Better to have a strong frontcourt or backcourt in the NCAA tourney?

[MonsterWebWarrior]

I've seen a few arguments on the board here about what's better to have, frontcourt or backcourt, but there seems to be actual statistical evidence that says it's better to have a strong frontcourt if you want to advance in the NCAA tourney.  I used to be a big believer that the college game is dominated by backcourts, but the last few years I started to change my mind.  This may prove it.  It's a really cool article that proves or debunks different tourney theories.   I'd post the whole article, but it's REALLY long.

http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/insider/news/story?id=2743600

"Given all the expert talk about the importance of strong guard play in the tourney, it should come as no surprise that the percentage of points a team gets from its backcourt vs. its frontcourt is a significant predictor of tourney success. What is surprising, though, is how much more important frontcourt scoring is than backcourt scoring. It's true that the percentage of points the tourney field gets from guards has risen over the last 20 years. In 1987, the average team got 42.2 percent of its points from the backcourt; last year the typical squad got nearly 10 percent more. In fact, only 2004 saw a higher reliance on guard scoring (by a scant tenth of a percent).

When it comes to advancing in the tourney, however, the more frontcourt-dominant teams tend to fare better. Based on PASE analysis, teams that get less than 40 percent of their points from guards (and therefore more than 60 percent from forwards and centers) won 27 more games than the "seed-expected" 393 wins. The averages of round-by-round tourney survivors tell the same story. Over the last 20 years, teams surviving into the later rounds of the tourney get more contributions from their big men -- with the champion fully 5 percent more reliant on frontcourt scoring. This "big man" trend wasn't quite as dramatic last year. But the Gators, like the Tar Heels and the Huskies before them, were clearly the most frontcourt-dominant team in the Final Four. And look what happened."

[MarquetteDano]

I am not insider so I couldn't read the whole article.  The whole concept of "backcourt" and "frontcourt" in college doesn't apply any more.  How many teams have a SF who is 6-6 who acts completely like a guard from a ball handling and offensively standpoint?

What I want to see is an analysis of TRUE back to the basket bigs.  The reality is that there a few in the college game and they can make a difference.  However, there are excellent teams without these TRUE bigs.

[4everwarriors]

Somehow make certain Chicos reads this topic.

[Marquette84]

I am not insider so I couldn't read the whole article.  The whole concept of "backcourt" and "frontcourt" in college doesn't apply any more.  How many teams have a SF who is 6-6 who acts completely like a guard from a ball handling and offensively standpoint?

What I want to see is an analysis of TRUE back to the basket bigs.  The reality is that there a few in the college game and they can make a difference.  However, there are excellent teams without these TRUE bigs.

The ESPN analysis is flawed--the way they performed the analysis, Steve Novak's 3 point shots would count as "frontcourt" scoring!

[ZiggysFryBoy]

why not both?  Isn't the key to winning anything to have a good balance of all of a team's key aspects?  I.E., a good QB to go with a good defense or a good pitching staff to go with a monster lineup?