NCAA Tournament Midwest Region Betting Primer (2021 March Madness)

The Midwest Region is filled with scalding hot clubs, mid-majors which were Cinderellas in previous tournaments, as well as also the player consented to become the No. 1 overall selection in next year’s NBA Draft. Besides Gonzaga, who didn’t miss a match all season, nobody is playing much better basketball than No. 1 seed Illinois. The Fighting Illini have won 14 of the past 15 matches and didn’t skip a beat from the 3 matches Ayo Dosunmu missed using a face injury. Head coach Brad Underwood has his group in a prime place to return to the institution’s first national championship match because 2005.

For there, Illinois might need to conquer a dangerous competitor in the next round, given that they get by Drexel very first. Loyola Chicago understands what is needed to create a Final Four series, and also ACC champion Georgia Tech was missed all season. Rutgers has had award-winning seasons for the first time since 1991-92, that was the last time that they looked at the NCAA championship. However, the greatest buzz in this area encircles Cade Cunningham along with the Oklahoma State Cowboys. Many believe the Cowboys were radically under-seeded as a No. 4 seed, and all eyes will be on Cunningham to observe just how much he could take his team.

Here is a comprehensive look at the way the Midwest Region breaks (likelihood courtesy BettingPros consensus):

Compare odds from major sportsbooks such as College Basketball >

FREE Bracket Optimizer: Develop a winning bracket in minutes >

(1) Illinois Fighting Illini (23-6 SU, 18-10-1 ATS, 16-12-1 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +165

Strengths: One of 2 teams from the nation that ranking at the top seven from the nation in both corrected offensive and defensive performance. Both three-point and two-point shooting proportions position at the top 25 nationwide. Ranked second in the Big Ten in offensive rebounding percent and offensive rebounding percentage permitted.

Weaknesses: 69.1percent free-throw shooting percentage rankings 235th from the nation. Forced turnovers around 16.0percent of possessions (rankings 319th from the nation ). Ranked 12th in Big Ten play committing turnovers around 18.1percent of the possessions.

X-Factor: Andre Curbelo. All of us know how great Ayo Dosunmu and Kofi Cockburn are what they’re capable of. Illinois wants another participant to step up in crunch time, and also the freshman Curbelo has demonstrated the ability to perform this of late. He awakened in Dosunmu’s lack, also averaged 15.7 PPG within the previous four matches of the season. His capacity to let Dosunmu to play the ball occasionally is a must.

Prediction: Closing Four

(2) Houston Cougars (24-3 SU, 18-8 ATS, 13-13 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +350

Strengths: Ranked in the top 16 from the nation in adjusted offensive performance and adjusted defensive performance. Led the nation in successful field goal percentage defense, also ranked second in the nation in offensive rebounding percentage (39.4percent ).

Weaknesses: Houston hasn’t yet been contested as far as other large seeds out of major conventions. The Cougars played with three Quad 1 matches rather than 16 combined Quad 4 and 3 matches. Were lucky all year which their opponents couldn’t make free throws, because their 65.2percent free-throw percent against was fifth-lowest from the nation.

X-Factor: Quentin Grimes. The prior five-star at Kansas leads the team in scoring with 18 PPG. He’s the only player who performs over 20 MPG that conveys greater than 40 percent from three-point selection. If the Cougars want a bucket, then they frequently seem his way.

Prediction: Sweet 16

(3) West Virginia Mountaineers (18-9 SU, 13-14 ATS, 18-9 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +500

Strengths: Ranked 11th in the nation in adjusted offensive performance and 13th in the nation in offensive rebounding percentage (35.6percent ). Led the Big 12 in free throw speed and has been second in offensive performance. Secondly in the Big 12 in three-point shooting percentage (38.7percent in league play).

Weaknesses: Ranked at the bottom third of their Big 12 in successful field goal percentage defense, two-point shooting percentage defense, offensive rebounding percentage permitted. 45.7percent two-point shooting percentage rated last in the group.

X-Factor: Bob Huggins. West Virginia’s head coach earns his 25th NCAA championship appearance. He’s not used the identical type of”Press Virginia” shield that we’ve been used to over the past couple of decades, but he must have any tricks up his sleeve come championship time.

Prediction: Round of 32

(4) Oklahoma State Cowboys (20-8 SU, 17-10-1 ATS, 19-8-1 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +600

Strengths: Ranked 22nd in the nation in restoring defensive efficiency. Held competitions to 32.0% Nominal shooting percentage of league play, that has been greatest in the Big 12. Ranked second in the league at two-point shooting percentage and free throw speed. Played in the quickest pace from the league.

Weaknesses: Commit turnovers about 21.5percent of the possessions (rankings 298th from the nation ). Enable offensive tack on 30.2percent of possessions (rankings 260th from the nation ). Showed inconsistency occasionally with just two Quad 3 declines.

X-Factor: The most clear response is Cade Cunningham, the very best player in the nation. But, I’ll state Avery Anderson’s drama is at least as significant. Anderson averaged 19.5 PPG within the previous four matches. With groups doing what they can to restrict Cunnigham’s play-making skills, job players such as Anderson might need to measure up.

Prediction: Sweet 16

(5 ) ) Tennessee Volunteers (18-8 SU, 13-12-1 ATS, 11-15 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +750

Strengths: Ranked at the top-25 nationwide in the next defensive classes: corrected defensive efficiency, successful field goal percentage, turnover percent, two-point shooting percent, and also block percent.

Weaknesses: Ranked ninth or diminished in the SEC from the next offensive classes: corrected offensive performance, successful field goal percentage, offensive rebounding percent, siphoned shooting percent.

X-Factor: John Fulkerson. Fulkerson (9.5 pts, 5.5 rebs) doesn’t fill the stat sheet, however, he’s a significant physical presence . He also missed their SEC semifinal match against Alabama after taking an elbow to the head of the previous match. Without himthey absence frontcourt depth, therefore that his health is still something to track going in the NCAA championship.

Prediction: Round of 32

(6) San Diego State Aztecs (23-4 SU, 14-12 ATS, 13-12-1 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +900

Strengths: Ranked 11th in the nation in restoring defensive efficiency. 37.5% Nominal shooting percentage ranks 28th in the nation. Force turnovers around 22.4percent of possessions (ranks 25th in the nation ). Ranked second in the Mountain West in equally adjusted offensive performance and efficient field goal percentage.

Weaknesses: 49.7percent two-point shooting percentage rated eighth in league playwith. Played only four Quad 1 matches in contrast to 14 matches in Quads 4 and 3 combined.

X-Factor: Depth and expertise. The Aztecs are among the oldest and deepest teams in the nation. They first start four seniors and a junior, directed by Matt Mitchell and Jordan Schakel. Schakel shoots greater than 46 percent from three-point selection, therefore defenses better understand where he’s constantly.

Prediction: Elite 8

(7 ) ) Clemson Tigers (16-7 SU, 11-11-1 ATS, 12-11 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +1600

Strengths: Ranked 20th in the nation in adjusted defensive performance. Rank in the top 50 in turnover percent forced. Own non-conference wins over Purdue, Maryland, and Alabama.

Weaknesses: Ranked 10th or worse at the ACC from the next offensive classes: adjusted offensive performance, turnover percent, offensive rebounding percent, siphoned taking percent, and also two-point shooting percent.

X-Factor: Aamir Simms. Simms (13.3 pts, 6.2 rebs) does it for Clemson. In the past few games he’s already been held to single digits, the Tigers have dropped by an average of 21.3 PPG.

Prediction: First-round reduction

(8 ) ) Loyola Chicago Ramblers (24-4 SU, 16-9-1 ATS, 12-14 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +900

Strengths: Patches at the nation in restoring defensive efficiency. Ranked in top ten nationwide in successful field goal percentage, offensive rebounding percentage permitted, and also two-point shooting percent.

Weaknesses: Played only four Quad 1 matches (2-2 record) in comparison to 16 matches from Quads 4 and 3 combined. Center Cameron Krutwig is the only participant that averages in double figures, therefore they’re not the very explosive offensive staff and also have very little margin for error.

X-Factor: Sister Jean. While she doesn’t affect what happens on the court, both the players and the coaching team will attempt to reevaluate what her existence supposed within their Final Four conduct of 2018. This staff is every bit as good as that group offensively, and therefore are light years better .

Prediction: Round of 32

Check out each our 2021 March Madness policy >

(9) Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets (17-8 SU, 15-10 ATS, 14-9-2 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +1300

Strengths: Top 30 from the nation in the turnover percent and turnovers forced. Top three at ACC play both three-point and two-point shooting percent. Input the championship in an eight-game winning series.

Weaknesses: Ranked 12th or worse in ACC play both offensive rebounding percentage and offensive rebounding percentage permitted. Allowed competitions to take 35.7percent from three-point variety in league play (ranked 10th).

X-Factor: Josh Pastner’s shifting defenses. Surethe Yellow Jackets are just among the greatest defenses never discussed enough in Jose Alvarado (15.5 pts, 4.2 aids ) along with the ACC Player of the Year at Moses Wright (18.0 pts, 8.1 rebs). However, Georgia Tech is a dangerous group because of how frequently they change defenses and maintain opponents uneasy with the number of steals and deflections that they get.

Prediction: First-round reduction

(10) Rutgers Scarlet Knights (15-11 SU, 13-12-1 ATS, 12-13-1 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +2700

Strengths: Ranked 18th in the nation in restoring defensive efficiency. Ranked top-four from the Big Ten in the turnover percent and turnovers forced. Block 14.1percent of competitions shots (ranks 16th in the nation ). 

Weaknesses: Three-point shooting (31.1% rankings 289th from the nation ). Rutgers fought with inconsistency, moving through stretches of dropping six of seven matches and three of four matches in the regular time.

X-Factor: Myles Johnson. The ’11” Johnson is really the most valuable player in the Scarlet Knights roster. He’s their sole real player in the starting lineup 6’6″ and Rutgers loses precious rim defense when he’s outside of the match. Johnson is going to likely be tasked with slowing Clemson’s Aamir Simms from the very first round.

Prediction: Round of 32

(11) Syracuse Orange (16-9 SU, 12-13 ATS, 13-12 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +3000

Strengths: Ranked at the top-31 at the nation in adjusted offensive performance and turnover percent. Take 78.4percent (ranks 15th in the state ) as a staff in the free-throw lineup, which can be important in close matches. Four players averaging in double figures.

Weaknesses: Expecting an offensive rebounding percent of 33.8percent (rankings 339th from the nation ). Ranked at the base of this ACC in adjusted defensive performance and free throw speed.

X-Factor: The 2-3 zone) It’s been a staple of head coach Jim Boeheim his whole career, and also the period of this zone is extremely tough to get ready for. As the year moved onthe zone has been active and got generated more densely and deflections.

Prediction: First-round reduction

(12) Oregon State Beavers (17-12 SU, 19-9-1 ATS, 18-11 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +4200

Strengths: Why was the PAC-12’s greatest caked shooting defense, allowing opponents to shoot only 32.5percent from outside the arc in league playwith. Come with hot-shooting, since they made 44 percent of the three-point efforts from the PAC-12 championship. 6-1 in the last seven matches.

Weaknesses: Ranks beyond the top-230 nationwide in these categories: successful field goal percentage, offensive rebounding percentage permitted, two-point percent, and also two-point proportion protection.

X-Factor: Momentum. Oregon State has been selected to finish last at the PAC-12 preseason survey, however they are representing the summit as their winner in the NCAA championship. Even the Beavers come in together with the impression they can beat anybody anywhere.

Prediction: First-round reduction

(13) Liberty Flames (23-5 SU, 16-8 ATS, 12-11-1 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +5000

Strengths: Rank top-20 nationwide in these categories: successful field goal percentage, turnover percent, three-point shooting, two-point shooting, and also free-throw percentage.

Weaknesses: Forced turnovers about 17.3percent of possessions (rankings 267th from the nation ). Ranked last in the ASUN at no cost speed also second-to-last in offensive rebounding percentage.

X-Factor: Deliberation. Liberty is a team which performs in a snail’s speed. They utilize a pack-line defense very similar to Virginia and also have among the greatest defenders in the nation at Elijah Cuffie. Their unusual type of play can pose difficulties for a fast paced group.

Prediction: First-round reduction

(14) Morehead State Eagles (23-7 SU, 19-9 ATS, 10-18 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +8000

Strengths: Some of the most popular teams in the nation, having won 19 of the past 20 games. Hold competitions to 30.7percent in the three-point line (positions 33rd in the nation ). Was the Ohio Valley’s top-ranked group in adjusted defensive performance, successful field goal percentage permitted, and offensive rebounding percentage permitted.

Weaknesses: Ranked tenth or more within their summit in turnover and turnovers forced. Their 67.8percent free-throw percent in league-play was only tenth-best. 

X-Factor: Johni Broome. The ’10” freshman averaged 13.9 PPG along with 9.0 RPG. He has to be a push on the glass from a Mountaineers group that’s among the best rebounding teams in the nation.

Prediction: First-round reduction

(15) Cleveland State Vikings (19-7 SU, 17-8-1 ATS, 13-12-1 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +8000

Strengths: Ranked at the top-two at the Horizon League in these classes: corrected defensive efficiency, successful field-goal percentage permitted, turnovers driven, and three-point proportion defense. 

Weaknesses: Ranked 258th or more difficult nationwide in these classes: 3 –point shooting percentage, free-throw percent, free-throw rate permitted, along with offensive rebounding percentage permitted.

X-Factor: Tre Gomillion. The 6’4″ junior was that the Horizon League Defensive Player of the Year also spearheads a tumultuous defense that forces turnovers in a high speed. Gomillion will probably be tasked with closing down Houston’s Quentin Grimes.

Prediction: First-round reduction

(16) Drexel Dragons (12-7 SU, 12-5-2 ATS, 11-8 O/U)

Opportunities to create Final Four: +8000

Strengths: Rank at the top-46 nationwide in these categories: successful field goal percentage, three-point shooting percent, two-point shooting percent, along with free-throw shooting percent. Produced 52 percent of the three-point efforts as a group during their current four-game winning series.

Weaknesses: Ranked or worse at the CAA from these classes: corrected defensive performance, turnover percent, turnovers driven, and three-point proportion protection.

X-Factor: The pandemic. Colgate and Iona will be the only two NCAA championship teams which have played more games compared to Drexel. After a lengthy pause from December 19th-January 9th, the Dragons went only 7-4 to finish the year.

Prediction: First-round reduction

win prizes playing our spare March Madness Bracket Contest >

Whether you are new to sports gambling or a gambling expert, our Sports Betting Strategy and Advice webpage is right for you. You can begin using our 101 segment — such as 10 Sports Betting Tips for Beginners — or visit a more sophisticated strategy — such as Key Numbers If Betting Against the Spread — to find out more.

Mike Spector is a featured author at BettingPros. To learn more from Mike, have a look at his archive follow @MikeSpector01.

College Basketball