You regulars know it can be helpful to fans and bettors to study how betting markets are evaluating teams.
*If you’re a fan, this is arguably the best “wisdom of the crowds” approach to knowing how teams stack up. REAL MONEY is at stake in the battle between sharps and oddsmakers, the two most important factions in the whole sports wagering process. When the dust settles, you’re left with something very close to reality in team assessments. Any one computer model will do a good job. “The sum of all models” will likely to an even better job. Call it “wisdom of the informed crowds.”
*If you’re a bettor, well, it’s YOU against THE MARKET! You’re trying to pick winners and make money. You should know what your enemy is thinking if you’re going to find any advantages or pick off any edges. If the markets aren’t adjusting to the fact that the Dallas Cowboys or Miami Dolphins are running up the score vs. bad teams, but flunking litmus tests left and right vs. good teams, you can fade them vs. good teams. It’s easier to notice that stuff if you’re making estimates of “market” Power Ratings and seeing which teams aren’t performing to their estimate.
Point spreads are fairly locked in now for the NCAA Tournament’s “Sweet 16” that will go to battle Thursday and Friday. We can use those point spreads to estimate how “the market” sees the full field. Games are being played on neutral courts. If one team is -8 over another, we know “the market” thinks that team is eight points better. We can use couplets based on those spreads (and other recent games involving those teams) to build a scale.
First, let’s run current estimates by region…
EAST: UCONN 92, Iowa State 86, Illinois 84, SDSU 81
SOUTH Houston 90, Duke 86, Marquette 84, NC State 78
MIDWEST Purdue 89, Tennessee 87, Creighton 84, Gonzaga 84
WEST Arizona 87, N. Carolina 87, Alabama 83, Clemson 80
Connecticut is -11 vs. San Diego State. They have to go 11 points apart on our scale. North Carolina is -4 vs. Alabama. They have to go 4 points apart. And so on. We’ve used recent pricing and some common sense to determine how the big picture fits together.
The scale is designed to estimate future point spreads. Margin for error is about a point either way. And, impressions can change on the fly. Maybe Houston or Purdue won’t look very good while barely surviving against Duke or Gonzaga. They might drop a point by the weekend. Maybe NC State looks so great they rise to 80 in the Elite 8. It’s always a work in progress. This is a snapshot of a reality that’s constantly in motion.
I’ll go into more depth about how those numbers were determined momentarily. First, let’s stack the whole 16 so you can see what it looks like through that lens. If you’re thinking about futures bets, or likely point spread ranges for possible future matchups.
92: Connecticut
90: Houston
89: Purdue
87: North Carolina, Arizona, Tennessee
86: Iowa State, Duke
84: Marquette, Illinois, Creighton, Gonzaga
83: Alabama
81: San Diego State
80: Clemson
78: NC State
Connecticut’s playing at such a high level that it’s earning distance from Houston and Purdue. Fans of those other two might not agree. But, remember…
*Houston just had to go OT to beat Texas A&M, after getting throttled by Iowa State in the Big 12 championship game.
*Purdue only beat Michigan State by 5 in the Big 10 quarters, and LOST to Wisconsin in the Big 10 semifinals. Those results look even worse now than they did at the time. Sparty was outclassed by North Carolina. Wisconsin had a very disappointing result vs. James Madison.
Feel free to disagree with anything you see. If you want to debate, remember that you have to move the COUPLET not just the individual team. If you think I have UCONN too high, you have to move UCONN and SDSU down a point or two. Huskies are 11-point favorites. Those teams have to remain 11 points apart if you’re trying to capture MARKET Power Ratings.
THURSDAY
Arizona (87) -7 vs. Clemson (80)
Arizona’s tricky to evaluate. They’ve had too many ugly results to treat as one of the “big three” at the top of the ladder. Yet, when things are clicking they look that good. It’s like, they’re an 87 that can look like a 90 when peaking…but then they plummet to 80ish too often (like when losing to Oregon in the Pac 12 tourney, or in other league losses). I think 87 best captures the Wildcats. Clemson’s playing better than 80-ish in this tournament so far…but sure wasn’t down the stretch (lost three of last four, routed by BC in ACC tourney). It’s very possible that this should be 88 and 81. I would be very skeptical about 89 and 82. Arizona’s not an 89 in terms of reliable consistency. I also wouldn’t be shocked if 86 and 79 would better represent “normal” if these teams would just settle down and play a normal game.
Connecticut (92) -11 vs. San Diego State (81)
I must have hopped back and forth on this one about 10 times (and twice while writing this article). If I use UCONN 92 and 81, that 81 feels too low for San Diego State. In good form. Proven ability to thrive in playoff-style basketball. Kenpom rating is within arm’s reach of Alabama, Marquette, Gonzaga, Creighton…and using 81 for SDSU feels be too far behind those guys. If 82 makes the most sense for SDSU, and UCONN has to be 11 points higher, that puts us at 93 for the Huskies. And, that lifts UCONN a bit too far away from the other top contenders for my taste. I don’t know that UCONN would be laying something like SIX vs. Arizona or North Carolina. Finally settled on 92 and 81. Maybe “with a bullet” by both UCONN and SDSU.
I think UCONN has established a bucket distance from Houston and Purdue. If you look at recent litmus tests for those latter two (not scrimmages vs. the outmatched, but litmus tests vs. quality), I was okay having that distance at the top for UCONN.
North Carolina (87) -4 vs. Alabama (83)
I mean…it’s somewhere near there! Just watching games this past weekend, Carolina could make a case for 88ish. Alabama had so many ugly stretches vs. Grand Canyon that its balloon may pop vs. an opponent that knows how to execute. And, Alabama lost three of its prior four games before the Dance. If I make it 88 and 84, that seems too high for what the market would think about Alabama. If I use 86 and 82…arguably too low for both. (The version of UNC that beat Duke and Michigan State is more like an 88…but there’s also the version that lost to NC State.)
Iowa State (86) -1.5 vs. Illinois (84)
This was -2 until recent betting on the dog. I’ll probably lift Illinois to 85 if the number falls to a solid one. Illinois did win its conference tournament and has played well in the Dance. Remember that “the market” has greatly underestimated Iowa State in the Big 12 regular season (67% cover rate) and in the postseason so far (100% cover rate with a 5-0 straight up and ATS mark vs. a tough schedule). It’s possible that “reality” would be 87 and 85. The “market” just keeps chasing Iowa State’s ability to thrive in playoff style basketball.
FRIDAY
Marquette (84) -6.5 vs. NC State (78)
Hard to know for sure what to do with NC State. In its last seven games, the Wolfpack has a five-game cover streak and two games that finished within half-point of the number. Granting, they needed OT vs. Oakland to rise there. Still, market’s kinda chasing. Doesn’t feel like 85 and 79 would be reasonable given Marquette’s bad second half vs. Colorado, and NCS needing extra time vs. Oakland. Very possible that this should be 83 and 77. Would the market have Marquette that far behind the other #2 seeds? Possible. If the game gets bet up to Marquette -7, not sure who I’d lift or drop.
Purdue (89) -5.5 vs. Gonzaga (84)
Maybe this should be 88 and 83. Purdue has obliterated two Dance opponents…but we already talked about the shaky Big 10 tourney. Gonzaga’s looked great surrounding the bad loss to St. Mary’s in Las Vegas in the West Coast tournament. But, that loss did happen. Probably 10 more minutes and I would have dropped that to 88 and 83. I think I’d probably like UCONN at -3 vs. Purdue if they meet later.
Houston (90) -4 vs. Duke (86)
I couldn’t see 91 and 87 based on recent losses by these teams. I’d be much more likely to go backward to 89 and 85. But, Duke’s losses to North Carolina and NC State recently don’t look so bad now. ACC may have been underrated by the market coming in. Another one where 10 extra minutes might have changed the couplet on the big scale (or two less minutes in the Houston/A&M game!). I think my main problem is….I’m seeing new distance between UCONN and Purdue/Houston…which could very well represent what the market is NOW thinking…but creating that distance kinda messes up teams in that 82-86 area. Well, I think EITHER 89/85 or 90/86 captures these two teams. They have to be four points apart.
Tennessee (87) -3 vs. Creighton (84)
Both have been getting market respect in recent pricing even though either could turn into a pumpkin soon. We know the Tennessee head coach has consistent trouble performing to Power Rating in tournaments…and we know Creighton looks very mortal when the treys aren’t falling. Whoever wins…I do think “the market” is going to price near this. Remember, Tennessee was -6.5 vs. Texas, and Creighton -5 vs. Oregon. They’ve gotta be in this general area…and the Vols have to be three rungs higher on the ladder as a 3-point favorite.
That’s how estimated “market” Power Ratings look on the fly as of Tuesday at lunch time. We can tinker if the lines move between now and tipoff. Because there are only 16 teams, I’d encourage YOU to compile your own ratings on this scale based on how YOU see these teams. Might help you find some value spots either Thursday or Friday…or when the winners play Saturday and Sunday.
Thanks for reading. A sharps report for Tuesday night’s NIT will go out to paid subscribers this afternoon. If you’d like to become a paid subscriber, and read sharps reports and game summaries for the rest of the Dance, the NIT, the UFL spring football league that starts Saturday, the NBA Playoffs, the full college and pro football seasons…and the first nearly 4 months of 2025 (!), cost is just $75 for a calendar year.
See you again soon.