Matchup Issues: Sweet 16 And Beyond

Thursday March 24th, 2011


Is Florida State's defense perfectly suited to stop VCU? (Jamie Squire/Getty Images)

(Ed: Today's guest post is from David Hess, who runs The Audacity of Hoops, a blog dedicated to statistical analysis of college basketball, and also writes for He has discovered some key Sweet 16 matchup issues by analyzing adjusted efficiency and adjusted box-score data.)

Many of you are probably familiar with Ken Pomeroy’s opponent-adjusted offensive and defensive efficiency data. Using those values, a team’s raw efficiency in any game can be adjusted for opponent strength, resulting in a number that represents how the team would have fared if it was playing an average NCAA opponent. This allows games against opponents of varying quality to be compared on equal footing.

None of you, on the other hand, is probably familiar with the opponent-adjusted box score data used to drive the possession-based game simulations on These are just your typical tempo-free stats -- offensive rebounding percentage, turnover percentage, etc. -- but also adjusted for opponent strength, in a simple power-rankings-style method.

I used these adjusted box-score and adjusted efficiency values to find which Sweet 16 teams seem to have matchup issues that might bode well or ill for future rounds, or that might help explain results from the opening weekend.

We should have seen Duke’s poor defensive game against Michigan coming, and Kansas is the worst remaining matchup for the Blue Devils.

The scouting report on Duke is that they have fantastic perimeter play, but are weak in the middle. Then again, that was the scouting report on the Blue Devils last year, and they ended up doing all right for themselves. The problem is, this year the numbers agree with the eye test.

The following chart plots the season-long adjusted 2PFG% of Duke’s opponents on the horizontal axis, and Duke’s adjusted defensive performance against them on the vertical axis (lower is better). Even after accounting for the quality of opposing offenses, Duke’s defense plays worse against teams that shoot the ball well from two-point range.

Duke 2FG

For comparison, here is the same chart for last year’s title winning team. This is more normal – since we’re already adjusting for the overall quality of the opponent offense, there is no apparent pattern:

Duke Flat

It turns out that Michigan was one of the worst possible matchups for Duke’s 2011 defense, as they’re 5th in the country in adjusted 2PFG%. Here is how the rest of the teams left in the tourney stack up to the Wolverines:

Region Team adj 2PFG% Rank
Southwest Kansas 59.0% 2
(West) (Michigan) (55.8%) (5)
Southeast Florida 55.6% 7
East Ohio State 54.7% 15
East Marquette 53.2% 33
West Arizona 53.0% 35
Southeast BYU 53.0% 37
East North Carolina 53.0% 38
East Kentucky 52.5% 45
West San Diego State 51.9% 58
West Connecticut 51.6% 61
Southwest Florida State 51.5% 63
Southwest VCU 50.6% 83
Southeast Wisconsin 50.5% 85
Southwest Richmond 50.2% 93
Southeast Butler 49.9% 104

It looks like Duke fans should be rooting for Kentucky to emerge from the East region, and Wisconsin from the other half of the bracket.

Florida State’s defense was built to shut down Notre Dame’s offense, and to an even greater extent, VCU’s.

The Seminoles are the 31st best team in the country in terms of adjusted three-point field goal percentage allowed, at 31%. Yet despite holding teams to a low shooting percentage, they also somehow convince their opponents to keep heaving -- 40.3% of an average NCAA team’s shots would be from three point range when playing Florida State. This combination makes their defense deadly for teams that are willing to settle for threes, as you can see from the following chart, which plots an opponent’s tendency to shoot three-pointers against Florida State’s adjusted defensive performance versus said opponent:

Florida State

Both Notre Dame and VCU fall into that “fire away” category, but potential regional final foe Kansas doesn’t have the same vulnerability:

Region Team adj 3PA/FGA Rank
Southwest VCU 42.3% 17
Southeast Wisconsin 40.4% 33
Southeast Butler 38.5% 52
(Southwest) (Notre Dame) (38.0%) (58)
Southeast BYU 37.5% 64
Southwest Richmond 36.2% 89
West Arizona 35.4% 111
West Duke 34.8% 124
Southwest Kansas 32.6% 169
Southeast Florida 31.5% 200
East Kentucky 31.0% 223
East Ohio State 30.9% 228
West Connecticut 28.7% 268
West San Diego State 28.4% 273
East Marquette 27.3% 301
East North Carolina 25.4% 322

Ohio State’s defense may be slightly overrated due to feasting on teams that don’t take good care of the ball, and they’d probably rather see Kansas than Wisconsin in the title game.

Against teams that are worse than average in terms of adjusted offensive turnover percentage, Ohio State’s defense is phenomenal, posting an adjusted defensive efficiency of 75.4, which would be by far the best in the country. Against teams that are better than average at holding onto the ball, however, the Buckeyes have an average defensive rating of 91.9, which would be good for only 26th nationally. Unfortunately for them, every remaining team is better than average:

Region Team adj TO% Rank
Southeast Wisconsin 9.7% 1
Southwest Notre Dame 13.2% 6
Southeast BYU 13.4% 9
East Kentucky 13.4% 10
West Connecticut 13.4% 11
Southwest Richmond 13.7% 14
West San Diego State 13.7% 16
Southeast Butler 14.0% 23
West Duke 14.3% 25
East Marquette 14.7% 39
West Arizona 15.4% 59
East North Carolina 15.5% 62
Southwest VCU 15.8% 83
Southeast Florida 16.0% 99
Southwest Kansas 16.1% 104

Badgers Northwest
SI Apps
We've Got Apps Too
Get expert analysis, unrivaled access, and the award-winning storytelling only SI can provide—from Peter King, Tom Verducci, Lee Jenkins, Andy Staples, Grant Wahl, and more—delivered straight to you, along with up-to-the-minute news and live scores.