While I think Izzo is a tremendous coach (obvs) the methodology here relies solely on expected tournament wins based on seeding, and I think a very good argument could be made, and has been made elsewhere, that a big part of the reason Izzo regularly outperforms MSU's seeding in the big dance is that the committee just as regularly underseeds MSU. This is probably based on the fact that Izzo usually schedules a monster non-con slate, so his teams pile up a few more losses than most teams in the area where his teams should be seeded based on quality (not resume).
Just looking at his farthest runs: in the kenpom era, he has made three final fours. Those teams were seeded on the fifth, second, and fifth seed lines. According to kenpom's rankings, those teams should have been seeded 1, 2, and 5. In the same era he has made two elite eights. Those teams were seeded seventh and fourth. According to kenpom, they should have been 4- and 2-seeds. Hell, this year's sweet sixteen team is a 7-seed; Kenpom would have had them on the border between the 4/5 seeds.
Izzo is an all-time great coach and his coaching is probably a competitive advantage in March. But if all you're looking at is performance relative to seed, a significant factor in his great numbers according to that measure is the fact that the Spartans are usually underseeded by the committee. It's a lot "easier" to outperform your seed expectation when the committee regularly gives you worse seeds than your actual quality would indicate.