Navigating the World of College Basketball: Analytics, Tournament Bids, and More

College basketball is more than just cheering for your favorite team; it's a complex world of analytics, predictions, and the ever-present bubble watch. Whether you're a seasoned fan looking to understand the game on a deeper level or a recruit aiming for Division 1, this article breaks down key concepts and provides insights into the world of NCAA basketball.

Understanding College Basketball Analytics

For those looking to make informed predictions, understanding the data behind the game is crucial. Forget simply looking at points per game; pace of play is a primary consideration.

Possessions: The Foundation of Efficiency

To truly understand a team's offensive and defensive capabilities, we must first estimate the number of possessions in a game. A possession can end in several ways:

A turnover (TO).
A field goal attempt (FGA), potentially extended by an offensive rebound (OREB).
Free throws.

Estimating possessions involves accounting for these factors. A common formula uses FGA - OREB to estimate possessions with a field goal attempt. Free throws also play a role, although not every free throw comes in pairs due to shooting fouls. Therefore, a more complex calculation is needed to estimate possessions accurately.

To estimate the possessions in one game, you apply this a formula to both teams and take the average. During the 2019-20 season, college basketball teams averaged about 70 possessions per game. Gonzaga was one of the faster teams, as they averaged 74 possessions per game.

Points Per Possession: Evaluating Efficiency

Once we have an estimate of possessions, we can evaluate teams using points per possession - an efficiency metric. During the 2019-20 season, college basketball teams averaged 100.5 points per 100 possessions.

To get from points per possession to college basketball rankings, you need to adjust for strength of schedule. Pomeroy uses the least squares method to adjust for strength of schedule. This is also the basic idea behind linear regression, the data science technique most often used to find the correlation between two variables. This least squares method also drives the team rankings on the Sports Reference sites. They call it the Simple Rating System (SRS), and this method assigns a rating to each team in college basketball. The difference in the rating between two teams gives a prediction for a future game.

Making Predictions: Gonzaga vs. Michigan State Example

With offensive and defensive ratings based on points per possession, we can now make predictions for games. Let’s use Gonzaga against Michigan State as an example. First, consider what the offensive and defensive ratings mean. For example, if Gonzaga has a rating of 115 points per 100 possessions, then they are expected to score 115 points per 100 possessions against an average college basketball defense. As another example, Michigan State might have a defensive rating of 90 points per 100 possessions. This means that they’re expected to allow 90 points per 100 possessions against an average college basketball offense.

To make a prediction between Gonzaga’s offense and Michigan State’s defense, you have to consider that Michigan State’s defense is much better than average. To do this, consider the deviation of a team’s rating from average. To simplify the math, let’s use an average efficiency of 100 points per 100 possessions. Gonzaga’s offense is 15 points better than college basketball average, but Michigan State’s defense is 10 points better than average, both per 100 possessions. A common way to make a prediction is that Gonzaga’s offense will score 5 points per 100 possessions better than average. This is because 15 (Gonzaga’s deviation from average on offense) minus 10 (Michigan State’s deviation from average on defense) is 5. Gonzaga is predicted to score 105 points per 100 possessions against Michigan State. If you scale this efficiency to 70 possessions for a game, this implies Gonzaga will score 73.5 points. You can do same calculation for the other matchup. Suppose Michigan State’s offense has a rating of 111 while Gonzaga’s defense has rating of 93 (both measured by points per 100 possessions). You can work out that Michigan State’s offense is predicted to be 4 points better per 100 possessions. While I have assumed 70 possessions in this game, you could assume a different number, especially if Gonzaga plays faster than average.

The Four Factors of Offensive Success

Dean Oliver, a pioneer in basketball analytics, identified four key factors that contribute to a great offense:

Shooting: Measured by effective field goal percentage, which gives extra credit for three-point shots.
Offensive Rebounding: Measured by the offensive rebounding rate, or the percentage of rebounds the offense gets on their end of the court. In college basketball, the average offensive rebounding rate is about 28%.
Turnovers: Measured by turnover rate, which is turnovers divided by possessions.
Getting to the Foul Line: Measured by free throw attempts divided by field goal attempts. In college basketball, this rate is about 32%.

Oliver’s four factors explain offensive efficiency, or points per possession, almost exactly. Based on regression analysis, shooting is the most important factor, offensive rebounding and turnovers have about the same importance but less than shooting, and the least important factor is getting to the foul line.

Matchups: Do They Really Matter?

While it's tempting to focus on specific matchups, team-level matchups in the four factors do not significantly improve predictions for college basketball games. The efficiency numbers already account for these matchups.

The Road to the NCAA Tournament: Bubble Teams and Bracketology

As March approaches, the focus shifts to the NCAA Tournament and the teams vying for a spot in the coveted field of 68. Several metrics are used to evaluate teams, including:

Joe Lunardi's Bracketology: Projections of the tournament field.
Forecast-model consensus: An aggregate of various statistical models.
NCAA resume metrics: Such as NET rankings.

Teams are often categorized based on their likelihood of receiving an at-large bid:

Locks: Teams with a near-certain chance of selection.
Should be in: Teams safely above the cutline but not immune to trouble.
Work to do: Teams whose upcoming results will significantly impact their chances.

Bubble Teams to Watch

Several teams often find themselves "on the bubble," needing strong performances to secure their tournament hopes. These teams often have a mix of strengths and weaknesses, making their fate uncertain until Selection Sunday.

Read also: The Heroism of Jonathan Joestar

Several teams that could use at least a couple more wins this season:

Miami (Ohio): Despite an undefeated record, their strength of schedule is questioned.
Missouri: A porous non-conference schedule puts them on the bubble.
Auburn: Recent struggles and a tough conference schedule make their chances uncertain.
Texas: Needs to secure wins to guarantee a .500 finish in league play.
TCU: Surging into the tournament picture after a strong run.
Ohio State: Needs wins in the Big Ten tournament to feel secure.
USC: Fading away from the tournament picture after a series of losses.
Santa Clara: Needs to beat top teams in their conference tournament.

The Division 1 Dream: Recruiting and Competition

For aspiring college basketball players, competing at the Division 1 level is the ultimate goal. Student-athletes who compete at D1 basketball schools not only meet highly competitive recruiting guidelines set by these elite schools but are also among the best student-athletes in the nation.

The Recruiting Landscape

Potential recruits should be prepared for the highest level of competition among not only high school athletes, but also current student-athletes competing at junior colleges with basketball programs, as these players are often recruited by four-year D1 basketball schools too. There is an extremely high caliber set for student-athletes who land roster spots on D1 basketball teams. Getting to the D1 level-and staying there-requires an extremely high level of dedication, passion for the sport and hard work.

Finding the Right Fit

When narrowing down your target list, it’s important to consider several factors. First and foremost, student-athletes who have their sights set on attending one of these D1 basketball schools should explore a complete list of D1 basketball colleges, be prepared to meet or exceed competitive recruiting guidelines, and stay up to date on D1 basketball rankings. Student-athletes who hope to compete at one of the 350+ Division 1 basketball colleges shouldn’t limit their search to only the most elite Division 1 basketball programs.

Title Contenders and Teams to Watch

The top tier of college basketball is deep, with several teams capable of making a deep tournament run.

Title Contenders

Arizona: Excellent defense and a terrific start under coach Tommy Lloyd.
Michigan: Spurtability reminiscent of UConn's title teams.
UConn: Defensive numbers similar to their back-to-back title teams.
Houston: Efficient offense and a talented player in Flemings.
Illinois: Best chance to make the Final Four since 2005.
Nebraska: Disciplined, resilient, and hard-playing.
Duke: Dominant team with a dominant player in Cameron Boozer.

Other Teams to Watch

Michigan State: Best defensive team in the country.
Purdue: Struggling with ball screen defense.
Iowa State: Complete team with elite shooting and defense.
Texas Tech: Improved team with a strong offensive duo.
Gonzaga: Capable of winning a national championship despite a loss to Michigan.
BYU: Three studs and an elite offensive coach.
Alabama: Awesome guards but needs size and rebounding.
Florida: Overwhelms opponents with length and rebounding.
Arkansas: Inconsistent but dangerous with an elite point guard.
Kansas: Learning to play with Peterson.
Iowa State: Improved with Nick Dorn in the starting lineup.
Ohio State: Talented but has underwhelmed.
NC State: Starting to play better in the ACC with NCAA Tournament experience.
Saint Louis: Fun to watch with a great offensive mind.
Utah State: In NCAA Tournament contention again.
Santa Clara: Appears to be their best team yet.

tags: #easiest #NCAA #basketball #teams #to #get