Welcome back to Bracket Breakers, where we are excited to keep extending our search for upsets in the NCAA women’s tournament. This year, the potential Cinderellas on the women’s side are more interesting than ever, with more bracket-breaking weapons in their arsenals. Today we’re breaking down which of those teams has the highest chance to beat an overdog in Friday’s first-round games.
Advertisement
As on the men’s side, our statistical model Slingshot, developed with help from the Furman University Mathematics Department, begins by estimating the strength of all D-I teams according to their scoring margin per 100 possessions, adjusted for strength of schedule. We then adjust those basic power ratings for how strongly teams carry traits associated with successful tournament teams of the past.
For underdogs, these characteristics generally include factors that widen the variability of a team’s play, such as shooting lots of threes and working to force turnovers. For favorites, it’s just the opposite: higher seeds cruise to wins when they cut risks and avoid chaos. Then we estimate matchup results.
Before we continue, two observations and one caveat. First, as we’ve mentioned, while parity is increasing in the women’s game, and there are more viable contenders for the national title than ever, the gap between the best programs and bottom-of-the-bracket teams has not closed much. Not yet, anyway. Slingshot sees only 11 first-round matchups with a 10 percent chance of an upset. That’s up from 10 last year, but still fewer than the men’s side. We’ll analyze those 11 in depth, with the first six here in Friday’s breakdown.
In more exciting news, the teams with Cinderella potential are now packing all types of underdog power. While last year’s tournament featured more upsets than ever before, the squads that pulled them off weren’t exactly an advertisement for stylistic diversity. No. 11 seed Mississippi State, which knocked off Creighton in the opening round, led the country in offensive rebounding percentage. In the second round, No. 1 seed Stanford lost to Mississippi, which was 16th in offensive rebound percent, and No. 1 seed Miami lost to Indiana, which ranked 52nd. LSU can’t count as an underdog, but the 3-seed that won the national title was also a powerhouse on the offensive boards (2nd in OR percent). With one great exception in Florida Gulf Coast, successful longshots tended to amass possessions by hitting the offensive glass. There’s an important lesson in that, but it left us wondering if teams could find other ways to take down Goliaths in the women’s game.
Advertisement
Well, this time around, they’re certainly going to try. The women’s 2024 tournament is about to show off lower seeds who also keep things slow, grab steals or launch bombs, sometimes in unusual combinations.
Finally, the caveat: We do want to point out that we are still working to close the gap between the historical data available for women’s and men’s hoops. We are confident we can calculate current team strengths. But to connect giant and killer factors to postseason performance with the precision that we bring to the men’s game, we still need fuller numbers from past tournaments. We’re getting there, but please keep in mind that we are providing you with the best estimates we can as our tools continue to evolve.
Now, on to Friday’s games!
Odds are from BetMGM. For more Underdogs, listen to Peter and Jordan’s podcast. For all our March Madness coverage, check out our content hub.
No. 6 Nebraska Cornhuskers vs. No. 11 Texas A&M Aggies
Upset chance: 42 percent
Spread: Nebraska favored by 3.5 points
Game 2 of the Trev Alberts classic (these two schools will compete in the men’s tournament 4 hours earlier) is loaded with upset potential. The reason isn’t very complicated: The Cornhuskers and Aggies are much closer in overall ability than a five-seed gap would suggest. The power ratings section of our model separates them by just 3.1 points per 100 possessions. The Huskers’ Alexis Markowski (15.9 ppg, 10.9 rpg) is a challenge for any opponent down low, but Texas A&M sports a great differential on the offensive glass, grabbing 36.7 percent of their own misses while only allowing a 25.9 percent rate for their foes.
No. 6 Louisville Cardinals vs. No. 11 Middle Tennessee Blue Raiders
Upset chance: 24.9 percent
Spread: Louisville favored by 5.5 points
Middle Tennessee is a strong mid-major, ranked 43rd in our basic power ratings, which leaves them less than 8 points per 100 possessions behind Louisville. Our model loves that the Blue Raiders hoist three-pointers on more than 37 percent of their field-goal attempts (30th in the nation), but their steal rate has declined since last season when they were one of our model’s favorite underdogs. They also have to find a way to overcome Louisville’s offensive rebounding (37.7 percent of missed shots). That glasswork will help insulate Louisville from a cold shooting night, making it harder to generate an upset.
Advertisement
No. 4 Virginia Tech Hokies vs. No. 13 Marshall Thundering Herd
Upset chance: 22.2 percent
Spread: Virginia Tech favored by 12.5 points
Hokies C Elizabeth Kitley (22.8 points, 11.4 rebounds and 2.1 blocks per game) is one of the best players in college hoops and has been sidelined since sustaining a knee injury in Virginia Tech’s final regular-season game. Though it’s safe to say these upset odds will jump if she can’t play in the NCAA Tournament, our model hasn’t estimated the impact of Kitley’s absence other than to include the conference tournament games the Hokies played without her. Even so, Slingshot sees slayage potential in this matchup. The Hokies play at a very slow pace of just 68.4 possessions per game (ranking 252nd in the country), which can make it difficult to separate from an inferior opponent or to catch up with a high-scoring team that establishes an early lead. They also take a lot of threes (37.8 percent of FGA as 3PA, the 24th-highest rate in the nation), which increases a giant’s vulnerability to an off shooting night. And in Marshall, they’re facing a very fast, prolific-shooting foe that works to clamp down the perimeter.
In fact, unlike most of 2023’s promising longshots, the Thundering Herd carry a whole bag of assassin’s tricks. They hit the offensive boards (ranking 28th in OR percent). They hoist more threes than any team in the country (31.3 per game) and hit 39.1 percent of them (ranking 17th). Led by G Abby Beeman, they also force a ton of steals (13.4 percent of opponent possessions, ranking seventh). Like McNeese State or Samford on the men’s side, Marshall is a small-conference killer that looks designed for Slingshot’s approval. There’s a difference of more than 20 points per 100 possessions between these teams in our basic power ratings, so our upset odds can’t go too high. But the numbers say it’s time you herd about this team.
No. 5 Baylor Bears vs. No. 12 Vanderbilt Commodores
Upset chance: 19.5 percent
Like just about everyone else, we like what see in Baylor: The Bears are a deep squad that shoots very well from inside, hits the boards, forces steals, hits threes when they need to and utterly handcuffs opponents on the perimeter. Opponents are shooting just 26.1 percent from long range against Baylor, the sixth-lowest rate in the country.
But Slingshot is intrigued by the upset potential of the Bears’ opponent Vanderbilt because it ups the risks and rewards of their play— and in an unusual way.
Advertisement
The Commodores, making their first NCAA tournament appearance in a decade, rank 18th in the country with steals on 12.5 percent of opponent possessions and 54th in offensive rebounding percentage. They are also holding opponents to shooting under 30 percent on threes.
Baylor is tough, but the ‘Dores have an arsenal of tactics for building possessions and keeping things close.
No. 5 Colorado Buffaloes vs. No. 12 Drake Bulldogs
Upset chance: 11.8 percent
Spread: Colorado favored by 8.5 points
Drake is becoming a trendy upset pick in some quarters, but we advise against buying the hype. We get why the Bulldogs look good: They won 29 games! They score more than 80 points a game! And they’re a fun watch — it seems like they lead the country in assist percentage every year (actually, four of the past seven). But let’s subject them to something more rigorous than the eye test.
Drake unquestionably had an outstanding season but their record is surely inflated by going 5-0 in games decided by two or fewer possessions and quite a bit more by facing what our model says has been the nation’s 115th-strongest schedule. They score and give up bucketloads of points while playing at a very fast clip; on a per-possession basis, their offense looks very good (ranking 24th) and their defense pretty bad (ranking 167th). Their pace is likely to be a problem against a superior opponent: Multiply a difference in points per possession by a bigger number of possessions, and you get a bigger difference in points.
We would also point out that while the Bulldogs are terrific shooters (eFG percent of 55.5 percent, ranking seventh), what they do when they’re not shooting can get scary. Drake commits turnovers on more than 20 percent of possessions and forces them on just 17.7 percent of opponent possessions (ranking 244th).
Advertisement
Meanwhile, our model says Colorado is the No. 15 team in the country. The Buffaloes aren’t a particularly invulnerable giant, but they avoid turnovers and grab defensive rebounds, which should help them stay safe. They’re more than 20 points per 100 possessions stronger than Drake in our basic power ratings. And with better analytics, we can now see just how yawning that gap is.
No. 3 Oregon State Beavers vs. No. 14 Eastern Washington Eagles
Upset chance: 11.1 percent
Spread: Oregon State favored by 18.5 points
Our model doesn’t have a glaring upset alert for this game, but it does see some issues with the Beavers. For starters, they aren’t as good as you’d expect from a 3-seed, ranking just 18th in our overall power ratings. They also struggle in the statistical categories that are most important for giants to stave off pesky underdogs. In particular, they play extremely slowly (291st in tempo) and only grab offensive rebounds on 29 percent of missed shots (227th). Eastern Washington may not have the chops to pull off the upset — although the 40 percent three-point shooting of Jamie Loera and Aaliyah Alexander will help — but it pays to be skeptical of Oregon State.
Games with upset chances below 10 percent
As a reward for making it this far, here’s where we tell you that Norfolk State is the No. 15 seed to watch, even if just for fun. The Spartans hit our radar when we noticed how well they disrupt other teams: They hijack the ball on 15.7 percent of opponent possessions, which ranks third in the country. They’re led by Diamond Johnson (20.3 points and 3.8 steals per game), formerly of Rutgers and North Carolina State. They won the MEAC tournament. And now they’re running into Stanford. That’s the life of a deep underdog.
No. 4 Kansas State Wildcats vs. No. 13 Portland Pilots
Upset chance: 7.7 percent
No. 2 Ohio State Buckeyes vs. No. 15 Maine Black Bears
Upset chance: 2.4 percent
Advertisement
No. 2 Stanford Cardinal vs. No. 15 Norfolk State Spartans
Upset chance: 1.7 percent
No. 3 LSU Tigers vs. No. 14 Rice Owls
Upset chance: 1.5 percent
No. 1 Texas Longhorns vs. No. 16 Drexel Dragons
Upset chance: 0.2 percent
No. 1 South Carolina Gamecocks vs. No. 16 Presbyterian Blue Hose
Upset chance: 0.01 percent
Thanks to John Harris, Kevin Hutson and Liz Bouzarth of Furman University for research assistance. Austin Mock also provided research material.
(Photo of Savannah Wheeler: Karl B. DeBlaker / AP)