We have meticulously examined the crucial statistics and removed the teams that seem to be the least suitable for a significant advancement in this tournament. If you haven't read that article yet, please click on this link.

The teams we were left with are as follows;
The Contenders

East
No Top 4 Seeds remain

Midwest
(1) Houston
(2) Texas

West
(2) UCLA
(3) Gonzaga
(4) UCONN

South
(1) Alabama
(2) Arizona

The initial observation is the absence of a qualifying team in the East. Purdue, the top seed, faces two major setbacks. Although being unranked in the preseason may appear arbitrary, it has proven to be a reliable predictor of postseason success. Furthermore, Matt Painter, their head coach, is one of the worst tournament coaches in the field, having only advanced to the Elite 8 once in 14 appearances. Therefore, Purdue should not be considered.

Marquette, the 2nd seed in the East, also has a few drawbacks. Like Purdue, they were unranked at the start of the season, and their scoring margin is weak. Shaka Smart, their head coach, gained notoriety following VCU's run to the Final 4 in 2011, but since then, he has only progressed past the first round once in eight tries.

Given that Kansas St has a rookie coach and Tennessee has one of the most ineffective tournament coaches in history, this bracket appears to be ripe for an upset. I'll delve into leverage and game theory in a future article, but for now, let's see which of the next best teams in the East offers us the greatest leverage against the field.

I have compared the 538 model to the current ESPN Bracket selections, but please note that ESPN's numbers may fluctuate in real-time. Therefore, it is recommended that you check the data as close to your bracket cutoff time as possible before making any decisions.

As of now, Kentucky appears to be a compelling choice, particularly in larger pools, as it offers a fair amount of leverage over the field unless the ESPN numbers change significantly. Kentucky has a "Legend" head coach, which is a great predictor of a team exceeding expectations. Michigan State, another team with a "Legend" coach, also offers good leverage in this bracket and could be worth considering if you're seeking upsets.

In the South, we have disregarded the top two seeds, making it difficult to bet against Houston. According to the 538 model numbers, Houston winning the tournament has a great leverage of 25%, compared to the 11% of brackets in ESPN that currently have them as champions. If Kelvin Sampson, Houston's head coach, leads them to the Elite 8, he will gain "Legend" status.

The West offers us three options, and while it may be unwise to dismiss the 1 seed, Kansas, with a "Legend" head coach, they lack in scoring margin, which has historically been one of the best predictors of tournament success.

The 538 model's unfavorable view of Kansas aligns with what we are observing. As a result, any of the other 2-4 seeds in the region could be considered. Based on futures lines, UCLA appears to be the best option. However, according to the 538 model, Gonzaga is the team to choose. UCONN may also be a viable choice based on leverage, but I will not make a determination on this region until Thursday.

In the South, we have the top two teams to choose from, and both Alabama and Arizona are acceptable choices. If you seek leverage, Arizona is the better option. Currently, Alabama is being selected at a much higher percentage to win the entire tournament.

In the next article on game theory, I will provide additional insight into which teams to pick from each region. Parts 1 and 2 of this series are just a few of the many tools available to you when filling out your bracket. Ultimately, game theory and what I will show you next are the most critical factors in determining your success or failure in bracket pools.




Use this info to win FREE money courtesy of the Sharp App!

Join our bracket challenge for FREE, and you could win $250 in Amazon gift cards.