2023 NCAA Tournament Top Seeds: Contenders or Pretenders

Mar 13, 2023 - 6:44 PM

We are going to look at the top 16 teams in the tournament via seeds (1-4) and whether or not they potentially are Contenders or Pretenders. The statistics we will be using are from KenPom and a MasterSheet I have compiled for every tournament team over the last 20 years.

In previous articles, we have listed statistics that correlate to success and failure depending on seeds. Today we will list where the seeds rank in a couple of categories vs. their counterparts of previous years. If a (1) seed is listed as 50th in AdjOff that means they rank 50th vs. the other 80 (1) seeds of the past. By doing this type of comparative analysis, we can determine whether or not a team is on par with previous tournaments or should be on upset alert. Let’s dive in!

Use our FREE bracket optimizer to build a winning men’s NCAA tournament bracket & take down your contest >>

NCAA Tournament Top Seeds: Contenders or Pretenders

Here’s a look at all of the teams seeded 1 through 4.

1-seeds

Houston

  • 42nd in AdjEM
  • 53rd in AdjOff
  • 40th in AdjDef
  • 1st in TO/Reb Combo (Turnover % plus Offensive Reb %)
  • Def FT Rate over 34.50%

Alabama

  • 57th in AdjEM
  • 67th in AdjOff
  • 26th in AdjDef
  • 80th in TO/Reb Combo
  • Under +2.5 in TO/Reb Combo (+.03)
  • Top 20 in Tempo and Off 3pt Rate

Purdue

  • 75th in AdjEM
  • 45th in AdjOff
  • 76th in AdjDef
  • 41st in TO/Reb Combo

Kansas

  • 79th in AdjEM
  • 74th in AdjOff
  • 56th in AdjDef
  • 67th in TO/Reb Combo
  • Bottom 10 Off/without a top 10 Def

I have to say these are four of the most underwhelming 1-seeds ever. Remember, these rankings are out of 84 total teams. Alabama, Houston, and Kansas have two of the red flags that lead to underachievement, as previously discussed in other articles. The only catch is Houston ranks 1st in one of the more telling statistics of the TO/Reb combo. Purdue doesn’t have any red flags or correlated successful statistics, they are just below average vs. previous 1-seeds. My first initial take is that we could be looking at a Final 4 with just one 1-seed or less. Last year Kansas was underwhelming as a 1-seed, but they were 69th in AdjEM, which is several points higher than their counterparts. I’m confident in penciling in Houston to the Final 4, but I easily could see the other three (1) seeds stumbling along the way.

2-seeds

UCLA

  • 13th in AdjEM
  • 62nd in AdjOff
  • 10th in AdjDef
  • 1st in TO/Reb Combo

Texas

  • 54th in AdjEM
  • 50th in AdjOff
  • 43rd in AdjDef
  • 27th in TO/Reb Combo

Arizona

  • 65th in AdjEM
  • 20th in AdjOff
  • 79th in AdjDef
  • 73rd in TO/Reb Combo (-.74)
  • Bottom 25 in AdjDef

Marquette

  • 76th in AdjEM
  • 26th in AdjOff
  • 80th in AdjDef
  • 38th in TO/Reb Combo
  • Bot 25 in AdjDef
  • Opponent Assist Rate over 56.3%

As you can see, we have some underwhelming 2-seeds as well. UCLA stands out to me as the strongest of the bunch. UCLA ranks first overall in TO/Reb combo out of all 84 2-seeds. Only three teams have made the Final Four with a negative TO/Reb combo (2003 Marquette, 2016 Oklahoma, and 2018 Loyola Chicago). There have been 29 tournament teams with a 1- through 4-seed with a negative TO/Reb margin, and only two have made the Final Four (7%). To give that a little perspective, seeds 1 through 4 represent 78% of the Final Four contestants. Arizona is not in good company in that regard. Marquette has a historically bad defense, and Texas is an average 2-seed. Let’s move on to the (3) seeds and hope for some stability.

3-seeds

Gonzaga

  • 17th in AdjEM
  • 4th in AdjOff
  • 78th in AdjDef
  • 11th in TO/Reb combo

Baylor

  • 66th in AdjEM
  • 6th in AdjOff
  • 83rd in AdjDef
  • 76th in TO/Reb Combo (-.03)
  • Lost 1st game of Conference Tournament

Xavier

  • 69th in AdjEM
  • 12th in AdjOff
  • 77th in AdjDef
  • 55th in TO/Reb Combo
  • Top 20 in Assist Rate

Kansas State

  • 78th in AdjEM
  • 68th in AdjOff
  • 54th in AdjDef
  • 61st in TO/Reb Combo
  • Bottom 15 in AdjEM
  • Top 20 in Assist Rate

Well, again, we have some extremely unbalanced teams. Gonzaga stands out as the best 3-seed, but they have a historically bad AdjDef. Baylor has a plethora of red flags, including a negative TO/Reb combo, the second-worst adjust defense of all time for a (3) seed, and losing their first game in their conference tournament. Kansas State and Xavier share red flags in having high assist rates, which can lead to a lack of an isolation player to get a bucket when needed. Not to mention both Kansas State, Xavier, and Baylor are all below-average 3-seeds. This is shaping up to have the potential of a crazy tournament.

4-seeds

UCONN

  • 8th in AdjEM
  • 11th in AdjOff
  • 48th in AdjDef
  • 10th in TO/Reb Combo
  • Top 20 AdjOff
  • Top 20 AdjEM

Tennessee

  • 16th in AdjEM
  • 60th in AdjOff
  • 4th in AdjDEf
  • 4th in TO/Reb Combo
  • Top 20 AdjEM

Indiana

  • 77th in AdjEM
  • 43rd in AdjOff
  • 71st in AdjDef
  • 83rd in TO/Reb Combo (-2.84)

Virginia

  • 78th in AdjEM
  • 69th in AdjOff
  • 53rd in AdjDef
  • 71st in TO/Reb combo

At first glance, UCONN and Tennessee stand out amongst these 4-seeds. UCONN checks several boxes when it comes to correlated success in the tournament for 4-seeds (Top 20 AdjEM and Top 20 AdjOff). Tennessee, on the other hand, gives me some pause simply because they have struggled so mightily down the stretch. Indiana boasts the second-worst TO/Reb combo of all time for 4-seeds, and Virginia is below average, to say the least. Even though we feel as if UCONN might be underrated, remember 4-seeds that have the advanced statistics on their side only make the Final 4 at a 13% rate, which is an improvement over the standard 7% rate.

Bottom Line

This was an eye-opening exercise. There is a slew of pretenders and very few contenders. This is arguably one of the weakest top-16 tournament teams of all time. Remember, 1-, 2-, and 3-seeds represent 19 of the last 20 champions. The only exception was the 2014 UCONN team which was a 7-seed.

I’m predicting a wild outcome that could rival the 2006 and 2011 tournaments where zero 1-seeds made the Final 4. As always, thank you for reading, and if you have any questions about the data or process, you can reach me at @goldendomer622 on Twitter. Tune in for our next article on Cinderellas, possible Final Four teams, and National Championship value picks.

Be sure to enter our FREE Bracket Contest for your chance to win a LIFETIME BettingPros & FantasyPros premium subscription and a signed Giannis Antetokounmpo jersey. Plus, use the Bracket Optimizer to leverage expert picks, historical performance, betting odds, and more to make your winning brackets for every contest.

View 5-star bets and historical prop performance by players with our Prop Bet Analyzer >>


Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Stitcher | RadioPublic | Breaker | Castbox | Pocket Casts

The post 2023 NCAA Tournament Top Seeds: Contenders or Pretenders appeared first on BettingPros.








No one has shouted yet.
Be the first!

Related News