NCAA Tournament - Breaking it Down

Time to breakdown the brackets and see who is going to cut down the nets.  I will use several criteria in breaking the brackets down.  1)  Efficiency 2)  Scoring Margin 3)  Created Possession Margin 4)  Guard play  5)  Experience.  I also like to start by figuring out who the winner of the bracket is, then working in some of the details.

Efficiency
The last 28 Final Four participants have been in the Top 30 in defensive efficiency.  2003, the last time 2 participants were outside this mark, Marquette and Texas ranked #1 and #3 in offensive efficiency, respectively.  29 out of the last 32 ranked in the Top 30 in offensive efficiency as well, the outliers being George Mason, LSU and Butler (the list includes two of the biggest Cinderellas in tournament history). 

This year's candidates would seem to be Ohio State (1 off, 10 def), Kansas (4,12), Duke (5,3), Texas (19, 1), Pittsburgh (6,21), San Diego State (24,4), Kentucky (7,22), Purdue (18,8) and Syracuse (17,16).  Teams that could play into this would be Louisville (36,5), North Carolina (37,7), Connecticut (21,31) and West Virginia (31,29). {Did anyone notice Pittsburgh is the only team in the Southeast here?}

Efficiency can also play into First and Second Round Success.  Here are the efficiency numbers for teams the last few years that were a 6 or lower and lost a first round game or a 1 thru 4 who did not advance to the Sweet Sixteen.  I will also include overall efficiency as the first number.

2010 First Round Upsets
#3 Georgetown (13, 9, 47)
#4 Vanderbilt (35, 24, 60) - Defeated By Murray State (50, 71, 35)
#5 Temple (22, 75, 7) - Defeated by Cornell (52, 16, 117)
#6 Marquette (33, 22, 57) - Defeated by Washington (30, 36, 31)
#6 Notre Dame (38, 6, 132) - Defeated by Old Dominion (34, 82, 10)

2010 Second Round Surprises
#1 Kansas (2, 2, 8) - Defeated by Northern Iowa (29, 61, 16)
#2 Villanova (21, 12, 62) - Defeated by St. Mary's (42, 20, 88)
#3 Pittsburgh (31, 40, 26) - Defeated by Xavier (14, 14, 39)
#3 New Mexico (54, 27, 90) - Defeated by Washington (30, 36, 31)
#4 Wisconsin (9, 17, 19) - Defeated by Cornell (52, 16, 117)

2009 First Round Upsets
#4 Wake Forest (25, 43, 23) - Defeated by Cleveland State (60, 107, 38)
#5 Utah (30, 63, 26) - Defeated by Arizona (41, 7, 142)
#5 Florida State (36, 100, 12) - Defeated by Wisconsin (29, 36, 49)
#5 Illinois (24, 98, 4) - Defeated by Western Kentucky (89, 56, 163)
#6 West Virginia (9, 18, 14) - Defeated by Dayton (78, 150, 27)

2009 Second Round Surprises
#4 Washington (17, 40, 9) - Defeated by Purdue (18, 54, 5)

2008 First Round Upsets
#4 Vanderbilt (53, 42, 81) - Defeated by Siena (99, 101, 102)
#4 Connecticut (22, 17, 41) - Defeated by San Diego (113, 173, 68)
#5 Drake (27, 5, 77) - Defeated by Western Kentucky (59, 55, 69)
#5 Clemson (13, 29, 12) - Defeated by Villanova (43, 51, 64)
#6 USC (26, 52, 17) - Defeated by Kansas State (17, 20, 23)

2008 Second Round Surprises
#2 Georgetown (7, 18, 6) - Defeated by Davidson (20, 14, 31)
#2 Duke (8, 11, 9) - Defeated by West Virginia (19, 21, 24)
#4 Pittsburgh (21, 8, 54) - Defeated by Michigan State (15, 12, 26)

2007 First Round Upsets
#6 Notre Dame (20, 10, 49) - Defeated by Winthrop (69, 75, 71)
#6 Duke (11, 40, 5) - Defeated by VCU (66, 28, 131)

2007 Second Round Surprises
#2 Wisconsin (8, 26, 6) - Defeated by UNLV (42, 35, 44)
#3 Washington State (29, 54, 19) - Defeated by Vanderbilt (35, 21, 56)
#4 Maryland (10, 34, 8) - Defeated by Butler (25, 16, 48)
#4 Texas (21, 5, 62) - Defeated by USC (27, 41, 24)
#4 Virginia (45, 30, 59) - Defeated by Tennessee (31, 14, 54)

2006 First Round Upsets
#3 Iowa (19, 129, 1)
#4 Kansas (6, 38, 2) - Defeated by Bradley (26, 70, 11)
#5 Syracuse (51, 60, 55) - Defeated by Texas A&M (25, 80, 8)
#5 Nevada (35, 58, 41) - Defeated by Montana (88, 45, 159)
#6 Oklahoma (50, 25, 102) - Defeated by UW-Milwaukee (63, 74, 63)
#6 Michigan State (33, 18, 103) - Defeated by George Mason (23, 49, 18)

2006 Second Round Surprises
#2 Tennessee (22, 8, 79) - Defeated by Wichita State (32, 33, 66)
#2 Ohio State (18, 34, 24) - Defeated by Georgetown (14, 9, 38)
#3 North Carolina (8, 10, 20) - Defeated by George Mason (23, 49, 18)
#4 Illinois (11, 16, 21) - Defeated by Washington (13, 13, 28)

2005 First Round Upsets
#3 Kansas (12, 11, 18)
#4 Syracuse (17, 16, 22) - Defeated by Vermont (71, 60, 99)
#5 Alabama (18, 8, 52) - Defeated by UW-Milwaukee (53, 61, 53)
#6 LSU (39, 21, 87) - Defeated by UAB (59, 65, 58)

2005 Second Round Surprises
#2 Wake Forest (11, 2, 72) - Defeated by West Virginia (30, 18, 78)
#2 Connecticut (13, 26, 7) - Defeated by NC State (20, 14, 39)
#3 Oklahoma (9, 17, 12) - Defeated by Utah (23, 32, 19)
#3 Gonzaga (33, 10, 121) - Defeated by Texas Tech (28, 43, 26)
#4 Florida (6, 13, 9) - Defeated by Villanova (4, 12, 4)
#4 Boston College (25, 20, 46) - Defeated by UW-Milwaukee (53, 61, 53)

2004 First Round Upsets
#5 Florida (24, 10, 69) - Defeated by Manhattan (54, 67, 47)
#5 Providence (25, 34, 24) - Defeated by Pacific (82, 80, 92)

2004 Second Round Surprises
#1 Kentucky (9, 19, 9) - Defeated by UAB (43, 68, 28)
#1 Stanford (16, 47, 6) - Defeated by Alabama (29, 16, 50)
#2 Gonzaga (15, 8, 40) - Defeated by Nevada (22, 39, 15)
#2 Mississippi State (17, 21, 17) - Defeated by Xavier (20, 20, 20)
#3 NC State (8, 3, 33) - Defeated by Vanderbilt (23, 26, 30)
#4 Maryland (19, 44, 7) - Defeated by Syracuse (28, 27, 36)
#4 Cincinnati (11, 14, 19) - Defeated by Illinois (12, 6, 35)

2003 First Round Upsets
#4 Dayton (48, 7, 160) - Defeated by Tulsa (43, 62, 37)
#5 Mississippi State (12, 59, 3) - Defeated by Butler (45, 16, 124)
#6 Creighton (30, 27, 46) - Defeated by Central Michigan (72, 42, 122)

2003 Second Round Surprises
#2 Wake Forest (22, 18, 38) - Defeated by Auburn (44, 77, 29)
#2 Florida (14, 8, 34) - Defeated by Michigan State (15, 40, 10)
#3 Xavier (19, 19, 28) - Defeated by Maryland (6, 23, 5)
#4 Stanford (35, 36, 43) - Defeated by Connecticut (21, 24, 24)
#4 Louisville (13, 10, 26) - Defeated by Butler (45, 16, 124)
#4 Illinois (5, 14, 8) - Defeated by Notre Dame (32, 9, 113)

28 out of 32 First Round Upsets were lost by a 6 seed or higher with either an offensive or defensive efficiency rating above 34 (11 offense, 14 defense, 3 both).  Also, 29 of the 32 were of a 4-6 seed (it does not seem prudent to pick against a 1, 2 or 3 in round 1).  It does not mean that a team with one of these attributes always is upset, please keep that in mind.  This is just a mechanism for creating the pool of upset candidates.  That pool for 2011 based on this stat is Wisconsin (9, 2, 63), Louisville (12, 36, 5), Arizona (15, 14, 67), Cincinnati (23, 55, 15), Kansas State (29, 50, 27), Georgetown (31, 27, 52), Vanderbilt (32, 15, 76), St. John's (35, 47, 35) and Xavier (37, 30, 61).

The data on who beats these teams is not as good.  18 of the 28 were beaten by teams superior in either offensive or defensive efficiency.  Out of the 10 winners who were not superior in either category, 6 had an attribute in the Top 60 and 9 in the Top 80.  The opponents for the above 9 teams are Belmont (18, 32, 19), Morehead State (95, 111, 91), Memphis (85, 134, 60), Missouri (34, 28, 53), Utah State (16, 57, 6), USC (44, 76, 30) or VCU (84, 59, 143), Richmond (46, 48, 51), Gonzaga (27, 49, 26) and Marquette (33, 20, 71).  Morehead State would thus be eliminated and the pool of first round upsets sits at 8 potential.

There were 37 top 4 seeds to lose in the second round the last 8 years.  20 of them also had either an offensive or defensive efficiency rating of 34 or higher, similar to the first round pool.  Of the 17 that didn't, 14 were defeated by a team with a Top 20 attribute, 16 a Top 30 and all a Top 35.   Wisconsin would remain susceptible if they advance, along with Notre Dame (10, 3, 62), BYU (13, 8, 37), North Carolina (14, 37, 7) and  Florida (19, 16, 40).  Additional teams who could play a team with a top 20 attribute are North Carolina again (Washington 15, 9, 42), Texas (Arizona 25, 14, 67), Louisville (Vanderbilt 32, 15, 76), Syracuse (Marquette 33, 20, 71), Notre Dame again (Florida State 42, 153, 2), Wisconsin again (Utah State 16, 57, 6), Kansas (UNLV 22, 54, 14) and Connecticut (Cincinnati 23, 55, 15). 

Looking further, 36 of the 37 top 4 seeds were defeated by a team with at least one attribute in the top 35, 33 in the top 30. This makes Duke and Pitt safe, with Florida and San Diego State meeting the 30 criteria for being safe but not the 35.  This is not perfect data, but something to work with. 

Scoring Margin
Scoring Margin is often a great determinant of tournament success.  Belmont leads the way in scoring margin at 18.4, but that is a bit skewed due to the level of competition.  Similarly, Utah State at 13.9 places 6th and George Mason 11.8 and Gonzaga 11.6 place high as well.  While it cannot be completely ignored for these schools, it is a better indicator for power conference teams.  Here is the 2010-11 scoring margins.

Belmont 18.4
Ohio St. 17.3
Kansas 17.1
Duke 16.8
BYU 14.1
Utah St. 13.9
Texas 13.5
San Diego St. 13.2
Pittsburgh 13.1
Washington 13.1
Kentucky 12.6
George Mason 11.8
Gonzaga 11.6
Purdue 11.2
Louisville 10.7
Notre Dame 10.4
Syracuse 10.3
Missouri 9.9
Wisconsin 9.9
Cincinnati 9.8
UNLV 9.3
Richmond 9.2
Arizona 9.1
Oakland 9
North Carolina 8.9
Temple 8.8
Long Island 8.7
Vanderbilt 8.6
Florida 8.5
Butler 8.2
Morehead St. 8.1
Xavier 8.1
Texas A&M 7.9
Old Dominion 7.5
Clemson 7.3
Bucknell 7.3
Villanova 7.2
Florida St. 7.1
Kansas St. 7.1
Connecticut 7
Marquette 7
UAB 6.6
Princeton 6.5
Northern Colo. 6.5
Illinois 6.1
Wofford 6
UNC Asheville 6
West Virginia 5.5
Hampton 5.3
Georgetown 4.9
Akron 4.9
Georgia 4.5
UCLA 4.2
Southern California 4.1
VCU 4.1
Memphis 3.9
St. John's (NY) 3.7
Michigan 3.4
Tennessee 3.3
UC Santa Barbara 3
Indiana St. 2.4
Michigan St. 2.3
Boston U. 2
St. Peter's 1.5
UTSA 1.3
UALR 1
Penn St. 0.6
Alabama St. -2.3

Obviously, Ohio State, Duke and Kansas rise to the top again.  The Big East is interesting because with the level of competition this year, you would expect their numbers to be low, and for the most part they are.  North Carolina and Florida jump out here as teams who probably don't have enough to make a Final Four run.

Created Possession Margin
Created possession margin is simply your rebound margin plus your turnover margin, essentially calculating how many more possessions you will get than your opponent.  Here are the numbers (rebound, turnover, total):

Old Dominion 12.2 -1 11.2
Pittsburgh 10.4 -0.3 10.1
Ohio St. 4.8 4.9 9.7
Morehead St. 9.2 0.1 9.3
Belmont 3.9 5.2 9.1
Kansas 7.8 0.9 8.7
Utah St. 8 0.3 8.3
San Diego St. 6.7 1.6 8.3
Texas 6.6 1.2 7.8
Kansas St. 6.8 0.9 7.7
Cincinnati 4.7 2.8 7.5
North Carolina 6.5 0.7 7.2
Washington 4.6 2.6 7.2
Gonzaga 5.9 1.2 7.1
Texas A&M 6.5 0.4 6.9
BYU 3.4 3.4 6.8
Florida 6.1 0.1 6.2
Wisconsin 3.8 2.3 6.1
Kentucky 4.2 1.6 5.8
Syracuse 3.7 1.9 5.6
Duke 2.7 2.8 5.5
Purdue 1.5 4 5.5
Northern Colo. 5.4 -0.1 5.3
UNLV 1.7 3.6 5.3
Temple 2.8 2.5 5.3
Tennessee 4.2 0.9 5.1
George Mason 2.3 2.7 5
Butler 3.4 1.6 5
Xavier 4.4 0.5 4.9
Marquette 2.7 2.1 4.8
Villanova 4.6 0.2 4.8
Long Island 5.1 -0.4 4.7
Connecticut 4.1 0.4 4.5
Notre Dame 4.5 -0.3 4.2
Florida St. 4.7 -0.6 4.1
Princeton 4.2 -0.2 4
St. John's (NY) 0.1 3.7 3.8
Arizona 3.9 -0.1 3.8
Oakland 5.2 -1.5 3.7
Clemson 1.9 1.8 3.7
Missouri -1.9 5.5 3.6
Louisville 0.5 3 3.5
West Virginia 3.5 0 3.5
Georgia 4.7 -1.2 3.
Michigan St. 4.2 -1.3 2.9
Wofford 1.2 1.6 2.8
UAB 2.5 0.2 2.7
UNC Asheville -0.4 2.6 2.2
Southern California 1.2 0.6 1.8
UCLA 4.5 -2.8 1.7
Penn St. 1.4 0.2 1.6
Vanderbilt 2.2 -0.9 1.3
Illinois 1.7 -0.5 1.2
Bucknell 0.4 0.6 1
Alabama St. 0.9 -0.2 0.7
Georgetown 2.5 -1.9 0.6
Indiana St. 1.5 -1 0.5
UALR -1.5 2 0.5
Richmond -1.7 2 0.3
Memphis 0.7 -0.4 0.3
Boston U. 0.8 -0.7 0.1
VCU -3.7 3.3 -0.4
Michigan -1.9 1.4 -0.5
Akron -2.8 2.2 -0.6
Hampton -4.3 3.5 -0.8
UTSA -1.4 0.6 -0.8
UC Santa Barbara -0.3 -0.7 -1
St. Peter's -0.5 -0.9 -1.4

The usual suspects, Pittsburgh, Ohio State and Kansas toward the top here.  San Diego State and Texas not far behind.  Old Dominion would look like a nightmare for most teams, but a second round date with Pittsburgh provides them a clone match-up. 

Guard Play
Experienced, savvy, talented guards can make a big difference in March.  Here are some of the potential difference makers here:

Duke - Nolan Smith
Ohio State - William Buford, Jon Diebler
Connecticut - Kemba Walker
BYU - Jimmer Fredette
Notre Dame - Ben Hansborough
Wisconsin - Jordan Taylor
Kansas State - Jacob Pullen
Xavier - Tu Holloway
Washington - Isaiah Thomas
Michigan State - Kalin Lucas
Pittsburgh - Brad Wanamaker
Illinois - Demetri McCamey
Villanova - Corey Fisher, Corey Stokes
St. John's - Dwight Hardy
Georgetown - Austin Freeman
Louisville - Preston Knowles
Richmond - Kevin Anderson

Experience
Experience can be measured two ways - tournament experience and overall experience.  Here are some observations here:

Experienced Rosters:
Duke has the two seniors, Singler and Smith, plus the Plumlees and Dawkins were through it last year.
Ohio State has the three seniors and one junior to go along with their 3 freshman.
Kansas starts five upperclassmen, but none have been stars in any tourney run.
Pittsburgh starts five upperclassmen who have yet to make a deep run.
Notre Dame starts five seniors, but they also have not made any big tourney runs for experience.
San Diego State has four seniors in their rotation.
Purdue starts four upperclassmen including two big-time seniors in Johnson and Moore.
Florida and BYU start four upperclassmen, including Jimmer of course.
Louisville, Vanderbilt and Georgetown all start four upperclassmen.
Wisconsin starts four upperclassmen, including Taylor and Leuer.
West Virginia starts all upperclassmen.
Xavier starts four upperclassmen who all have good tourney experience.
St. John's starts four seniors with no tournament experience.
Temple has good experience with Fernandez, Moore and Allen all upperclassmen.
George Mason starts four upperclassmen, but they all make their first tourney appearance.
Old Dominion starts four seniors who made the second round last year.
Villanova starts three seniors with tourney experience.
Illinois starts four seniors.
Georgia starts five upperclassmen, but they lack NCAA experience.
Michigan State starts four upperclassmen with loads of NCAA experience.
Penn State starts four seniors, but all are playing in their first NCAA tournament.
Missouri has four juniors who average 10 PPG.
Marquette starts four upperclassmen, but they have little tourney experience in their current roles.
USC starts five upperclassmen lacking in tourney experience.
VCU also starts five upperclassmen.
Richmond starts four upperclassmen.
Clemson starts four upperclassmen who have yet to win a tournament game.
Oakland has 4 upperclassmen who combined average 58 PPG.
Utah State and Wofford both start five upperclassmen who have been to the tourney before.

Inexperienced Rosters:
North Carolina starts no seniors and are led by freshman.
Connecticut is very young outside of Kemba Walker.
Texas' three top players are freshman or sophomores.
Kentucky is very young with three prominent freshman.
Arizona has no senior starters.
Memphis starts four freshman.
Michigan is very, very young.
UCLA starts no seniors.

There you have it.  Five good factors to help you fill out your bracket.  Not one of them is going to work on its own every year, but when you get to a close match-up, check out these five factors.