D'Yer Quak'er
newbie
Posts: 27
Reg: 01-18-05
|
03-13-05 11:44 PM - Post#6423
#13 Seed History
There's a big difference between No. 12 and No. 13 seeds. No. 12 seeds still win one out of three first-round games. No. 13 seeds win only one out of five (16-64, .200). They're a bigger long shot to win their first-round game than a top seed is to make it to the finals.
What are the telltale signs of a 13th-seeded Cinderella? Coaching experience and scoring balance are the keys. No. 13 seeds with coaches who have been to the tournament before are 12-33 (.267); those with rookie coaches are just 4-31 (.114). No. 13 seeds that get between 53 percent and 63 percent of their scoring from the frontcourt are 9-13 (.409); the rest of the teams are 7-51 (.121).
Only three of the sixteen 13th-seeded teams that won in the first round advanced past round two. They were Richmond in '88, Valparaiso in '98 and Oklahoma in '99. What do have they in common? A coach who has been to the tournament at least three times. No. 13 seeds without this much coaching experience are 0-10.
No No. 13 seed has ever advanced past the Sweet 16. Richmond and Oklahoma fell at the hands of top seeds. Valparaiso had the best chance to advance in 1998 when it played eighth-seeded Rhode Island, but the Crusaders lost 74-68.
#4 Seed 1st Round History
Fourth-seeded teams perform nearly as well as No. 3 seeds in the first round, winning 80 percent of their games (64-16). Which No. 4 seeds are more prone to upsets? Teams with neither experience nor momentum going into the tournament are likely victims. Fourth-seeded teams that have less than a four-year tourney run coming in and have won fewer than eight of the last 10 regular-season games are twice as likely (8-19, 30 percent losing rate) to be upset as those with more experience or momentum (8-45, 15 percent).
|
pennhoops
Postdoc
Posts: 2470
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: History for #13 seeds
03-13-05 11:47 PM - Post#6424
In response to D'Yer Quak'er
What's this from?
|
D'Yer Quak'er
newbie
Posts: 27
Reg: 01-18-05
|
Re: History for #13 seeds
03-14-05 12:00 AM - Post#6425
In response to pennhoops
It's on espn. I emailed the writer of the piece to see if it would be okay to post this section. If he says no, I'm going to delete it. Unless the mods see fit to do so first, which I'm sure is on the way. It might be an insider article, so if you can't find it, there's a 30 day free trial of insider. you can find it there.
|
Penn94
PhD Student
Posts: 1461
Loc: Dallas, Texas
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: History for #13 seeds
03-14-05 12:22 AM - Post#6426
In response to D'Yer Quak'er
Quote:
#4 Seed 1st Round History
Which No. 4 seeds are more prone to upsets? Teams with neither experience nor momentum going into the tournament are likely victims. Fourth-seeded teams that have less than a four-year tourney run coming in and have won fewer than eight of the last 10 regular-season games are twice as likely (8-19, 30 percent losing rate) to be upset as those with more experience or momentum (8-45, 15 percent).
check and check
|
D'Yer Quak'er
newbie
Posts: 27
Reg: 01-18-05
|
Re: History for #13 seeds
03-14-05 12:56 AM - Post#6427
In response to Penn94
Pete said yes, so admins, I have express permission. Huzzah!
|
pennhoops
Postdoc
Posts: 2470
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: History for #13 seeds
03-14-05 01:04 AM - Post#6428
In response to D'Yer Quak'er
Technically, it's not the author's permission to give (as a work-for-hire copyright belongs to ESPN.com), but the site would have a valid innocent infringement defense.
|
