The tournament is finally here so we of course need to check to see where all of these teams sit as we enter the tourney. As I’ve been saying all year, we have 4 dominant teams and it played out as all 4 of them earned a 1 seed as Florida came on strong to end the season and claim the final 1 seed. Everyone loves to proclaim that it’s never as chalk as people think it’s going to be, but if there’s ever a year we see the 1 seeds dominate this would have to be the year. We have only had 4 teams since 2000 enter the tourney with a net Kenpom rating as high as all of our 4 1 seeds have this year. And wouldn’t you know they all made at least the Final 4 with 3 of them getting to the title game. Obviously, anything can happen as always, but you can already bet I will have at least 3 of these teams in my Final 4, with Houston the one I’m concerned about as of writing this due to the J’Wan Roberts injury. If he’s healthy full steam ahead for our all 1 seed Final 4, but if he’s out I would start to look beyond Houston at Tennessee and a sleeper pick being Clemson as the 5 seed in that region. Also, long time readers, how bout that finish to the season for Auburn? Not so crazy now am I…anywho, let’s get it.

For those new here, a quick refresher – The goal of this entire exercise is simple, try and place the “best” teams in college basketball into Archetypal buckets, and assess their likelihood of going on a deep run in March based on where they fall. This will all be derived from years of Kenpom data (2005-2024) which I have compiled to create 8 unique archetypes that, in my opinion, will help all who take notice avoid backing a horse that falls in the first weekend, and instead, lead you to hitch your wagon to one that finds itself making a deep tourney run. What we’re not attempting to do is pick the team that comes out of nowhere and goes on a deep run, a la NC State last year.

So, we will focus on the top-30 in Kenpom as of each update. For context, entering the tournament just 8 of the 76 (10.5%) total Final 4 teams since 2005 have entered the tourney outside the top-30. Just with that we already can narrow down our focus and begin to analyze what characteristics of those teams we can identify as key indicators. On top of that we can track week over week movements and spot teams who are improving vs fading.

The 8 Archetypes are:

• Elite
• Great
• Solid
• Strong Enough
• Matadors
• Grinders
• Vanilla
• Wannabe’s

Below I will provide some context for each archetype and list the teams that fall in at the time of publishing. There will be a graphic for each category that shows the criteria and the percentage of teams who fell into that category since 2005 that made it to each round. For example, 83.9% of Elite teams have made it out of the first weekend into the Sweet 16. Juxtapose that with just 19.6% of Vanilla teams and you should catch on real quick to what we’re doing here.

This week’s update:

ELITE:

Here is where we find the cream of the crop in college basketball, as these are the teams who are top-10 in both offensive and defensive efficiency. These are exceptionally good teams, with only 1 such team over the last 2 seasons. However, we’ve already had Iowa St, Auburn and Duke land here, with both the Cyclones and Blue Devils still here this week, so it’s not looking like a year without an elite team. 84% of these teams survive the first weekend, with a whopping 42% getting to the Final 4, almost 20 points better than the next closest Archetype.

Our same trio of elite teams that we’ve been tracking all year long. I would at minimum have these teams in the Elite 8, but watch out for Houston as they have a Strong Enough team Gonzaga potentially in round 2 with J’Wan Roberts last seen in a boot. Also, Clemson as Solid is the 5 that they could see in the Sweet 16 so the path won’t be easy.

GREAT:

The next couple are going to be pretty obvious but we’re notching down a peg to teams who weren’t top-10 but do happen to be top-15 on both ends of the floor. It’s pretty consistent in terms of odds of getting out of the first weekend, but does drop off decently as you go to Elite 8 and beyond. Still, with only 31 teams to have entered the tourney as “Elite” since 2005 we may find the 2nd or 3rd options this year fall here. These aren’t always your top seeds either, with 2023 UConn being a perfect example as a 4 seed falling here and winning the whole thing.

Still have Auburn just a step off the pace but as you can see in the numbers teams here are still very successful in March, especially the first weekend. I will have Auburn in my Final 4, but losing to Florida in a SEC clash.

SOLID:

Following the trend here, down a peg to teams who were top-25 on both ends but outside of top-15. I will note the difference between top-20 and top-25 was negligible, with the top-20 teams much more resembling the top-25 numbers vs the top-15, so they’ve been combined.

Tennessee is the team I’m really watching here as they’re borderline Great and looked awesome in the SEC tourney. They are Houston light, with a bit more difficulty scoring, but we could have an opening for them if Houston goes down early, so I’m thinking Tennessee to the Final 4. Iowa St is dealing with injuries so tread lightly there and I already mentioned I’m watching Clemson as a dark horse Elite 8 team.

STRONG ENOUGH:

This is where we start getting a little unique and into the weeds, as we’ve had to find a bucket for those that fail to land in the top-25 on both ends but are elite on one end of the floor. Conversely they aren’t horrible on the other end, so they don’t drop down to our vulnerable categories. They’re just good enough on their weaker end of the floor that their elite abilities are able to carry them with some confidence out of the first weekend. I had to find the line of demarcation, where the weakness became tangible in the results. The teams ranking above 50 over and over again stood out with early exits, so that’s where it stuck after the numbers confirmed that the teams that live in this area perform much better than those in the “Matadors” or “Grinders” categories just by limiting that weakness. Obviously, the weakness is still indicating less reliability, with nearly half as many “Strong Enough” teams reaching the Elite 8 as “Elite” teams (35% vs 67%.).

Alabama has a good draw with 0 other teams in trustworthy categories until the Elite 8 potential matchup with Duke. If they get knocked off before that I’m looking at Wisconsin who is just outside the Solid group. Texas Tech and Michigan St look like strong Elite 8 picks as well, as Tech has Grinder St. John’s and Sparty gets a beat up Iowa St potentially as the biggest test. Maryland has to get through Florida so I’m stopping them at the Sweet 16 but confident in them and same with A&M.

MATADORS

Now we get into the teams we have to start worrying about which are the overly unbalanced teams. This group will be the teams that can put on a show offensively but who really struggle defensively. We’ve seen time and time again this type of team lose in the first round, including top seeded teams like Kentucky (’24), Iowa (’22), and Ohio St (’21) just to name a few recent examples. The data tells us if you’re gonna be bad on one end it’s better to be worse on D than O, but it still is a stark drop off from 62% (Solid) to the Sweet 16, to just shy of 37% here.

Not picking these teams to get past the first weekend, end of story. Don’t play D you don’t win in March.

GRINDERS:

Similar to the Matador group this group of teams is very unbalanced, just on the other end of the floor. We all know teams like this, that are forced to take you to the deep waters and test your resolve. Physicality, toughness and relentless pressure on D, but they just can’t seem to score the basketball on a consistent basis. These teams historically have really struggled in March, with nearly 3/4 of them flaming out the first weekend. Some recent examples include Iowa St (’23), LSU (’22), Kansas and Tennessee (’21) among many others.

St. John’s might be an outlier here because they’re so good on defense but I’m not taking them beyond the Sweet 16 for sure. St. Mary’s night night.

WANNABE’S

I classified these teams as wannabe’s because they are unbalanced, excelling on one end of the floor compared to the other but not at an elite level. They’re solid on one end and competent on the other, keeping them out of the Vanilla category thanks to their better than average ability on one end but still it is not enough to make up for their deficiency on the other.

Not much faith in any of these teams except maybe Arizona/Wisconsin who have some favorable matchups. No Final 4 for sure, probably not past Sweet 16 at best.

VANILLA:

These are your purely average teams, who don’t truly excel on either end of the floor. They find ways to win and remain amongst the top-30 teams but without that true strength to lean on and without the overall elite ability they’re just kind of meh, and you see it in the numbers. With greater than 80% failing to make it out of the first weekend and nearly half checking out after just 1 game these are the last teams you want to trust come March. Some recent examples include Texas Tech (’24), Virginia/Duke/Indiana (’23) and Illinois/UConn (’22) who all failed to get out of the first weekend.

No chance beyond the first weekend for these teams either. Can’t do it won’t do it.