The Cases For & Against March Madness Favorites

It’s early March. In approximately one month, the Final Four will occur in Glendale, Arizona. One of the 68 teams that hear their name called on Selection Sunday will achieve the ultimate prize. 

In the NCAA Tournament, favorites are promised nothing. Upsets are regular, in the first round and beyond. You certainly don’t need a No. 1 or No. 2 seed to win the national championship. But every year, a handful of outfits enter the tournament with the expectation of competing for the title. If they are not up to snuff, someone is sure to alert them. 

All teams have strengths and weaknesses. I have dived deep into the cases for and against six of the most likely candidates to leave Glendale on top of the world. If you fill out a bracket or join the Splash $100K NCAAB Survivor Madness contest, this is the sort of information you need to know before locking in your selections. 

Purdue

For: Zach Edey isn’t just one of the most dominant players in the country this season, he’s one of the most dominant players college ball has seen. The 7-foot-4 center collected a cabinet’s worth of individual accolades in 2022-23, and he is set to do the same in 2023-24. Edey was already an efficiency monster, but he’s still managed to improve his true shooting percentage (.639) and effective field goal percentage (.607) marks from last season to .665 and .628 this season, respectively. He is also a big reason why the Boilermakers are one of the best rebounding teams in the country - Purdue is in the top 15 in T-Rank’s offensive and defensive rebound percentage metrics.

‍

‍

Last year, Purdue came in at 291st in three-point percentage at 32.2 percent. The team’s inability to score from the perimeter haunted it in the first round catastrophe against Fairleigh Dickinson as it shot 5-of-26 (19.2 percent) from deep in the defeat. It’s quite a different story this time around. The Boilermakers are currently connecting on 40.5 percent of their three-point attempts, the second-best percentage in the nation. 

The Purdue offense is more balanced than ever and is better equipped to handle the unique pressures of the NCAA Tournament than it was one March ago. 

Against: Purdue shoots significantly better from beyond the arc now than before, but the team still doesn’t take too many of them. The Boilermakers have a three-point rate of 35.7, which ranks 226th in T-Rank. This goes hand-in-hand with their preference for a slow tempo, a risky style of play that limits the number of possessions, and therefore scoring opportunities, in a game. Lots of pressure is placed on the opponent to be efficient, but Purdue is put under the same duress. The team is ranked 192nd in T-Rank’s defensive three-point rate, illustrating that it isn’t amazing at running teams off the three-point line. An opponent that can fill it up from deep could be a real issue for Matt Painter’s team.

The Boilermakers don’t really turn their opposition over. That’s not to say they are a bad defensive team - Purdue is 21st in KenPom’s defensive efficiency metric - but they don’t use their defense to steal extra possessions. Purdue averages 9.79 turnovers forced per outing, which is the 328th-most in Division I. This is just one more reason why the pressure is on Purdue to maximize every time it has the ball. A requirement for sustained excellence can be your downfall in the Big Dance. 

Houston

For: You won’t find a better defense in the country, at least as far as KenPom and T-Rank are concerned. The Cougars are No. 1 in both rankings’ defensive efficiency metrics, both by decent margins. Houston is holding teams to an average of 57.2 points per game, the fewest in the country, while existing - and thriving - in the behemoth that is the modern Big 12. Eight different Houston players have amassed defensive win shares of 1.3 or more, a ridiculous fact that illustrates how deep the Cougars go on that side of the ball.

Kelvin Sampson’s team values the basketball. After what you just read about their defense, it probably won’t surprise you to learn that the Cougars are forcing 15.97 turnovers per outing, the 12th-most in the sport. Perhaps more crucially, Houston is equally adept at avoiding making the same mistake itself. Houston is fourth in T-Rank’s turnover percentage measurement, which is in line with its position of fourth nationally in turnovers per game (8.6). 

Houston is designed to smother teams into submission with length, aggressiveness, and patience.

‍

‍

Against: If Houston is to have an issue in the tournament, offense will likely be the source. 

The Cougars are within the top 15 of the country in offensive efficiency, according to KenPom and T-Rank. Don’t be confused - Houston is a very good offensive team. However, its shooting isn’t amazingly efficient. The Cougars are 11th in the Big 12 in field goal percentage (43.8 percent), and they are 208th in America in T-Rank’s effective field goal percentage. Houston shoots okay from beyond the arc, but it’s not its forte. It’s possible that the Cougars could go cold one night this March, and that could doom them, especially in a slow tempo situation like the team prefers.

One way teams having poor shooting nights get points on the board is via the free throw line. But Houston is 225th in T-Rank’s free throw rate, and more concerning, the team shoots a combined 69.1 percent from the charity stripe, the second-worst mark in the Big 12. The Cougars do have three players who are shooting better than 80 percent from the free throw line this season (Emanuel Sharp, Jamal Shead, and LJ Cryer), but it’s a steep drop off from there. Hopefully this doesn’t come back to bite Houston in a critical moment this March. 

UConn

For: The Huskies won the 2023 national championship on the back of offensive boards. They are again elite at crashing the offensive glass and buying extra, and often better, looks at the rim. It takes a team to be as good at offensive rebounding as UConn is, but Donovan Clingan is particularly responsible. He has an outrageous 16.7 offensive rebounding percentage, good for sixth-best in the nation. The second-chance opportunities that Clingan and his compatriots generate would be the fuel for a Connecticut repeat. 

‍

‍

UConn is one of the most dominant teams in the paint in the country; it ranks in the top 10 of two-point percentage offensively and defensively. Tristen Newton is the only member of the team’s nine-man rotation who shoots below 50 percent from two-point land, and he’s at 49.7 percent. Add in what Connecticut can do on the glass and how well it protects the basket (5.3 blocks per game, 13th in the country), and the Huskies pose a serious threat to any team in college basketball around the rim. 

Against: The UConn defense is relatively foul prone. The Huskies are 217th in T-Rank’s defensive free throw rate, and they commit the fourth-most fouls per game as a team in the Big East. Teams shoot an average of 19.0 free throws per contest against Connecticut, and a team that is really good at getting to the line could enjoy itself with those numbers. 

At 36 percent, the Huskies are one of the best three-point shooting teams in the Big East and sit within the top 100 nationally in the stat. This year, they have found ways to win even when the deep ball isn’t falling, but in two of their three losses up to this point, they shot worse than 20 percent from beyond the arc. In the defeats to Creighton and Seton Hall, UConn went a combined 7-of-37 from three, and not even 30 collective offensive rebounds could save the Huskies. It’s a little ridiculous to say because no team in modern college basketball will set itself up to win shooting that poorly from three, but it seems important that Connecticut at least convert a reasonable amount of their triple attempts. 

Arizona

For: Arizona is one of the premier rebounding teams in Division I. The Wildcats are in the top 15 of T-Rank’s offensive and defensive rebounding percentages, and their 43.14 rebounds per game as a team is the second-most in the nation. This is in thanks part to the team’s style of play - Arizona utilizes a fast tempo and gets up tons of shots, which means their contests include plenty of opportunities to wrangle rebounds. It’s also because of players like Oumar Ballo, who is eighth on the national rebounding percentage list (21.4) and hauls in 10.2 boards per outing. The Wildcats also have excellent rebounding guards, which makes it especially difficult for opponents to find second-chance opportunities and helps Arizona keep possessions alive. 

The Wildcats are efficient from the floor. Six members of the team’s rotation have a player efficiency rating of 19.4 or better, and eight players who see regular court time have an effective field goal percentage of 51.2 or better. As previously outlined, Arizona gets up a ton of looks at the basket. When you get up that many shots and shoot 49.5 percent from the field as a squad, your offense is genuinely terrifying. 

‍

‍

Against: On Selection Sunday last year, Arizona was the 14th-best three-point shooting team in the country, according to T-Rank. In the first round against Princeton, the Wildcats went 3-of-16 from deep (18.8 percent), a major reason why Tommy Lloyd’s team suffered one of the bigger upsets in recent NCAA Tournament memory. In 2023-24, Arizona is again hitting triples at a great clip. But what if it has a bad shooting night in the tournament? Opponents have held the Wildcats to below 30 percent from deep in nine games so far this season. The Wildcats are 4-5 in those contests.

Given Arizona’s style, it makes sense that turnovers would be plentiful. The team sits at 204th in T-Rank’s turnover percentage and averages 11.8 giveaways per game. The Wildcats aren’t generating many turnovers out of their opponents either, ranking 297th nationally in total turnovers forced (397). Arizona has shot the ball very efficiently this season and rebounds exceptionally well, and those two facts should theoretically be enough to get Arizona the points it needs to win games. But if one or both of those doesn’t go right on any given night, the turnover battle isn’t likely to fill the void. 

Tennessee

For: The Volunteers play some of the toughest defense around. They’re in the top 4 in the country in adjusted defensive efficiency, according to T-Rank and KenPom, and the 38.26 percent they allow opponents to shoot from the field is the second-smallest percentage in Division I. Their three-point defensive rate is sub-300, but their three-point defensive percentage of 30.7 is 31st in the NCAA, which illustrates that Tennessee is forcing opponents to end a lot of possessions with deep, poor-quality chucks. Only seven teams have managed to score 75 points or more on the Vols so far this season.

Tennessee is very good at sharing the ball on offense. Its 17.0 assists per game as a team is the 20th-best mark in America, and six Vols are scoring 7.2 points or better per outing. The team’s point guard Zakai Zeigler is the leading assister in the SEC with 5.8 dimes per night, and his eye for the open man is crucial in facilitating production for the Tennessee attack. It certainly helps when you have a player like Dalton Knecht and his 20.6 points per game to pass to. 

‍

‍

Against: The main cause for concern for Tennessee in the tournament is its head coach. Rick Barnes has been in the game for a long time and proven himself through decades of victories - 27 Big Dance invitations in 36 completed seasons show that he is very good at what he does. However, in 18 of those tournament trips, his team fell to another with a lower seed. He has reached eight Sweet 16s and one Final Four, which is a lot more than most coaches can say, but there are enough upsets mixed in to be wary of any squad he oversees. 

Tennessee plays great offense, but its defense is what is truly elite. The Vols are outside of the top 85 in T-Rank’s effective field goal percentage, free throw rate, and three-point percentage. Other than Jonas Aidoo and Knecht, everybody else in the Tennessee starting lineup has a player efficiency rating of 17.6 or worse. Knecht is the only Vol with more than 2.0 offensive win shares to his name this season, and his usage rate of 31.0 percent outlines how important his production is to the team’s success. While it is true that Tennessee scores a lot of assisted baskets, Knecht eats up a healthy portion of those. When opposing teams have limited the Volunteers to worse than 40 percent shooting from the field, Tennessee is 2-4, and one of those two was Tarleton State. 

North Carolina

For: The Tar Heels are No. 6 in KenPom’s adjusted defensive efficiency metric, and they are No. 11 in T-Rank’s equivalent. Their starting five have combined for 8.0 defensive win shares so far this season. North Carolina is restricting opponents to 40.64 percent from the field, the second-best mark in the ACC and 31st-best in the NCAA. If those collective stats aren’t enough to show you the might of the Carolina defense, then perhaps a reminder that Armando Bacot and his 5.5 block percentage patrol the paint for the Tar Heels will do it. Don’t let the 70.4 points allowed per game confuse you - that’s just the nature of playing with a top 50 tempo. 

North Carolina has minimized turnovers this year. As a team, UNC commits 10.4 turnovers per contest, which sits it at 25th in T-Rank’s turnover percentage stat. RJ Davis, who leads the team in usage percentage at 27.7, has a personal turnover percentage of just 7.9 percent. That means that the player with the ball in his hands the most is incredibly cautious with the rock. Davis also happens to score an ACC-leading 21.7 points per game. He’s pretty good.

‍

‍

Against: For as adept as Carolina is in avoiding turnovers, it is about equally as inept at forcing them. The Tar Heels turn their opponents over an average of 10.9 times per game, one of the lowest marks in the ACC, and they are 299th in T-Rank’s defensive turnover percentage. This is a bit strange given the tempo the team prefers. Do not expect North Carolina to steal extra possessions through the turnover route. 

This isn’t a great shooting team. Harrison Ingram and Davis both shoot better than 39 percent from beyond the arc, but the Tar Heels lack another reliable marksman. Cormac Ryan takes triples as if he hits them at the same rate, but he only converts 32.1 percent of the 5.9 three-point attempts he averages per outing. North Carolina is much worse from inside the arc - its 50.1 percent shooting from two-point territory ranks 226th in Division I. This is mostly mitigated by increasing the number of a game’s possessions via tempo and getting up a lot of shots. But if a tournament opponent can slow the game down and force the Tar Heels to be more efficient from the field, it could be a big problem.