Monday, March 21, 2016

NCAA 2016: Sweet 16 projections

Using the Pythagorean Win % statistic from Ken Pomeroy's site, I've estimated the probability of victory for each sweet 16 team advancing further into the tournament:

Team Pyth Elite 8 Final 4 Finals Champs
Kansas 1 0.9503 73.6% 45.2% 30.0% 18.2%
Maryland 5 0.8725 26.4% 9.6% 4.0% 1.5%
Miami FL 3 0.8971 37.7% 14.2% 6.8% 2.9%
Villanova 2 0.9352 62.3% 30.9% 18.5% 10.0%
Oregon 1 0.9123 59.7% 30.4% 12.9% 6.0%
Duke 4 0.8752 40.3% 16.6% 5.6% 2.1%
Texas A&M 3 0.8923 41.9% 20.2% 7.5% 3.1%
Oklahoma 2 0.9199 58.1% 32.7% 14.7% 7.1%
North Carolina 1 0.9407 64.8% 49.7% 28.8% 16.0%
Indiana 5 0.8959 35.2% 22.6% 9.9% 4.0%
Notre Dame 6 0.8131 45.5% 11.7% 3.4% 0.9%
Wisconsin 7 0.839 54.5% 16.0% 5.2% 1.6%
Virginia 1 0.9482 68.9% 53.3% 34.0% 20.1%
Iowa St. 4 0.8919 31.1% 18.9% 8.6% 3.4%
Gonzaga 11 0.8609 59.0% 18.1% 7.1% 2.4%
Syracuse 10 0.8111 41.0% 9.7% 3.0% 0.8%

However, as George Box observed, "all models are wrong, some are useful",  so maybe it's more meaningful to look at how these probabilities rank:

Team/Seed Conference Pyth Champs
Virginia 1 ACC 0.9482 20.1%
Kansas 1 B12 0.9503 18.2%
North Carolina 1 ACC 0.9407 16.0%
Villanova 2 BE 0.9352 10.0%
Oklahoma 2 B12 0.9199 7.1%
Oregon 1 P12 0.9123 6.0%
Indiana 5 B10 0.8959 4.0%
Iowa St. 4 B12 0.8919 3.4%
Texas A&M 3 SEC 0.8923 3.1%
Miami FL 3 ACC 0.8971 2.9%
Gonzaga 11 WCC 0.8609 2.4%
Duke 4 ACC 0.8752 2.1%
Wisconsin 7 B10 0.839 1.6%
Maryland 5 B10 0.8725 1.5%
Notre Dame 6 ACC 0.8131 0.9%
Syracuse 10 ACC 0.8111 0.8%

With the record number of ACC teams, it might be interesting to compute the probability of an ACC champ.  I've been using a lot of complement logic lately, so may as well stick with the trend:

P(no ACC win) = (1-.201)*(1-.160)*(1-.029)*(1-.021)*(1-.009)*(1-.008) = 0.628

Therefore,  P(ACC win) = 1 - P(no ACC win) = 1 - 0.628 = 0.372.

So Ken Pomeroy's model of win % estimates the probability of an ACC champ at 37.2%, where most of that probability is wrapped up in either Virginia or North Carolina (32.8% to be exact).

No comments:

Post a Comment