It’s that time of the year again – making sure the
MaltShopLogic blog has not crumpled under the weight of its inactivity. After
dusting, removing the nest of raccoons that moved in while we were gone and
confirming that blogs are still an acceptable method of communication (NOTE: confirmation
pending), I’m pleased to announce that we’re back!
Oh yeah, it’s also March Madness time, which means it’s time
for my annual tradition of posting to the blog. And subjecting you to my fetish
for the adjusted scoring margin method of picking my NCAA brackets.
My use of the system is predicated on a few truths:
- People who want to win NCAA tournament pools start at the wrong place. Don’t worry about the first round all that much. Bully for you if you get that 5-12 upset right, but it’s one point. You want the big points.
- To win a tournament pool, you almost always have to have the champion correct.
- After you get the champion right, you better have a bunch of Final Four teams and a bunch of elite eight teams because you aren’t the only one who picked that team as a champion.
I know what you’re saying right now. Chris, this system
sucks. It peaked in the years 2004-2008, much like this blog.
Agreed.
ASM hasn’t been as good the last few years as it was
2004-2008, but I’m sticking with it. And so are you, since no one else on the
blog offers a system.
But has the ASM really not been that good? I’ve been using
it now for nine years, which gives us a reasonable sample to draw some trends
from. To wit:
Did you know that eight of the nine past national champions were
had a top five ASM ranking the year they won (the only outlier was UConn in
2011) and seven of the top nine were in the top three?
So, when you’re picking a national champion this year, you
might want to pick one of these five teams:
|
Region
|
Seed
|
Team
|
OQ
|
DQ
|
ASM
|
|
South
|
3
|
Florida
|
14.1
|
7.1
|
21.1
|
|
East
|
1
|
Indiana
|
5.0
|
16.1
|
21.1
|
|
West
|
1
|
Gonzaga
|
9.4
|
11.0
|
20.5
|
|
Midwest
|
1
|
Louisville
|
9.8
|
9.6
|
19.4
|
|
Midwest
|
2
|
Duke
|
5.1
|
12.5
|
17.6
|
Did you also know that 22 of the 36 Final Four teams in the
last nine years had a top 10 ASM that season? And that 27 of 36 had a top 15
ASM that season? So, assuming that the top rated ASM in each region won’t all
make the final four, you should expand your search to these 15 teams:
|
Region
|
Seed
|
Team
|
OQ
|
DQ
|
ASM
|
|
South
|
3
|
Florida
|
14.1
|
7.1
|
21.1
|
|
East
|
1
|
Indiana
|
5.0
|
16.1
|
21.1
|
|
West
|
1
|
Gonzaga
|
9.4
|
11.0
|
20.5
|
|
Midwest
|
1
|
Louisville
|
9.8
|
9.6
|
19.4
|
|
Midwest
|
2
|
Duke
|
5.1
|
12.5
|
17.6
|
|
West
|
7
|
Notre Dame
|
4.6
|
12.6
|
17.3
|
|
West
|
8
|
Pittsburgh
|
12.4
|
3.7
|
16.1
|
|
South
|
1
|
Kansas
|
7.5
|
8.4
|
15.9
|
|
West
|
11
|
Belmont
|
6.4
|
9.2
|
15.6
|
|
West
|
2
|
Ohio State
|
8.9
|
6.3
|
15.2
|
|
East
|
4
|
Syracuse
|
7.8
|
7.3
|
15.2
|
|
South
|
4
|
Michigan
|
3.9
|
11.1
|
15.0
|
|
South
|
5
|
Virginia Commonwealth
|
4.5
|
10.1
|
14.6
|
|
Midwest
|
11
|
Saint Mary's
|
4.8
|
9.5
|
14.3
|
|
Midwest
|
7
|
Creighton
|
4.7
|
9.3
|
14.1
|
And if you think that mid-major teams like Gonzaga (who
never live up to their ASM billing), Belmont (another perennial disappointment
in this system), VCU, Saint Mary’s or Creighton won’t make the final four, you
might want to expand your search for a Final Four team to include this group.
|
Midwest
|
3
|
Michigan State
|
9.2
|
4.6
|
13.8
|
|
West
|
5
|
Wisconsin
|
12.0
|
1.6
|
13.7
|
|
Midwest
|
9
|
Missouri
|
2.8
|
10.6
|
13.3
|
|
Midwest
|
6
|
Memphis
|
4.7
|
8.7
|
13.3
|
|
Midwest
|
8
|
Colorado State
|
4.4
|
8.4
|
12.9
|
(NOTE: I took Harvard out of that list because, come on.)
What I’m suggesting this year is not rigid adherence to the
system. And to look for bargains compared to the wisdom of the crowds as laid
out in this excellent Slate article.
For example:
·
Take the East Region. According to ESPN.com, the
crowd has Indiana winning this region 44 percent of the time and Miami winning
it 37 percent of the time. But Syracuse has the second highest ASM in the
region (behind Indiana). Might be worth a flier on them in one of your brackets
because at worst, only 19 percent of your pool might pick them.
·
And just to reiterate Slate, Florida and
Pittsburgh are tremendously undervalued by the crowds.
Look, everyone is going to be picking Louisville and
Indiana. You can too. And you probably should for at least one of your
brackets. But let’s not let ASM run your pool absolutely – search around in the
parameters of possibility and walk away a winner.