2018 NCAA Tournament Round of 32 matchup preview: Villanova vs. Alabama

After Villanova’s first round opponent, the 16th-seeded Radford Highlanders, nailed a quick three-pointer and then forced a Wildcat turnover on the very first two possessions of the game, fans of the small Virginia school might have momentarily allowed themselves to wonder if maybe the impossible could be accomplished. About 90 seconds of game time later, however, those same fans quickly realized those thoughts were nothing more than delusions of grandeur.

The Wildcats completely manhandled the Highlanders at both ends of the court, eventually defeating the by a more than comfortable 26 points, 87-61. Aside from those first two possessions, Radford was never really in the game at any point.

Villanova’s second round opponent, however, will more than likely put up a more spirited fight than the Highlanders could muster. The 9th-seeded Alabama Crimson Tide, coming off their first round victory over 8th-seeded Virginia Tech, boast a top-20 ranked defense according to kenpom. They also roster the extremely talented Collin Sexton, a freshman phenom guard that appears to be headed to the NBA as a potential lottery pick after this tournament is over.

While you can find a more detailed breakdown of this matchup pretty much anywhere, I have provided the kenpom profiles of each team below. Take a look at the data and decide for yourself just how much of a challenge this Crimson Tide squad should be for the Wildcats.

[2] Villanova Wildcats (31-4) [49] Alabama Crimson Tide (20-15)
Scouting Report Scouting Report
Data through games of Thursday, 3/15 Data through games of Thursday, 3/15
Category Offense Defense D-I Avg. Category Offense Defense D-I Avg.
Adj. Efficiency: 127.6 1 95.9 25 105.2 Adj. Efficiency:  109.3 97 95.0 18 105.2
Adj. Tempo: 68.4 166 68.2 Adj. Tempo: 68.8 140 68.2
Avg. Poss. Length: 17.8 221 16.6 48 17.4 Avg. Poss. Length: 16.6 83 17.5 204 17.4
Four Factors Four Factors
Effective FG%: 60.0 1 49.0 74 51.0 Effective FG%: 52.0 128 47.7 38 51.0
Turnover %: 14.7 12 18.5 166 18.4 Turnover %: 20.3 288 18.8 149 18.4
Off. Reb. %: 28.8 171 27.0 93 28.7 Off. Reb. %: 29.3 157 30.8 269 28.7
FTA/FGA: 28.6 305 25.6 19 33.5 FTA/FGA: 41.8 16 36.8 252 33.5
Misc. Components Misc. Components
3PT %: 40.1 11 32.8 49 35.1 3PT %: 32.8 286 32.4 30 35.1
2PT %: 59.9 2 48.9 131 50.0 2PT %: 53.6 47 47.1 62 50.0
FT %: 77.2 20 75.5 343 71.4 FT %: 67.2 307 68.1 22 71.4
Block %: 8.2 97 10.3 100 9.3 Block %: 10.4 264 14.7 14 9.3
Steal %: 6.5 8 9.4 102 8.7 Steal %: 9.4 263 9.0 148 8.7
Style Components Style Components
3PA/FGA: 46.7 16 35.6 111 37.5 3PA/FGA: 35.7 220 37.0 161 37.5
A/FGM: 54.1 129 53.5 212 52.3 A/FGM: 50.0 232 48.0 65 52.3
Def. Fingerprint: Inconclusive Def. Fingerprint: Mostly Man
Point Dist. (% of total pts.) Point Dist. (% of total pts.)
3-Pointers: 39.6 16 29.9 223 31.3 3-Pointers: 26.5 296 29.9 225 31.3
2-Pointers: 44.9 296 53.7 41 49.6 2-Pointers: 52.2 101 49.3 188 49.6
Free Throws: 15.5 328 16.5 300 19.0 Free Throws: 21.2 55 20.8 83 19.0
Strength of Schedule Strength of Schedule
Components: 110.9 25 100.9 28 105.2 Components: 111.1 19 99.7 5 105.2
Overall: + 9.95 23 0.0 Overall: + 11.32 8 0.0
Non-conference: + 4.16 59 0.0 Non-conference: + 3.06 84 0.0
Personnel Personnel
Bench Minutes: 26.0% 301 31.5% Bench Minutes: 36.4% 53 31.5%
Experience: 1.29 yrs. 291 1.70 Experience: 0.74 yrs. 348 1.70
Minutes Continuity: 55.9% 124 48.4% Minutes Continuity: 42.0% 235 48.4%
Average Height: 77.4″ 90 76.8″ Average Height: 78.1″ 28 76.8″

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s