- Close
ESPN Senior Writer- Peter Keating is a senior writer at ESPN The Magazine, where he covers investigative and statistical subjects. His column, The Numbers, appears in every issue.
- Close
ESPN The Magazine contributing writer- Brenner writes for ESPN The Magazine and ESPN Insider. He covers the NBA and college basketball.
It's time for a detailed look at how our Giant Killers statistical model sees the NCAA tournament brackets. We'll go region by region, and, as we did last year, we will sort potential upsets into four categories: Best Bets, Worth a Long Look, Not Completely Crazy and Stay Away. Hopefully, those names are self-explanatory; Best Bets have a good chance to win outright and Stay Aways are likely to lose no matter what. But we can't tell you exactly how to fill out your brackets in between, because that depends on how heavily your particular pool rewards upsets. (The more points you score when underdogs win, the more you should be willing to pick high-risk teams.)
We begin with the East Region. From an upset perspective, it's a very uninspired batch (but we've got to start somewhere). Other regions, with juicier upset potential, will be unveiled through Tuesday. Stay tuned.
(Note: Numbers in parentheses represent a team's Giant Killer score. The higher the number for underdogs, the more likely they can pull the upset. The higher the number for favorites, the more likely they are to fall. For a deeper explanation, click here.)
EAST REGION
Worth a Long Look
No. 12 UAB (35.4) vs. No. 5 West Virginia (20.6)
UPSET CHANCE: 22.9 percent
While the debate rages about whether UAB belongs in the field -- and aren't there more pressing issues in college basketball than whether mediocre Colorado and Virginia Tech squads got snubbed? -- our statistical model is focused on something far more meaningful: What can the Blazers do if they get by Clemson? Its answer: put a legit scare into West Virginia.
Start with UAB's pace -- anything but Blazin' -- which hides their offensive efficiency (108.1 points per 100 possessions). The Blazers are better than average on both the offensive and defensive boards, and they don't turn it over a ton (19.3 TO percentage) which helps them maximize possessions. They hold opponents to an effective field goal percentage of just 45.6 percent, 32nd in the nation. And in Cameron Moore and Jamarr Sanders, they have a darn good veteran inside/outside combo. Meanwhile, the Mountaineers owe a huge portion of their success to offensive rebounding (39.7 percent, sixth in the nation) and 3-point defense (29.1 percent, fourth in the country). But those strengths don't fully expose UAB's weaknesses. And safe Giants traditionally exploit teams from inside the arc; West Virginia doesn't generate nearly enough offense from 2-pointers, hitting only 47.4 percent of its shots from closer range.
We'll leave you with this thought, which you can apply to VCU as well: Remember the last time an at-large bid generated such outrage? That was 2006. The team was George Mason. Just saying.
Stay Away
No. 14 Indiana State (13.3) vs. No. 3 Syracuse (20.1)
UPSET CHANCE: 8.6 percent
The Orange aren't Killer-proof. In particular, poor defensive rebounding out of their 2-3 zone leaves them ripe for the picking against a team that goes hard to the offensive glass. But Indiana State grabs boards on only 30.9 percent of offensive possessions, ranking 229th in the country. Yuck. Plus, the Sycamores turn the ball over way too often while putting little pressure on opposing guards. The result? Fewer extra scoring chances in the type of matchup where the underdog almost always has to get more shots up than the favorite.
Yes, the Sycamores are above average from beyond the arc (36.3 percent) and can get 3s from five or six sources, led by Jordan Printy (48.1 percent) and Aaron Carter (1.5 makes per game). But the misnomer about the Syracuse zone is that it's susceptible to the long ball. In fact, the Orange hold opponents to 31.2 percent shooting from downtown, 25th in the country. And that is consistent with their performance the past two seasons. Jim Boeheim's club actually does an excellent job of forcing teams to take low-percentage 3s by closing out quickly on those shots. This is a matchup that doesn't work for the dog.
No. 15 Long Island (19.1) vs. No. 2 North Carolina (9.9)
UPSET CHANCE: 8.6 percent
Our model says the Tar Heels are built to withstand the kind of unpredictable play that Killers throw at Giants. UNC outscores opponents by a whopping 13.59 points per 100 possessions on 2-point FGs, and the Heels generate more turnovers than they give up. That's too bad, because LIU can make some noise. The Blackbirds, who run an entertaining offense at a breakneck pace (74 possessions per game, fourth in the NCAA), can shoot from anywhere (51.2 percent from inside, 36.6 percent from behind the arc), and are always crashing the boards (offensive rebounds on 38.6 percent of misses, eighth in the country). Unfortunately, they also allow opponents to shoot nearly 50 percent on 2-point FGs, which is a recipe for disaster against a team with Carolina's kind of inside presence. Our model doesn't rely on height as an independent statistical factor, but this is a case where a difference in altitude will affect the bottom line: North Carolina's average height is third in the NCAA, LIU's is 327th. Harrison Barnes, the fourth-tallest member of the Tar Heels at a listed height of 6-foot-8, is taller than anyone on the Blackbirds. (Also, he's pretty good.) If you're looking for a first-round breakout beatdown, keep an eye on UNC F John Henson, who is ninth in the NCAA with blocks on 12 percent of opponent 2-point shots.
No. 13 Princeton (less than 2.0) vs. No. 4 Kentucky (19.3)
UPSET CHANCE: 8.2 percent
Unless you're a Harvard grad, Princeton is a lovely story. Under coach Sydney Johnson, who in the 1990s was the only three-time captain in Princeton history, the Tigers have gone from six to 25 wins over the past three seasons, and in a nod to Pete Carril's old-school ways, this Princeton team knows a defensive possession isn't successful unless you grab the defensive board; the Tigers are sixth in the country at preventing opponents' offensive rebounds. But the Tigers don't grab many boards off their own shots, or generate many turnovers. Meanwhile, Kentucky is strong where it matters most for avoiding Giant slayings, outscoring opponents on 2-point FGs by 7.63 points per 100 possessions. The Wildcats are also pretty good at limiting opponents' 3s, too. Overall, opponents have an effective field goal percentage of just 44 percent, 10th-lowest in the NCAA. The back door is closed, and so is the front.
No. 16 Alabama State (6.4) or Texas-San Antonio (less than 2.0) vs. No. 1 Ohio State (21.8)
UPSET CHANCE: 1.7 percent
The upset chance listed here is for Alabama State, which went on a nice run to win the SWAC. Whatever their flaws, the Hornets hit the boards, generate turnovers and limit opponents to just 43.5 percent shooting on 2-point FGs. Also, they have a cool dance line named the Stingettes. If Texas-San Antonio (260th in the NCAA in offensive rebounding, 214th in defensive rebounding) wins the right to face the Buckeyes, our model isn't sure the Roadrunners will ever touch the ball.