It's time to take a look at the Final 4 matchups and also analyze how effective the efficiency ratings are in predicting who made the Elite 8 & Final 4.
North Carolina (3) (.973) vs Villanova (12) (.949)
Overall Efficiency: North Carolina (3), Villanova (12)
Offensive Efficiency: North Carolina (1), Villanova (18)
Defensive Efficiency: North Carolina (18), Villanova (15)
Efficiency Prediction: North Carolina
My Prediction: North Carolina
Comments: The difference here is the offense. Believe it or not the defenses are pretty comparable and UNC actually holds teams to a lower effective FG%. However, UNC's offense is far more efficient than Villanova's and I think that will be the difference in the game. I also think UNC's size might potentially cause some problems for 'Nova. However, 'Nova is definitely a tough team, so the height advantage for UNC might not matter. Both teams are pretty deep, so UNC probably won't have an advantage there like they usually do. If 'Nova can offensive rebound and hit 10-12 three-pointers, I could see the possibility of an upset here, but if UNC is firing on all cylinders offensively then Villanova won't have a shot in hell.
UConn (1) (.977) vs Michigan State (8) (.953)
Overall Efficiency: UConn (1), Michigan State (8)
Offensive Efficiency: UConn (13), Michigan State (23)
Defensive Efficiency: UConn (3), Michigan State (9)
Efficiency Prediction: UConn
My Prediction: UConn
Comments: A lot is being made of this game being in Detroit and how that will help Michigan State win, however, I ain't buying that idea one bit. On the surface, it looks as though these two teams are pretty close, but if you dig a little deeper you will see that's not the case at all:
Off. Effective FG%: UConn 51.5 [75], Michigan State 50.0 [132]
Def. Effective FG%: UConn 42.2 [2], Michigan State 47.3 [87]
Off. Turnover %: UConn 18.0 [45], Michigan State 20.6 [196]
Def. Turnover %: UConn 16.2 [336], Michigan State 20.2 [175]
Off. Reb. %: UConn 40.0 [10], Michigan State 41.0 [5]
Def. Reb. %: UConn 71.2 [51], Michigan State 73.0 [7]
Off. FTA/FGA: UConn 46.2 [7], Michigan State 41.2 [48]
Def. FTA/FGA: UConn 19.2 [1], Michigan State 35.0 [142]
Michigan State's offensive and defensive ratings are both driven by their rebounding, however, I see two problems with this. The first is that they play in a conference with 10 other teams and of those 10 other teams, 9 of them ranked 178th or worse in offensive rebounding, the 10th team ranked 79th. Defensive rebounding was a little better, but when the offensive rebounding is so poor that's really no surprise. Still 7 out of the other 10 teams ranked 114th or worse. Meanwhile, the Big East had 8 other teams in the Top 100 in offensive rebounding and 5 in the Top 100 in defensive rebounding. Oh and by the way, Louisville isn't one of those teams, in case you want to make that argument that Michigan State just beat them.
So my point here is that not only has Michigan State been beating up on poor rebounding teams, but I have a hard time believing they will be able to outrebound UConn, who is the biggest and most physical team they've had to face yet. Without being dominant on the boards, both the Michigan State offense and defense are bound to suffer, and they don't shoot a high enough percentage from the field or prevent baskets well enough to make up for not outrebounding their opponent. To make matters worse, UConn is 7th best in the country at getting to the free throw line, while Michigan State is only 142nd in preventing opponents from getting to the free throw line. The "home court" advantage might help some, but I think UConn will win the game and also has a high chance of winning the game rather handily.
Elite 8 Efficiency Analysis
Here are the Overall Efficiency Rankings of each Sweet 16 team before the tournament started:
1.) North Carolina (2)
2.) UConn (3)
3.) Louisville (4)
4.) Pitt (6)
5.) Missouri (10)
6.) Michigan State (13)
7.) Oklahoma (17)
8.) Villanova (19)
Analysis: All of the Elite 8 teams were in the Top 20 in overall efficiency before the tournament started. 4 of the top 6 teams made the Elite 8 and 5 of the Top 10. In the Sweet 16, Memphis(1) lost to Missouri(10), Gonzaga(5) lost to UNC(2), Duke(7) lost to Villanova(19), Kansas(11) lost to Michigan State(13), Purdue(14) lost to UConn(3), Syracuse(15) lost to Oklahoma(17), Xavier(24) lost to Pitt(6), & Arizona(39) lost to Louisville(4). Previously, UCLA(9) lost to Villanova(19), Arizona State(12) lost to Syracuse(15), Washington(16) lost to Purdue(14), & Marquette(20) lost to Missouri(10). West Virginia(8) and BYU(18) were the only two Top 20 teams to lose to a team outside of the Top 20. Not many surprises here based on efficiency with the biggest difference in ranks being the 12 spots separating Duke & Villanova, which is not that big of a difference.
Here are the Offensive Efficiency Rankings of each Elite 8 team:
1.) North Carolina (1)
2.) Pittsburgh (2)
3.) Oklahoma (8)
4.) UConn (13)
5.) Missouri (16)
6.) Villanova (22)
7.) Michigan State (30)
8.) Louisville (41)
Analysis: Even though 7 out of the Top 10 offensive teams made the Sweet 16, only three of them made it to the Elite 8. In the Sweet 16, Gonzaga(4) lost to UNC(1), Duke(5) lost to Villanova(22), Arizona(7) lost to Louisville(41), Syracuse(9) lost to Oklahoma(8), Kansas(24) lost to Michigan State(30), Memphis(25) lost to Missouri(16), Xavier(43) lost to Pitt(2), & Purdue(57) lost to UConn(13). Duke, Arizona, and Kansas all lost despite having higher rated offenses, however, Kansas was the only one of these three teams that had a higher rated offense and defense then their opponent. Previously, UCLA(3) lost to Villanova(22), Arizona State(6) lost to Syracuse(9), Marquette(10) lost to Missouri(16). In each of those cases, the better defensive team won, which for the most part looks like a good trend to follow when two high rated offenses play each other.
Here are the Defensive Efficiency Rankings of each Elite 8 team:
1.) Louisville (2)
2.) UConn (3)
3.) Missouri (10)
4.) Michigan State (12)
5.) Villanova (19)
6.) North Carolina (28)
7.) Pittsburgh (35)
8.) Oklahoma (39)
Analysis: 6 of the Top 10 teams on defense made the Sweet 16, but only 3 of them survived into the Elite 8. Memphis(1) lost to Missouri(10), Purdue(5) lost to UConn(3), Kansas(8) lost to Michigan State(12), Xavier(14) lost to Pitt(35), Gonzaga(15) lost to UNC(28), Duke(20) lost to Villanova(19), Syracuse(26) lost to Oklahoma(39), & Arizona(118) lost to Louisville(2). In most cases, the better defensive teams lost because their offenses weren't up to par. While defense is important, it looks like a high rated offense is a better indicator of who moves on, however, in the case of two high rated offenses, the better defensive team has been prevailing.
Final 4 Efficiency Analysis
Here are the Overall Efficiency Rankings of each Final 4 team before the tournament started:
1.) North Carolina (2)
2.) UConn (3)
3.) Michigan State (13)
4.) Villanova (19)
Analysis: Only 2 teams from the Top 10 made the Final 4 this year, even though the trend was for all 4 teams to be in the Top 10. However, Michigan State is now 8th and Villanova 12th. My advice would be to look at teams who are in the Top 20 as potential Final 4 candidates, because they could work there way up into the Top 10 by playing well. Also, this season we know was very similar in efficiency rankings to 2006, which is the year George Mason made the Final 4, so it's not surprising that all the teams didn't come from the Top 10. Louisville(4) lost to Michigan State(13), Pitt(6) lost to Villanova(19), Missouri(10) lost to UConn(3), and Oklahoma(17) lost to UNC(2). UNC and UConn were better than their opponents in both offense and defense, so no surprise they both won. Louisville had a subpar offense(41) for a Final 4 candidate. Out of the last 24 Final 4 teams, Louisville had a better offense than just two of them, George Mason(49) & LSU(50), so it's safe to say their offense is what did them in. Out of the last 24 Final 4 teams, Pitt did not have a better defense(35) than any of them. The worst defensive team to make the Final 4 in the past 6 years was the Michigan State squad from 2005 that ranked 25th. So even though Louisville & Pitt were ranked in the Top 10 in efficiency, there were indicators for both that they would most likely not make the Final 4. The problem of course was deciding which teams would beat them.
Here are the Offensive Efficiency Rankings of each Final 4 team:
1.) North Carolina (1)
2.) UConn (13)
3.) Villanova (22)
4.) Michigan State (30)
Analysis: Since 2004, the only other season where there wasn't at least 3 teams in the Final 4 that were in the Top 10 in offensive efficiency was 2006. Again we should have seen this coming. Michigan State is especially bad with a ranking of 30, which is better than just George Mason(49) & LSU(50) of the past 24 Final 4 teams. Of course, they had the luxury of playing the one Elite 8 team that had a worse offense than they did in Louisville(41). They most likely would have lost to any other opponent.
Here are the Defensive Efficiency Rankings of each Sweet 16 team:
1.) UConn (3)
2.) Michigan State (12)
3.) Villanova (19)
4.) North Carolina (28)
Analysis: The trend here over the last 5 years was that 19 out of the 20 Final 4 teams ranked in the Top 20 in Defensive Efficiency and the 20th team ranked 25th. That means that UNC was actually outside of the trend, however, they were close and have actually moved up to 18th in defensive efficiency now. They also have the highest ranked offense by a wide margin, which probably makes up for the difference. So the trend remains that you need a relatively solid D to advance to the Final 4.
More: March Madness
No comments:
Post a Comment