How stats and history would pick the 2023 NCAA Tournament
do not try this at home mostly because even I cannot make sense of this tournament
For whenever this gets picked up by people who don’t normally read this website, many of these picks will be wrong. Even the very best brackets miss on an average of 13-15 picks out of 63 total a year. If I missed on 15 total picks, I would be beyond thrilled. I missed 22 last year; maybe that can get below 20 this year. Who knows. I look forward to seeing how it all unfolds.
As a reminder, here’s how all of this works: What this is is simply a game-by-game projection of the field of 68 based on a document I’ve put together since 2018. I’ve accumulated KenPom odds, based on pre-tournament data, from 2002 to present. (The spreadsheet is available upon request. It’s not private data by any means, it’s just so large that I cannot imagine any normal person asking for it.)
I’ve spent many days hunting for trends in these stats, and for the most part, I feel alright with what I’ve found. That being said, this is the most parity-filled year since I’ve been doing this type of work. The net expectation is 5.32 Round of 64 upsets, above the average expectation of 5.13 over the last 20 years. I’m hovering more towards the upper end of that and looking for six first-round upsets. Beyond that, the Tournament looks nuts: an expectation of one 1 seed in the Final Four, 1 2-3 seed, 1 4-6 seed, and scariest, one 7-16 seed.
I did not follow that perfectly because, well, it proved impossible. And yet: I think at minimum there’s a few good value picks in here that might help you do okay in the bracket pool. Feel free to ignore as many as you so desire.
Lines in parentheses are via KenPom odds.
ROUND OF 64
SOUTH REGION
(1) Alabama (-19.5) over (16) Texas A&M Corpus Christi/SE Missouri State. While I’m more down on Alabama than the metrics may be there’s never a reason to pick a 16 seed to win.
(9) West Virginia (-0.5) over (8) Maryland. This is as dead a heat as it gets. The favorite in 8/9 games is 45-35 since 2002, and both are top-25 metrics teams. This is mega-bruiser ball. Either pick here is fine, but I make WVU a very slight lean here. The last time both teams in an 8/9 game were in the KenPom top 25 was 2014, when (8) Gonzaga defeated (9) Oklahoma State. The other factor here is that Maryland was absolutely terrible away from home, which isn’t always that important but is as good a decision-maker as any in a coin-flip game.
(5) San Diego State (-6) over (12) Charleston. As tempting an upset pick as this looks on paper, this doesn’t feel like a great draw for Charleston. San Diego State’s vulnerable as a 5 because they don’t shoot well at all and generally like to play in the 60s, but Charleston’s method - creating a huge shot volume advantage via the boards - could run into trouble against an SDSU team that does a very similar thing. 12 seeds with a sub-30% chance of winning their first game, as Charleston has, are just 10-22 since 2002. All others: 22-26.
(13) Furman (+5) over (4) Virginia. This is an extremely tempting pick on its face. 4 seeds at 70% or lower to win represent half of the 16 first-round losses 4s have suffered since 2002, and I’m not sure what reason I would have for picking Virginia (in the 30s on KenPom) to go very far anyway. The reverse of this is that Virginia compares strongly to 2017 Butler, a 4-seed that was also super-vulnerable but managed a Sweet 16 run with a weak draw. This is more of a value shot. 84% of ESPN users have picked Virginia in a game they’ve got a 67% shot to win.
(11) NC State (+5) over (6) Creighton. Initially I rolled with Creighton here, but of the situational draws Creighton could’ve gotten at the 11 line this is a brutal one. For all Creighton’s done well, they force fewer turnovers than anyone else in the field and don’t generate much in the way of actual shot attempts on offense. NCSU figures to have something around a 6-8 shot attempt advantage in this one, which means you’re betting on Creighton to outshoot NCSU significantly away from home while facing a turnover deficit of -6 or worse. It’s a Creighton team that’s 8-10 anywhere other than Omaha.
(3) Baylor (-9) over (14) UC Santa Barbara. This is a pick I’d love to go against. Baylor’s defense is a pathetic unit, and UCSB possesses a quality offense that can hit shots in bunches. The problem is that they can’t stop anyone either. 14 seeds with a KenPom defense ranked 150th or lower, since 2002, are a perfect 0-21. A bummer, as I was looking for reasons to fade Baylor.
(10) Utah State (-3.5) over (7) Missouri. The favorite in 7/10 games is 50-30 since 2002, but this is more about the extreme rarity that is Missouri. They’re just the 7th 7-seed ever to enter the Tournament outside of the KenPom top 50. The others went 2-4, and none progressed past the Round of 32. Missouri was actually pretty good away from home, but so was Utah State.
(2) Arizona (-13) over (15) Princeton. As a rule I don’t pick 15 seeds, but this is notable for one reason: no 2 seed below 90% to win their first game has ever made the national title game, and only 2 of 17 eventually made the Final Four. However, 15 of 17 at least won their first game. I can see this being close, though.
EAST REGION
(1) Purdue (-23) over (16) First Four. Doesn’t matter much, to be honest. Fairleigh Dickinson projects as a slightly more dangerous option because of how many turnovers they force.
(9) Florida Atlantic (+0.5) over (8) Memphis. I just go with the 8/9 favorite in most cases because I don’t know what else to do, but this is as good a spot as any to talk about how badly Florida Atlantic got screwed. Apply their resume, with the exact same wins and losses, to Florida State and they’re a 6 seed. The committee blows. The value pick here is Florida Atlantic, for the record, because 72% of ESPN users are taking Memphis in a coin-flip affair. Of greater importance in this specific game is that FAU projects to have a significant advantage on the boards and is superior at shooting. Memphis would have the better shot to beat Purdue, though.
(5) Duke (-3.5) over (12) Oral Roberts. The value pick here really should be Oral Roberts, who’s being treated like a double-digit underdog by ESPN users. Unfortunately, 5 seeds with an offensive rebounding margin as wide as Duke’s (+10%) are 9-3 all time in the first round.
(4) Tennessee (-11) over (13) Louisiana Lafayette. No drama here, in all likelihood. Teams with Tennessee’s OREB + TO margin combination are 16-1 all-time in the Round of 64, and 4 seeds at 84% or better to win are a perfect 13-0.
(6) Kentucky (-2) over (11) Providence. This is the first time since 2016 Arizona/Wichita State that a 6/11 game has seen two teams with this level of rebounding dominance face off. I honestly don’t have great rationale for this pick.
(14) Montana State (+8.5) over (3) Kansas State. But yes I DO for this one. 3 seeds with Kansas State’s woeful Offensive Shot Volume of 113 or lower (KSU’s being 110) are 9-5 against 14 seeds; all other 3 seeds are 62-4. Montana State’s Shot Volume isn’t any better, but there is this:
I think one of UCSB or Montana State pulls it off. UCSB is a marginally better value pick, but Montana State has the better chance to win on paper. A key aspect of this is that, per Torvik, Kansas State played more like a 10-11 seed away from home than a 3 seed. Montana State actually played better when not at home. A very keen eye on this one.
(7) Michigan State (-1) over (10) USC. Well, they’re favored. A worry for me here is that MSU was awful away from home, but Izzo is Izzo and I think he’s earned the trust.
(2) Marquette (-11) over (15) Vermont. If Marquette had drawn Princeton, a team that actually could exploit their extreme rebounding problem, I would be a lot more interested in a 15-over-2. Instead, they received Vermont, one of the least-threatening rebounding teams in America that likely will need a tremendous day of shooting to keep pace.
MIDWEST REGION
(1) Houston (-19) over (16) Northern Kentucky. Rough draw for Houston, who gets the best 16 seed despite being the overall #2. However, an even rougher draw for NKU. The Norse are tremendous at forcing turnovers, but are playing the most ball-secure 1/2 seed in the entire field. Meanwhile, NKU regularly gets destroyed on the boards, which is a problem when you play, y’know, Houston.
(9) Auburn (-1.5) over (8) Iowa. Both Iowa and Auburn are awful away from home, with a combined record of 11-20. There’s not much analytically to separate these two, so I’m punting and taking the favorite. If anything it’s a very mild value pick, as the average ESPN user is taking Iowa 53% of the time.
(12) Drake (+1.5) over (5) Miami. First off, this is one of the easier 12/5 picks I’ve ever had to make. 12 seeds with a >35% chance to win their first game are 14-15; all others are 18-33. The other aspect is how good Drake was against their toughest competition. Against Quadrant 1 and 2 opponents, Drake was actually better than Miami (23rd vs. 24th) and was tremendous defensively. However, the biggest factor here is Norchad Omier’s injury for Miami. If he’s unable to go, Evan Miyakawa noted Drake would actually be favored by his ratings.
(13) Kent State (+3.5) over (4) Indiana. This is a surprisingly unpopular 14-over-3 pick on ESPN, where 82% of users are selecting Indiana in a game they’ve got a 63% chance to win. Even without the value play aspect, this is a truly brutal draw for Indiana. This is an Indiana team with a below-average turnover margin taking on a Kent State side with a +6.3 turnover margin per 100 possessions. Kent State has the superior defense, and quietly, Indiana went 7-9 when not at home with one of the worst turnover margins in the entire sport. There’s only been six 4 seeds ever to enter the NCAAT ranked 30th or worse, and only one of those six made the second weekend.
(11) Mississippi State (+3) OR (11) Pittsburgh (+4) over (6) Iowa State. There’s actually a position to be staked out for ISU here, but I will not be the one to make the case. Iowa State without Caleb Grill is not a top-30 team; per Hoop-Explorer they’re more like a top-50 unit without him on the court. I think Otzelberger’s a great coach, but this is situationally a rough draw, particularly if they get a Mississippi State team that can take serious advantage of Iowa State’s fouling problems. The Pittsburgh matchup isn’t as favorable but still features a team in Pitt that hits a ton of threes and does a good job of taking care of the ball, always critical with ISU.
(3) Xavier (-11.5) over (14) Kennesaw State. I’m skeptical of Xavier the second they are required to play one (1) defensive possession. That being said, Kennesaw is the sixth-worst 14 seed the field has seen since 2002, and the only team worse than them to win a game was 2015 UAB. That UAB team was tremendous at rebounding, though, and Kennesaw’s just okay. All that being said this feels headed directly for something like Xavier 83, Kennesaw State 76.
(7) Texas A&M (-2.5) over (10) Penn State. I would love to get there with PSU, a delight of a team to watch, but I cannot. Their Offensive Shot Volume of 105.1 is one of the lowest in Tournament history; teams with that rate or lower went 5-14 in their Round of 64 games, though the expected record was 4-15 anyway. The massive shot volume advantage A&M is likely to run up on the boards is very notable. Penn State reminds me of a better Marquette from last year: really fun story, capable of amazing offensive performances, goes into every game staring down a massive deficit on the boards.
(2) Texas (-12.5) over (15) Colgate. Texas’s style - lots of ball pressure, shaky shooting, quality two-point work on both ends, and rebounding issues - lends itself more to problems down the road than it projects to here. A thing to be fearful of, I guess, is that no 2 seed to be at 95% or above to win their Round of 32 game has ever lost (18-0) and Texas is down at 87%. Even so, 2 seeds in the 80-90% range are 19-1. (There’s also the aspect of Colgate being far worse against teams in Quadrants 1-3; if you made lines based on that it would be Texas -16.)
WEST REGION
(1) Kansas (-18.5) over (16) Howard. Won’t spend much time here, but it will be really cool to see Howard in the NCAA Tournament. Unfortunately, it will be a short stay. Feels like one Kansas wins by 25 as a “we’re pissed off about our bracket” thing.
(8) Arkansas (-1.5) over (9) Illinois. I hate watching both of these teams, though Arkansas has become less horrid with Nick Smith. Undoubtedly, I am sure we’ll have to deal with one of them. Neither of these teams can shoot a basketball, and both are defense-first units. This feels a lot like something where Arkansas wins 74-70 but it’s nowhere near as exciting as that score sounds. If nothing else, we get an exciting trend-breaker: 8 and 9 seeds with three or fewer true road wins, entering the Tournament, are 7-14 in the Round of 64 all-time. Both teams meet this! I hate it!
(5) Saint Mary’s (-6.5) over (12) VCU. VCU is actually the most popular 12-over-5 pick at ESPN right now, and I can’t blame anyone for going for it, but I’m not sure the average bracket-filler knows that Saint Mary’s is going to have a gigantic advantage on the boards and will force a VCU team without a litany of quality shot-makers to hit a ton of mid-range twos. Same stat as earlier: 12 seeds with a sub-30% chance of winning their first game, as VCU has, are just 10-22 since 2002. All others: 22-26. I wouldn’t be shocked if one of VCU or Charleston pull it off, but I like Charleston’s odds more than VCU’s.
(4) UConn (-9.5) over (13) Iona. Iona really needed to draw Literally Anyone Else. Iona ranks 273rd in DREB%; UConn ranks 1st in OREB%. Anything other than a demolition by UConn on the boards would be a shocker. 13 seeds at 20% or lower to win: 3-28 all time.
(6) TCU (-2, -4) over (11) Arizona State or (11) Nevada. Away from home, TCU has been pretty pedestrian, going 8-8. Arizona State’s actually the tougher draw in that case, because they went 12-7 away from home this year and had some tremendous wins. TCU’s biggest problem is that they cannot shoot a basketball, which is one thing, but they also bleed offensive rebounds on defense and offer unremarkable rim protection. Arizona State is likely more equipped to beat this specific version of TCU, who lost center Eddie Lampkin to…something, but Nevada could be a play here, too. Less a pick for TCU than it is against their First Four options.
(3) Gonzaga (-12.5) over (14) Grand Canyon. 3 seeds at 87% or better to win in the Round of 32 are 22-1 in the KenPom era. Grand Canyon should be able to score on Gonzaga, but nothing about Grand Canyon’s defense suggests that they can keep Gonzaga from scoring at will on them.
(10) Boise State (-1.5) over (7) Northwestern. Boise is the better team, which makes them my lean in general, but it’s also a Four Factors game. The only one that Northwestern projects as better in, even adjusted for competition, is TO%. While they should have a sizable lead there, how often do you win games where you’re likely to get outshot, lose the rebounding battle, and commit more fouls? Boise was also significantly better against Top 100 competition.
(2) UCLA (-16.5) over (15) UNC Asheville. Even the value-reduced version of UCLA should be alright. At 93% to win, UCLA is in a pretty safe club. Really, though, you could just point to the likelihood of UCLA possessing a massive turnover/rebounding advantage even without Jaylen Clark.
ROUND OF 32
SOUTH REGION
(1) Alabama (-5.5) over (9) West Virginia. It’s worth noting that no 1 seed at 67% or lower to make the Sweet 16 - 15 teams - has ever won the national title. They’re just 3-for-15 in making the Final Four. That being said, they still managed an 11-4 record in the Round of 32. That also being said, West Virginia is the team most likely to highlight Alabama’s guards and their struggles with turnovers, along with the Tide’s fouling and defensive rebounding issues. This is more “I don’t want to pick a 9 seed” than it is “Alabama is obviously the superior option.”
(5) San Diego State (-8) over (13) Furman. Doesn’t really fill me with warm fuzzies? Then again, who does in this year’s field. 5 seeds at 45% or better to make the Sweet Sixteen are 7-for-12 since 2002 in doing so, with all others sitting at 22-for-68. This is probably less a pick for SDSU than it is against the Virginia/Furman winner.
(3) Baylor (-4.5) over (11) N.C. State. This is not a pick I particularly enjoy making but it’s a punt. I don’t like any of the potential options here for deep runs at all. State has been awful as of late, Baylor's defense is an embarrassment to defenses everywhere, and Creighton likely would have to shoot the lights out (or have the defense shoot 3-for-20 from deep) twice in a row, which isn’t a good formula when you’re playing a Baylor team that regularly shoots the lights out. My preference here is NCSU and I’ll be rooting for them.
(10) Utah State (+3) over (2) Arizona. This is the shortest line any 2-seed would face in a Round of 32 game this year, and frankly, Arizona should blame Utah State. The Aggies went 11-6 against Quadrants 1 and 2 but 1-2 against Quadrant 4, which is befitting of a team that doesn’t force turnovers and is highly open to shooting variance. That being said, Utah State actually played a tougher non-conference schedule than Arizona (!). Against Quadrant 1-3 opponents, Utah State outshot Arizona, had a dead-equal turnover margin, and was better on the boards. This has monster value potential, as 80% of ESPN users are picking Arizona to the Sweet 16 when KenPom has them at 56% to advance.
EAST REGION
(1) Purdue (-4.5) over (9) Florida Atlantic. The shame of this game, if it were to happen, is that Memphis matches up far better with Purdue than FAU does. FAU simply doesn’t force turnovers like Memphis does, and in general they aren’t as good defensively. The problem is that Memphis must get past FAU first, and FAU actually rates as a bad matchup for Memphis. They take a ton of threes; Memphis gives up a ton of attempts. They’re great on the boards; Memphis is terrible at defensive rebounding. They don’t foul; Memphis fouls a lot. FAU’s Vlad Goldin would be of use in this matchup, but I think I can safely wager Vlad has seen no one like Edey. I’m relatively low on Purdue, too, but the uncertainty of the Memphis/FAU game makes me stick with them.
(4) Tennessee (-4) over (5) Duke. I am not required to explain this! But I will. Duke is white-hot coming into this Tournament, and naturally, everyone thinks they’re going to do really well. Here’s the thing: as explored earlier this year, teams that play their best basketball in February often underachieve in March. In fact, teams seeded 4-7 have been top 10 February teams 33 times in the last 15 seasons. Exactly zero of them made the Final Four, and only three even touched the Elite Eight. 5 and 6 seeds in particular were easy fades: an average of 0.71 wins each against 1.0 expected, with just six of the 17 teams overachieving their seed line. Oh and Tennessee would have a huge turnovers + rebounds advantage in this one sorry.
(6) Kentucky (-8) over (14) Montana State. If you ever want to feel like a complete idiot, type what I just typed into a text box. (Alternately, go read this for some amount of reasoning for picking Kentucky to outperform their seed.)
(7) Michigan State (+3.5) over (2) Marquette. Please do not denote this as a pick for Michigan State. I am picking against Marquette. Marquette’s run was one of the loveliest things to happen in college hoops this year. I get a huge kick out of watching them. I also find them a super-obvious fade for March purposes. Marquette sits at just 53% to make the second weekend, per KenPom, the 10th-lowest rate out of 84 2-seeds from 2002 to now. No 2 seed below 56% has made a Final Four out of 13 candidates, and only 4 of 13 made the Sweet Sixteen. Either of MSU or USC could win this game, but MSU makes more sense. They’re the better team, for one, but they’re more well-equipped to exploit Marquette’s giant rebounding deficit and the fact Marquette’s struggled to get to the line away from home.
MIDWEST REGION
(1) Houston (-8.5) over (9) Auburn. This is a brutal situational draw for Houston, who’ll play a de-facto road game against Auburn. I would be more intrigued by that if Houston were not A) 15-1 at home (by far the best record in the Midwest Region); B) shockingly unsusceptible to turnover or rebounding issues in other arenas; C) not the obvious better team with the better coach. Plus, at 75% to make the Sweet Sixteen, Houston sits in rarefied air. 1 seeds at 75% or better to advance are 35-for-39 in doing so since 2002.
(12) Drake (-0.5) over (13) Kent State. Here’s hoping this game actually happens. Kent is a really tempting pick for a lot of reasons, but I believe that Drake beats Miami a little more than I do Kent beats Indiana. Either way, I’d be thrilled with either of these very fun sides in the Sweet Sixteen.
(11) Mississippi State or Pittsburgh (+4 or +5) over (3) Xavier. It’s either going to be Baylor or Xavier that bows out early, but I felt better running it here because Xavier was slightly worse against top-100 teams. Plus, without Zach Freemantle, Xavier’s offensive eFG% drops by 5% and they foul a lot more. Neither is optimal against an elite MSU defense or a Pitt team that can really score.
(2) Texas (-4) over (7) Texas A&M. While it would be really fun to ride with A&M for a while, A&M’s offense has really struggled to score against quality defenses. I’m under no delusion that Texas is elite on that end, but A&M’s shot selection against units like Texas is brutal. Their peak performance against a top-40 defense this year is 1.06 PPP, which will not get it done if Texas does their usual quality shooting + ball pressure combo. Plus, top-6 KenPom 2 seeds (like Texas) are 22-for-34 in getting to the second weekend.
WEST REGION
(8) Arkansas (+3) over (1) Kansas. Picking a 1 seed to lose in the Round of 32 is a fool’s errand beyond belief, but at the same time, I would have either winner losing in the Sweet Sixteen anyway, so, meh. Might as well swing for the fence. Arkansas has indeed been awful in true road games, but this is a neutral-site affair. Kansas is a good team, but their rim protection isn’t elite and they allow a ton of attempts at the rim game-over-game. Meanwhile, Arkansas refuses to attempt one (1) jumper, but as egregious a watch as they can be, they drew the worst offense a 1 seed has possessed since 2014 Virginia. Kansas is 29th overall. No 1 seed with an offense outside of the top 25 has made the Final Four. I would rank the 8/9 over 1 seed outcomes from most to least likely as follows:
Arkansas > Kansas
Memphis > Purdue
West Virginia > Alabama
Illinois > Kansas
FAU > Purdue
Auburn > Houston
Maryland > Alabama
Iowa > Houston
(4) UConn (-2) over (5) Saint Mary’s. SMC is a tempting pick, but they’ve run into a team that’s like a much more athletic version of themselves. UConn is dominant on the boards on both ends, has a solid turnover rate, and even gets to the line more often than SMC. The Gaels are very well-coached, but 4 seeds at >50% to make the Sweet Sixteen (as UConn and Tennessee both are) sit at 16-for-24 in getting there. All other 4 seeds: 22-for-56.
(3) Gonzaga (-4.5) over (6) TCU. If this is a First Four team it actually might be tougher. The things Gonzaga struggles with (two-point defense, forcing turnovers) are not things TCU would take advantage of, and I struggle to see a potential matchup on the board that would really make a Gonzaga fan sweat. There’s the off-chance of Arizona State creating havoc but they seem just as likely to lose by 18 as they would to keep it close.
(2) UCLA (-6) over (10) Boise State. No Jaylen Clark limits UCLA’s ceiling, and to be honest I hate the draw they got with Gonzaga here and UConn/Kansas looming up top. But either way, 2 seeds at >67% to make the Sweet Sixteen are 18-for-25 in doing so, while all others are a still-good 31-for-55. Boise is more likely to create a problem for UCLA than Northwestern, however, so tread lightly.
SWEET SIXTEEN
(5) San Diego State (+4.5) over (1) Alabama. Total value pick, feel free to fade. Alabama is getting the lion’s share of nominations to at least make an Elite Eight, which is reasonably fair for a team with a 52% shot of doing so. (Stephen A. Smith voice) HOWEVA, an astounding 76% of ESPN’s users are selecting them to do so. You stand to earn a full point of value on average if San Diego State, or literally anyone not named Alabama, wins this game. Statistically, the most likely number of 1 seeds in the Elite Eight this year is two. I don’t think Kansas is getting there. I do think Houston is. That leaves Alabama or Purdue, and you’re dadgum right I’m copping out of picking Tennessee again, because I’ve simply been hurt too much.
(10) Utah State (+0.5) over (3) Baylor. OHHHHHHH BOY HERE WE GO so this is another value pick deal, but again, this is less about Utah State than it is about Baylor and Arizona. Really, this is less about Utah State than it’s about this year’s atrocious 3 seeds. The threesome of Baylor, Xavier, and Kansas State are all at 21% or worse to make the Elite Eight. Of the group that’s gone before them, just 6 of 24 have made the Elite Eight, and only two went to the Final Four. A problem is that ESPN users apparently understand this quite well, as only 26% have selected Baylor to the Elite Eight. At the same time, 52% have Arizona there, despite just a 34% shot in real life of making it. At 14%, currently picked by only 2% of ESPN users, Utah State represents absurdly good value for a 10 seed.
(1) Purdue (PK) over (4) Tennessee. No. I’m not gonna do it. Next question.
(6) Kentucky over (7) Michigan State. I guess? I got here and realized this was a very stupid thing to be picking. So let’s go with
(6) Kentucky over (2) Marq- actually this is just as bad
(6) Kentucky (-1) over (7) Michigan State. Using Evan Miyakawa’s numbers, Kentucky is remarkably undervalued for once. They sit at a 25% to make the Elite Eight; ESPN users have it at 14%. Meanwhile, Marquette looks dramatically overvalued by the public and Michigan State doesn’t have the same level of value. Ugh.
(1) Houston (-11.5) over (12) Drake. I mean, if they make the second weekend, this is a dream draw. No reason to take a 12 seed here.
(2) Texas (-7) over (11) Mississippi State. I would take Texas over anyone from the 3/6/11/14 brigade, and while Texas is a very flawed team with problems, I simply feel better about them making the Elite Eight than I do any of Xavier, Iowa State, or the First Four entrant. They offer no real value here, but there’s no better obvious pick I can find.
(4) UConn (-4.5) over (8) Arkansas. I would take UConn over anyone on the top half of the bracket; they’re the best team. More so, this is about the insane value UConn presents at this moment in time. Only 16% of brackets have UConn in the Elite Eight right now versus 31% odds on KenPom.
(2) UCLA (-0.5) over (3) Gonzaga. This is pretty sickening stuff, because I really believed this UCLA team could and would win the national title. Without Jaylen Clark, I don’t they can do that. However: they can absolutely still make the Final Four. Even adjusting for Clark’s absence using the injury reduction from Evan Miyakawa (about 2.5 points), UCLA still projects as a top-5 team nationally. I’d still rate them above a Gonzaga team that is awesome, but cannot stop a soul some nights. If this game happens, it’s KenPom’s #1 offense versus its #1 defense. Please give us this.
ELITE EIGHT
(5) San Diego State (-1) over (10) Utah State. This is such a bad pick that I can’t help but laugh. And yet: of all the 5-16 seeds this year, no one has higher Final Four odds than San Diego State. Nine straight NCAA Tournaments have produced at least one 5+ seed in the Final Four. What makes you think this year would be any different? Plus, you get to root against Alabama.
(1) Purdue (-4.5) over (6) Kentucky. By refusing to pick Tennessee I’ve really put myself in a bind. Tennessee’s path is honestly pretty nice. It’s so nice that…no, just kidding, I can’t do it. Purdue is at just 24% to make the Final Four, and teams at 26% or lower are 2-for-14 all-time. But I cannot figure out who else to pick here. This is as clear a punt as I will ever put.
(1) Houston (-3) over (2) Texas. Oh thank Christ a normal pick. I outlined why I anticipate Houston to be so successful in March in the Field of 68 recently; the short version is that the level of shot volume they produce is historically astounding and makes up for an occasional lack of shot efficiency. This is a perfectly reasonable path to the Final Four for them.
(4) UConn (-0.5) over (2) UCLA. Well, I thought I would pick UCLA to go to the Final Four. But I’m at a point where I want either Tennessee or UConn in it for value purposes, and as mentioned many times, I am not going on record as picking Tennessee to overachieve again. I’ve been hurt.
FINAL FOUR
(1) Purdue (-3) over (5) San Diego State. I genuinely, incredulously, cannot believe these words I am typing. Surely not. Fade this. Fade it HARD.
(1) Houston (-2.5) over (4) UConn. That’s more like it.
NATIONAL CHAMPION
(1) Houston (-3) over (1) Purdue. I really do not anticipate that this will actually be a 1 seed vs. a 1 seed. It very well could be any combination of outcomes, and honestly Houston versus Arizona is probably more reasonable than this is. But I am nothing if not a fool, and given that I swore off participating in any sort of bracket challenge for money after last year, maybe I can save Houston for the survivor pool.
Okay! That is a lot of words. Now, click here for the Vibes Bracket.
give me spreadsheet
Lol before reading this I had SDSU, Purdue, Houston and UConn in the F4 with Houston beating SDSU in the final. I feel vindicated and shall not change it.