A Stat That Might Mean Something And Might Mean Nothing!
So, I was watching Arizona and Washington today and marveling at how the Wildcats seemed to mysteriously miss not just good looks from three, but wide, wide open looks. I thought to myself, "Dang, it seems like every team hits all of those against WSU."
Such a thought in my mind never goes unchallenged, so I cruised over to Statsheet.com to check out how teams actually have shot from three against WSU. I sorted their games from highest three-point percentage against to lowest, and discovered something that might mean something, and might mean nothing.
The Cougs' record against teams who shoot well from three against them is really, really bad. For example, when teams shoot above 38 percent from three against them, the Cougs are 0-11. Made sense to me: It seems like when teams hit their shots against WSU they lose, and when they miss them WSU wins. I threw it out there on Twitter as something interesting, and a few people said, "Well, that happens to everyone -- or something close to it."
Which got me thinking. Is that true?
So I went and looked at the rest of the Pac-12 and how dramatically their won-loss record was impacted (or not) by opponent three-point percentage. Of course teams are going to lose more when their opponents shoot well -- duh. So, I decided to see what the difference was in winning percentage when a team allows above a certain shooting percentage from three and when they allow below that certain percentage. If it's really as simple as some of those people on Twitter made it sound, then everyone should have a similar difference between their winning percentages, right?
One more note on methodology. I needed to set a threshold for "good/bad shooting day from three." I didn't stick with 38 percent because that just seemed too arbitrary to me -- obviously, that cutoff would favor my case. So I went to kenpom.com to see what the average three-point percentage is across Division I and found it to be 34.3. I set my line there.
Here's how Pac-12 teams rank by that difference in winning percentage:
Now, this is highly unscientific -- and there are probably any number of you that could come up with a better way to try and quantify this -- but this quick-and-dirty investigation seems to suggest that the Cougars' ability to win ball games is impacted by their opponents' three-point percentage to a higher degree than their peers in the Pac-12. WSU has the worst margin -- 9 percent worse than anyone other than UCLA -- and only ASU and Utah have worse winning percentages when opponents have an above-average three-point shooting game against them.
What does it mean? We already know, via kenpom.com, that the correlation between effective field goal defense and the Cougs' defensive efficiency is plus-0.88. Perhaps WSU's opponent eFG% is driven more by threes than other teams? Obviously, there are other factors that can impact how dramatic of an effect shooting has on defensive efficiency -- the fact that the Cougs aren't particularly strong at taking the ball away or securing defensive rebounds probably makes them more vulnerable to the vagaries of shooting percentages, as they're unable to overcome the randomness in other ways.
I also find their very good winning percentage on opponents' below-average shooting days interesting, too. Given that the Cougs have the 48th rated offense in adjusted efficiency, this reinforces the idea that the offense is good enough consistently enough to take advantage and win a game when opponents miss some shots. In which case, the take away is GOSH DARN IT I WISH THE DEFENSE WAS JUST A LITTLE BIT BETTER AND WE'D ALL BE A LOT HAPPIER.
But honestly? I'm not going to pretend to know exactly what it means. Maybe something? Maybe nothing?
I'm actually curious about your thoughts. Fire away.
15 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I tweeted this to Nuss, but thought I would post my thoughts here
What I found interesting is that UW does not mind getting into 3 point war. They are still 7-6 when opps shoot over 34.3% from 3.
That may speak to what kind of athletes UW has and how far we still have to go to get those players if Bone is going to run same system
Our defense might also
feel more deflated after they play good D and then someone hits a 3 on them. Messes with their psyche. I also think shooters shoot better against teams they expect to beat then against teams they have to play more flawless against. I don’t know how you quantify the mental and emotional part of sports.
CougCenter OG since 9/2/2008 | @TheSoCalCoug
by SoCalCoug on Feb 18, 2012 4:12 PM PST via iPhone app reply actions
Threes are all or. I
This would be much more informative with the % possessions that a team shoots a three vs. WSU
by Something Snazzy on Feb 18, 2012 4:16 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Ugh sorry for the half post
But basically, a three point play is very all or nothing. Most of the time, they end with 3 points or none. With a two point play, there is much more rebounding, fouls, etc. Thus, if teams are taking more threes against us, I would expect a large gap between winning and losing based on the % they make.
by Something Snazzy on Feb 18, 2012 4:20 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Teams shoot a pretty extreme amount of 3s against us
37.8 percent of FGAs, actually. I would imagine that’s most in the conference — it’s 31st most nationally. That does, indeed, make intuitive sense.
right.
The more 3 point attempts you allow on defense, the more of an impact opponent 3PT% in the game would have. And WSU allows an extremely high number of 3PT attempts
follow @klett206
by Rochestie4ever on Feb 18, 2012 7:09 PM PST up reply actions
This is exactly what I was about to comment about.
I think that to make your research better, I would include a column which states the percent of FGAs that are of the 3 pt variety.
I think that WSU’s zone defense has a lot to do with why opp 3pt shooting is so important.
I think you should look at teams doing better or worse than their season average instead of the NCAA average.
Otherwise schedule differences are gong to make this not mean a whole lot.
I don't think I agree with this
What if your season average is really high or really low? Then it’s not really telling me what I want to know.
Obviously what this post means
is that the writers on CougCenter are by far the most intelligent, thoughtful group in the Pac-12, if not the nation. I’ve perused some of the other SB Nation sites, as well as hitting other people’s (mostly empty) game threads, and you guys simply rule. A post like this just demonstrates how amazing this site is: we as fans make an unscientific observation that feels right. Instead of either A) dismissing it as unscientific or B) chiming in with an affirmative, Nuss takes the time to use KenPom’s stats and get opinions on Twitter to ultimately confirm that… maybe it means something, maybe it doesn’t.
CougCenter rocks. That is my conclusion.
by WinTheDay on Feb 18, 2012 4:49 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Shouldn't you be grading papers, or something?
I feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football. Ugh
by HitKing69 on Feb 18, 2012 5:24 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs

by 












