March Madness Updates Due to Mismatches in Steals, 3-pointers or Rebounds

In looking for a match-up upset in the NCAA tournament, look at the possibility of a mismatch in one of these three areas (higher, positive numbers are best in every column). First the brackets of potential upsets based on an underdog being able to dominate on steals, 3-pointers or offensive rebounds, then the explanation of each potential mismatch.

(Marquette Note: Marquette is a +3.9 in 3-point shooting, meaning they score 24.9 points for every 20 three-point attempts, which would have been barely behind Purdue for the top mark in the tournament. The one Region that would have projected a mismatch win is against TCU in the Midwest, which had a -1.6 on defending the arc - they were worse than average defending the arc meaning they allow 22.6 points per 20 opponents three-pointers. The combination of Marquette's three-points shooting and the weak TCU defense projects to multiply on each other to provide more three-point shots and high percentage made to give MU a run. They would have projected to lose to Michigan State in the next round.)

Seed	South	Mismatch	Which Mismatch	Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
1	Virginia	6		1.8	2.1	-0.3	2.0	3.6	1.1
16	UMBC			1.4	1.8	-0.7	-0.3	-0.4	-0.3
8	Creighton	1		-0.8	1.5	-2.4	0.2	1.2	1.6
9	Kansas St.			2.1	-0.4	-0.8	0.3	1.2	-1.1
				Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
5	Kentucky	1		-0.5	-0.2	2.6	0.3	3.9	-0.7
12	Davidson			-1.0	2.0	-2.0	0.9	0.0	2.7
4	Arizona	2	off reb>kentucky	-1.0	2.0	1.5	-0.1	-0.5	1.2
13	Buffalo			-0.3	1.4	1.2	0.9	1.0	0.0
	South	Mismatch	Which Mismatch	Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
6	Miami FL			0.6	0.8	0.1	0.3	1.6	0.1
11	Loyola Chicago	1	steals>Miami	1.0	3.0	-2.3	-0.7	1.6	1.0
3	Tennessee	2		0.5	1.6	1.5	0.2	2.4	-0.8
14	Wright St.			0.5	-0.6	0.1	0.2	0.1	1.4
				Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
7	Nevada			-0.1	3.2	-0.5	2.3	2.7	-0.1
10	Texas	1		0.2	-2.1	0.3	0.7	1.3	-0.3
2	Cincinnati	3		1.7	0.7	3.5	1.0	2.9	0.0
15	Georgia St.			1.2	2.3	-1.0	1.3	0.2	-1.3
Seed	West	Mismatch	Which Mismatch	Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
1	Xavier	2		-0.5	1.1	0.5	-0.3	1.0	2.5
16	North Carolina Central			-1.2	-1.0	1.3	1.1	1.0	-0.4
16	Texas Southern			-0.7	0.3	0.0	1.3	-1.4	-1.1
8	Missouri			-0.8	2.5	0.8	-0.5	1.7	0.1
9	Florida St.	1	Off Reb>Missouri	0.3	0.0	1.6	0.5	-0.8	-0.5
				Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
5	Ohio St.	1		0.1	0.2	0.6	0.9	0.3	1.5
12	San Diego St.			0.2	-0.4	1.1	0.1	1.0	1.3
4	Gonzaga	3		0.3	1.4	1.5	1.2	-0.3	2.6
13	UNC Greensboro			1.5	0.3	1.8	-0.9	1.6	2.0
Seed	West	Mismatch	Which Mismatch	Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
6	Houston	2	Off Reb>Michigan	0.4	2.4	2.3	0.8	1.5	1.3
11	South Dakota St.			-1.4	2.5	-1.4	1.8	0.8	2.5
3	Michigan	1		0.4	0.8	-0.9	2.4	0.5	1.7
14	Montana			1.6	-0.7	2.0	1.1	0.3	0.9
				Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
7	Texas A&M			-0.5	-1.3	2.0	-0.2	1.7	0.1
10	Providence	1	Steals>Tex A&M	0.7	-0.9	0.2	-0.5	2.1	0.1
2	North Carolina	4		-0.6	0.9	3.5	0.1	-1.8	1.1
15	Lipscomb			-0.4	-1.2	-0.2	-0.5	1.0	1.9
Seed	East	Mismatch	Which Mismatch	Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
1	Villanova	5		0.4	2.9	-0.2	2.1	1.4	0.7
16	LIU Brooklyn			-0.7	-0.1	0.4	-0.3	1.5	-0.4
16	Radford			0.8	0.0	1.3	0.3	0.5	0.1
8	Virginia Tech	1		-0.4	2.1	-1.8	0.9	0.3	-0.2
9	Alabama			0.4	-1.6	0.1	-0.5	2.7	-0.8
				Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
5	West Virginia			2.0	0.0	2.9	0.8	-0.8	-0.5
12	Murray St.	2	3-pt&OffR>WVU,3pt>Wich	0.7	1.4	1.4	0.7	2.9	0.5
4	Wichita St.	1		-1.4	2.1	2.3	0.2	-0.6	2.7
13	Marshall			-0.1	0.2	-2.2	0.1	0.0	-0.9
Seed	East	Mismatch	Which Mismatch	Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
6	Florida			1.0	1.4	0.2	2.0	-0.3	-0.6
11	St. Bonaventure	1	3pt>Flo	0.9	3.1	0.4	0.9	2.6	-0.4
11	UCLA	1		-0.5	2.3	0.1	0.4	0.0	0.5
3	Texas Tech			1.5	0.9	1.8	0.1	1.8	0.0
14	Stephen F. Austin	2	Steals>TexTech & UCLA/StB	3.1	1.6	1.4	-0.9	-0.6	-0.2
				Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
7	Arkansas	1	3-pt>Butler	0.2	3.0	0.0	2.0	0.3	-1.0
10	Butler			0.6	0.3	-0.3	1.4	-1.2	1.8
2	Purdue	3		-0.1	4.2	-0.3	0.9	0.8	0.1
15	Cal St. Fullerton			0.2	-0.1	-0.6	0.3	-0.8	-0.2
Seed	Midwest	Mismatch	Which Mismatch	Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
1	Kansas	1		0.5	2.9	0.2	0.5	1.5	-0.9
16	Penn			-0.3	-0.3	-1.4	1.2	3.7	2.3
8	Seton Hall			0.1	0.8	2.0	0.3	1.0	0.0
9	North Carolina St.	2	Off Reb>Seton Hall, Kans	1.2	1.3	1.8	0.1	2.3	-1.0
				Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
5	Clemson	1		-0.2	0.9	-0.4	0.0	-0.3	0.7
12	New Mexico St.			-0.7	-1.0	2.1	1.8	3.3	2.5
4	Auburn	3		1.0	0.9	1.5	0.2	-0.2	0.1
13	College of Charleston			-0.5	0.8	-1.0	2.8	0.0	0.2
Seed	Midwest	Mismatch	Which Mismatch	Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
6	TCU			0.4	3.0	2.1	0.0	-1.6	1.0
11	Arizona St.	1		0.2	0.8	-0.2	1.0	0.5	-0.7
11	Syracuse	1		1.6	-1.7	2.3	-0.6	1.4	-0.2
3	Michigan St.	2		-1.9	3.8	2.6	-0.1	1.1	0.7
14	Bucknell			-0.7	-0.4	-0.5	-0.3	1.2	0.4
				Steals	Off 3 pt	Off Reb	Protect ball	Deny 3	Def Reb
7	Rhode Island	1	Steals>Okl	1.7	-0.4	0.7	0.4	1.7	0.5
10	Oklahoma			-0.1	0.8	-0.2	-0.1	-0.6	-0.5
2	Duke	4		1.3	1.9	3.7	0.6	1.8	-0.1
15	Iona			0.4	2.3	-1.5	1.5	-0.3	-0.6

1) STEALS. An average team steals the ball 6 times a game (in 68 trips down the court). This ends the opponent's chance to score and giving the team a chance for an easy basket at the other end. The first column shows how far above average a team is at steals, with West "Press" Virginia average +2.0 steals per game. If a team with a high plus like that goes up against a team who is not good at protecting the ball (such as Syracuse who has a -0.6 in column 4 for giving up steals to be worse than the average team in the country) then the team with lots of steals can completely disrupt the opponent. Stephen F. Austin won the Southland Saturday night, and the reason they are a threat is they are +3.1 in steals, a full steal better than West Virginia or anyone else in the tournament.

2) 3-POINTERS. An average team scores 21 points on 20 three-point shots (seven made). Purdue averages 4.2 points more per 20 three-point shots (hits almost 8.5 per 20). If a team like that goes up against a team bad at denying three-pointers (e.g. in Column 5 North Carolina has a -1.8 meaning their defense gives up 1.8 points MORE per 20 three-pointers attempted than an average defense) then the three-point shooting team can win even if they are trading three-pointers for two-pointers at the other end.

3) OFFENSIVE REBOUNDS. An average team grabs 10 offensive rebounds on 35 missed shots. Duke, UNC, and Cincinnati get 3.5 extra offensive rebounds per 35 missed shots (column 3). After doing this table before the UNC-Duke ACC semifinal, I noticed Duke is actually below average in defensive rebounding (-0.1 in column 6 means below even the national average, much less of tournament teams). UNC grabbed 18 offensive rebounds to defeat Duke, showing how a team that can overwhelm the opponent on the boards can keep the ball alive until they finally score.

The seventh column indicates how above average a team is at everything else - mainly the things that happen in half court offense and defense - dead ball turnovers, getting to the line and making free throws, and hitting more difficult two-pointers that do not come off a steal or offensive rebounding. The most important of the Four Factors measured at www.kenpom.com is shooting (effective Field Goal Percentage or eFG% means the shooting percentage after adding a half shot made for every three-pointer made). However, a team's eFG% is likely higher if they get more steals and offensive rebounds to create easier shots.