Since 1996, UCLA has 3 appearances in the national semifinals. PickHoops QuickFact
In eighteen years, the most common numbers of #1 seeds in the national semifinals are 2 (six times) and 1 (seven times). PickHoops QuickFact
Since PickHoops started, Kentucky is 4-1 in the national semifinals. PickHoops QuickFact
Since PickHoops was founded, the average number of #1 seeds in the national semifinals round is just under 2. PickHoops QuickFact
Since PickHoops started, only one team seeded lower than #5 has reached the national championship game (#8 Butler in 2011). PickHoops QuickFact
In eighteen years, no #1 seed advanced to the national semifinals in two tournaments (2006 and 2011). Both times a #11 seed was there. PickHoops QuickFact
Since PickHoops was founded, the ACC has had four different schools advance to the national semifinals (Duke, UNC, Maryland, and Georgia Tech). PickHoops QuickFact
Since PickHoops was founded, more #12 seeds (11) have advanced to the round of 16 than #7, #8, or #9 seeds. PickHoops QuickFact
Since 1996, eight #11 seeds have advanced to the round of 16. PickHoops QuickFact
During PickHoops history, the round of sixteen has included at least one team seeded #9 or lower every year except 2007. PickHoops QuickFact
During PickHoops history, a #13 seed has upset a #4 seed 16 times. PickHoops QuickFact
Since PickHoops started, a team seeded #9 or lower has advanced to the round of sixteen 46 times (out of 288), about 16% of the time. PickHoops QuickFact
In eighteen years, Arizona has made the round of 16 ten times. PickHoops QuickFact
Since PickHoops was founded, a #13 seed has upset a #4 seed 16 times. PickHoops QuickFact
Since PickHoops was founded, Michigan State has made the round of 16 eleven times. PickHoops QuickFact
In eighteen years, the Big 10 has had seven different schools advance to the national semifinals (Michigan State, Ohio State, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, and Indiana). PickHoops QuickFact
During PickHoops history, the national semifinals have featured three #1 seeds only twice, in 1997 and 1999. This has only been surpassed once, in 2008, when all four #1 seeds advanced. PickHoops QuickFact
In eighteen years, the Horizon League, the Conference USA, the Mountain West, the Mountain Valley Conference, and the Atlantic 10 have each sent one school to the national semifinals. PickHoops QuickFact
In eighteen years, eleven out of eighteen national semifinals have had at least one ACC team. PickHoops QuickFact
In eighteen years, a #14 seed has upset a #3 seed 8 times. PickHoops QuickFact
In eighteen years, three #3 seeds have won the championship (Syracuse in 2003, Florida in 2006 and UConn in 2011). PickHoops QuickFact
Since PickHoops was founded, eleven out of eighteen national semifinals have had at least one Big 10 team. PickHoops QuickFact
Since PickHoops was founded, UCLA has made the round of 16 eight times. PickHoops QuickFact
Since PickHoops started, the SEC has five champions (Kentucky three times and Florida twice). PickHoops QuickFact
Since PickHoops started, Kentucky has made the round of 16 eleven times.
The Pick65 Power Ratings assigns a rating for each Division I men's U.S. college basketball team, and ranks them based on that rating. A higher numerical rating indicates a stronger team.
The Pick65 Power Ratings are formed by analyzing scores for all games played during the season. Actual win/loss results are not considered, only points scored and allowed and the strength of the opponent. Furthermore, no points scored in overtime are even considered. The point difference against each opponent is measured against how other teams fared against the opponent to arrive at an overall power rating. The resulting power ratings are sorted from top to bottom to form the ordered list.
While these ratings have merit, ultimately the best it can hope to be is an approximation of teams relative strength. The power rating does not take into account the fact that non competitive games (i.e. blow-outs) often give false impressions of relative strengths since both the winner and loser loses incentive to play their best and use their best players. Also, this system does not take into account injuries or general upward or downward trends, but rather utilizes all games played independent of how recently they were played.
No. The players on the court are trying to win each game and are not expected to be concerned with the margin of victory or defeat. For this reason, it would not be fair to use a "power rating" to judge worthiness of teams. However, this system can be useful as a PREDICTOR of the outcome of upcoming games. The system is not meant to be used to dole out rewards such as post season tournament berths to higher rated teams.
Yes. The home court advantage is measured based on a subset of games played so far. In general, the home court is worth about 6% more points, or 4 points on an absolute scale, but that can vary as new results are considered. In measuring the home court advantage, we are selective in which games we count due to scheduling biases.
This question usually comes to mind when "team A" is much lower in the human polls. Computer rankings have advantages and disadvantages over human polls. First of all, it is difficult for humans to consider margin of victory and strength of opponents for many games, while a computer can exhaustively examine every game. Secondly, traditional powers such as Kansas and Duke might have an advantage until actual loses prove otherwise since they are usually strong year after year. A computer can notice when a team is winning by lower margins of victory than expected and can can distinguish a win over a strong team from a win over an over-rated team.
Human polls on the other hand can take in much more intangibles factors. Some computer ratings may take into account upward and downward trends in ranking the teams, however as of now the PickHoops Power Ratings do not take this into account.
Ultimately, if a team is rated higher than expected, it can mean they are somewhat of a dark-horse, or the computer has over-ranked them, or even a combination of the two. A similar statement can be made about teams that are ranked lower than expected.
No one would deny that all teams have good days and bad days. So how do we know that when "team B" beat "team A" that "team A" was not just having a bad day? For example, in a recent year Purdue was the lone team to have beaten Duke late in the season, but few would suggest that Purdue was stronger than Duke. This question rarely comes up when there is a wide gap between teams. But if we accept the fact that Duke should be rated higher than Purdue, even though Purdue won head to head, does it not make sense that "team A" could be rated only slightly above "team B" even though "team B" beat "team A"?
The power rating is the ratio of expected points scored versus expected points allowed against a mythical "average" team. Thus roughly half the teams will have a power rating above 1 and half below.
We try to exercise reasonable care in recording game results, however since all PickHoops contributors have demanding day jobs and families, some errors may have slipped through the cracks. We welcome any correctional feedback that does not call into question the matrimonial status of our parents at the time of our births. E-mail that has correctional information should ideally have a web link to a teams complete record.
The PickHoops Power Ratings has had reasonable success in picking game outcomes. To get a rough predictor of the final score at the end of regulation of an upcoming game, take the average point total of 65.4 and multiply by the power rating of each time. Multiply the home team, if any, by 1.029. This offers only a crude predictor, which doesn't take into account offensive-defensive tendencies. We do NOT encourage using these calculations as a gambling resource.