2021 Quality Curve Analysis - Final Edition

I'm not going to bore you with catchy intros and wordy mantras, so let's see the final edition of the 2021 QC and the 2021 seed curve.

 

Final Quality Curve

I'm going to start with the season-long progression of the QC.

From Dec to Jan, the QC grew along the 1-16 spots. From Jan to Feb, the QC grew along the 1-39 spots. From Feb to Mar, the QC grew along the entire length of the curve, with the exception of a few spots: spot #2 (attributable to BAY's decline due to their Covid pause), spots #10 and #11 (one of which I can attribute to the decline of TEX), and spot #38 (which appears to be VT, another Covid-paused program). The size and scale of the progression of this curve is impressive, and I don't throw adjectives like that out freely because I'm rarely impressed. After two days of recollection, I have a hypothesis as to what we might be seeing. In QC Analysis articles of past seasons, I think these movements happen in the February QC Article, which would be the progression from Jan to Feb. With this pre-season (and in all fairness, this entire season) limited by Covid protocols, it is possible that we are seeing the typical February advancement now in Mar 2021 as teams finally get their footing and find some level of consistency. This brings me to another point, one regarding a potential National Champion. My one criticism of this program is the horse-race style: They come out of the gates strong and well-prepared (probably more prepared than any other team in Division I), then they cruise through the West Coast Conference with ease while everyone else is becoming battle-hardened by nightly fights against ACC/B12/B10/SEC/P12/BEC opponents, then they flop in the NCAA tournament because everyone else caught up to their out-of-the-gate level. I'm not going to mention any names, Gonzaga (#$%!&, that one slipped), but did they dodge their perennial kryptonite of everyone else catching up to their level due to the restraints place on the season by Covid? It is a very interesting hypothesis that will be tested over the next few weeks, but it is my guess as to what we are seeing in the current QC.

Now, I want to look at the historical comparison.

Wow! I'm impressed again, but this time for two separate reasons. The top of the curve is in-line with 2017 and 2019, which were really good years for top-seed advancement (low M-o-M ratings) and predictability. The back of the curve is higher than a <insert drug-related joke here>, which is conducive to upset-heavy years. The good news is that eight of the twenty teams from spots #31-#50 are not participating in the tournament. The better news is that most of these teams are over-seeds, which is a pretty awesome teaser if you ask me. The important news is that a high back-end of the QC leads me to expect a higher quantity of upsets in later rounds (R32 and S16), especially if mis-seedings happen, which we will now investigate.

2021 Seed Curve

The one and only 2021 Seed Curve, and you can't find it anywhere else (well, you can make it yourself, but then you wouldn't get the entertainment of my off-the-wall comedic prose).

There's a lot to unfold here. Let's start with the weak points, and that would be the 3-seeds, 7-seeds, and 12-seeds. If you looked at the bracket model that was posted early Monday morning, you will see a lot of over-seeds (marked O-#) in these three seed groups. The 3-seeds are so bad this year, the averages of the next three groups (4- thru 6-seeds) are all higher than them. I don't think I would be shocked to see a 14 over 3 this year. With 7-seeds sharply below their QC-average and 10-seeds slightly above their QC-average, I like the chances of 10-seeds this year against their R64 rivals (this is not a call for a full 4-0 sweep). With the 12-seeds ridiculously below their QC average and 5-seeds above their own, I like 5-seeds to go either 3-1 or 4-0 against 12-seeds this year.

Let's move to the strong parts of the curve. Typically when a seed group out-performs its QC average, the seed group as a whole out-performs its win expectations:

• 1-seeds expect to win 16 games
  
• 2-seeds expect to win 12 games
• 3-seeds and 4-seeds expect to win 8 games
• 5- and 6-seeds expect to win 4 games
• 7- thru 10-seeds expect to win 2 games
• 11- and 12-seeds expect to win 0 games

As you can see, we have a problem. 1-seeds can never go above their QC. If the top four QC teams are given 1-seeds, then the QC average will equal the SC average. If any of the top four QC teams are given any other seed than a 1-seed, they will pull up the average of that seed-group and the 1-seed group will be below the QC average. As it stands, 1-seeds are at their QC average (and I cannot recall ever seeing this before) while 8-seeds and 9-seeds are well above theirs. It is impossible for all three of these groups to out-perform their expectations. The only plausible scenario that gets closest is a 1-seed National Champ (6 wins), a 1-seed National Runner-up (5 wins, cumulative 11 wins), a 1-seed Final Four (4 wins, cumulative 15 wins), a 3-1 record for either 8s or 9s (3 wins vs 2 expected) with the lone winner from the other group going to the Elite 8 (3 wins vs 2 expected). Again, it is impossible. With the setups though, I like the 8-seeds to go 3-1 vs 9-seeds this year (and this may work to your favor since the sports media boasts about the historical record of 9-seeds trouncing 8-seeds). Finally, with 6-seeds nudging above their QC averages, I like good things from this group. Historically, when 6-seeds are below the curve, they go 1-3 against 1-seeds and when they are at or above the curve, they go 3-1 against 11-seeds. I would favor the 6-seeds this year.

Conclusion

Mission Accomplished..........................Well!?!?!?!?!?!?!................The next article goes into the relative strength of each seed in the 2021 and gives a complementary perspective on the quality curve and seed curve. I'll see you then.