Bracket Breakdown in a Nutshell

It’s not all over....but, let's be honest, it really is. At least for me.

KU bowed out early in the NCAA Tournament this weekend. Now that I’ve had a few days to mourn the end of my favorite season it’s time to go back and look at bracketology 101.

I typically do pretty well with my brackets. There are some tried and true “tells” that I use when making my picks but this year I added something else to the mix: astrology.

My sister-in-law’s aunt Julie, a professional astrologist with oodles of training, worked with me on the “Billion Dollar Bracket” in order to try and combine astrology with basketball stats in order to pick a perfect bracket. We learned a few things in the process.

I won’t share all of the secrets because Julie is going to continue researching her side of the equation, but suffice it to say half of our missed picks were with matchups that we lacked the necessary team information. I give us a pass on these.

There were other picks made because of astrology that ended up being amazingly correct. For instance, we picked Tennessee to win the play in game without batting an eye; and to win their next game as well. On the other hand, we picked Texas to go very far based solely upon their chart. In that particular case, I would never have picked Texas to make it past the second game (I wouldn’t have picked them to win the first game, to be honest; they rarely play well in the tournament). It didn't matter, though, because we were trying something new and different. Something none of the other 15 million contestants were doing.

Astrology led us to pick Providence and George Washington to win their first games. Wrong. But how wrong? Providence played a very close game, leaving us wondering if the astrological readings WERE accurate in that Providence would have a great tournament. By definition, MAKING the tournament and playing so well in the first game is a success for that program. By the same token, it also led us to pick Dayton and Harvard, which were the right choices.

When I look back at the basketball aspects I typically use I found that even without astrology I still would have picked Dayton and Harvard but not G. Washington or Providence.

As for KU? Julie clearly said from the beginning that KU “has nothing” in their chart that would lead her to believe we would make it past the second game. In fact, and this is intriguing, when we reviewed the personal astrological charts of Andrew Wiggins and Joel Embiid, she said they would both be flat during the late portion of March. Furthermore, there were specific “tells” in Embiid’s chart indicating some sort of physical problem. This was long before his injury but I remember looking at her and saying “he’s going to get hurt, isn’t he?” Her response was “it leans that way”. Of note is the fact that we didn't look at very many individual players other than KU, mostly because of time constraints.

Now, when we look at the specific factors non-astrologically related that I typically use every year there were additional discrepancies.

I research these particular factors, not always in the same order:

1) Season opponents and the scoring margin between top RPI teams, even if a team loses.

2) Overall scoring margins; close games against tough opponents will lead to me to lean towards a team in the tourney

3) Number of potential NBA draft picks playing on a team

4) Veteran tournament coaches

5) Number of upperclassmen on a team

6) Higher scoring teams

7) Road wins

Here’s an example: Dayton beat Gonzaga early in the season. They lost to Baylor but only by one point. They beat UMass, SLU and George Washington all LATE in the season. Those three teams are in the tournament, hence a lean towards Dayton possibly pulling an upset in the opening round.

Harvard is another good example. They lost to Cincinnati, which has a potential late 2nd round NBA pick on their team in Kirpatrick, early in the season but it was on the road and they only lost by five points. The majority of their conference wins were on the road and they won by a margin of roughly ten points or more in many of those wins. Over half of the Harvard team is composed of Juniors/Seniors and they only have three freshman on the roster. None of these players will be in the NBA.

This is a simple example, but it works over half the time.

This year has been crazy.

Syracuse, with Tyler Enis and Jerami Grant (both potential first round NBA draft picks), is out. So is KU, with the potential 1st & 2nd overall picks and a sure-fire Hall of Fame coach at the helm.

Duke, with another potential 1-3 NBA pick in Jabari Parker and one of the greatest college coaches ever is also out after the first weekend. OSU, with Marcus Smart, out. Indiana has a potential top ten NBA pick and they didn’t even make the tournament.

UCLA, on the other hand, has two potential first round NBA picks on their roster and they are playing in the Sweet Sixteen next weekend. Michigan State, with Gary Harris and Adreian Payne as potential first round drafts and a veteran tournament coach, are also still alive in the tournament. Roy Williams, with only three freshman on the entire roster, is out; John Calipari, who boasts nine freshman four of whom could go pro in the first round, is still in. Wichita State returned almost an entire Final Four team and rolled through this season, undefeated. As a one seed this year, they are done. As a nine seed last year, they were in the Final Four. I personally thought they'd make it to the Championship game based upon the typical factors I look at (Early is a projected #13 draft pick as of today). I'm still shaking my head.

Simply put, I tried this year to set aside any bias and look strictly at statistics. I paid to join “bracketscience.com”, which is a candy store for stat wonks. There were studies on defensive and offensive efficiency ratings, coaching records, bracket matchups compared to previous year bracket matchups….and on and on and on. You name it and there is a statistical study that has been done.

So what does all of this mean???? NOTHING. Okay, I take that back. A few things tend to hold true in the end. Nothing higher than an eight seed has ever won the tournament.

The lowest seed to ever make the Elite Eight was Missouri in 2002 as an eleven seed.

Only three ten seeds have ever made the Final Four.

Only seven ten seeds have ever made the Elite Eight and only one nine seed (Wichita State last year) has ever made the Final Four.

An eight seed has only played in the Championship game twice and only won it all once. Let me repeat this: an eight seed has only won the tournament ONCE and nothing lower has ever even played in the Championship Game.

After the dust settles following the first round, the cream does start to rise to the top. The seeds tend to start playing out more clearly. This isn’t the frustrating part of the tournament. It is figuring out the first weekend’s games.

What, in the end, does all of this mean???? For me personally, it’s more of a challenge. My picks this year left me believing that regular season wins are important to study. Looking at the history of teams that traditionally don’t do well in the tournament is also important (see Texas and some of the other Big 12 teams).

In addition, the influx of talented Freshman starters seems to only be a partial factor in success and mid-majors with upper class leadership have an edge when it comes to the stress and pressure of the NCAA tournament. Pay attention, though, with regard to the mid-majors. Veteran leadership makes a difference in the opening weekends; history shows that during the second weekend the seeds play out.

I’m not discounting the astrological factor either; rather, I think it will require far more detailed research on individual players on each team in order to get a better read on how they will do in the tournament. KU showed me this: everything we saw within individual charts outlined clearly a second game loss. Julie didn’t even bat a single lash at this.

In the end, let’s just call it like it is. A total and complete crap shoot.

My advice? Keep picking one seeds to beat 16 seeds. That seems to be clear. Keep picking nine seeds and higher to make it to the Elite Eight. That seems to be clear.

Everything else? Pick a color, mascot, favorite player, or just close your eyes and point to a team on the bracket. You will probably do better than we did this year.

But don’t count us out yet. Julie and I have a year to perfect our strategies. Let’s just hope Warren Buffet likes a good bracket contest again.

And that he has a good underwriter.