What Triggered Round of 64 Upsets in 2024 NCAA Tournament?
Can You Guess Which Skill Set Had Best Correlation to Winning?
Before the conference tournaments started last week, I was already thinking about the Big Dance. I started wondering what had driven upsets from the Round of 64. I remember thinking that treys were behind Oakland’s shocker of Kentucky when getting +13.5 points. Seemed like that was also a factor when Yale took out Auburn as a 14-point dog. Was it just treys and nothing else that drove upsets? I wasn’t certain. Figured I’d go back and look.
With this new Trey-less Efficiency stat we’ve been playing around with, I might develop a better sense of what was happening outside and inside the arc. Nothing like improving on old memories with new tools!
Ran through last season’s brackets. In the Round of 64, there were EIGHT upsets where an underdog of +4 or higher pulled off a mild or big surprise. Let’s run the key stats from those eight games. I’ll go in descending order of point spread size.
(If you’re a first-time reader, our stat summaries separate the often-random three-point performances from “everything else.” A shortcut stat we developed for “everything else” is “Trey-less Efficiency,” which is points scored on 1’s and 2’s divided by the number of possessions that DON’T end with a made trey. Numbers at .85 or better are good, at .75 or worse are not.)
*Yale (+14) upset Auburn 78-76
What happened with Treys?
Yale 9/20 (45%), Auburn 7/20 (35%)
Obvious edge to the winner. But, Yale was only +6 points in a game it covered by 16 points. So…treys were a key to springing the upset…but stats must have been close in the “other stuff” for it to be a much-closer-than-expected game.
What happened with everything else?
Trey-Less Efficiency: Auburn .89, Yale .87
Yale won free throws 21/31 to 15/22 and turnovers 14-11. Auburn won two-point shooting 61-47% and rebounds 35-30. Brisk 69-possession game rather than any sort of Ivy League crawl. Auburn owned the “physical” stuff…two-point shooting and rebounding. But, Yale did a good job of earning free throws and forcing mistakes from Auburn. This was much closer inside the arc than most expected. THAT created the toss-up that saw treys push Yale over the top.
*Oakland (+13.5) upset Kentucky 80-76
What happened with Treys?
Oakland 15/31 (48%), Kentucky 9/28 (32%)
My memory was correct. Oakland was plus 18 points in a game it only won by four. Shot lights out from behind the arc. Kentucky wasn’t terrible, but couldn’t keep up. This is bound to happen somewhere in the brackets. Impossible to know for with any certainty who’s going to make THAT many with a high percentage.
What happened with everything else?
Trey-Less Efficiency: Kentucky .82, Oakland .65
Oakland won rebounding 40-39 and turnovers 11-7. Kentucky won two-point shooting 52-34% and free throws 15/20 to 13/23. A bit surprised Oakland won two of the four categories here. Played cleaner. Hustled on the boards. You’re actually doing A LOT OF WORK to win rebounding as a 14-point underdog because you likely have lesser athletes. Obviously, Kentucky advances with even three-point shooting.
*Duquesne (+9.5) upset BYU 71-62
What happened with Treys?
Duquesne 7/18 (39%), BYU 8/24 (33%)
BYU had more makes, though Duquesne had the better percentage. No way you can say this upset was “driven” by three-point shooting though. BYU was +3 points here, Duquesne must have been +12 points in everything else. Having fewer long-range misses helped a bit with that.
What happened with everything else?
Trey-Less Efficiency: Duquesne .83, BYU .73
Duquesne won two-point shooting 50-42% and turnovers 12-11. BYU won free throws 15/17 to 12/16 and rebounding 35-29. Many of you likely recall that last year’s BYU team (most BYU teams) generally needed good games on three-pointers to get results. We were covering the Big 12 a year ago (where my alma mater Texas was playing at the time). Cougars were mortal when treys weren’t falling. Looked really mortal here when Duquesne cancelled that out and sprung a big upset with better inside play.
*Grand Canyon (+5.5) upset St. Mary’s 75-66
What happened with Treys?
St. Mary’s 7/25 (28%), Grand Canyon 5/18 (28%)
Definitely not a three-point driven upset. St. Mary’s is on the list of teams that look mortal when treys aren’t falling. At least in the postseason when playing real teams.
What happened with everything else?
Trey-Less Efficiency: Grand Canyon .91, St. Mary’s .70
Grand Canyon won two-point shooting 52-45%, free throws 28/36 to 7/12 (!!), and turnovers 13-11. St. Mary’s won rebounding 40-34. I’m sure St. Mary’s fans were mad at the refs. But, Grand Canyon HAD to be attacking the basket aggressively to draw that many fouls as the lesser-respected team. We’re four games into this exercise. I should note now that the team with fewer turnovers won all four games. None of the favorites have yet “imploded” with a disastrous total. But, dogs played cleaner…and that’s a big part of why Trey-less efficiency WASN’T slanted to the superior seeds (except for the Oakland game).
*NC State (+5) upset Texas Tech 80-67
What happened with Treys?
NC State 5/13 (39%), Texas Tech 7/31 (23%)
Dramatic percentage advantage for State, even though Tech had more makes. State emphasized inside play…only taking wide-open looks from long range. Tech played with desperation and kept digging a bigger hole. State only had 8 misses, Tech 24. This wasn’t an upset driven by “hot shooting” from long range (like Oakland), but definitely at least partly by panicky, poor long range shooting from the favorite.
What happened with everything else?
Trey-Less Efficiency: NC State 1.04, Texas Tech .77
NC State won free throws 21/26 to 12/14. Both teams shot 55% on two-pointers (NC State had 5 more makes), grabbed 33 rebounds, and had 10 turnovers. Very evenly played outside of State more smartly attacking inside while Tech panicked too often outside. I think everybody kinda knew this already…but looking at Trey-less efficiency and key inside stats has really driven home the point that…if you’re shooting a zillion treys, it’s hard to draw easy points at the free throw line. A lot of favorites shoot themselves in the foot that way.
*James Madison (+5) upset Wisconsin 72-61
What happened with Treys?
Wisconsin 8/21 (38%), James Madison 5/17 (29%)
Definitely not a trey-driven upset. The favorite was +9 points from long range while hitting close to 40%. Most coaches will take 38% on bombs.
What happened with everything else?
Trey-Less Efficiency: James Madison .84, Wisconsin .57
James Madison won two-point shooting 46-37%, free throws 21/30 to 15/23, rebounds 37-36, and turnovers 19-12. Clean sweep for Madison! Suggests a bad price. Madison was much better at “real” basketball in this meeting. Won scoring on 1’s and 2’s by 20 points.
*Utah State (+4) upset TCU 88-72
What happened with Treys?
Utah State 8/19 (42%), TCU 7/22 (32%)
Utah State got the best of it…but not to a degree that would have explained a 16-point straight up win or a 20-point cover. Plus three points with a better percentage on a similar number of attempts.
What happened with everything else?
Trey-Less Efficiency: Utah State 1.01, TCU .80
Utah State won two-point shooting 61-38% and turnovers 14-9. TCU won free throws 17/22 to 14/15 and rebounds 41-30. That’s big edges in turnovers for the last two upset-winners (Madison and Utah State)….which brings the running record to 6-0-1 for dogs winning the TO category. Should also note that TCU is the THIRD team from the Big 12 to show up as a victim on this list. Conference was overrated last year in a way that just wasn’t clear until it had to face teams from other conferences.
*Northwestern (+4) upset Florida Atlantic 75-68 in OT (58)
What happened with Treys?
Northwestern 8/23 (35%), Florida Atlantic 5/27 (19%)
Not great shooting from the winner, but awful shooting from the loser. Combination of “looks mortal when treys aren’t falling” and “panicky shooting instead of working for something better” for FAU.
What happened with everything else?
Trey-Less Efficiency: Northwestern .77, Florida Atlantic .69
Northwestern won rebounding 41-38 and turnovers 21-12 (!!). Florida Atlantic won two-point shooting 57-46% (but had 4 fewer makes) and free throws 16/21. Wow…21 turnovers in a game with 77 possessions counting overtime…and 22 missed three-pointers that were also virtual turnovers much of the time. FAU mentally imploded in a game it expected to win.
Before running all the numbers, I would have guessed that overly hot three-point shooting had been the most common key to those underdogs pulling upsets. Scary…because I wrote up those box scores a year ago on these pages but didn’t remember many of the specifics. You get old…you’re lucky to remember where you put your reading glasses. I didn’t remember how rare Oakland’s style of upset was on that Thursday and Friday. Look at the Trey-less efficiency scores again!
NC State 1.04, Texas Tech .77
James Madison .84, Wisconsin .77
Utah State 1.01, TCU .80
Grand Canyon .91, St. Mary’s .70
Duquesne .83, BYU .73
Northwestern .77, Florida Atlanta .69
Auburn .89, Yale .87 (much closer inside than expected)
Kentucky .82, Oakland .65 (upset was trey-driven)
That’s six of eight upset winners taking our Trey-less efficiency category. And, THAT was helped by teams winning the turnover category going 7-0-1 straight up.
Keys to pulling Round of 64 upsets a year ago…
*Playing CLEAN basketball
*Working INSIDE for good shots or to draw fouls rather than launching at will
Keys to Favorites Losing…
*Missing a zillion treys in panic mode
*Missing too many treys even when not panicking
*Playing SLOPPY, or at least less-clean basketball
As you handicap this week’s games…be sure you’re paying specific attention to skill sets instead of just remembering when some smaller-college team had a big game…or a big-name program lost a TV game you watched six weeks ago. Many shockers aren’t driven by what Oakland did (15/31 on treys). They’re driven by avoiding turnovers, earning more free points from the free throw line, and keeping your heads on straight while a favored opponent panics and falls apart.
Wanted to get that down on paper before it was too late. The Big Dance begins Tuesday night with a couple of play-in games from Dayton. On the immediate agenda the next few weeks.
*Reports on how SHARPS (professional wagerers) are betting each and every game (as determined by line movement) through the full NCAA Tournament
*Stat recaps of every game in the format you just read above. Learn about each team as it advances through the brackets. See what kinds of skill sets are consistent, or prone to ebb and flow that get prominent teams knocked out earlier than expected.
If you’re reading today for free and like this kinda stuff…signing up for a calendar month for $20 would take you all the way through the tournament with room to spare. Best value is $75 for a calendar year that would obviously include the full college and pro football seasons (along with the NBA and MLB Playoffs) and carry you through mid-March of 2026.
If you’re already a subscriber, thanks for your interest and support. Back with you Tuesday morning to see how sharps are betting North Carolina/San Diego State and Alabama State/St. Francis.