Giant Killers: East Region

West | South | East | Midwest

For each of the four regions, we'll break down the six Giant vs. Killer matchups. (Remember, a Giant Killer is any team that beats an opponent seeded at least five spots higher. See our full methodology here for more details.)

Per tradition, we have divided the games among four categories: Best Bets, Worth A Long Look, Not Completely Crazy and Stay Away. We can't tell you exactly how to play your brackets; that depends on how much upsets are worth in your pool. But we can give you the odds of upsets, based on statistical analysis that begins with teams' basic power ratings and layers in their "Secret Sauce" (their statistical similarity to past Davids and Goliaths) and adjusts further for the matchup of their playing styles.

We covered the Midwest and South on Monday, have the East and West on Tuesday and look ahead to future rounds on Wednesday.

Here are matchups to watch in the East Region ...

Best Bets

No. 5 Cincinnati Bearcats (Giant rating: 85.9) vs. No. 12 Harvard Crimson (Giant Killer rating: 19.6)
Upset chance: 36.2 percent

The case for Harvard is straightforward and actually getting a little trendy. This Crimson team is the best and deepest of the squads Tommy Amaker has assembled since arriving in Cambridge. They protect the ball and hit the offensive glass far better than they did on their way to Cinderella status last year. And their defense is better than most past Killers in that they're effective against both interior and perimeter shooting (allowing 96.3 points per 100 possessions after adjusting for opponent strength, ranking 35th in the NCAA).

The deeper question now is: Is there something more here that could drive Harvard's tournament success? Most Giant Killers, you see, have a signature style and fall into one of various families we have now identified through cluster analysis. But every once in a while smart Killers seem able to go Meta, finding different ways of increasing the variability of their scoring against different opponents.

In 2011, for example, the VCU Rams played four quite different styles in their five NCAA tournament wins: they crashed the boards against USC, drew fouls against Georgetown, worked inside against Purdue and bombed away against Florida State and Kansas. And last season, Wichita State sharply increased its 3-point attempts during the tournament and gave more minutes to steals machine Fred VanVleet, who was then a freshman coming off the bench.

Now, we're wondering if Harvard will try something similar. The Crimson can shoot 3-pointers, led by small forward Laurent Rivard (42.8 percent) and point guard Siyani Chambers (40.3 percent), but against most competition they don't risk too many long-distance heaves (28.2 percent of FGA, ranking 285th). In Harvard's four games (all nonconference) against top-75 opponents, however, it took 32.6 percent of its shots, a much greater proportion, from behind the arc, while still hitting nearly 40 percent on those bombs. Same thing happened in its tourney win against New Mexico last year: the Crimson took 18 of 42 shots (42.6 percent) from downtown and nailed 44.4 percent of them.

It's almost as though Harvard is smart enough to realize that it can extend its 3-point performance over a greater number of attempts -- but also that it only needs to do so against superior teams. What should we call a team like that, a possum? A Shaka? A chameleon?

As for Cincinnati, the Bearcats play a strangling defense that forces turnovers (22.5 percent of opponent possessions, ranking 11th in the NCAA) and shuts down opponents inside and outside. Overall, they surrender just 91.4 points per 100 possessions (ranking ninth). And while Cincinnati shoots poorly, the Bearcats pile up so many offensive rebounds (39.1 percent of missed shots, ranking eighth) that their offensive efficiency is above average.

It's a familiar statistical profile, similar to lines we usually see from Syracuse or Louisville -- though Mick Cronin, the Bearcats' fantastically short and animated coach, mixes in more rapidly rotating man-to-man D than his old boss Rick Pitino. And usually it's highly effective for Giants. But Harvard matches up well against Cincinnati's style, according to our model's cluster analysis, so Cincinnati isn't as safe in this case as its excellent numbers would suggest. Watch carefully; this could be the week the chameleon turns crimson.

No. 6 North Carolina Tar Heels (80.0) vs. No. 11 Providence Friars (17.5)
Upset chance: 35.0 percent

The Friars are a Wounded Assassin we've been tracking for a while -- a power conference team (or at least the remnants of a power conference, given what the Big East has become) that struggled at various junctures. What caught our model's eye was an interesting combination of offensive rebounding prowess (44th in the country), overall offensive efficiency (an adjusted 114.3 points per 100 possessions) and a slow pace (251st in the country). What's interesting about those stats is that they aren't just traits of a good Killer -- they bode especially well against North Carolina.

The Tar Heels, as always, prefer to play fast. And they've struggled against lesser teams that bogged the game down, particularly in losses to UAB and Miami (FL). Only Lamar takes fewer 3-pointers as a percentage of overall shots than UNC, and Providence's strong D beyond the arc won't let UNC adjust that strategy with much ease. And Carolina is a far better defensive team (22nd in adjusted efficiency) than offensive squad (58th), meaning the Heels will pit their strength against Providence's best quality. That Providence offense has overcome some stingy defenses before -- like in a pair of wins against St. John's, which sports an efficiency rating one spot better than UNC's.

If that isn't enough working in Providence's favor, our new friend, cluster analysis, chimes in with more support. That's because the Friars profile as a "Kenneth Faried Killer" -- one characterized by strong offensive rebounding -- while Carolina falls into the "Bo Ryan Giant" class. The Faried family has upset the Ryan family in 23.8 percent of their matchups.

Now, Carolina is a fine offensive rebounding team in its own right, forces a healthy number of turnovers and has Marcus Paige ready to erupt at any moment. But make no mistake -- the Heels are in for a tough one in their opener.

NOT COMPLETELY CRAZY

No. 3 Iowa State Cyclones (63.1) vs. No. 14 North Carolina Central Eagles (8.6)
Upset chance: 11.8 percent

Keep an eye on this one. Our model appreciated Iowa State as a Killer last year, but as an overdog the Cyclones have the same kind of problems that plague Wisconsin and Creighton. They don't grab offensive rebounds (just 28.1 percent of missed shots, ranking 278th), they are even worse at forcing turnovers (16.2 percent of opponent possessions, ranking 301st) and they're just OK at defending the perimeter (allowing 33.6 percent on 3s, ranking 127th). You can see how they might struggle to win the fight for possessions -- and that's a battle North Carolina Central is built to win.

The Eagles rank fifth in the NCAA in forcing turnovers (24 percent of opponent possessions), led by thieving point guard Emanuel Chapman. And their 35.3 percent offensive rebounding percentage ranks 48th in the NCAA; watch out for Jay Copeland and Jordan Parks, who split time at center but who each nab more than 14 percent of missed shots when on the floor.

On paper and in the basic power rankings of our spreadsheets, there is a large gap between these teams, thanks in part to the enormous difference in their schedule strength. But if North Carolina Central can impose its slow pace on the proceedings, Iowa State could find the Eagles hard to shake. And our model doesn't penalize NC Central coach LeVelle Morton for saying he should have played "One Shining Moment" at his wedding.

STAY AWAY

No. 4 Michigan State Spartans (76.2) vs. No. 13 Delaware Blue Hens (4.4)
Upset chance: 6.3 percent

For all the hype about Michigan State being a Final Four -- if not national title -- favorite, our model isn't quite so bullish on Sparty's chances. The Spartans' Giant rating is just a middling 76.2. And even when we adjust for games in which their full squad was healthy, that number only rises to 79.5. That's something to keep in mind for the next round, though, because Delaware is an awfully poor Killer for a 13-seed.

The Blue Hens do the things necessary to beat Towson and James Madison, not Michigan State. So, sure, they almost never turn the ball over (13.5 percent of possessions, fourth in the country). And they shoot well from inside the arc. But Delaware doesn't emphasize any of the key traits of Giant Killers, such as offensive rebounding, forcing turnovers or shooting tons of 3-pointers. Worse, the Blue Hens also get crushed on the defensive glass. And if you think a Tom Izzo team won't punish them for that last sin, you must typically hibernate for the month of March.

No. 2 Villanova Wildcats (82.0) vs. No. 15 Milwaukee Panthers (2.4)
Upset chance: 2.5 percent

There are reasons to be skeptical about Villanova, starting with blowout losses in three of its four games against top-three seeds (Creighton twice and Syracuse once). But it's tough to dispute the Wildcats' balance. They rank 16th in adjusted offensive efficiency and 14th in adjusted defensive efficiency, per kenpom.com. And they profile as a fairly safe Giant because they rebound well -- particularly on the defensive end -- and force turnovers on 20.2 percent of opponents' possessions. It is somewhat concerning that Villanova allows teams to generate 28.9 percent of their points from 3-point range, which is higher than the national average. As you know by now, the 3-pointer is a favorite weapon of a strong GK. And Milwaukee shoots a ton of them -- 40.7 percent of the Panthers' field goal attempts, in fact.

But Rob Jeter's crew, which went just 7-9 in the Horizon League before upsetting Green Bay in the conference semifinals -- don't do much else well. In particular, they get killed in the possession battle by throwing the ball away frequently on offense and rarely collecting their own misses (28.6 percent offensive rebound rate). As intriguing as its potential to catch fire from deep might be, there is little hope for Milwaukee against Villanova.

No. 1 Virginia Cavaliers (74.5) vs. No. 16 Coastal Carolina Chanticleers (1.1)
Upset chance: 1.6 percent

Coastal Carolina can't shoot, and throws the ball away on more than 20 percent of possessions -- a case study in offensive inefficiency (97.3 points per 100 possessions, ranking 298th). As far as we can tell, their mascot first showed up in "The Nun's Priest's Tale," one of "The Canterbury Tales" written about 720 years ago by the poet Chaucer, where a rooster named Chauntecleer dreams of a clever fox, who later tries to eat him. This week, the Chanticleer should be more worried about a funny-looking swordsman.