Statsationals 5 Ways To Narrow The Field of 64

The NFL may be my bread and butter but there is absolutely nothing in sports that compares to the excitement of the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament.  Everyone from the sharpest of sharps to your grandmother and her hair dresser are putting in a bracket pool entry somewhere.  I do hours upon hours of research this time of year in the hopes of finding some angles worth playing.  Let me share with you some of my thoughts on this upcoming tournament and what you should be looking for in your brackets.

Much of the data I will be referencing in this article I received via Peter Tiernan of Bracket Science.  His site is an invaluable tool for getting information on the tournament teams.

In picking potential final 4 teams and champions I find it much easier to eliminate teams from consideration to narrow down the selections.  Here are some of the criteria I will use

1. Pre Season AP Rankings can predict tournament success

The following comes from a Nate Silver article in the NY Times before the 2011 tournament.

Since the tournament field expanded to 64 teams in 1985, there have been 41 cases in which a school that was unranked to start the season entered the tournament ranked in the A.P. top 10 (excluding a couple of cases where the team was ineligible for tournament play). These schools, as you might expect, were seeded highly: eight were No. 1 seeds and another 17 were seeded No. 2.

Absolutely none of these teams have made the Final Four, however: they are 0-for-41. Instead, they have been the victims of some notorious upsets, like the No. 2-seeded South Carolina Gamecocks losing — by 13 points! — to the No. 15 seed Coppin State in the opening round of the 1997 tournament, and the No. 3 seed Wisconsin Badgers being one of Davidson’s victims in 2008. Three of the No. 1 seeds that fit this description — Michigan in 1985, St. John’s in 1986, and Cincinnati in 2002 — lost in the Round of 32. 

This has held up since then.

2011 Notre Dame (2) lost in 2nd round to Florida

2012 Florida State (3) lost in 2nd round to Cincinnati 

2013 Georgetown (2) lost in 1st round to Florida GC

2013 Miami (2) lost in 3rd round to Marquette

2014 Villanova (1) TBD

2014 Iowa St (3) TBD

2.  3 point shooting

In this day and age of college basketball the three point shot has become extremely important.

Since 2007 no team who has shoots under 30% from behind the arc has won a game in the tournament.

This year no teams qualify

Since 2007 only 3 teams shooting under 33% from 3 have made the elite 8.  If you are not going to shoot the 3 well then you need to defend it well.  In 2012 both Louisville and Ohio State made it to the final 4 with sub 33% 3 point shooting but both defended the 3 as good or better than they shot it.  Louisville gave up 30.3% from 3 and Ohio State 32.5%.

Teams to be leary of 

NC State 30.3%

St. Louis 31.9%

Colorado 32%

Texas 32.4%

Kentucky 32.5%

Tulsa 32.5%

Ohio St 32.6%

Milwaukee 32.7%

St Louis, and Ohio St defend the 3 as well as any team in the country so keep that in mind.  St Louis defends at 28.4% and OSU 29.4%.  Kentucky is not far behind at 31.7% 

The worst net 3 point shooting teams (Off % - Def %) are

Colorado 

Tulsa

Texas

NC ST

Kansas

Syracuse

New Mexico

Tennessee

3. Scoring Margin

Using the PASE (Performance above seed expectations) stat from Bracket Science the number one determinant of being able to outperform your seed expectation is scoring margin. 

111 teams have been a 1-4 seed and come in to the tournament with a 15+ scoring margin.  46 have made the final 4 (41%) and 16 have won it all (14.4%). 

This year that is Wichita St and Louisville.  The problem here is when you look at teams that had a strength of schedule 70 or worse from this group you get 6 teams, none of which made it to an elite 8.  Louisville had an 80 SOS and Wichita St 98.

*Arizona has a 14.9 scoring margin and the number 4 strength of schedule.

Of the 132 teams to get a 1-4 seed and have a scoring margin under 10 just 2 have won a title and 11 gone to the final 4.  

This year

Wisconsin

Michigan

Kansas

Syracuse

Iowa St

4. Coaches Success

Coaches are very important to the success of a team come tournament time.  The great coaches tend to outperform their expectations.

Again from Pete at Bracket Science

Using tourney appearances and Elite Eight trips, I’ve come up with the following taxonomy of coaching types in the tourney:

• Rookies – making their first trip to the tourney
• Novices – 2-5 tourney trips with no Elite Eight runs
• Prodigies – 2-5 tourney trips with at least one Elite Eight run
• Snake-bit – more than five trips with no Elite Eight runs
• Flashes – more than five trips with one Elite Eight run
• Destined – 6-10 trips with more than one Elite Eight run
• Veterans – more than 10 trips with 2-4 Elite Eight runs
• Legends – more than 10 trips with more than four Elite Eight runs

I’m focusing this analysis on one through six seeds, the seeds most likely to advance in the dance. A standard PASE analysis on the eight classes of coaches turned up these results:

 As the chart shows the "snakebit" coaches are ones you will want to stay away from picking to make a deep run.

This years Snake Bit coaches are

Gonzaga

Oregon

UCLA

Arizona St

Creighton

St. Louis

Cincinnati 

Iowa

5. Points Per Game

Playing defense is great but you will need to keep pace with great offenses come tournament time.

68 Teams have scored 73 ppg or less in the tournament and had a 1-4 seed.  9 made the final 4 with no champions.  

This year

Virginia  65.9 ppg

Syracuse 68.2 ppg

San Diego St 70.6 ppg

Florida 70.7 ppg

Arizona squeaks in at 73.1 ppg

Summary

27 Champions since 1985 have been a 1-4 seed with just 2 seeded higher.  So for a potential champion we should eliminate all teams seeded above 4.

From the above we can eliminate the following top 4 seeds from championship contention

Team (corresponding number from above that eliminated them from consideration)

1 Seeds

Virginia (5)

Florida (5)

Wichita St (3)

2 Seeds

Wisconsin (3)

Michigan (3)

Kansas (3)

Villanova (1)

3 Seeds

Syracuse (2,3,5)

Iowa St (1)

Creighton (4)

4 Seeds

UCLA (4)

San Diego St ( 5)

Louisville (3)

So of the 1-4 seeds that leaves us with 

1. Arizona

3. Duke

4. Michigan State

We have eliminated some of the top picks like Louisville and Florida but we still have some public favorites like Arizona and Michigan St left.  Duke may be a team to take in your office pool that will not be heavily picked.  Michigan St and Louisville seem to be very en vogue picks right now.  So if you are looking to zig while they zag you have some options.

In my brackets I would look for a team higher than a 4 to make one of the final four spots.  If you like Arizona, Duke and Michigan St then you have to look to the South region for that long shot to come in.  We eliminated the top 4 seeds so lets try and find a long shot.

We eliminated Ohio St, New Mexico and Colorado all based on 3 point shooting.

Of the top 8 seeds that leaves VCU at the 5 seed.  This is a team with a coach who knows how to win in the tournament.  Shaka Smart has exceeded his seed expectation by 1.2 games per tournament thanks in large part to his final four run in 2011 as an 11 seed.  VCU plays a smothering, trapping style of defense and it gives teams with weak point guards fits.  The teams that have beaten VCU in the tournament the last 3 years all had very good point guards.  If you are looking for a long shot in the South this is the team I like.

It is often said but this year it is true, the tournament is up for grabs.  Would you be that surprised if Kentucky made a run with all that talent?  Or  if there were no 1 seeds in the final 4?  I don't think anything should surprise you come this years dance.  That makes for very exciting games and office pools.

BOL

Stats

Follow Stats on Facebook

Statsational Super Bowl Selection

The championship games played out just as we thought.  With the weather perfect in Denver Peyton Manning was able to have his way with the New England Patriots.  The game was not as close as the score indicated.  In the second game it was a tough battle but, as we figured, Kaepernick lost the game turning it over 3 times late.

Before the Championship games the potential Seattle/Denver matchup had Seattle -1.  When the games ended some places opened the game at Seattle -1 and others a pk.  Within hours the money flooded in on Denver and the line went up to 2.5 and in some spots 3 in favor of Denver.  Generally that early money is smart money since the public won't be betting this game until Sunday.  The smart money wants to get the best line they can. They knew the public would be on Denver so getting Denver at a pk had great value.  If they like Denver they could keep their bets.  If they wanted to bet Seattle they could get a better line and if they wanted to just hedge they could play for a middle with Seattle.  This is how the professionals will handle a game like this as opposed to an average bettor.

So why does the public love Denver?  Going into the championship games both San Francisco and New England were getting the public backing.  The reason Denver was faded was because of Mannings lack of success in the post season and against Brady.  When Denver came out and looked unstoppable the public changed quickly.  Everyone knows how good Manning is and when you go against him and he picks you apart you want desperately to get back on his side.  Its psychological.  You just do not think he can be stopped when he is on a roll.  I was out watching the games and I heard the same things over and over.  "Manning is on a mission."  "Manning won't let this team lose".  Compare that to what I heard hours earlier "Manning is awful in the playoffs." "Manning can't beat Brady"  etc.  The public is very fickle.

Seattle, on the other hand, were not the public choice against San Francisco and they easily could have lost the game.  In the public's mind they had the game right, San Francisco was the better team.  So they take that feeling and couple it with the feeling of not being able to stop Manning and you have a very one sided bet game from the public.  That is not to say the public can not be correct.  The public was all over Auburn over Florida St while the smart money loved FSU and the public had that game pegged perfectly.

Both teams are very evenly matched up.  Both went 13-3 in the regular season.  Both were their conferences 1 seed.  Seattle was the best defense in the league while Denver was the best offense.  This is the 5th time we have a matchup of the best offense against the best defense.  The defense is 3-1 so far.  '78 Steelers, '84 49ers, 90 'Giants were all top defensive teams that defeated the top offense that year.  Only the 1989 49ers were able to win as the top offense in the league against the number 1 defense.  Many people have talked about this but few have mentioned the other side of the ball for the teams involved in these Super Bowls.  In my pre playoff analysis I showed how being efficient in the passing game was a key to Super Bowl success.  In 1978 Pittsburgh was 1 in offensive yards per pass attempt.  In 1984 San Francisco was 3 and in 1990 the NY Giants were 9.  The 1989 49ers team with the top offense ranked 3 in defensive yards per passing attempt.  So these teams were not just dominant on one side of the ball.  They were dominant on both.  Seattle this season is 2 in OYPPA and 1 in DYPPA.  Denver was 3 in OYPPA but just 15 in DYPPA.  Seattle is the more dominant team on both sides of the ball.

From a YPPA standpoint this game resembles the Super Bowl 1991.  Washington was 1 in OYPPA and 2 on DYPPA.  Buffalo was 3 in OYPPA and 13 in DYPPA.  In that game the offenses dominated.  Buffalo gave up 37 points in the game in large part to Kelly throwing 4 picks.  That Washington team threw the ball deep really well as does this Seattle team.  Mark Rypien was 249-421 for 3564 Yards with a 97.9 QB rating and 8.47 YPA.  Wilson, this season, 257-407 for 3357 yards with a 101.2 QB rating and 8.2 YPA.  The biggest difference is their ability to run.  Rypien had no ability and Wilson is one of the better scramblers we have seen.  

One team scored over 30 on Seattle this year.  The Colts put up 34 at home against the Seahawks in week 5.  A look at the boxscore however shows that the defense played fairly well.  7 points came off a blocked fg.  Luck threw for just 208 yards on 16 of 29.  The Colts ran it for 109 on 29 attempts.  The Seahawks were killed with penalties.  7 for 85 yards.  Typically a game like that you would see about 18-21 points for the Colts.  So it was a bit of an anomaly. 

The lowest points scored for Denver was that San Diego game.  San Diego was able to stop the run.  Denver ran for just 18 yards on 11 attempts.  Manning was 27-41 for 277.  This is the type of game Seattle will need to play.

Seattle has been very good on offense averaging almost 26 ppg.  They score 3.5 more points per game then their opponents give up.  The Denver defense has given up 24 ppg.  They give up .5 ppg more than their opponents score.  The Denver defense does get better when the offense plays more of a ball control style.  They give up a lot of points because their offense is scoring so much.  The Denver defense has played well in the playoffs.  The San Diego game was near impossible to throw the ball.  That was one of the windiest games I have ever seen.  The New England performance was more impressive although going in we did say New England was a bit overrated.

Russel Wilson is 7-1 ATS as an Underdog.  Peyton Manning is 2-7 ATS off a bye week in the post season.  For some reason the off week has not helped Manning much.  Perhaps the week off takes him out of his rhythm a bit.

If you like experience as a factor consider the more experienced Super Bowl team since 1990 has won just 8 times.

Seattle had an average O/U this season of 43.  The total for this game is 47.  Teams in the postseason playing in a game with a higher O/U than their season average and who have a + Interception Differential over their last 3 games win ATS at a 61% clip.

 

We spoke about defensive penalties going in to the NFC Championship game.  The league has made an effort to let these guys play.  The Super Bowl will be no different.  Last year there were no defensive holding penalties and 1 defensive pass interference calls.  This plays right into Seattle's hands.  They want to play this game physical with the Denver WR's.  In the colder temperatures, and if there is any wind, Seattle is going to play tight to the Denver receivers.  This will disrupt the timing that Manning needs to be successful.  This will force Manning to try and go deep and/or run the ball.  Both of which I do not expect them to do well.  Look for Manning to turn it over more than Wilson does and that becomes the deciding factor in this game.

So many of the trends in the model were offset meaning both sides fit.  We did however get slightly more on the Seattle side and as such they become a small percentage play.  Take the game now because if the weather does change for the worse the line will get closer to a pick.

Super Bowl

1. Seattle +2.................54%

BOL

Thank you all for being part of another winning NFL season.  106-89-6 going into this weekend.  Follow on twitter for the NBA/CBB/NHL selections everyday.

Pass It Efficiently and Stop The Pass Wins Championships

All of us who grew up watching football listened to commentators and analysts pound home the theory that you need to run the ball and stop the run to win championships.  I just assumed that was true since the "experts" all said it was.  But watching the NFL the last few seasons it didn't seem to be the case.

In my never ending quest to find an angle to help me handicap I looked at some statistics for Super Bowl winning teams.  Yards per Rush Attempt and Yards Per Pass Attempt.  I looked at these both offensively and defensively.  Below are the Super Bowl winners since the merger and their ranking in each category.

Year	Team	OYPR Rank	OYPP Rank	DYPR Rank	DYPP Rank	Passing Combined	Rushing Combined
1970	Baltimore	22	5	12	4	9	34
1971	Dallas	7	2	1	5	7	8
1972	Miami	2	1	12	4	5	14
1973	Miami	2	15	7	2	17	9
1974	Pittsburgh	2	22	3	2	24	5
1975	Pittsburgh	2	6	22	2	8	24
1976	Oakland	14	2	15	23	25	29
1977	Dallas	5	3	8	1	4	13
1978	Pittsburgh	21	1	2	5	6	23
1979	Pittsburgh	1	1	1	2	3	2
1980	Oakland	9	10	1	15	25	10
1981	San Francisco	26	9	21	4	13	47
1982	Washington	17	3	13	9	12	30
1983	Los Angeles	14	3	5	7	10	19
1984	San Francisco	2	3	21	8	11	23
1985	Chicago	5	6	7	2	8	12
1986	NY Giants	11	12	11	6	18	22
1987	Washington	5	1	11	16	17	16
1988	San Francisco	2	9	5	3	12	7
1989	San Francisco	11	1	9	3	4	20
1990	NY Giants	19	9	8	1	10	27
1991	Washington	17	1	15	2	3	32
1992	Dallas	10	8	3	3	11	13
1993	Dallas	3	4	18	1	5	21
1994	San Francisco	7	1	16	6	7	23
1995	Dallas	5	3	19	16	19	24
1996	Green Bay	12	7	4	1	8	16
1997	Denver	2	6	30	4	10	32
1998	Denver	2	5	8	11	16	10
1999	St Louis	2	1	6	7	8	8
2000	Baltimore	8	21	1	4	25	9
2001	New England	24	14	21	17	31	45
2002	Tampa Bay	27	19	4	1	20	31
2003	New England	30	13	6	1	14	36
2004	New England	17	9	11	15	24	28
2005	Pittsburgh	12	1	1	5	6	13
2006	Indianapolis	17	3	32	8	11	49
2007	NY Giants	4	28	8	19	47	12
2008	Pittsburgh	29	14	1	1	15	30
2009	New Orleans	6	3	26	15	18	32
2010	Green Bay	27	3	31	7	10	58
2011	NY Giants	32	3	23	20	23	55
2012	Baltimore	12	14	7	17	31	19

Just 10 of the 43 Super Bowl winners since the merger had a combined ranking in Offensive and Defensive YPR greater than the combined ranking for YPP.  Included in that number are the 1979 Steelers who were pretty much dominant in every category, the 1988 49ers who were top 10 in each, and the 1998 Broncos who were very good in all categories just missing a top 10 sweep.

• The average combined YPP ranking for Super Bowl winners is 14 while the average YPR rank is 23. 
• Only two teams have combined for more than a 25 in YPP rankings and won the Super Bowl (2007 NY Giants 47, 2012 Baltimore Ravens 31)

The 2007 Giants were probably the most difficult team to predict going into a playoff.  They performed nothing like they did in the regular season.  During the playoffs Eli became a different QB and the Giants pass rush was unstoppable.  They were an enigma and definitely not the norm.

We do see the numbers for all rankings a bit higher in the last 19 years since the salary cap was instituted.  Teams do not have the ability to be as dominant across the board like they were in previous seasons.  We may never see a 1979 Pittsburgh line again.

What I found most interesting was teams that I had assumed won with good running games and the ability to stop the run like the '85 Bears '86 Giants and '90 Giants were not necessarily true.  Yes the Bears were pretty dominant across the board but it was equal.  The Giants in 1990 were actually not very efficient in the running game but they stopped the pass better than anyone that season.

Here is a look at this years playoff teams

Year	Team	OYPR Rank	OYPP Rank	DYPR Rank	DYPP Rank	Combined Pass Rank	Combined Rush Rank
2013	Seattle	12	2	9	1	3	21
2013	Cincinnati	27	10	16	2	12	43
2013	New Orleans	26	6	28	11	17	54
2013	San Francisco	9	8	11	6	14	20
2013	Denver	18	3	10	15	18	28
2013	Philadelphia	1	1	6	19	20	7
2013	Carolina	16	14	17	9	23	33
2013	New England	11	18	24	13	31	35
2013	Green Bay	4	5	29	27	32	33
2013	San Diego	21	4	29	29	33	50
2013	Kansas City	5	27	26	18	45	31
2013	Indianapolis	13	19	25	22	41	38

Seattle is much the best in the passing categories combined.  Ranked 2 on offensively and 1 on defense.  Those are menacing numbers for teams coming in to Seattle.

Cincinnati ranks best in the passing categories in the AFC.

Philadelphia ranks first in both offensive categories.  Will their 19 rank in defensive YPP slow them down?

Kansas City and Indianapolis play each other this weekend but neither team looks to have a line that is favorable to a team winning it all.

8 Teams finished in the top 10 in Off YPP that are in the playoffs.  Just 4 finished in the top 10 of Off YPR.

Based on these numbers who do you like to win it all?

2014 NFL Playoff Package $99.95
Get Every Playoff Selection from the Statsational Model