Expectations with 3PT Distance Increasing

[SouthJerseySpiderFan]

My thinking was an increase of 17" would initially lower 3PT shooting % of players with possibly lowering the % of 3PTA by teams. Going by the below numbers from some of the previous 11 years after the 12" distance increase to start the 2008-09 season, expect both the above scenarios to occur. Especially considering this time an added 5" increase over the 12" from 2008.

Look at the median team point for the 2007-08 college season when the distance was 19-9. The median point D1 team shot 34.9% from deep. The median point D1 team's shots consisted of 33.9% being 3PTA. In 2008-09 when the distance went to 20-9 the median point lowered to 33.9% for teams 3PT shooting along with less 3PTA shots at 32.9%.

With that 33.9% of teams 3PTA from the last season (2007-08) with the line at 19-9. Well it wasn't until 2015-16 that the median team point went above 33.9%. Appears coaches were hesitant to keep shooting so much from deep. Also that median point 34.9% team 3PT% shooting from the same 2007-08 season. Well in the last 11 years it has never been surpassed. So the past numbers say that 17" increase will decrease both 3PT% shooting and 3PTA% this season. Probably easier to look at it below.

Median Point Team Stats
2007-08
19-9
34.9 3PT%
33.9 3PTA%

2008-09
20-9
33.9 3PT%
32.9 3PTA%

2015-16
20-9
34.5 3PT%
35.2 3PTA%

2018-19
20-9
34.2 3PT%
38.6 3PTA%

 

[wr70beh]

I think the game, at least at the next level, has changed since 08-09. It's way more an outside game now, and if the college player wants to get a shot at the next level he needs to shoot from outside, especially at this new distance (INTL distance). I don't think moving the line back is going to have an effect.

 

[UR80sfan]

This rule change is not a positive for U of R who might have one of the best 3 point shooting teams in their history. It will benefit the power conferences that have great in the paint teams. It is unfortunate the rule change is taking place this year. I think the last time they made a rule change also hurt us when the shot clock was reduced as an experiment in the NIT. We probably would not have lost to Miami that year.

 

[Not-A-Homer]

This rule change is not a positive for U of R who might have one of the best 3 point shooting teams in their history. It will benefit the power conferences that have great in the paint teams. It is unfortunate the rule change is taking place this year. I think the last time they made a rule change also hurt us when the shot clock was reduced as an experiment in the NIT. We probably would not have lost to Miami that year.

All teams play by the same rules. How you adjust and adapt determines whether a change affects you positively or negatively.

Spiders lost to Miami because Mooney implemented an early slowdown that completely changed the momentum and altered the result.

 

[BuckinghamPalace]

I think the last time they made a rule change also hurt us when the shot clock was reduced as an experiment in the NIT. We probably would not have lost to Miami that year.

Losing that 18 point lead was in some regards due to the shot clock. Miami used a press and by the time the team was able to get into a half court set the shot clock had already run 8 or 9 seconds off the 30 second shot clock. Adjustments should have been made. Miami also lived at the line in the 2nd half. That game was a tough one to lose at home with the winner getting to play in Madison Square Garden.

 

[97spiderfan]

This rule change is not a positive for U of R who might have one of the best 3 point shooting teams in their history. It will benefit the power conferences that have great in the paint teams. It is unfortunate the rule change is taking place this year. I think the last time they made a rule change also hurt us when the shot clock was reduced as an experiment in the NIT. We probably would not have lost to Miami that year.

I knew you could find a way to make Mooney not responsible for being our losingist coach in program history. It was the blasted shot clock rule.

 

[SpiderTrap]

In terms of 3 point shooting - I think UR this year needs to shoot 38% or better as a team to be a threat in the A10 and for NCAA bid.

I think we have the shooters to do it - minus Cayo so it will be interesting to see if the new line effects our offense production or will it help out defense by pushing guys farther out?

 

[64Spider]

New 3 point line will allow more room to launch the Flying Dutchman defense. Should benefit.

 

[VT4700]

In terms of 3 point shooting - I think UR this year needs to shoot 38% or better as a team to be a threat in the A10 and for NCAA bid.

I think we have the shooters to do it - minus Cayo so it will be interesting to see if the new line effects our offense production or will it help out defense by pushing guys farther out?

Only 31 teams shot 38% or better from 3 last year. I sure do hope we don't need to shoot that well to be a threat, especially with the new line.

 

[urfan1]

Only 31 teams shot 38% or better from 3 last year. I sure do hope we don't need to shoot that well to be a threat, especially with the new line.

I agree 38% is to high a bar. All teams will have to adjust.

 

[fan2011]

Hopefully we take fewer threes. For the past 5 years we have been one of the most efficient teams in the country from 2 (ranking 20th, 56th, 12th, 10th and 27th in 2FG%) but not great from 3 (ranking 156th, 250th, 208th, 130th and 185th in 3FG%). I would be happy to see our shot selection move towards more inside and less outside, even with the shooters we will have next year, and even though it is the opposite of the way the game is going.

 

[97spiderfan]

Hopefully we take fewer threes. For the past 5 years we have been one of the most efficient teams in the country from 2 (ranking 20th, 56th, 12th, 10th and 27th in 2FG%) but not great from 3 (ranking 156th, 250th, 208th, 130th and 185th in 3FG%). I would be happy to see our shot selection move towards more inside and less outside, even with the shooters we will have next year, and even though it is the opposite of the way the game is going.

The Mooney offense is built around having shooters on the floor. As your stats bear out, we haven't had the personnel to execute the style of offense Mooney wants to run. We should be a great 3 point shooting team based both on our system and the type of athlete Mooney is looking for, but we are in fact a below average 3 point shooting team.

I think we could again be very efficient from 2 but if we aren't any better from 3, we are in for another lackluster year and that is not even taking into account the problems we have on defense.

 

[SpiderTrap]

We are not far off from 38% in my eyes. Gilyard and Wojcik shot 36%. I think they get better with addition of Sherod and Francis. Sherod shot 39% year before. Francis shot 40% at Wagner.

Golden is at 29% but I think he is capable of bumping that up a few points. Maybe to 33%. Cayo shouldn’t take any threes. Andre - in his limited minutes shot 34%.

Ultimately - if we can get Gilyard, Sherod, Francis, Wojcik above 38% and Grant around 33%. - I am feeling pretty good.

The offense is built on shooting and we have not had the shooters (or the defense) to win games. Hopefully return of Sherod and addition of Francis change that around.

 

[BuckinghamPalace]

We are not far off from 38% in my eyes. Gilyard and Wojcik shot 36%. I think they get better with addition of Sherod and Francis. Sherod shot 39% year before. Francis shot 40% at Wagner.

Golden is at 29% but I think he is capable of bumping that up a few points. Maybe to 33%. Cayo shouldn’t take any threes. Andre - in his limited minutes shot 34%.

Ultimately - if we can get Gilyard, Sherod, Francis, Wojcik above 38% and Grant around 33%. - I am feeling pretty good.

The offense is built on shooting and we have not had the shooters (or the defense) to win games. Hopefully return of Sherod and addition of Francis change that around.

You mentioned Golden. I think that he should look to create space by staying down low from the elbow to the glass. 16 of 54 from deep is not good and many of the 3s were wide open looks. 54 is too many for a big man especially with Gilyard, Wojcik, Francis, Sherod and Gustavson able to knock them down. I in no way want to handcuff a player but it seems to me that Golden can rack up rebounds and 2nd chance points by patrolling the front court. His best 3 point percentage was last season at 29%. He was 20% in his redshirt freshman season making 22 of 80 three point shots attempted.

 

[gospidersgo]

To me, it all comes down to defense anyway. Per NCAA website (https://www.ncaa.com/stats/basketball-men/d1/current/team/152/p4), we were actually a slightly above average 3 point shooting team last year (34.7%, #156 out of 351 teams). That coupled with an elite 2 point shooting team should equal at least some success.

But we just can't seem to stop anybody from scoring for several years running now. Until that's fixed I really don't think it will matter much how well we shoot from the new 3 point line.

 

[Captain Anderson]

To me, it all comes down to defense anyway. Per NCAA website (https://www.ncaa.com/stats/basketball-men/d1/current/team/152/p4), we were actually a slightly above average 3 point shooting team last year (34.7%, #156 out of 351 teams). That coupled with an elite 2 point shooting team should equal at least some success.

But we just can't seem to stop anybody from scoring for several years running now. Until that's fixed I really don't think it will matter much how well we shoot from the new 3 point line.

Exactly, it's been discussed ad nauseam on this board over the past few years but against strong, physical teams (which is what most power 5 and top A-10 teams are) we give up tons of easy offensive put backs and second chance points. I have no doubts that we will have some hot shooting games next season with the personnel we have and we will out score more opponents than we have the last two seasons but its getting those defensive stops that concerns me.

 

[spiderman]

Grant shot 45% from 3 down the stretch (13 games) which includes a 1-6 game against UMass. if left open I'm 100% OK with him shooting. I don't want him being a non-threat so his man can clog the lane.

 

[BuckinghamPalace]

Grant shot 45% from 3 down the stretch (13 games) which includes a 1-6 game against UMass. if left open I'm 100% OK with him shooting. I don't want him being a non-threat so his man can clog the lane.

I am not saying he should not shoot 3s but in my opinion he needs to look for a pick and roll more. He can make them but overall percentages are low.

 

[97spiderfan]

Grant shot 45% from 3 down the stretch (13 games) which includes a 1-6 game against UMass. if left open I'm 100% OK with him shooting. I don't want him being a non-threat so his man can clog the lane.

Not at 29%. When you big man shoots and misses a 3, it almost always is a turnover, because you biggest potential rebounding weapon out of position. Yeah, he needs to take some to keep the defense honest but he has a much higher liklihood of success out of the post both in scoring and rebounding a miss from another teammate.

 

[spiderman]

Not at 29%. When you big man shoots and misses a 3, it almost always is a turnover, because you biggest potential rebounding weapon out of position. Yeah, he needs to take some to keep the defense honest but he has a much higher liklihood of success out of the post both in scoring and rebounding a miss from another teammate.

you're concerned that Grant's not available to offensively rebound on the 1.6 three pointers he takes per game?

 

[gospidersgo]

Grant only grabbed 26 offensive rebounds in 33 games last year so I can assure you that is not high on the concern list.

Whether it should be is another question...

 

[BuckinghamPalace]

you're concerned that Grant's not available to offensively rebound on the 1.6 three pointers he takes per game?

When you put it that way I say shoot away.

 

[97spiderfan]

you're concerned that Grant's not available to offensively rebound on the 1.6 three pointers he takes per game?

It's not a good shot within our offense is what I am saying. One or two plays can have trickle effects throughout the game. But I agree, it is not high on my list of concerns. A much bigger concern for Grant is his inability to play sound interior defense.

 

[SpiderTrap]

Forget offensive rebounds - we have complained about those since the Beilein days. We are not going to be a good offensive rebounding team.
And I don’t think our defense will improve all that much. I think it will be better than last year but not a significant increase.
But one area I think we can improve is 3 pt shooting. And good shooting can protect our average defense.

 

[RichmondNative]

You mentioned Golden. I think that he should look to create space by staying down low from the elbow to the glass. 16 of 54 from deep is not good and many of the 3s were wide open looks.

+1000. I never applaud when he makes a 3 because in my opinion he should not shoot them. He is so much more effective under the basket and getting some offensive rebounds would be a nice change. Does anyone know the Spiders second chance stats? Have to be in the bottom of D1. But he is enamored with the 3 and thinks he needs to “show this ability”.

 

[MrTbone]

Forget offensive rebounds - we have complained about those since the Beilein days. We are not going to be a good offensive rebounding team.
And I don’t think our defense will improve all that much. I think it will be better than last year but not a significant increase.
But one area I think we can improve is 3 pt shooting. And good shooting can protect our average defense.

The counterpoint to this is if your big guy is floating out on the perimeter taking shots or being a decoy of sorts then you drastically reduce your chances for offensive rebounds merely by absence.

I don’t really think it’s the 1.6x per game he’s shooting that matters, it’s the 10(?) other times he’s out there pretending like he’s a top option to shoot.

 

[SpiderDaMan]

38% as a squad is unattainable for the vast majority of D1. 35% is a good goal and 33% is decent if there is a D to back it up. I don't expect 38% from my guys as a team and you shouldn't either. The attainable goal is to have a couple of guys shooting close to 40%. That's plenty.

We and most of the mid major group don't get a slew of 5 stars every year. Just the way it is. Gotta find other ways to win and it can be done on a high level. We see someone doing it that no one would think of every single year. Utah State comes to mind as I think about this. They'll be in the top 30 all year as they were last year. It's not a flash in the pan for them. They are becoming the real deal.

 

[spiderman]

the counterpoint to that is most times we're playing against man defense and he draws the opponents best rebounder away from the paint too.

this isn't 1980. Grant's a skilled big man who can face the basket. obviously 30% from 3 isn't efficient enough, but based on his shooting the 2nd half of the year I expect his percentage to jump this year.

 

[GKiller]

Forget offensive rebounds - we have complained about those since the Beilein days. We are not going to be a good offensive rebounding team.
And I don’t think our defense will improve all that much. I think it will be better than last year but not a significant increase.
But one area I think we can improve is 3 pt shooting. And good shooting can protect our average defense.

I agree with lot of this.

Rebounding forget it. We need to hold our own defensively but offensively we don’t even send guys to rebound, it would take a major philosophy change. This will never be a strength.

3 pt shooting I don’t know what the % has to be with the new distance but it has to be an advantage we hold over most teams. Why shouldn’t we get into top 20% as team overall. We have enough shooters. Now the argument against is inexplicably we’ve been bad for quite a while in 3s. Last year we got to average but otherwise been below average. With our style that’s gotta change. I think it will this year.

Where I disagree is the defense. I’m not saying elite or anything but it can make a significant jump. We’ve heard consistently about all our great individual defenders - gilyard, goose, Francis, Cayo, Burton - if we have 5 Plus defenders the rest of team must be some of the worst in all d1. Now maybe this is just more smoke screen talk but hopefully the problem was the matchup zone & coaching and we will now see big improvement.

 

[SpiderDaMan]

I agree with lot of this.

Rebounding forget it. We need to hold our own defensively but offensively we don’t even send guys to rebound, it would take a major philosophy change. This will never be a strength.

3 pt shooting I don’t know what the % has to be with the new distance but it has to be an advantage we hold over most teams. Why shouldn’t we get into top 20% as team overall. We have enough shooters. Now the argument against is inexplicably we’ve been bad for quite a while in 3s. Last year we got to average but otherwise been below average. With our style that’s gotta change. I think it will this year.

Where I disagree is the defense. I’m not saying elite or anything but it can make a significant jump. We’ve heard consistently about all our great individual defenders - gilyard, goose, Francis, Cayo, Burton - if we have 5 Plus defenders the rest of team must be some of the worst in all d1. Now maybe this is just more smoke screen talk but hopefully the problem was the matchup zone & coaching and we will now see big improvement.

When the 5 guys on the floor can play D as one the D will be good. Until then individual defender quality makes absolutely zero difference. None whatsoever. Get a coach and maybe some D will be played.

 

[GKiller]

When the 5 guys on the floor can play D as one the D will be good. Until then individual defender quality makes absolutely zero difference. None whatsoever. Get a coach and maybe some D will be played.

Well u do need individual good defenders to play good team D. And I also acknowledged it was matchup zone & coaching problems.

 

[SpiderDaMan]

Well u do need individual good defenders to play good team D. And I also acknowledged it was matchup zone & coaching problems.

Understood. My point is that D typically needs to be taught to every highly rated recruit out there. D is rarely taught in AAU and/or HS. It's a rare recruit that can even come close to being a good defender at the D1 level. The coach is everything.

 

[Eight Legger]

We combined with STFU to go 27 of 57 from three last night. As expected, the new distance had no negative impact. Based on this game, maybe it has made it even easier to shoot threes because the defense can't get out on time.

 

[FrontRoyalSpider]

I knew you could find a way to make Mooney not responsible for being our losingist coach in program history. It was the blasted shot clock rule.

Even more than Losing Lew?

 

[VT4700]

We combined with STFU to go 27 of 57 from three last night. As expected, the new distance had no negative impact. Based on this game, maybe it has made it even easier to shoot threes because the defense can't get out on time.

Just one game, but no question it was nice to see our guys shooting so well from 3 last night. I wouldn't say as expected because plenty of coaches think the new line will be a factor. Our 13-29 shooting puts us at 35th in percentage right now, so it's not like every team is shooting that well from 3 so far. UVA and Syracuse combined to go 9-54 from 3, so I still think the distance will be a factor and result in lower percentages overall this year.

If you can shoot, you can shoot, so it might not affect some of our guys as much, but a lot of guys on a lot of teams shot 3s from right at the line last year, and will need to get more range. And the high school guys from last year will have to find even more range because now their 3s will be almost 2 1/2 feet longer.

 

[SpiderRick]

We combined with STFU to go 27 of 57 from three last night. As expected, the new distance had no negative impact. Based on this game, maybe it has made it even easier to shoot threes because the defense can't get out on time.

Maybe it will also encourage players like Golden and Cayo to stay inside or drive, which will also keep the defense honest.

 

[urmite]

Maybe it will also encourage players like Golden and Cayo to stay inside or drive, which will also keep the defense honest.

Exactly, nobody should be shooting from the old line. Either you can make it from the new line and move out, or you can’t and move in.

 

[SpiderDaMan]

It will end up making no difference at all. Most 3's were shot from out there anyways. Move it to NBA distance and it will make a difference. Would be quite interesting actually.

 

[SpiderDaMan]

It will end up making no difference at all. Most 3's were shot from out there anyways. Move it to NBA distance and it will make a difference. Would be quite interesting actually.

Is being "assistant coach" a good thing on this board???

 

[fan2011]

It will end up making no difference at all. Most 3's were shot from out there anyways. Move it to NBA distance and it will make a difference. Would be quite interesting actually.

The D1 average is down from 34.4% to 32.2% so far this year. A 2.2% difference in 3FG% is the difference between the 100th best 3FG team and the 220th, which seems pretty significant to me.