NCAA Tournament Projections: Examining Seeds No. 1-4

NCAA Tournament Projections: Examining Seeds No. 1-4

The NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Committee revealed their top 16 teams in the country on Saturday, and while it gave us few surprises, there were still some interesting rankings. Let’s take a look at the four seed lines.

One seeds: Purdue, UConn, Houston, Arizona

No surprises on this line at all. Most bracketologists in the country had these teams in this order. Purdue was No. 1 because of the overwhelming résumé. These four were so far apart from the rest of the field that the committee was unanimous in the selection and order of this line.

Two seeds: North Carolina, Tennessee, Marquette, Kansas

Most bracketologists had these teams as well, but there are some mild surprises within the ranking. The biggest is North Carolina as the No. 1 on this line and Marquette No. 3. It’s dangerous to overthink why a particular committee does what they do, but it does appear they valued a high number of wins in Quads 1 and 2, especially with a majority of them being away from home. That would explain UNC over Marquette, as the Heels had 10 such wins with six of those away from home versus Marquette’s 10 wins with only five in those two categories. It may not be much of a difference, but the only other thing that would separate the teams would be that it appeared that the committee favored a good KPI number in most instances.

Three seeds: Alabama, Baylor, Iowa State, Duke

Alabama was a head-scratcher to be the No. 1 on this line, but another trend seems to be that NET ranking was important, with higher-ranked teams gaining an advantage. It appeared, in a couple of cases, that a triple-digit non-conference schedule ranking hurt teams. This may have been the case with Iowa State and could also explain why Auburn wasn’t on this line.

Four seeds: Auburn, San Diego State, Illinois, Wisconsin

Most had 15 teams correct in their top 16 projections. The question was, who was the last team? Turns out, it was San Diego State, and as you can see by the rankings they weren’t last at all, but rather 14th. In looking at why the Aztecs were chosen over teams like Creighton, Dayton and Clemson, it could be that SDSU garnered more high-quality wins (five in the top 30) and again a stronger non-conference SOS. The only thing explanation for why Wisconsin, with their high volume of top-two quad wins, was at the bottom of this list is a lower percentage of those were road wins and that the NET difference won the day.

Just a note: I did not make any adjustments after the weekend results to the committee’s reveal. I felt that although they’re very close, Purdue still edges UConn with those seven top-25 NET wins. It was also razor-thin between Wisconsin at 16 and Creighton at 17, but a few more quality wins, more wins against the field (6 to 3) and better SOS and KPI numbers gave the Badgers the edge.

In summary, while the committee has a few factors that are weighed more heavily, they do appear to take many factors into selecting and seeding teams, which is a good thing. It doesn’t appear that just one overriding factor is driving the bus here.

How did I do? Happy to say I selected all 16 teams correctly and only missed on Duke and Auburn on the seed line, although they were seeded together on lines 12 and 13. I stuck to my guns with my high opinion of San Diego State and it paid off. This time.

LAST FOUR IN: Gonzaga, Nevada, Cincinnati, Ole Miss

FIRST FOUR OUT: Utah, Seton Hall, Providence, Drake

NEXT FOUR OUT: Wake Forest, Iowa, Colorado, Pitt

CONFERENCES WITH MULTIPLE BIDS

Big 12: 10

SEC: 9

Big Ten: 6

MW: 6

Big East: 4 ACC: 4

Pac-12: 2

AAC: 2

WCC: 2

Just a reminder that the 2024 Mock Selection Committee will be together in the same room for the first time to project the field from March 1st to the 3rd. Join us on our YouTube channel on those dates and interact with us on the live chat.

Follow me on Twitter/X @tkbrackets. I will give you updates all season long as we make our way to Phoenix for the Final Four.