In Pursuit of NCAA Gambling Redemption

A year ago this Saturday, on April 3, 2004, UConn beat Duke by one point, and a 3-point shot made by Duke at the buzzer meant nothing to the outcome of the game, but everything to me. When UConn won 79-78, half the bar I was at erupted into cheers; half threw their hands up and collectively groaned, “NOOOOOO.” I was in the latter half, and not because I was rooting for Duke, but because that long bank shot in the last second prevented UConn from covering the spread.

Come this Saturday, I’m going to need to make up for last year’s Final Four betting disaster. I’ll be honest, I haven’t been having a stellar run so far. I’m 3 for 9 in individual game bets, and I’d sooner admit to possessing a Clay Aiken CD than own up to the choices in my office pool bracket. And yet a mysterious man in a hotel elevator tipped me off, and now despite my track record, I feel like I’ve been given a second chance to prove myself. I’m like the Norman Dale of gambling, and I’m going with MICHIGAN STATE. The anonymous tip-off began when a middle-aged man asked about my Georgetown sweatshirt during the quick 2-floor elevator ride we shared:
“Ahh, I see you’re a Hoya.”
“Oh, did you go there?”
“No, my son does though. I went to Duke.”
“Well, your alma mater’s looking pretty good this year. They gonna take it all?”
Deadpan. “No. Michigan. State. Trust me on this one.” He was even leaning in a little, as if letting me in on a secret.

I have no idea why I’m taking this guy’s word as Bible. Maybe because he said it with such authority that it sounded like he had the Mafia fixing the game. Maybe it’s because my success with college basketball picks is indirectly proportional to my rationale behind them.

I had a much higher success rate with my brackets when I was using logic like, “Gonzaga!! That sounds like a muppet name! I’m picking them.” As soon as I started rattling things off about rebound percentage and playoff history records, my brackets had more red cross-outs than my sophomore year Linear Algebra final.

And it always seems a dumb girl (who didn’t even remember she filled out a bracket) wins the office pool, so the moral of the story? College basketball picks are most dead-on when they are made with no concrete evidence backing them. So I’m going with the elevator shaman/mobster.

All unsupported claims aside, I’m so fascinated by Michigan, because while they are clearly cutting through the tourney with seamless momentum, they still seem to be slipping under everyone’s radar. Louisville is the sleeper-of-choice, but it is just too much of an oxymoron for me to buy into: the underdog favorite?

There’s no such thing as a huge underdog in March Madness. Upsets, yes. But given the regularity of a lower seed advancing, no team can be that easily dismissed. The reason Michigan hasn’t been a bettor’s choice is because they have no X-factor to justify picking them. In other words, you always need some kind of ace to validate an unconventional bracket-buster, like choosing Utah because of Andrew Bogut, or Louisville on account of Pitino, or Pitt for Taft. I mean, even the Mighty Ducks had Adam Banks.

Michigan, on the other hand, doesn’t boast a superstar. There’s Shannon Brown whose inconsistent shooting around the arc is about as threatening as a poodle. And based on the passive-aggressive way the 7-foot tall Paul Davis plays, I get the impression he’s embarrassed if he has to ask someone to pass the salt. And then there’s Maurice Ager, who plays like he’s a summer intern: reliable and solid at what he knows how to do, but don’t even think about asking him to work outside his comfort zone of entering data into spread sheets.

No one on Michigan instills fear into the hearts of opponents, and yet they’ve overcome the imposing forces of Duke and Kentucky in the tourney, while competing with some of the toughest teams in the nation during the regular season.

There’s no question that Michigan is a risky bet. Though they’re only a 5-point underdog, they’re playing against the team with arguably the biggest incentive to win. I usually try to avoid making off-the-wall gambling claims, since it’s almost like talking about what you’d do with the money IF you won your pool. Automatic jinx.

That said, here I go:

The Breakdown:

Field Goals:
Both Michigan and UNC are shooting a dead even .496. UNC allows less shots, but it’s negligible.
Edge: Even

3-Pointers:
The .360 and .400 percentage Michigan and UNC are posting, respectively, doesn’t wholly speak to the fact that there is no Jimmy Chitwood on Michigan to assert, “I’ll make it” in a clutch situation. This is huge. Not just for the fundamental inconvenience, but for the team’s confidence and self-possession during the final minutes of a close game.
Edge: UNC, by a long shot

Free Throws:
As the second best free throw-shooting team in the nation, Michigan’s numbers beat out Carolina here, with .775 versus .735.  With both teams pushing aggressive man-to-man defenses, this game will be littered with FTs. It may not be a consequential, game-calling issue, but when the game is tight, having 5 men shooting over 80% is never a bad thing.
Edge: Michigan

Intangibles:
UNC is in a tough position. Roy Williams is basically wrestling with the undesirable consensus that this team is as good as it gets. They need a win, or the season and their sparkling bench of talent will seemingly be all for naught. Effectively, UNC is the Yankees of recent years.

I don’t really know why Michigan has to win. To redeem my gambling credibility? To follow up UConn’s 2004 feat with a women/men double championship?  You could say Michigan’s lack of powerhouses mirrors the1998 Yankees, who trotted out a similar no-star club but with players like Scott Brosius propelling the team into a World Series sweep. Michigan, however, doesn’t have that Yankee mystique. Michigan is the Moneyball team. Just as Oakland could win by wearing down pitchers, Michigan darts up and down the court (and hard) to tire their opponents.

Edge: No idea. I wish I could just bet on things like the probability the losing coach will say, “They just wanted it more,” or “You can lose a game or you can be outplayed. We were just outplayed.”  

But if those prop bets are available, they are yet to be posted.

The numbers favor UNC. And statistics and research and past game analysis favors UNC, too. Hell, even dumb girls in office pools favor UNC.

But I’m still betting on Michigan. Because anytime a strange man in a Best Western imparts his Final Four wisdom and insights, you gotta make that call.

At least that’s what my grandfather used to always say.