Giant Killer upsets to watch in West Region

Other regions: South | East | Midwest

It's upset time, baby. We have again gone deep in analyzing each of the six Giant vs. Killer matchups for each of the four regions. Remember, a Giant Killer is any team that beats an opponent seeded at least five spots higher. See our full methodology for more details.

We are utilizing our standard categories of Best Bets, Worth A Long Look, Not Completely Crazy and Stay Away. If you object to a game's placement, you're arguing with math. Our statistical model generates upset odds for each game. Those odds are based on three key factors: basic power ratings, teams' "Secret Sauce" (their statistical similarity to past Davids and Goliaths) and the matchup between Giants' and Killers' playing styles. This year, we introduced a similar games component that is not yet a predictive part of the model, but it added interesting insights. Below each game's upset odds, you'll find data on how similar GK games dating back to 2007 turned out.

Worth a long look

No. 6 Texas (82.3 Giant rating, as a percent chance of beating an average Giant Killer) versus No. 11 Northern Iowa (13.0 Giant Killer rating, as a percent chance of beating an average Giant)

Upset chance: 25.8 percent

In the four most similar GK matchups since 2007, the Giants went 3-1 and outscored the Killers by an average of 4.2 points per 100 possessions.

Texas head coach Shaka Smart is used to being on the other end of these matchups, but the former VCU coach is now in charge of the power team that will face a legitimate challenge from a feisty mid-major. Texas has enjoyed a strong start to the Smart Era, despite not fully embracing his "Havoc" style -- the personnel just isn't there to press and trap and shoot 3s. Instead, the Longhorns play slow, take care of the ball and lock down on D without gambling.

Despite the presence of Shaquille Cleare, Connor Lammert and Prince Ibeh inside, they don't finish defensive possessions well, and they gave up offensive rebounds on 32.3 percent of opponents' possessions. That's usually Kryptonite for a Giant, but in this case, there are two mitigating factors. First, Cameron Ridley is back, at least somewhat. The 6-foot-9, 285-pound center was averaging 12.7 points and 10 rebounds when he hurt his foot three months ago. He played two minutes in Texas' loss to Baylor in the Big 12 tournament, and an expanded role in the tourney could do wonders for Texas on the boards.

Even so, the Longhorns might not need Ridley against Northern Iowa. The Panthers rank dead last in Division I with a paltry 17.8 percent offensive rebounding rate. That's just not their style -- they'd rather get back on defense to prevent transition baskets. That strategy is part of what makes them as conservative a team as you'll find, running their offense at a plodding pace (sixth slowest in the country) while taking care of the ball (15.2 percent turnover rate, 17th nationally). They are stingy in the half court, give up just 97.2 points per 100 possessions (45th in the country) and hardly ever foul (23.6 percent FTA/FGA, second in the nation). To beat Texas, they must generate efficient scoring, which means big games from Wes Washpun attacking the basket as a scorer (14.3 ppg) and distributor (5.2 apg) and knock-down shooting from the three players who shoot better than 39 percent from downtown (Matt Bohannon, Paul Jesperson and Jeremy Morgan).

The Panthers already have wins over North Carolina, Iowa State and Wichita State (twice), so Texas is hardly a daunting opponent. Based on both teams' style of play, this game should be tight. In fact, if our model owned a pillow, it would need it to get through this game. But boring is just fine for UNI -- that's how it produces upsets.

No. 5 Baylor (Giant rating: 92.7) versus No. 12 Yale (Giant Killer rating: 10.4)

Upset chance: 20.2 percent

In the four most similar GK matchups since 2007, the Giants went 3-1 and outscored the Killers by an average of 24.2 points per 100 possessions.

Baylor's dominant offensive rebounding -- the Bears grab 40.3 percent of their own missed shots, third best in the country -- is sure to tilt many prognosticators away from the Ivy League champions. But this is a lowercase version of the West Virginia-Stephen F. Austin matchup we described in the East Region. Power Giants such as Baylor are especially vulnerable to Slow Killers such as Yale. How many warning signs are flashing?

• The Bears turn the ball over once every 5.3 times they touch it, which ranks 228th, and that problem crippled them in their upset loss to Georgia State in last year's tournament.

• Baylor has a severe "peanut allergy," our term for a weakness in defending an area where Killers need to be strong. The Bears allow opponents to shoot 37.1 percent on 3s (295th).

• Yale is among the nation's top 10 in rebounding at both ends of the floor, and it isn't giving away size in this matchup, with an average height that actually exceeds Baylor's by 0.1 inch.

Both teams like to keep things slow ... hmmm. Baylor can score with anybody (116.9 adjusted points per 100 possessions, 13th), but if anything, our model underestimates Yale's chances. This has the feel of North Carolina-Harvard last year, a 4-13 matchup that ended up a 2-point game. That will be especially true if the Bulldogs, who don't generally shoot 3s (30.8 percent of field goal attempts, 274th) but can hit them (37.1 percent, 59th), open things up a little.

Not completely crazy

No. 3 Texas A&M (92.1) versus No. 14 Green Bay (6.6)

Upset chance: 7.8 percent

In the four most similar GK matchups since 2007, the Giants went 4-0 and outscored the Killers by an average of 23.7 points per 100 possessions.

Over the next 48 hours, you're going to hear a lot about Green Bay's up-tempo intensity and how its pressure defense leads to turnovers that lead to fast breaks that lead to free throws. That's all true. Sparked by point guard Carrington Love, the Phoenix play at a feverish pace and are quicker on offensive possessions than any team in the country (average length: 13.4 seconds).

But that style is not too helpful in beating Goliaths. Green Bay's frantic pace might surprise an unfamiliar foe, but it's more likely to run the Phoenix right out of games against superior opposition, especially because gambling for steals so often leaves them vulnerable to easy jumpers, both inside (2-point field goal percentage allowed: 49.5, which ranks 211th) and outside (3-point field goal percentage allowed: 36.3, 259th). This is a team that gave up 103 points to Youngstown State. Further, reliance on the charity stripe is not a good sign for Killers, in part because once you get to the NCAA tournament, you run into better teams who can play effective D without fouling.

A final warning sign: Green Bay is especially poor on the defensive glass, where Texas A&M is particularly strong (offensive rebounds on 34.6 percent of its missed shots, good for 40th). The Aggies also pressure the ball and force turnovers on 21.4 percent of opponent possessions (21st). As a result, they're likely to take something like 70 shots in this game, and Green Bay isn't a good bet to stop many of them.

No. 4 Duke (93.9) versus No. 13 UNC Wilmington (9.0)

Upset chance: 7 percent

In the four most similar GK matchups since 2007, the Giants went 2-2, but the Killers outscored them by an average of 3.0 points per 100 possessions.

If the information listed above seems contradictory, allow us to explain. Our beloved model bases its projections on a heavily tested system that incorporates overall team strength, similarity to key traits possessed by previous Giants and Killers, and matchup analysis based on style of play. That system gives Duke a significant advantage in this game.

But there's something else going on here. This year, we have introduced a similar games feature, which doesn't have the predictive value of our full model but offers an additional window into GK matchups. Over the years, there have been a handful of teams that didn't play like typical Killers but pulled off big upsets anyway. Often, they played at a fast tempo (prime Killers generally limit possessions), forced turnovers and shot well. (Think Florida Gulf Coast in 2013 or Ohio in 2012). UNC Wilmington fits that profile. If that isn't scary enough for Duke, consider this: The three games most similar to this matchup include Duke-Lehigh from 2012 and Duke-Mercer from 2014. You know how those games turned out.

Like those two first-round losers, this Duke team struggles on defense. Without Amile Jefferson, the Blue Devils don't have the depth to pressure the ball or the communication to help effectively, and they have given up 100.7 points per 100 possessions, which is 110th in the country and last among any top-five seed in the tourney. They've been forced to alternate between man and zone to generate stops, but Wilmington will have plenty of opportunities to score, which the Seahawks do at a fairly efficient rate (109.4 points per 100 possessions, 74th in the country). They generate most of that offense from the perimeter: Their top five scorers are all guards, and they typically play four of them at a time. Chris Flemmings, a 6-foot-5 transfer from Division II Barton College, is the best of the bunch. He averages 16.1 ppg and 5.9 rpg and hits 36.7 percent of his 3-pointers.

Of course, going small plays right into Duke's hands. This team spreads the floor with Brandon Ingram at power forward and scores as well as any team in the country. Duke ranks sixth in the nation in offensive efficiency (119.3 points per 100 possessions), takes care of the ball (14.3 percent turnover rate, fifth nationally) and can annihilate teams from 3-point range, where the Blue Devils hit 38.7 of their shots. Ingram, Grayson Allen, Luke Kennard and Matt Jones are simply a nightmare to guard when they are moving the ball and knocking down jumpers. If you can't exploit them with low-post scoring and offensive rebounding, they're a tough team to beat. Wilmington gets on the offensive glass, despite its lack of size (32.1 percent offensive rebound rate), and won't be intimidated by Duke. But can the Seahawks follow in the footsteps of Lehigh and Mercer? As the category says, it wouldn't be completely crazy if they did.

Stay Away

No. 2 Oklahoma (88.7) versus No. 15 CSU Bakersfield (5.6)

Upset chance: 7.5 percent

In the four most similar GK matchups since 2007, the Giants went 3-1 and outscored the Killers by an average of 18.1 points per 100 possessions.

By now, you're probably familiar with the Sooners' fast-paced, wide-open offense, which frequently uses screens to set up a trio of players who are shooting 42.5 percent or better from beyond the arc and to get the ball to Buddy Hield, who knows a thing or two about getting to the basket. Statistically, Lon Kruger's system, which is focused on creating and limiting good looks, has interesting drawbacks: Oklahoma is mediocre at both ends, when it comes to rebounding and turnovers. But it's going to be hard for the Roadrunners, who lack offensive firepower, to sustain a challenge. Bakersfield does have some impressive Killer stats: It ranks 15th in the NCAA in forced turnovers and 47th in offensive rebounding percentage, and 6-foot-4 forward Kevin Mays somehow has the 22nd-best offensive rebound percentage in the country. But those numbers are products of hard work by a severely undersized team against terrible competition. In other words, the Roadrunners are game, but against Oklahoma, they're likely to have a Wile E. Coyote moment.

No. 1 Oregon (91.3) versus No. 16 Holy Cross (Giant Killer rating: 1.2) or Southern (Giant Killer rating: 1.2)

Upset chance: 2.8 percent for Holy Cross; 1.5 percent for Southern

In the four GK matchups since 2007 most similar to Oregon-Holy Cross, the Giants went 4-0 and outscored the Killers by an average of 28.9 points per 100 possessions. In the four GK matchups since 2007 most similar to Oregon-Southern, the Giants went 4-0 and outscored the Killers by an average of 26.1 points per 100 possessions.

That these underdogs have even the chances listed underscores the weakness of this year's top teams: Oregon has had a fine season, but our basic power ratings say the Ducks are 25.3 points better than an average Div. I team, which is five full points worse than an average No. 1 seed since 2007. That's not likely to get the Ducks into trouble here, but it's another sign that the second round of this tournament should be very interesting. Southern is led by quick guards who like to force turnovers and drive to the basket, but the undersized Jaguars severely lack in shooting and rebounding. Holy Cross is even less efficient at both ends, but they are the team to root for if you want to see Oregon cope with a Killer who has some style. The Crusaders (who were 10-19 entering the Patriot League tournament) have half a dozen players who are proficient at stealing, and they love to hoist 3s (40.4 percent of FGA, ranking 61st) out of their Princeton Offense. Unfortunately, they don't often hit them (32.7 percent, 260th). It's up to you to decide when the fun turns sadistic.

Thanks to Liz Bouzarth, John Harris and Kevin Hutson of Furman University for research assistance.