College basketball's history is filled with teams that had to overcome adversity on the road to a title. Winning, at minimum, six games en route to a championship will test a group in ways they might not have even imagined. Having reliable, experienced players can guide a roster through the most precarious of situations, often acting as second or third coaches on the floor.
But why does experience still matter in today's age of one-and-done prospects? There are notable exceptions to the rule, such as 2012 Kentucky and 2015 Duke, but for the most part, today's more player-friendly era still correlates wins to staying in school. What makes battle-tested leadership so important, and has college basketball's current climate make upperclassmen less valuable?
Guard Play
A constantly repeated m0tto come March is that veteran point guards lead to success in the NCAA Tournament. When assessing the past ten champions, it's a good assumption to make. With the exception of 2012 Kentucky, 2015 Duke, and 2018 Villanova, every tourney winner has had two upperclassmen as their starting guards. The last six Most Outstanding Players of the tournament were all upperclassmen guards, and it's no surprise that it took nearly all of them years to grow into their role as lead distributors and reliable scorers.
We see dominant teams 'beat themselves' all the time in the postseason. A major contributor? Turnovers. Having a savvy ball handler that can dribble in and out of traffic while making smart decisions goes a long way against elite competition. Today, the same applies to giving opposing offenses open shots. Any squad that values perimeter defense, like Baylor in 2021, has a better shot at winning close games.
Underdogs Need Upperclassmen
It's easier for the Kentuckys and Dukes of the CBB world to reload with a new class of five-star talent. That can't be said for most non-major conference programs, where playing as a unit often (but not always) takes precedent over one player. Along with previously mentioned experience at guard, returning roster production is crucial for scrappy mid-majors if they want to take down a goliath.
Of the 26 teams that pulled off a significant upset (#13 seed or lower) in the first round of the NCAA Tournament since 2008, 18 have returned more than 60% of their total scoring output from the previous season. 16 have returned over 60% of their total minutes. It's no secret that playing with the same group over a period of time builds chemistry, a major boost for coaches attempting to implement a system. Last year's Saint Peter's run to the Elite Eight was unprecedented, but the numbers state that they had a better shot than most underdogs to make an extended run in the postseason; of the post-'08 Cinderellas, the Peacocks were first in returning scoring and second in returning minutes.
More Important Than Ever
With players shuffling in and out of rosters ever since the arrival of the transfer portal prior to the 2018-19 season, it's hard to find any cohesiveness in college basketball. That places even more precedent on coaching staffs to try and keep groups together; playing together for more than a year is an increasingly rare commodity. While power programs are able to take part in what is essentially free agency, the sport's changing landscape offers a new path to contention for smaller schools. On rosters with little to no future NBA talent, players have less incentive to leave in order to boost their brand. The end result could be a growing gap between who has upperclassmen playing major minutes.
The arrival of the transfer portal may have actually helped smaller schools, at least when it comes to keeping a core together. Since 2019, amongst mid-majors responsible for a significant postseason upset, the average percentage of returning minutes sits at 70.4, with average returning scoring production just above it at 73.5. Both those averages are about ten percent higher than figures from the previous decade. Even average roster experience has seen a small, but not insignificant, rise. Greener pastures don't look quite so promising when your role could be in jeopardy as soon as the next offseason.
If lesser-known programs are to stay relevant in today's era, they might want to take a page from college basketball history. Rosters that mature and grow together stand a better chance at staying competitive, all while acting as a potential safe haven for players that might get ignored by top conferences or lost in the shuffle of the transfer portal. When looking through sleeper picks next March, keep an eye out for the double-digit seed with a senior at point guard, or the mid-major that retained 70% of last season's scoring. You might not see them play in the NBA, but college basketball's veterans are as reliable as they come.
