Oh, Duke has J.J. Redick, you say. Actually, Brandon Roy’s offensive production has not been that much different (Roy 125.6 ORtg\/27.4% Poss vs. Redick 122.1\/29.4). True, UW doesn’t have a Shelden Williams-analog. But the Huskies make up for some of that with another outside shooter in Ryan Appleby. And they’re an improved defensive team from last season. <\/p>\n With all that said, a road to the Final Four that goes through Illinois, UConn, and UNC, seems way too rocky to have a realistic (even 8-9%) chance of getting there.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Minneapolis<\/u><\/p>\n <\/b><\/p>\n Some would use Florida’s tournament history to disqualify them from a run to Indy. But don’t hold last season against them – they got the shaft by drawing a (then-)highly-underrated Villanova in the second round. With questions about the first and third picks in this region – the health of Villanova’s Allan Ray and the complete loss of shooting touch by Ohio State’s Je’Kel Foster – this is a good opportunity for Billy Donovan to restore his post-season image.<\/p>\n In conclusion, this system leads one to believe that the champion will come from this group of seven: Villanova, Texas, Duke, UConn, UNC, Kansas, and UCLA. I’ll call anyone else that crashes the championship party a true Cinderella.<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
Seed Team Round 2 Round 3 Regionals Semis Finals Champion<\/b>\n 2 Texas 92.83% 75.00% 55.11% 34.80% 22.16% 14.05%\n 1 Duke 97.45% 80.24% 57.34% 32.83% 19.71% 11.77%\n 3 Iowa 87.08% 54.50% 21.90% 9.85% 4.46% 1.99%\n 4 LSU 77.23% 44.15% 17.54% 7.10% 3.03% 1.28%\n 12 Texas A&M 62.84% 33.86% 12.73% 4.88% 1.97% 0.79%\n 6 West Virginia 59.41% 27.53% 8.99% 3.31% 1.22% 0.44%\n 7 California 51.90% 12.36% 5.13% 1.62% 0.51% 0.16%\n 10 NC State 48.10% 10.88% 4.32% 1.30% 0.39% 0.12%\n 5 Syracuse 37.16% 15.47% 4.22% 1.17% 0.34% 0.10%\n 11 So. Illinois 40.59% 15.37% 3.94% 1.14% 0.33% 0.09%\n 9 UNC-Wilm. 53.50% 10.92% 4.07% 1.04% 0.28% 0.07%\n 8 George Wash. 46.50% 8.56% 2.92% 0.67% 0.16% 0.04%\n 13 Iona 22.77% 6.52% 1.17% 0.21% 0.04% 0.01% \n 15 Penn 7.17% 1.76% 0.33% 0.04% 0.01% 0.00%\n 14 N'western St. 12.92% 2.60% 0.28% 0.03% 0.00% 0.00%\n 16 Southern 2.55% 0.28% 0.02% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%\n<\/pre>\n
Seed Team Round 2 Round 3 Regionals Semis Finals Champion<\/b>\n 4 Kansas 78.93% 54.37% 38.45% 25.92% 14.72% 9.01%\n 2 UCLA 95.39% 70.86% 53.75% 29.49% 14.80% 8.09%\n 5 Pitt 81.35% 34.47% 19.87% 10.81% 4.64% 2.19%\n 1 Memphis 86.40% 52.89% 22.30% 11.60% 4.70% 2.10%\n 8 Arkansas 72.27% 36.08% 13.45% 6.32% 2.26% 0.90%\n 11 San Diego St. 55.81% 34.29% 12.35% 4.17% 1.25% 0.42%\n 7 Marquette 62.35% 19.94% 11.30% 3.88% 1.18% 0.40%\n 6 Indiana 44.19% 24.66% 7.68% 2.23% 0.57% 0.16%\n 3 Gonzaga 56.26% 24.58% 7.06% 1.88% 0.44% 0.11%\n 13 Bradley 21.07% 8.23% 3.31% 1.25% 0.34% 0.10%\n 10 Alabama 37.65% 8.61% 3.81% 0.93% 0.20% 0.05%\n 14 Xavier 43.74% 16.47% 3.97% 0.88% 0.17% 0.04%\n 9 Bucknell 27.73% 8.15% 1.58% 0.42% 0.08% 0.02%\n 12 Kent State 18.65% 2.93% 0.73% 0.17% 0.03% 0.00%\n 16 Oral Roberts 13.60% 2.88% 0.32% 0.05% 0.01% 0.00%\n 15 Belmont 4.61% 0.58% 0.08% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%\n<\/pre>\n
Seed Team Round 2 Round 3 Regionals Semis Finals Champion<\/b>\n 1 UConn 94.79% 73.74% 49.55% 32.74% 20.97% 11.55%\n 3 North Carolina 89.81% 65.88% 49.40% 26.90% 16.03% 8.08%\n 4 Illinois 69.71% 41.74% 19.10% 10.52% 5.52% 2.39%\n 5 Washington 75.34% 39.34% 16.61% 8.55% 4.16% 1.65%\n 2 Tennessee 77.53% 50.47% 20.24% 7.32% 2.99% 0.97%\n 6 Michigan St. 58.46% 20.10% 11.29% 3.86% 1.50% 0.46%\n 8 Kentucky 64.43% 18.55% 7.82% 3.28% 1.28% 0.39%\n 7 Wichita St. 58.37% 26.14% 7.81% 2.05% 0.62% 0.14%\n 11 George Mason 41.54% 11.57% 5.55% 1.52% 0.48% 0.11%\n 13 Air Force 30.29% 12.23% 3.45% 1.25% 0.41% 0.11%\n 10 Seton Hall 41.63% 15.47% 3.67% 0.75% 0.18% 0.03%\n 9 UAB 35.57% 6.83% 1.99% 0.59% 0.16% 0.03%\n 12 Utah State 24.66% 6.69% 1.39% 0.38% 0.09% 0.02%\n 15 Winthrop 22.47% 7.93% 1.38% 0.20% 0.04% 0.00%\n 14 Murray St. 10.19% 2.45% 0.66% 0.09% 0.01% 0.00%\n 16 Albany 5.21% 0.88% 0.10% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00%<\/pre>\n
Seed Team Round 2 Round 3 Regionals Semis Finals Champion<\/b>\n 1 Villanova 96.12% 68.64% 50.72% 32.01% 17.73% 9.01%\n 3 Florida 83.38% 59.56% 34.03% 18.37% 8.85% 3.86%\n 2 Ohio State 90.75% 56.79% 32.66% 17.11% 7.97% 3.34%\n 7 Georgetown 63.18% 29.18% 14.57% 6.53% 2.55% 0.88%\n 4 Boston College 65.04% 38.44% 14.23% 6.12% 2.19% 0.69%\n 8 Arizona 56.56% 18.82% 10.58% 4.65% 1.70% 0.55%\n 5 Nevada 75.40% 39.42% 13.54% 5.44% 1.81% 0.53%\n 6 Oklahoma 63.10% 24.48% 9.68% 3.59% 1.14% 0.31%\n 9 Wisconsin 43.44% 12.18% 6.07% 2.29% 0.71% 0.19%\n 10 Northern Iowa 36.82% 12.64% 4.75% 1.56% 0.43% 0.10%\n 13 Pacific 34.96% 15.55% 3.82% 1.12% 0.26% 0.05%\n 11 UW-Milwaukee 36.90% 10.33% 2.89% 0.76% 0.17% 0.03%\n 14 So. Alabama 16.62% 5.62% 1.23% 0.25% 0.04% 0.01%\n 12 Montana 24.60% 6.59% 1.00% 0.19% 0.03% 0.00%\n 15 Davidson 9.25% 1.39% 0.19% 0.02% 0.00% 0.00%\n 16 Monm.\/Hamp. 3.88% 0.36% 0.04% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%<\/pre>\n