While UMBC ruined the No. 15 seeds' claim to fame as the worst seed to have won a game in the Round of 64 in the NCAA tournament, No. 15 seeds can still be known as the worst seed to have won more than one game.
And that's something, right?
No. 15 seeds have played 140 first-round games vs. a No. 2 seed. They’ve won eight times (that's 5.7 percent). The first came in 1991, when Richmond took down Syracuse 73-69; the most recent when Middle Tennessee downed Michigan State 90-81 in 2016.
Here's the full list:
| Year | Seed | Team | Final AP ranking | Record | Conf | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1991 | 15 | Richmond | NR | 22-10 | CAA | 73 |
| 1991 | 2 | Syracuse | 7 | 26-6 | Big East | 69 |
| 1993 | 15 | Santa Clara | NR | 19-12 | WCC | 64 |
| 1993 | 2 | Arizona | 5 | 24-4 | Pac-10 | 61 |
| 1997 | 15 | Coppin State | NR | 22-9 | MEAC | 78 |
| 1997 | 2 | South Carolina | 6 | 24-8 | SEC | 65 |
| 2001 | 15 | Hampton | NR | 25-7 | MEAC | 58 |
| 2001 | 2 | Iowa State | 10 | 25-6 | Big 12 | 57 |
| 2012 | 15 | Norfolk State | NR | 26-10 | MEAC | 86 |
| 2012 | 2 | Missouri | 3 | 30-5 | Big 12 | 84 |
| 2012 | 15 | Lehigh | NR | 27-8 | Patriot | 75 |
| 2012 | 2 | Duke | 8 | 27-7 | ACC | 70 |
| 2013 | 15 | Florida Gulf Coast | NR | 26-11 | A-Sun | 78 |
| 2013 | 2 | Georgetown | 8 | 25-7 | Big East | 68 |
| 2016 | 15 | Middle Tennessee | NR | 25-10 | CUSA | 90 |
| 2016 | 2 | Michigan State | 2 | 29-6 | Big Ten | 81 |
So, if you're looking to predict a crazy upset, what should you look for? What does it take for a No. 15 seed to pull off the improbable? We looked at the season stats and box scores from those eight games to find out.
The answer: Free throws matter and experience matters, but 3-pointers do not.
Free throws
The biggest difference in every 15-v-2 upset was free throws. In all eight upsets, No. 15 seeds shot more free throws. In six, they made more, highlighted by FGCU’s ridiculous line of 30-for-44 against Georgetown.
| PF/G | FTM/G | FTA/G | FT% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. 15 seed | 18.88 | 18.88 | 27.63 | 68.33% |
| No. 2 seed | 22.88 | 13.38 | 19.75 | 67.72% |
Strangely enough, the No. 15 seeds that won haven’t been lights out at the line. The eight teams averaged a free throw percentage of 69.3 during the regular season and 68.3 in the 15-v-2 games.
Even at sub-70 percent, shooting an average of 28 free throws per 15-v-2 matchup makes a huge difference. The No. 15 seeds scored an average of 25 percent of their total points from the charity stripe, as opposed to 19 percent for the No. 2 seeds.
But all the talk about free throws can boil down to one simple stat: In 15-v-2 upsets, No. 15 seeds won by an average of 5.9 points, and hit an average of 5.5 more free throws.
Experience
It’s one of the most hypothesized theories for why worse-seeded teams pull off major upsets in the NCAA tournament: They’re simply more experienced.
And in the case of 15-v-2 upsets, the theory proves true.
To examine this, we took the level of experience for each player (one for freshman, two for sophomore, etc.) and multiplied it by the minutes that player played in the game. For example, since there are 200 total minutes in a regulation game (40 minutes each for five players), a team composed of all seniors would have a score of 800, while a team of all freshman would have a score of 200.
Through seven of these games (full stats were not available for Richmond vs. Syracuse), the No. 15 seeds had an average score of 616.9, while the No. 2 seeds’ score was 565.4.
| Arizona-Santa Clara | SCAR-Coppin St | Iowa St-Hampton | Missouri-Norfolk St | Duke-Lehigh | Georgetown-FGCU | MSU-MTSU | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. 15 seed | 520 | 618 | 662 | 686 | 609 | 571 | 652 |
| No. 2 seed | 538 | 529 | 641 | 702 | 494 | 434 | 620 |
| Difference | -18 | 89 | 21 | -16 | 115 | 137 | 32 |
While raw talent is always a necessity, in high-pressure situations, nothing is more valuable than a player with plenty of minutes under his belt.
3-pointers
Here’s one where popular opinion may prove false. Upsets come at the hand of hot sharpshooters, right? Not in these cases.
In the eight upsets, No. 15 seeds averaged fewer than six made 3-pointers per game, and no No. 15 seed hit more threes than their No. 2 seed opponent.
| FGM | FGA | FG% | 2PM | 2PA | 2P% | 3PM | 3PA | 3P% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. 15 seed | 25.3 | 55.5 | 45.5% | 19.4 | 37.6 | 51.5% | 5.9 | 17.9 | 32.9% |
| No. 2 seed | 24.5 | 57.0 | 43.0% | 17.5 | 35.0 | 50.0% | 7.0 | 22.0 | 31.8% |
Instead, the underdogs opted for more high-percentage shots, shooting an average of 38 two-pointers per game. Only one No. 2 seed had a better field goal percentage than its opponent — 2001 Iowa State.
So, if you're feeling bold and want to predict the ninth-ever 15-v-2 upset this year, your ideal candidate should draw a lot of fouls, shoot decently from the line, and have an experienced roster. And a little luck never hurt.
Here are a few more observations from the data:
• Three of the winning No. 15 seeds came out of the Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference, which has sent 12 total No. 15 seeds to the tournament. On the other side of the coin is the Ohio Valley Conference, which is 0-11 as a No. 15 seed.
• While the average margin of victory in a 15-v-2 upset was 6.3 points, the average margin for all 15-v-2 games is -16.2 points.
• Eleven 15-v-2 games have been decided by one shot (three points or fewer). The No. 15 seeds are 3-8 in those games.
• Only one of the No. 15 seeds who pulled off the upset had a win over a top-25 opponent before the tournament — 1991 Richmond, which beat No. 14 Georgia Tech 73-71 at home in the third game of the season. Combined, the eight No. 15 seeds have a 1-7 regular-season record against the Top 25.
