This is great advice... but, I'm still gonna go with copying the bracket from Linda in HR since she's won the office pool the last 5 years despite never having watched a single game of college basketball.
Great video! One of my (flawed) philosophies when it comes to brackets is “don’t get the first round right, get the final 4 right” where I basically think that if I can get 3/4 right and then hope 1/2 and then the 1 wins it all, I have a good chance at winning my pool. Another philosophy is one I don’t understand where I was a 7th grader in a bracket pool with like 70 other guys all 35+ and picked Louisville over Michigan in the national championship and ended up winning it
My dad used to have me fill out his brackets for money with his friends when I was growing up cuz I was like a little sports number savant back in the day
My favorite way to find upsets is to find inefficient offensive teams that play slow. I think slow pace usually favors the underdog and inefficient offense leads to more off nights for the favorite. Last year it hit with Tennessee (85th in offense and 232nd in pace per KenPom) but there's not really an obvious team this year
I think a slower pace lends itself to more variable outcomes just based on the fact that there are fewer possessions. Faster good teams are less likely to be upset, and faster bad teams are less likely to pull the upset. This is why Virginia (very slow) can lose to UMBC and why gonzaga (speedy af) almost never loses early in the tourney to inferior opponents.
I find great value in UCLA. They have tracked as a top 15 offense and defense on KenPom this year despite a season filled with injuries, covid pauses still, no fans at one point and really just the same stuff that happened last year. Yet everyone is back from last years final four team. They have 4 legit guards which is always important, a good post player and play at a frustrating pace of play that can wear on a team. There have been times where a team has made a final four (2008 North Carolina 2009 UConn.. [won it in 2011) 2012 Louisville, 2014 Wisconsin, 2016 North Carolina) and that same team or at least close to the same team made it back again in the next year and won it all or got close again. I think they are a team that won't get nervous and choke up either. If you are looking for some great value UCLA certainly provides it. Anyway, UCLA is fully healthy again and really the only player that needs to get it going again is Juzang, everyone else is still playing very well. Just keep an eye on UCLA if you want some great value.
Man I just found out you're a Villanova alum. I have been watching your stuff because you made some great Nova content, and I assumed it was just because you were a smart, basketball nerd who knows Jay Wright is a genius lol. Awesome to know you're a fellow Villanovan. Go Cats (to the Final Four)!
Have always thought about this… I picked Marquette over Murray state when they had Ja cause I knew the odds were so so much more in my favor since more people were picking a 12 than a 5 and Markus Howard was really good. I get clowned for it but stand by that it was the right decision
I think another underrated way to find value is to look at teams with the most NBA players (outside of Duke and Kentucky). The team with the more NBA talent likely wins even if lower seed.
i dont know i like playing risky, in 2019 i was in the 99th percentile at a point because i had auburn, texas tech and virginia in my final four and duke was still yet to play michigan state for the last spot.
What team do you think can still have a good chance of winning it all but also getting value with that team. Also how many people need to be in your bracket pool for you to worry about making value picks, especially picking a different champion than others so you can separate yourself?
I didn't pick zaga and picked Baylor because history has will continue to show that if a team is that heavily favored without another team to be around that area, the won't win. Probably because of the amount of pressure there is on the college players.
Bracket theory is entirely dependent on the size of the pool and, while mentioned - went understated. In ESPN's pool, with millions of entries, you have to be practically perfect It's worthwhile doing a somewhat random selection in an attempt to be "perfect" In a bracket pool of ~10 people, studies have show what complete chalk brackets win over 40% of the time. That being said, here are a few historical data points for you. 12 of the past 16 national champions have been 1-seeds. Very rarely does one of the teams not on the #1 line win it all. Don't remember the exact number (think it's 8 of last 9) years a double digit seed has made it to the Sweet 16. If you need to be perfect find an 11 or 12 to take to the next weekend. There are certain play styles that create more variance and lead to being more likely to be upset. (I'll include examples from 2021) - Slower teams have less possessions, therefore more variance. In 2021, SDSU, Purdue and Virginia were all under 67 possessions per game and lost in the first round - One of the best ways to reduce variance for a high-seed is getting offensive rebounds and not turning the ball over. Last year Virginia was in the bottom 30 in the nation in offensive rebound% and Texas was in the bottom 50 for offensive turnover% - How well do you force turnovers? Purdue and BYU last year were upset and didn't force turnovers at a high level. Abilene Christian was #1 in the country in forcing turnovers, which was hugely beneficial in beating Texas. Some early teams I've identified that could be in for an early upset: Saint Mary's, Purdue, Texas Tech, Alabama, Wisconsin and LSU are all teams that (if they get a bad matchup) could be going out early. Last thing I'll add: every national champion over the past 20 years (except for the 2014 UConn team) have had 3 consistencies: 1. Experienced Head Coach (Usually with experience in the second weekend) 2. Top-20 offense and defense per KenPom (Baylor was technically 22 at the end of the year, but they were like #3 until they lost a bunch of guys to COVID, so I count them) 3. Elite point guard play Here are the teams that qualify (as of 3/11) this year: Gonzaga, Baylor, Houston, and UCLA Arizona counts if you think Tommy Lloyd can win as a first time HC. Kentucky, Duke and Kansas are all just outside the top-20 defensively and Auburn is just outside the top-20 offensively. But history has been pretty clear that top-20 (if not top-15 most years) is needed. There's my list. Hope it helps. My credentials is that I've won at least one of my tournament pools every year since 2017. Good luck!
Only 11 of the 19 champions were in the KenPom top 20 of both offensive and defensive PRE-tournament. So less of a requirement and more of a good sign if you are. Of the 7 that weren't pre-tournament, but got there post, all of them improved their defense to get in. So you want a top 20 offense pre-tournament, and either a top 20 defense or a top 40 defense with the ability to lock-in/get hot on D. So I would definitely add Kentucky, Duke, and Kansas to that short-list officially, and probably Auburn as well. Also Villanova, especially Villanova (Gillespie is the top PG and Wright is elite HC, and they just had 0.94ppp against in BET across the 3 games).
@@nathancarroll7347 If you go to each year, you can download the final or pre-tourny data. It's fairly small under the main title. But some people have done similar analysis so you can also just google for pre-tourny kenpom champion stuff.
Let's disntiguish between "small office pools" and "big pools". In a small office pool, you could pick the favorite in every game and win. You have little need or incentive to be creative or imaginative. If you get the right winner, even if it's a heavy favorite like Gonzaga or Arizona, you have a good chance to win an office pool. In one of the really big pools, however, that strategy is like trying to win a lottery. You could be right about the winner along with hundreds or thousands of others, and your chances of accumulating the most points is low and fairly random because all those early round results are close to random. HOWEVER, if you are creative enough to find that 4 or 5 seed who might win the tournament, and there are some, you've narrowed the field tremendously. Everyone who didn't pick that winner has missed the huge points from the final. Most have missed semi-final points and points from the Sweet 16 and Eltie 8 games involving that team. If you doubt that a four or five can win it, you haven't been paying attention this year. On ONE SAT, the top 6 teams in the polls all lost. The advanced metrics for the entire season tell us that there aren't more than 2 points separating No 2 from No 25, and IMO the only reason Gonzaga is a couple more points ahead is that they play so many weak teams. In other words, it would NOT take some huge upset for a No 4 or 5 to win it. it might not be an upset at all. Here's the other thing about picking an "upset winner" of the tournament in a huge bracket pool. If you get that team to the FF with a lead in the bracket over everyone else who had that team winning, you can hedge bigtime and guarantee a nice return. Just bet against them in the semifinal or final for enough to insure a profit or sell shares of your ticket for a lot more than you invested in the pool. I'm not going to "tout" any particular "upset winner". I have one or two teams in mind that I think are more than capable of beating anyone. However, what I would suggest is that you look at the top seeds -- ie, No 1 and 2 seeds in particular -- and decide which ones are the "most vulnerable" and find that higher seed in that bracket that might win it all. I think there are two very vulnerable No 1 seeds this year. I won't start an srgument by saying who they are, and of course they could prove me completely wrong.
I think that's definitely fair feedback! I also think that the conclusion is accurate though. Computers are better at this type of decision optimization than us. Absolutely wouldn't have done the sponsor if I didn't believe that
I mean depending on the size of your pool, picking almost entirely favorites with only a couple mathematically-sound "value picks" objectively makes your odds a lot better. That's also what's fun about bigger pools, is that you have more freedom to pick upsets and a weird champion and still be viable. After all, just being in the 60-70th percentile with a chalk bracket almost definitely won't be enough to end up on top. But big risky picks generally aren't rewarded very highly in smaller pools.
This is great advice... but, I'm still gonna go with copying the bracket from Linda in HR since she's won the office pool the last 5 years despite never having watched a single game of college basketball.
Yeah, send that
Lmaooo 😂😂
For me it's my grandma or aunt 😂
Great video! One of my (flawed) philosophies when it comes to brackets is “don’t get the first round right, get the final 4 right” where I basically think that if I can get 3/4 right and then hope 1/2 and then the 1 wins it all, I have a good chance at winning my pool. Another philosophy is one I don’t understand where I was a 7th grader in a bracket pool with like 70 other guys all 35+ and picked Louisville over Michigan in the national championship and ended up winning it
My dad used to have me fill out his brackets for money with his friends when I was growing up cuz I was like a little sports number savant back in the day
Lol this is funny to me cause I was in 7th grade too when Louisville won and I knew they were gonna win because Peyton Siva was just different
My favorite way to find upsets is to find inefficient offensive teams that play slow. I think slow pace usually favors the underdog and inefficient offense leads to more off nights for the favorite. Last year it hit with Tennessee (85th in offense and 232nd in pace per KenPom) but there's not really an obvious team this year
I’m the other way around I always pick against teams who are very efficient offensively but can’t defend like Colgate and South Dakota State.
I think a slower pace lends itself to more variable outcomes just based on the fact that there are fewer possessions. Faster good teams are less likely to be upset, and faster bad teams are less likely to pull the upset. This is why Virginia (very slow) can lose to UMBC and why gonzaga (speedy af) almost never loses early in the tourney to inferior opponents.
I find great value in UCLA. They have tracked as a top 15 offense and defense on KenPom this year despite a season filled with injuries, covid pauses still, no fans at one point and really just the same stuff that happened last year. Yet everyone is back from last years final four team. They have 4 legit guards which is always important, a good post player and play at a frustrating pace of play that can wear on a team. There have been times where a team has made a final four (2008 North Carolina 2009 UConn.. [won it in 2011) 2012 Louisville, 2014 Wisconsin, 2016 North Carolina) and that same team or at least close to the same team made it back again in the next year and won it all or got close again. I think they are a team that won't get nervous and choke up either. If you are looking for some great value UCLA certainly provides it. Anyway, UCLA is fully healthy again and really the only player that needs to get it going again is Juzang, everyone else is still playing very well. Just keep an eye on UCLA if you want some great value.
UCLA is an elite 8 team
See, here’s the problem with just those two stats - you miss rankings in other categories.
Man I just found out you're a Villanova alum. I have been watching your stuff because you made some great Nova content, and I assumed it was just because you were a smart, basketball nerd who knows Jay Wright is a genius lol. Awesome to know you're a fellow Villanovan. Go Cats (to the Final Four)!
Will you be making a video explaining all team in March Madness again this year?
That will be out on Sunday!
@@hoopvision68 cant wait
Have always thought about this… I picked Marquette over Murray state when they had Ja cause I knew the odds were so so much more in my favor since more people were picking a 12 than a 5 and Markus Howard was really good. I get clowned for it but stand by that it was the right decision
I have been trying to explain the value pick to my friends for so long😭. It’s hard to get across that chalk picks don’t win because everyone has them.
Damn hoopvision exposing my strategy to the world
Could you do a video on the Bill Self Offense at Kansas
As a GCU student who picked them over Iowa in my bracket that I also picked Baylor to win it all, i felt called out at 6:45 lol
My method is picking teams with funny names… that’s how I predicted Oral Roberts making the sweet 16
Love your stuff! Im also a nova grad… lets get another ring this march
Funny how Bill Self is the thumbnail and he won it all.
This is exactly what I do. Got nova this year... lets dance
I think another underrated way to find value is to look at teams with the most NBA players (outside of Duke and Kentucky). The team with the more NBA talent likely wins even if lower seed.
Analyzing individual matchups of teams is never a waste of time.
Your background music is so addictive - maybe I'm affected by your fantastic content. Can u tell me its name? Thank u so much.
Over valued teams this year: 5Iowa, 3Tennessee, 2Kentucky, 1Gonzaga
Undervalued teams: 1Baylor, 4Providence, 6Colorado State
Per ESPN Who picked Whom
2015 was an even more polarized example . Everyone and their grandma had undefeated kentucky. Pick duke and you were golden
You should make a video of you filling out a bracket for next year!
Are you dropping a bracket prediction?
Videos are always so good!
i dont know i like playing risky, in 2019 i was in the 99th percentile at a point because i had auburn, texas tech and virginia in my final four and duke was still yet to play michigan state for the last spot.
i picked Grand Canyon over Iowa last year but still won my pool because I picked the bears. Great Video
are you gonna do a video for your picks and predicitons?
What team do you think can still have a good chance of winning it all but also getting value with that team. Also how many people need to be in your bracket pool for you to worry about making value picks, especially picking a different champion than others so you can separate yourself?
Your content has really helped me visualize the various set plays of some of the teams. Nice job!
I didn't pick zaga and picked Baylor because history has will continue to show that if a team is that heavily favored without another team to be around that area, the won't win. Probably because of the amount of pressure there is on the college players.
Bracket theory is entirely dependent on the size of the pool and, while mentioned - went understated. In ESPN's pool, with millions of entries, you have to be practically perfect It's worthwhile doing a somewhat random selection in an attempt to be "perfect"
In a bracket pool of ~10 people, studies have show what complete chalk brackets win over 40% of the time. That being said, here are a few historical data points for you.
12 of the past 16 national champions have been 1-seeds. Very rarely does one of the teams not on the #1 line win it all.
Don't remember the exact number (think it's 8 of last 9) years a double digit seed has made it to the Sweet 16. If you need to be perfect find an 11 or 12 to take to the next weekend.
There are certain play styles that create more variance and lead to being more likely to be upset. (I'll include examples from 2021)
- Slower teams have less possessions, therefore more variance. In 2021, SDSU, Purdue and Virginia were all under 67 possessions per game and lost in the first round
- One of the best ways to reduce variance for a high-seed is getting offensive rebounds and not turning the ball over. Last year Virginia was in the bottom 30 in the nation in offensive rebound% and Texas was in the bottom 50 for offensive turnover%
- How well do you force turnovers? Purdue and BYU last year were upset and didn't force turnovers at a high level. Abilene Christian was #1 in the country in forcing turnovers, which was hugely beneficial in beating Texas.
Some early teams I've identified that could be in for an early upset: Saint Mary's, Purdue, Texas Tech, Alabama, Wisconsin and LSU are all teams that (if they get a bad matchup) could be going out early.
Last thing I'll add: every national champion over the past 20 years (except for the 2014 UConn team) have had 3 consistencies:
1. Experienced Head Coach (Usually with experience in the second weekend)
2. Top-20 offense and defense per KenPom (Baylor was technically 22 at the end of the year, but they were like #3 until they lost a bunch of guys to COVID, so I count them)
3. Elite point guard play
Here are the teams that qualify (as of 3/11) this year:
Gonzaga, Baylor, Houston, and UCLA
Arizona counts if you think Tommy Lloyd can win as a first time HC. Kentucky, Duke and Kansas are all just outside the top-20 defensively and Auburn is just outside the top-20 offensively. But history has been pretty clear that top-20 (if not top-15 most years) is needed.
There's my list. Hope it helps. My credentials is that I've won at least one of my tournament pools every year since 2017. Good luck!
Only 11 of the 19 champions were in the KenPom top 20 of both offensive and defensive PRE-tournament. So less of a requirement and more of a good sign if you are. Of the 7 that weren't pre-tournament, but got there post, all of them improved their defense to get in. So you want a top 20 offense pre-tournament, and either a top 20 defense or a top 40 defense with the ability to lock-in/get hot on D.
So I would definitely add Kentucky, Duke, and Kansas to that short-list officially, and probably Auburn as well. Also Villanova, especially Villanova (Gillespie is the top PG and Wright is elite HC, and they just had 0.94ppp against in BET across the 3 games).
@@ra2bk Where do you find historical data on KenPom?
@@nathancarroll7347 If you go to each year, you can download the final or pre-tourny data. It's fairly small under the main title. But some people have done similar analysis so you can also just google for pre-tourny kenpom champion stuff.
@@ra2bk Watch Murray State too. Got a tough matchup with Kentucky, I think the winner of that game goes far
@@aadisaha9762 too bad that game was disrupted by a peacock and didn’t happen
9:29
Didn’t think we would make it though
This is actually great thinking
Please do a video on Mike Young Wofford and VT!!!
I like relying on that one dog from tik tok as my strategy but I might give this a try
Let's disntiguish between "small office pools" and "big pools".
In a small office pool, you could pick the favorite in every game and win. You have little need or incentive to be creative or imaginative. If you get the right winner, even if it's a heavy favorite like Gonzaga or Arizona, you have a good chance to win an office pool.
In one of the really big pools, however, that strategy is like trying to win a lottery. You could be right about the winner along with hundreds or thousands of others, and your chances of accumulating the most points is low and fairly random because all those early round results are close to random. HOWEVER, if you are creative enough to find that 4 or 5 seed who might win the tournament, and there are some, you've narrowed the field tremendously. Everyone who didn't pick that winner has missed the huge points from the final. Most have missed semi-final points and points from the Sweet 16 and Eltie 8 games involving that team. If you doubt that a four or five can win it, you haven't been paying attention this year. On ONE SAT, the top 6 teams in the polls all lost. The advanced metrics for the entire season tell us that there aren't more than 2 points separating No 2 from No 25, and IMO the only reason Gonzaga is a couple more points ahead is that they play so many weak teams. In other words, it would NOT take some huge upset for a No 4 or 5 to win it. it might not be an upset at all.
Here's the other thing about picking an "upset winner" of the tournament in a huge bracket pool. If you get that team to the FF with a lead in the bracket over everyone else who had that team winning, you can hedge bigtime and guarantee a nice return. Just bet against them in the semifinal or final for enough to insure a profit or sell shares of your ticket for a lot more than you invested in the pool.
I'm not going to "tout" any particular "upset winner". I have one or two teams in mind that I think are more than capable of beating anyone. However, what I would suggest is that you look at the top seeds -- ie, No 1 and 2 seeds in particular -- and decide which ones are the "most vulnerable" and find that higher seed in that bracket that might win it all. I think there are two very vulnerable No 1 seeds this year. I won't start an srgument by saying who they are, and of course they could prove me completely wrong.
It was me who picked GCU over Iowa, big time Javon Blackshear fan
Lets go nova! I’m a sophomore there rn
Great video
bruh forget the green screen. that shit looked cursed lmao
Holy shit dude, never knew you were Villanova alum. Me too man, roll Cats \V/
Hi do you think Texas Tech is a good pic
I finally figured this out last year and I destroyed the rest of my pool
If you ain’t first you’re last - Ricky Bobby
It’s pretty sad that almost all bracket sites don’t allow European contenders 😞
We did a March Madness pool at my job one year, and the person who won isn't from the US and knows nothing about sports in general
Gematria
Kentucky is going to win it all… hopefully
Didn’t age well
Go with gut
ND = Awesome -- I R I S H
A 12 seed just beat a 5 seed
Good vid, but the sponsorship basically leading the conclusion to be, "just let a robot do it," was a little weird.
I think that's definitely fair feedback! I also think that the conclusion is accurate though. Computers are better at this type of decision optimization than us. Absolutely wouldn't have done the sponsor if I didn't believe that
I mean depending on the size of your pool, picking almost entirely favorites with only a couple mathematically-sound "value picks" objectively makes your odds a lot better. That's also what's fun about bigger pools, is that you have more freedom to pick upsets and a weird champion and still be viable. After all, just being in the 60-70th percentile with a chalk bracket almost definitely won't be enough to end up on top. But big risky picks generally aren't rewarded very highly in smaller pools.
So, this was more or less a waist of time. Hes trying to sell subscriptions.
villanova bad, creighton good