How to bet the West, Southeast regions
Chad Millman
ESPN Insider
During the NCAA tournament last year we played a fun little game. For every round, just as the teams tried to prove their worthiness on the court, I asked some sharp handicappers and analysts to put their own knowledge to the test and play ... wiseguy brackets.
Last season, Sal Selvaggio from madduxsports.com beat out Vegas legend Alan Boston when Butler covered in the final. And this season, the format will be the same. Four wiseguys from a rotating pool of eight (give or take a couple) will share their wisdom for each bracket. Then, the two with the most wins will face off in the Final Four and the final. The winner will get your undying devotion. And maybe a fleece.
Today, we're breaking down the West with Boston and the Southeast with newcomers to the blog stable, TeamRankings.com (the brains behind Insider's Bracket Predictor tool -- look to the right). I met Tom Federico, CEO and co-founder of TR during the Sports Analytics conference at MIT a couple of weeks ago. After I moderated the panel on sports gambling, Tom came up to me, introduced himself, handed me a packet describing his site and the data he used and then told me, basically, that I was often an idiot. Finally, someone is paying attention. But he did it all with a smile. Then I went and checked out his site, which was very cool, very thorough and very deep.
Earlier this week I called Tom to invite him into the wiseguy bracket. Why should I be the only one potentially embarrassing myself in the column? He graciously agreed and we started talking about his site. Turns out TeamRankings.com was started by Federico and his buddy, Mike Greenfield -- two sports-loving Stanford students who decided to use the math and engineering they were learning for good, not geek.
"We have mined about 15 years' worth of data across all the major sports," Federico says. "And we use a lot of contextual game variables in our analysis. For example, when a team that looked statistically liked Florida State played a team that looked like Texas A&M, what was the spread, how far did the team travel? We examine those types of game factors as well as team and player stats."
Ultimately, TR uses three prediction models to determine how confident it is about an against-the-spread prediction. One is the standard power rating. Two is a bucket titled "Similar Games" which incorporates the power rating as well as dozens of other stats and betting lines that featured similar teams. And three is the "Decision Tree" model, which is what I found most fascinating. "[That] came straight from the Stanford math textbooks," says Federico.
Greenfield was working as a programmer at Paypal in the early 2000s. The bosses there realized they were often getting scammed and assigned Greenfield to a team that was tasked with figuring out why. Using sophisticated programming language and mathematical models they were able to find the "signal," as Federico called it, that was common in every scam or scam attempt. TeamRankings uses similar programming techniques in its Decision Tree model. Ultimately, it identifies the elements that most accurately predict who will win and lose a game and by how much.
"It is what a guy who studies statistics would call a black box model," says Federico. He started to explain it even more and then, when he realized it was hopeless, just sent me to the website for a clearer explanation. Here it is: "The Decision Tree model is the output of a machine learning algorithm that views every college basketball game since 1999 through the lens of hundreds of input variables, ranging from contextual information like the distance traveled by squad to team statistics like effective field goal percentage."
The algorithm does what might be convenient to think of as complex, high volume, statistically significant trend analysis. It repeatedly partitions the games into smaller and smaller subsets based on the values of one or more variables. Each split is chosen so that the win probabilities of the teams in each group get further away from 50 percent and closer to 0 percent or 100 percent.
Of course, it makes total sense -- as long as it translates to wins.
Without further ado, here are the expert picks for the West and Southeast regions:
West: Alan Boston
Duke Blue Devils (1) vs. Hampton Pirates (16)
Spread: Duke minus-22.5
"I think Duke will have a hard time getting super motivated for this game. It knows it can waltz through it. But Krzyzewski doesn't have teams that let up too often. Meanwhile Hampton is in a weak conference this year and pre-conference games would indicate they'll have a problem because they lost to Wake Forest, which isn't a good team. I think Duke can name the score. But I don't think they'll have motivation for it. I made it 22 and it is 22.5 right now. I am not fooling with this game. "
ATS pick: Pass
Straight-up pick: Duke
Michigan Wolverines (8) vs. Tennessee Volunteers (9)
Spread: Tennessee minus-2
"This is a classic tourney game that, in the old days, you would drool over. It's the not-so-smart Vols team vs. the ultra-smart Michigan team. If this had been played a month ago the Vols would have been a four-point fave. The line has been adjusted. However, it's on its way back up and people are betting Tennessee because the opener of Michigan minus-1 was silly. Michigan got better as the year went on and it was no fluke. I can't imagine Tennessee being ready for the 1-3-1 and the well-timed, constantly cutting offense that Michigan has and the other stuff John Beilein will throw at them. I made it Tennessee -1, but Michigan's home run efforts this year have been spectacular. I think Michigan is going to win the game because smarts can beat athleticism in the NCAA tourney. It wouldn't surprise me if Michigan runs them out of the gym.
ATS pick: Michigan
Straight-up pick: Michigan
Arizona Wildcats (5) vs. Memphis Tigers (12)
Spread: Arizona minus-6
<OFFER>"The tournament committee rigged it up so gamblers can't make any money. They did it so their buddies at the big schools have a chance to succeed, because they know if either of these teams played anyone decent in the first round neither would make it out. So at least one of them will. I made it 5.5, the line was 5.5 and I don't see anything at all that would get me to lean either way. I will say Memphis played great as a dog this year, winning at Gonzaga and Central Florida and even at plus-11 against Kansas they played them tough. It is possible they could play better than they are rated, but I don't think Arizona can. So it will be an ugly game to watch if you are purist. I want to bet against both of these teams. But if you had to put a gun to my head I would take Memphis plus 5.5."
ATS pick: Memphis (if he had to)
Straight-up pick: Memphis (if he had to)
Texas Longhorns (4) vs. Oakland Golden Grizzlies (13)
Spread: Texas minus-9.5
"This game opened 11. Then it got bet down to 9.5 and 10. I made a bet at plus-10. I made the game 8. I'm a little concerned because, while Texas' best effort is unbelievable -- beating A&M and Kansas the way they did is unheard of -- they hit a wall at end of the year. I think a couple things work in Oakland's favor. First is that it is an older team that has NCAA experience. Last year it played well against Pitt and then one of its better players was injured and it got run out. But that loss helps them because they know if all things are equal they could have beaten Pitt last year. They won't be intimidated. Second is that I don't think Texas will have the picnic on the boards that the top-tier teams usually have against mid-majors, which helps. Those two factors plus value leads to a very good bet, especially if Oakland doesn't play run and gun. I think Oakland will win."
ATS pick: Oakland
Straight-up pick: Oakland
Cincinnati Bearcats (6) vs. Missouri Tigers (11)
Spread: Pick
"Kind of a tricky game here. Mizzou pre-conference was great. Crushing Illinois and Old Dominion looks really good right now. But the way they played at the end of the year, you can't imagine how they beat Illinois. I actually like their coach a lot. They play an aggressive, 24-hours-of-hell style, but he does a lot of smart things in that tempo. If you are not ready for this offense you can get run out quickly. Cincy likes to press, too. But outside of a little spurt at the end of the year, it was not that great. It had a good run when its life was on the line. I think Mizzou's best game is better than Cincy's best game. I made the Tigers a 1.5-point favorite and I will definitely go with them at pick."
ATS pick: Mizzou
Straight-up pick: Mizzou
UConn Huskies (3) vs. Bucknell Bison (14)
Spread: UConn minus-10
"I power rated UConn as 11-point favorites. However the five games in five days en route to winning the Big East tourney is tough to factor. Their bodies get beat up. Is four days enough time to recover for these college kids? Maybe. But if not then these kids are in a world of trouble because they are facing a very tough team in Bucknell. It beat Richmond at home and is very experienced and well coached. Now it's catching a team that can't have that much energy for this game after winning the Big East? It opened 13 and is down to 10. If it ever goes back up I will bet Bucknell. I think they will beat them."
ATS pick: Bucknell
Straight-up pick: Bucknell
Temple Owls (7) vs. Penn State Nittany Lions (10)
Spread: Temple minus-2.5
"I made it Temple minus-4. Penn State should not be in the tourney. Penn State couldn't beat UAB if they played. If it goes back to two I will make a big bet on Temple. The Owls will have fresh legs for this game. Penn State has just earned a mission accomplished by getting into the tourney. The subconscious is powerful and they have to feel that they BS'd their way into tourney. Now that they are in, I don't think their max effort is good enough to hang with Temple. I expect Temple to kill this team. Even if I have to buy the minus-2, I will make a big bet on them. Next to VCU, Penn State is worst team in the tourney."
ATS pick: Temple
Straight-up pick: Temple
San Diego State Aztecs (2) vs. Northern Colorado Bears (15)
Spread: San Diego minus-15.5
"I made the game 13.5. I think San Diego State is another team that may have a problem getting motivated. They beat BYU after losing to them twice in the regular season. But the thing about San Diego State is that they have not had any letdowns this year at all. If they are at all flat, Northern has the talent and the coaching to hang in there. If anything, this is a first-half bet on Northern. I still think State will win, but I think they had their best effort last game and repeating best effort is hard."
ATS pick: Northern Colorado (first half)
Straight-up pick: San Diego State
Southeast: TeamRankings.com
Pittsburgh Panthers (1) vs. UNC-Asheville/AR-Little Rock winner (16)
Spread: No Line
"Our predictive models give NC-Asheville a 60 percent chance to beat AR-Little Rock and earn the right to lose to Pittsburgh. Though there is no spread to pick against yet, we can tell you that our power ratings favor Pitt by 13.5 against NC-Asheville and by 16.6 against AR-Little Rock. If the Panthers end up playing the former, their 3 percent chance to lose would be the highest of any 1-16 matchup in this year's tourney."
ATS pick: ---
Straight-up pick: Pittsburgh (97 percent confidence)
Butler Bulldogs (8) vs. Old Dominion Monarchs (9)
Spread: ODU minus-2
"Vegas favors the lower seed here for a reason, as our power ratings show Old Dominion has been 0.7 points better over the course of the season. In the last 10 games, that advantage has ballooned to 3.5 points. Our possession-based game simulation projects that the Monarchs will outrebound Butler by eight, make it to the free throw line six extra times and hold the Bulldogs to under 40 percent from the field."
ATS pick: ODU
Straight-up pick: ODU (53 percent confidence)
Kansas State Wildcats (5) vs. Utah State Aggies (12)
Spread: Kansas State minus-2
"Though Kansas State has been playing its best basketball recently, our predictive power ratings favor Utah State by one. The Aggies are a better shooting team than the Wildcats, with an effective field goal percentage of 52.2 percent, compared to Kansas State's 49.7 percent. They also turn the ball over on only 15.5 percent of their possessions, versus 17.7 percent for Jacob Pullen and company. That should help them against a Kansas State defense that thrives on forcing turnovers, doing so on 19.7 percent of opponent possessions."
ATS pick: Utah State
Straight-up pick: Utah State (60 percent confidence)
Wisconsin Badgers (4) vs. Belmont Bruins (13)
Spread: Wisconsin minus-4.5
"Before the NCAA tournament field was announced, Belmont's plus-18.4 average scoring margin led us to believe they'd have a good chance of pulling off a first-round upset. Unfortunately, the Bruins were seeded about three spots too low and the Badgers about one spot too low, so instead of a 7-seed they're facing a team good enough to be a 3. This is a fascinating matchup, as Wisconsin is second nationally in points per possession at 1.167, while Belmont is second-lowest in opponent points per possession at 0.869. As Wisconsin has done it against a tougher schedule, we think it should have the edge."
ATS pick: Wisconsin
Straight-up pick: Wisconsin (60 percent confidence)
St. John's Red Storm (6) vs. Gonzaga Bulldogs (11)
Spread: St. John's minus-1.5
"St. John's has actually been a slightly better team than Gonzaga this year, according to our predictive power ratings. However, Gonzaga has to travel across fewer time zones to get to Denver, plus St. John's will be missing D.J. Kennedy, who leads the Red Storm in rebounding (5.6 RPG) and steals (1.8 SPG) and is third in scoring (10.4 PPG)."
ATS pick: Gonzaga
Straight-up pick: Gonzaga (55 percent confidence)
BYU Cougars (3) vs. Wofford Terriers (14)
Spread: BYU minus-8
"As everyone surely knows, BYU is missing big man Brandon Davies, who was the leading rebounder for the Cougars (6.2 RPG) and by far the team's most efficient interior scorer, with a 52.5 percent field goal percentage, compared to Noah Hartsock's 48.9 percent. That said, we're still picking BYU to cover. Against teams ranked within 45 spots of Wofford in our power ratings, BYU was 10-0 with an average margin of victory of 16.6 points. There's simply no way Davies is worth the eight-point difference between those results and the spread."
ATS pick: BYU
Straight-up pick: BYU (90 percent confidence)
Florida Gators (2) vs. UCSB Gauchos (15)
Spread: Florida minus-12.5
"Though Florida is favored by 12.5 points, our predictive power ratings have them as only 9.2 points better than UCSB. That's still a large enough advantage to make an upset relatively rare, but leads us to pick the Gauchos to cover. If they do manage to pull off a shocker, it will likely involve a poor night at the free throw line for Florida; free throw percentage is pretty much the only area where UCSB has an advantage, as it shoots 10 percentage points higher than the Gators (76.5 percent vs. 66.6 percent).
ATS pick: UCSB
Straight-up pick: Florida (92 percent confidence)
UCLA Bruins (7) vs. Michigan State Spartans (10)
Spread: Michigan State minus-1.5
"We have six different predictive models that we rely on to predict game winners, and the four that have the best historical accuracy all give Michigan State a win probability between 55 percent and 61 percent. It's no surprise that Tom Izzo has his team peaking in March, with the Spartans' last 10 games power rating a full 2.3 points better than their overall season rating. Michigan State is expected to outrebound UCLA by three and to have two fewer turnovers, while shooting a similar percentage from the field."
ATS pick: Michigan State
Straight-up pick: Michigan State (56 percent confidence)
Chad Millman
ESPN Insider
During the NCAA tournament last year we played a fun little game. For every round, just as the teams tried to prove their worthiness on the court, I asked some sharp handicappers and analysts to put their own knowledge to the test and play ... wiseguy brackets.
Last season, Sal Selvaggio from madduxsports.com beat out Vegas legend Alan Boston when Butler covered in the final. And this season, the format will be the same. Four wiseguys from a rotating pool of eight (give or take a couple) will share their wisdom for each bracket. Then, the two with the most wins will face off in the Final Four and the final. The winner will get your undying devotion. And maybe a fleece.
Today, we're breaking down the West with Boston and the Southeast with newcomers to the blog stable, TeamRankings.com (the brains behind Insider's Bracket Predictor tool -- look to the right). I met Tom Federico, CEO and co-founder of TR during the Sports Analytics conference at MIT a couple of weeks ago. After I moderated the panel on sports gambling, Tom came up to me, introduced himself, handed me a packet describing his site and the data he used and then told me, basically, that I was often an idiot. Finally, someone is paying attention. But he did it all with a smile. Then I went and checked out his site, which was very cool, very thorough and very deep.
Earlier this week I called Tom to invite him into the wiseguy bracket. Why should I be the only one potentially embarrassing myself in the column? He graciously agreed and we started talking about his site. Turns out TeamRankings.com was started by Federico and his buddy, Mike Greenfield -- two sports-loving Stanford students who decided to use the math and engineering they were learning for good, not geek.
"We have mined about 15 years' worth of data across all the major sports," Federico says. "And we use a lot of contextual game variables in our analysis. For example, when a team that looked statistically liked Florida State played a team that looked like Texas A&M, what was the spread, how far did the team travel? We examine those types of game factors as well as team and player stats."
Ultimately, TR uses three prediction models to determine how confident it is about an against-the-spread prediction. One is the standard power rating. Two is a bucket titled "Similar Games" which incorporates the power rating as well as dozens of other stats and betting lines that featured similar teams. And three is the "Decision Tree" model, which is what I found most fascinating. "[That] came straight from the Stanford math textbooks," says Federico.
Greenfield was working as a programmer at Paypal in the early 2000s. The bosses there realized they were often getting scammed and assigned Greenfield to a team that was tasked with figuring out why. Using sophisticated programming language and mathematical models they were able to find the "signal," as Federico called it, that was common in every scam or scam attempt. TeamRankings uses similar programming techniques in its Decision Tree model. Ultimately, it identifies the elements that most accurately predict who will win and lose a game and by how much.
"It is what a guy who studies statistics would call a black box model," says Federico. He started to explain it even more and then, when he realized it was hopeless, just sent me to the website for a clearer explanation. Here it is: "The Decision Tree model is the output of a machine learning algorithm that views every college basketball game since 1999 through the lens of hundreds of input variables, ranging from contextual information like the distance traveled by squad to team statistics like effective field goal percentage."
The algorithm does what might be convenient to think of as complex, high volume, statistically significant trend analysis. It repeatedly partitions the games into smaller and smaller subsets based on the values of one or more variables. Each split is chosen so that the win probabilities of the teams in each group get further away from 50 percent and closer to 0 percent or 100 percent.
Of course, it makes total sense -- as long as it translates to wins.
Without further ado, here are the expert picks for the West and Southeast regions:
West: Alan Boston
Duke Blue Devils (1) vs. Hampton Pirates (16)
Spread: Duke minus-22.5
"I think Duke will have a hard time getting super motivated for this game. It knows it can waltz through it. But Krzyzewski doesn't have teams that let up too often. Meanwhile Hampton is in a weak conference this year and pre-conference games would indicate they'll have a problem because they lost to Wake Forest, which isn't a good team. I think Duke can name the score. But I don't think they'll have motivation for it. I made it 22 and it is 22.5 right now. I am not fooling with this game. "
ATS pick: Pass
Straight-up pick: Duke
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
Michigan Wolverines (8) vs. Tennessee Volunteers (9)
Spread: Tennessee minus-2
"This is a classic tourney game that, in the old days, you would drool over. It's the not-so-smart Vols team vs. the ultra-smart Michigan team. If this had been played a month ago the Vols would have been a four-point fave. The line has been adjusted. However, it's on its way back up and people are betting Tennessee because the opener of Michigan minus-1 was silly. Michigan got better as the year went on and it was no fluke. I can't imagine Tennessee being ready for the 1-3-1 and the well-timed, constantly cutting offense that Michigan has and the other stuff John Beilein will throw at them. I made it Tennessee -1, but Michigan's home run efforts this year have been spectacular. I think Michigan is going to win the game because smarts can beat athleticism in the NCAA tourney. It wouldn't surprise me if Michigan runs them out of the gym.
ATS pick: Michigan
Straight-up pick: Michigan
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
Arizona Wildcats (5) vs. Memphis Tigers (12)
Spread: Arizona minus-6
<OFFER>"The tournament committee rigged it up so gamblers can't make any money. They did it so their buddies at the big schools have a chance to succeed, because they know if either of these teams played anyone decent in the first round neither would make it out. So at least one of them will. I made it 5.5, the line was 5.5 and I don't see anything at all that would get me to lean either way. I will say Memphis played great as a dog this year, winning at Gonzaga and Central Florida and even at plus-11 against Kansas they played them tough. It is possible they could play better than they are rated, but I don't think Arizona can. So it will be an ugly game to watch if you are purist. I want to bet against both of these teams. But if you had to put a gun to my head I would take Memphis plus 5.5."
ATS pick: Memphis (if he had to)
Straight-up pick: Memphis (if he had to)
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
Texas Longhorns (4) vs. Oakland Golden Grizzlies (13)
Spread: Texas minus-9.5
"This game opened 11. Then it got bet down to 9.5 and 10. I made a bet at plus-10. I made the game 8. I'm a little concerned because, while Texas' best effort is unbelievable -- beating A&M and Kansas the way they did is unheard of -- they hit a wall at end of the year. I think a couple things work in Oakland's favor. First is that it is an older team that has NCAA experience. Last year it played well against Pitt and then one of its better players was injured and it got run out. But that loss helps them because they know if all things are equal they could have beaten Pitt last year. They won't be intimidated. Second is that I don't think Texas will have the picnic on the boards that the top-tier teams usually have against mid-majors, which helps. Those two factors plus value leads to a very good bet, especially if Oakland doesn't play run and gun. I think Oakland will win."
ATS pick: Oakland
Straight-up pick: Oakland
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
Cincinnati Bearcats (6) vs. Missouri Tigers (11)
Spread: Pick
"Kind of a tricky game here. Mizzou pre-conference was great. Crushing Illinois and Old Dominion looks really good right now. But the way they played at the end of the year, you can't imagine how they beat Illinois. I actually like their coach a lot. They play an aggressive, 24-hours-of-hell style, but he does a lot of smart things in that tempo. If you are not ready for this offense you can get run out quickly. Cincy likes to press, too. But outside of a little spurt at the end of the year, it was not that great. It had a good run when its life was on the line. I think Mizzou's best game is better than Cincy's best game. I made the Tigers a 1.5-point favorite and I will definitely go with them at pick."
ATS pick: Mizzou
Straight-up pick: Mizzou
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
UConn Huskies (3) vs. Bucknell Bison (14)
Spread: UConn minus-10
"I power rated UConn as 11-point favorites. However the five games in five days en route to winning the Big East tourney is tough to factor. Their bodies get beat up. Is four days enough time to recover for these college kids? Maybe. But if not then these kids are in a world of trouble because they are facing a very tough team in Bucknell. It beat Richmond at home and is very experienced and well coached. Now it's catching a team that can't have that much energy for this game after winning the Big East? It opened 13 and is down to 10. If it ever goes back up I will bet Bucknell. I think they will beat them."
ATS pick: Bucknell
Straight-up pick: Bucknell
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
Temple Owls (7) vs. Penn State Nittany Lions (10)
Spread: Temple minus-2.5
"I made it Temple minus-4. Penn State should not be in the tourney. Penn State couldn't beat UAB if they played. If it goes back to two I will make a big bet on Temple. The Owls will have fresh legs for this game. Penn State has just earned a mission accomplished by getting into the tourney. The subconscious is powerful and they have to feel that they BS'd their way into tourney. Now that they are in, I don't think their max effort is good enough to hang with Temple. I expect Temple to kill this team. Even if I have to buy the minus-2, I will make a big bet on them. Next to VCU, Penn State is worst team in the tourney."
ATS pick: Temple
Straight-up pick: Temple
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
San Diego State Aztecs (2) vs. Northern Colorado Bears (15)
Spread: San Diego minus-15.5
"I made the game 13.5. I think San Diego State is another team that may have a problem getting motivated. They beat BYU after losing to them twice in the regular season. But the thing about San Diego State is that they have not had any letdowns this year at all. If they are at all flat, Northern has the talent and the coaching to hang in there. If anything, this is a first-half bet on Northern. I still think State will win, but I think they had their best effort last game and repeating best effort is hard."
ATS pick: Northern Colorado (first half)
Straight-up pick: San Diego State
<HR style="WIDTH: 100%">
Southeast: TeamRankings.com
Pittsburgh Panthers (1) vs. UNC-Asheville/AR-Little Rock winner (16)
Spread: No Line
"Our predictive models give NC-Asheville a 60 percent chance to beat AR-Little Rock and earn the right to lose to Pittsburgh. Though there is no spread to pick against yet, we can tell you that our power ratings favor Pitt by 13.5 against NC-Asheville and by 16.6 against AR-Little Rock. If the Panthers end up playing the former, their 3 percent chance to lose would be the highest of any 1-16 matchup in this year's tourney."
ATS pick: ---
Straight-up pick: Pittsburgh (97 percent confidence)
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
Butler Bulldogs (8) vs. Old Dominion Monarchs (9)
Spread: ODU minus-2
"Vegas favors the lower seed here for a reason, as our power ratings show Old Dominion has been 0.7 points better over the course of the season. In the last 10 games, that advantage has ballooned to 3.5 points. Our possession-based game simulation projects that the Monarchs will outrebound Butler by eight, make it to the free throw line six extra times and hold the Bulldogs to under 40 percent from the field."
ATS pick: ODU
Straight-up pick: ODU (53 percent confidence)
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
Kansas State Wildcats (5) vs. Utah State Aggies (12)
Spread: Kansas State minus-2
"Though Kansas State has been playing its best basketball recently, our predictive power ratings favor Utah State by one. The Aggies are a better shooting team than the Wildcats, with an effective field goal percentage of 52.2 percent, compared to Kansas State's 49.7 percent. They also turn the ball over on only 15.5 percent of their possessions, versus 17.7 percent for Jacob Pullen and company. That should help them against a Kansas State defense that thrives on forcing turnovers, doing so on 19.7 percent of opponent possessions."
ATS pick: Utah State
Straight-up pick: Utah State (60 percent confidence)
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
Wisconsin Badgers (4) vs. Belmont Bruins (13)
Spread: Wisconsin minus-4.5
"Before the NCAA tournament field was announced, Belmont's plus-18.4 average scoring margin led us to believe they'd have a good chance of pulling off a first-round upset. Unfortunately, the Bruins were seeded about three spots too low and the Badgers about one spot too low, so instead of a 7-seed they're facing a team good enough to be a 3. This is a fascinating matchup, as Wisconsin is second nationally in points per possession at 1.167, while Belmont is second-lowest in opponent points per possession at 0.869. As Wisconsin has done it against a tougher schedule, we think it should have the edge."
ATS pick: Wisconsin
Straight-up pick: Wisconsin (60 percent confidence)
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
St. John's Red Storm (6) vs. Gonzaga Bulldogs (11)
Spread: St. John's minus-1.5
"St. John's has actually been a slightly better team than Gonzaga this year, according to our predictive power ratings. However, Gonzaga has to travel across fewer time zones to get to Denver, plus St. John's will be missing D.J. Kennedy, who leads the Red Storm in rebounding (5.6 RPG) and steals (1.8 SPG) and is third in scoring (10.4 PPG)."
ATS pick: Gonzaga
Straight-up pick: Gonzaga (55 percent confidence)
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
BYU Cougars (3) vs. Wofford Terriers (14)
Spread: BYU minus-8
"As everyone surely knows, BYU is missing big man Brandon Davies, who was the leading rebounder for the Cougars (6.2 RPG) and by far the team's most efficient interior scorer, with a 52.5 percent field goal percentage, compared to Noah Hartsock's 48.9 percent. That said, we're still picking BYU to cover. Against teams ranked within 45 spots of Wofford in our power ratings, BYU was 10-0 with an average margin of victory of 16.6 points. There's simply no way Davies is worth the eight-point difference between those results and the spread."
ATS pick: BYU
Straight-up pick: BYU (90 percent confidence)
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
Florida Gators (2) vs. UCSB Gauchos (15)
Spread: Florida minus-12.5
"Though Florida is favored by 12.5 points, our predictive power ratings have them as only 9.2 points better than UCSB. That's still a large enough advantage to make an upset relatively rare, but leads us to pick the Gauchos to cover. If they do manage to pull off a shocker, it will likely involve a poor night at the free throw line for Florida; free throw percentage is pretty much the only area where UCSB has an advantage, as it shoots 10 percentage points higher than the Gators (76.5 percent vs. 66.6 percent).
ATS pick: UCSB
Straight-up pick: Florida (92 percent confidence)
<HR style="WIDTH: 50%">
UCLA Bruins (7) vs. Michigan State Spartans (10)
Spread: Michigan State minus-1.5
"We have six different predictive models that we rely on to predict game winners, and the four that have the best historical accuracy all give Michigan State a win probability between 55 percent and 61 percent. It's no surprise that Tom Izzo has his team peaking in March, with the Spartans' last 10 games power rating a full 2.3 points better than their overall season rating. Michigan State is expected to outrebound UCLA by three and to have two fewer turnovers, while shooting a similar percentage from the field."
ATS pick: Michigan State
Straight-up pick: Michigan State (56 percent confidence)
