According to simulations run by Accuscore, MU is a popular pick to be upset. Awesome.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/st_NCAAUPSETLIST_20090316.html
Pomeroy says we win 72% of the time.
This is kind of an interesting article on Giant killers.
Clearing up confusion
Monday, March 16, 9:55 a.m. ET
Posted by Jordan Brenner
In the first-round matchup post below, the percentages listed next to each team aren't game-specific. They are indicators -- based on historical stats -- of a team's likelihood of fulfilling its destiny to be a Giant Killer or a Slain Giant. So, to answer tothman22's question (yes, we're reading the comments), UCLA's profile indicates that it has a 0% chance of being upset by any Giant Killer, irrespective of its opponent. Similarly, VCU's likelihood of being a Giant Killer is 40.2 percent, regardless of which team the Rams play. That's why we started computing these numbers prior to the Tourney -- we're purely comparing a team's profile to those who pulled of the feat in the past.
So, which team should you trust more? Well, no Giant with a 0 percent rating has lost to a Killer in our five-year sample. In fact, only two Giants below 23 percent have fallen during that time. Obviously, VCU would be a stronger pick against someone like Florida State, but we'll help you reconcile the difference between weak Giants and strong Killers (and vice versa) shortly. For now, if you're still confused, read our methodology. And if you're struggling after that, post another comment. We'll get back to you!
First Round: Killer Matchups
Sunday, March 15, 8:20 p.m. ET
Posted by Jordan Brenner
In case you forgot our rules, here's a refresher: A Giant Killer is a team that beats another squad seeded at least five spots better. A Giant Killer can't come from any of the six BCS conferences. Gonzaga, Memphis, Butler and Xavier can't be Killers either, and we've added Utah to that group, since the Utes earned a 5-seed. With that in mind, here are the first-round Giant Killer matchups. Each Giant and Giant Killer is listed with the percentage our model computed as a likelihood of falling or pulling off an upset, respectively. Stay tuned Monday for a detailed breakdown of the East and South regions, followed by a closer look at the Midwest and West on Tuesday.
East Region
(1) Pittsburgh (16.7 percent) vs. (16) ETSU (17.8 percent)
(2) Duke (0.0 percent) vs. (15) Binghamton (21.2 percent)
(3) Villanova (39.1 percent) vs. (14) American (12.9 percent)
(4) Xavier (62.7 percent) vs. (13) Portland State (17.6 percent)
(6) UCLA (0.0 percent) vs. (11) VCU (40.2 percent)
South Region
(1) North Carolina (6.6 percent) vs. (16) Radford (0.0 percent)
(2) Oklahoma (44.5 percent) vs. (15) Morgan State (30.9 percent)
(3) Syracuse (34.9 percent) vs. (14) Stephen F. Austin (21.6 percent)
(4) Gonzaga (13.1 percent) vs. (13) Akron (38.6 percent)
(5) Illinois (37.4 percent) vs. (12) Western Kentucky (25.4 percent)
(6) Arizona State (27.9 percent) vs. (11) Temple (32.6 percent)
Midwest Region
(1) Louisville (26.7 percent) vs. (16) Alabama St. (13.2 percent)/Morehead St. (2.6 percent)
(2) Michigan State (41.7 percent) vs. (15) Robert Morris (8.8 percent)
(3) Kansas (40.4 percent) vs. (14) North Dakota State (16.1 percent)
(4) Wake Forest (17.8 percent) vs. (13) Cleveland State (34.9 percent)
(6) West Virginia (0.0 percent) vs. (11) Dayton (24.7 percent)
West Region
(1) Connecticut (33.4 percent) vs. (16) Chattanooga (0.0 percent)
(2) Memphis (3.8 percent) vs. (15) Cal State Northridge (20.9 percent)
(3) Missouri (0.0 percent) vs. (14) Cornell (12.3 percent)
(5) Purdue (5.2 percent) vs. (12) Northern Iowa (6.8 percent)
(6) Marquette (10.5 percent) vs. (11) Utah State (20.0 percent)
Quote from: MarquetteFan94 on March 17, 2009, 11:26:52 AM
According to simulations run by Accuscore, MU is a popular pick to be upset. Awesome.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/st_NCAAUPSETLIST_20090316.html
They also flagged UConn and Michigan State as possible upsets. ::) There is no chance that they go down first round.
Morgan State over Oklahoma
QuoteEach Giant and Giant Killer is listed with the percentage our model computed as a likelihood of falling or pulling off an upset, respectively
Eh? I'm confused. If a team falls, then the other team pulls an upset, if a team pulls an upset then the other team falls, so shouldn't those number be the same?
Quote from: RawdogDX on March 17, 2009, 11:49:22 AM
Eh? I'm confused. If a team falls, then the other team pulls an upset, if a team pulls an upset then the other team falls, so shouldn't those number be the same?
Dude, read the explanation. It spells it out for you.
"In the first-round matchup post below, the percentages listed next to each team aren't game-specific. They are indicators -- based on historical stats -- of a team's likelihood of fulfilling its destiny to be a Giant Killer or a Slain Giant. So, to answer tothman22's question (yes, we're reading the comments), UCLA's profile indicates that it has a 0% chance of being upset by any Giant Killer, irrespective of its opponent. Similarly, VCU's likelihood of being a Giant Killer is 40.2 percent, regardless of which team the Rams play. That's why we started computing these numbers prior to the Tourney -- we're purely comparing a team's profile to those who pulled of the feat in the past."
These are theoreticals. The higher the number for the "giant" the more vulnerable. The higher the number for the "killer the more dangerous.
So West Virginia has no chance of being upset... I am really confused by these numbers.
I am no Math guy, but the numbers just don't seem accurate... Oklahoma 40%... WVU 0?
As a MU fan, I have seen West Virginia being really bad (MU wins by 22)... then again right now they are in my elite eight, so what do I know.
That looks like a bunch of hooey to me. As if UL or UConn have anything more than a zero percent chance of being upset by anyone 5+ seeds away? In the first round? Pshaw.