Taking stock of the current field before the second weekend.
Hello, and welcome back to another round of the NCAA tournament.
The first weekend was exciting, with a lot of great basketball, and even a few significant upsets after last year’s chalk apocalypse.
For those of you that are new here, here’s a quick breakdown of the models I’ll be referencing throughout this post:
If you want a more in-depth breakdown of these models, I suggest taking a look at my first post, specifically the “The Contenders” section.
With that out of the way, let’s dive into some analysis.
In my preview post, I talked about the “Big Three” of college basketball this year: Duke, Arizona, and Michigan. The models, as well as public opinion, had them as prohibitive favorites to win the championship. That belief has been validated so far, as aside from Siena giving Duke a surprising fight in the first round, these three have lived up to their billing in this tournament. As if to emphasize this point, the only team that looked ready to really challenge these teams for the crown during the regular season, Florida, bowed out in the second round.
So, how have these teams’ odds shifted?
| Minnow | Branchy | Resumetric | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duke | 28% (-2%) | 38% (-4%) | 31% (-1%) |
| Arizona | 14% (+2%) | 43% (+8%) | 37% (+1%) |
| Michigan | 20% (+1%) | 7% (-3%) | 20% (+2%) |
| The Field | 38% (-1%) | 12% (-1%) | 12% (-2%) |
So, none of the odds shifted too dramatically, aside from Arizona’s 8% leap in Branchy odds. In each case, the odds of the Big Three cumulatively only increased by a percent or two. Part of that is because the models never saw much threat to them in the first two rounds anyway, with each of them having 83% odds or better of making the second weekend according to each of the models (and that’s by Minnow’s relatively conservative estimation. Branchy and Resumetric both had the odds of each team making the second weekend over 90%). The other thing keeping their odds from exploding despite advancing is that none of their primary challengers were eliminated. None of the other Big Three went down, so the biggest obstacles in their way still remain. Plus, all of the two seeds advanced, and each one seed is facing either a four or a five seed, meaning that the path forward didn’t get any easier than the models were expecting as far as real obstacles are concerned.
What stands out more to me is that Duke’s odds went down across each of the models. This is peculiar, as naturally, if we were maintaining the pre-tournament odds with no updates, we would expect each team’s odds to increase with every cleared round. However, we aren’t just relying on pre-tourney odds. I fed my models up to date game data following the first weekend to generate new ratings. What the shift tells us is that the models were unimpressed with Duke’s performance thus far this tournament. While we shouldn’t overreact to one game, their performance against Siena is not what we would normally expect to see from the number one overall seed (with the important caveat that neither Patrick Ngongba or Caleb Foster played in that game for the Blue Devils). Meanwhile, Arizona and Michigan both looked excellent in their first two games against superior opponents, so the models appropriately ever so slightly shift some of the odds towards them.
At least, that’s what I would be saying if it weren’t for Branchy. Branchy decided to more extremely shift the odds in Arizona’s direction, away from Duke and Michigan in a big way. Why? Well, do you remember that kid from your middle or high school growing up? You know, the one who you never quite knew what he was doing, but he sure seemed happy doing it so you just let him be? Branchy is sort of like that. With Minnow and Resumetric I can confidently point to the results on the court and tell you why a particular performance affects the model in a certain way. Branchy is more opaque. However, just like that kid from your school growing up, sometimes the model is really good at that weird thing it does. We are, after all, talking about the 2025 MLBR consensus champion, so maybe we should just let Branchy cook and see if it can defend its title.
In terms of raw rank, Texas made the biggest leap of any of the tournament participants, going from 42 and 45 in Minnow and Resumetric, respectively, pre-tournament to 35 in each now. This is not exactly surprising. As one of the last at large teams selected for the tournament, Texas had a lot of upwards mobility, and was able to knock off two high-quality opponents in a row.
Below is a full list of rating changes for our Sweet 16 participants from their pre-tourney data:
| Team | Old Rank | New Rank | Rank Δ | Old Net | New Net | Net Δ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 18 | 14 | +4 | 22.23 | 24.06 | +1.83 |
| Illinois | 6 | 6 | 0 | 28.22 | 29.76 | +1.53 |
| Texas | 42 | 35 | +7 | 15.19 | 16.70 | +1.51 |
| Nebraska | 20 | 18 | +2 | 21.43 | 22.83 | +1.40 |
| Houston | 5 | 5 | 0 | 28.62 | 29.94 | +1.32 |
| Tennessee | 15 | 12 | +3 | 23.16 | 24.45 | +1.29 |
| Michigan St. | 11 | 10 | +1 | 24.17 | 25.25 | +1.08 |
| Iowa | 27 | 23 | +4 | 19.19 | 20.26 | +1.07 |
| Iowa St. | 7 | 7 | 0 | 28.15 | 29.18 | +1.03 |
| St. John’s | 19 | 19 | 0 | 21.62 | 22.61 | +0.99 |
| Purdue | 9 | 8 | +1 | 26.66 | 27.64 | +0.99 |
| Michigan | 2 | 2 | 0 | 33.63 | 34.28 | +0.65 |
| Arizona | 3 | 3 | 0 | 31.35 | 31.98 | +0.64 |
| Connecticut | 13 | 13 | 0 | 23.84 | 24.33 | +0.50 |
| Arkansas | 16 | 16 | 0 | 23.07 | 23.49 | +0.42 |
| Duke | 1 | 1 | 0 | 36.38 | 35.84 | -0.54 |
| Team | Old Rank | New Rank | Rank Δ | Old BT | New BT | BT Δ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Texas | 45 | 35 | +10 | 2.4910 | 2.8785 | +0.3874 |
| Iowa | 37 | 30 | +7 | 2.7870 | 3.0750 | +0.2880 |
| Tennessee | 24 | 20 | +4 | 3.3427 | 3.5308 | +0.1881 |
| Nebraska | 12 | 9 | +3 | 4.0900 | 4.2305 | +0.1404 |
| St. John’s | 14 | 11 | +3 | 3.9742 | 4.0882 | +0.1139 |
| Alabama | 19 | 16 | +3 | 3.7668 | 3.8704 | +0.1036 |
| Michigan | 3 | 3 | 0 | 5.5895 | 5.6612 | +0.0716 |
| Purdue | 10 | 7 | +3 | 4.2005 | 4.2696 | +0.0691 |
| Michigan St. | 11 | 8 | +3 | 4.1991 | 4.2673 | +0.0682 |
| Illinois | 16 | 13 | +3 | 3.9622 | 4.0205 | +0.0583 |
| Connecticut | 5 | 5 | 0 | 4.5425 | 4.5686 | +0.0262 |
| Arkansas | 15 | 14 | +1 | 3.9623 | 3.9835 | +0.0212 |
| Arizona | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6.1107 | 6.1116 | +0.0008 |
| Duke | 2 | 2 | 0 | 5.9281 | 5.9133 | -0.0148 |
| Iowa St. | 6 | 6 | 0 | 4.3703 | 4.3553 | -0.0150 |
| Houston | 4 | 4 | 0 | 4.6858 | 4.6348 | -0.0510 |
Alabama made the biggest move up the Minnow leaderboard, likely on the back of their demolition of a solid, if hobbled Texas Tech squad. The other thing that jumps out to me is Duke, aligning with the win probabilities we discussed above, was the only team to advance to the Sweet 16 while decreasing their net rating.
We’ve talked at length about the Big Three already, but with Florida gone, there’s an open question as to who will make the Final Four from the South region. None of the models are super confident in picking a winner. Minnow and Resumetric both prefer Houston (35% and 42% to make the Final Four, respectively) while Branchy favors Illinois at 37%. The models still see that region as very much up for grabs.
Something to keep in mind with those projections, though, is that the South regionals are being hosted by Rice in Houston, which is functionally a home game for the Cougars. My models still treat those games as neutral-site because they technically are, but the advantage for Houston is something to consider.
For what its worth, here are the win probabilities for Houston versus each of their regional opponents according to Minnow, assuming that they had home-court advantage:
| Opponent | Houston Win % | Win % Δ |
|---|---|---|
| Illinois | 62.9% | +12.5% |
| Nebraska | 78.1% | +10.6% |
| Iowa | 81.3% | +8.8% |
Those adjusted probabilities put Houston at almost exactly 50% odds to make the Final Four. Illinois is a dangerous team though, and while playing in their hometown should be a big advantage, it isn’t quite the same thing as playing in their own arena, so this should all be taken with a grain of salt.
Home advantage aside, Minnow clearly thinks that Houston-Illinois will be the best game of the Sweet 16. Not only does that matchup have the best combined net rating of the round (Houston is ranked fifth in Minnow, Illinois sixth), but Houston and Illinois have nearly identical net ratings, suggesting two very evenly matched squads, with Minnow marking the game as practically a pickem. They get there in different ways too, with Illinois ranking second in adjusted offensive efficiency, and Houston ranking fourth in adjusted defensive efficiency. That should be a heck of a basketball game.
Resumetric is a bigger fan of UConn-MSU, with those teams ranking 5th and 8th in Resumetric meaning that’s the highest-rated matchup for the round in Resumetric, and that matchup also having the closest odds of the round (57% UConn). Minnow has that game even closer at 52% MSU, but the combined ranking is a bit lower.
As for who’s on upset alert, I think I’ll stick to my rules from my tournament preview: It’s hard to call anything an “upset” that involves a difference in seed of three or less. However, given the nature of this tournament, I think it would be a significant upset to see one of the Big Three go out before the Elite 8. That leaves us with Iowa vs. Nebraska, Texas vs. Purdue, Tennesee vs. Iowa St, Michigan vs. Alabama, Duke vs. Saint John’s, and Arizona vs. Arkansas.
Minnow believes that any team has at least a half-decent shot to beat anyone at this point in the tournament, with even its lowest win percentage (St John’s at 18% vs. Duke) still not being all that low. Still, of that group, the only teams it has over 30% to advance are Tennessee (38%) and Iowa (44%).
Branchy is higher on Texas (31%) and lower on Iowa (35%) and Tennessee (27%) while still giving each of them half-decent shots at the upset. Branchy is much lower on the teams facing the Big Three, though, Giving Duke, Arizona, and Michigan 98%, 97%, and 90% chances to win respectively.
Resumetric doesn’t give the underdogs much shot at all, with Tennessee, Iowa, and Texas getting 30%, 24%, and 20% odds to win, and none of the teams playing the Big Three having greater than 14% odds to win.
Check out the Bracket Tracker if you want to see the full matchup odds for this round.
As always, if you made it this far, thanks for reading! Here’s hoping the tournament only gets better from here on out.