3 point defense a UNC problem? Not necessarily a Roy problem?

[ChiShankCity]

Came across a pretty surprising tweet today.



Basically since 1994, UNC has had 10 of the 13 worst 3 point defenses in terms of 3-pointers made allowed.

This is staggering. Any thoughts? I thought it was a Roy thing, but it might be a UNC thing. Did this start with Dean?

 

[coolwaterunc]

It's been UNC's defensive philosophy long before Roy that they'd rather give up threes than twos since it's a lower percentage shot. It's not all that surprising. Hell, I'd have expected them all to be UNC.

 

[goheels653]

Came across a pretty surprising tweet today.

View embedded media

Basically since 1994, UNC has had 10 of the 13 worst 3 point defenses in terms of 3-pointers made allowed.

This is staggering. Any thoughts? I thought it was a Roy thing, but it might be a UNC thing. Did this start with Dean?

7 of those 10 UNC teams went to the final four and 2 won national championships. Dean always felt like 3 pointers were "fools gold" and I've always assumed we, to a degree, invite other teams to jack up 3s as part of our defensive philosophy. That doesn't mean we don't need to contest them better than we have for the last month or so, but I also think it means we are a lot closer to being good defensively than we've played recently. Just a few minor adjustments and focus on getting a hand up and the percentages should go down, even if it's down from 10.5/game to 9/game, that's 5 points per game better defensively.

 

[Spacegrass]

It's a consistency in philosophy between Dean and Roy. But it's also the evolution of the game where teams are shooting more 3's every year. It's the best way to combat teams like UNC that generally have a significant size/talent advantage inside. But it also leads to long rebounds and run outs that typically play into the advantage of UNC. This years team some guys just haven't grasped the concept of help defense off the drive and kick. Also not sure what the numbers say.? But I don't feel like this team makes others pay in transition as well as the typical Roy teams.

 

[soap - new and improved]

It's no mystery, both Dean and Roy focus more on stopping (and getting) the easier 2 point shots. I fully expect Roy will continue this until he retires. Both Dean and Roy have done pretty dadgummed well with their approach(es) to coaching.

Roy/UNC have won 3 of the last 13 NCAA titles. Not too shabby. I wonder how many other schools and fan bases would take the poor 3 point defense along with the 3 Championships in 13 years? Plenty, I'm thinking.

 

[DeuceManJones]

7 of those 10 UNC teams went to the final four and 2 won national championships. Dean always felt like 3 pointers were "fools gold" and I've always assumed we, to a degree, invite other teams to jack up 3s as part of our defensive philosophy. That doesn't mean we don't need to contest them better than we have for the last month or so, but I also think it means we are a lot closer to being good defensively than we've played recently. Just a few minor adjustments and focus on getting a hand up and the percentages should go down, even if it's down from 10.5/game to 9/game, that's 5 points per game better defensively.

Furthermore, those teams frequently had big leads and dominant bigs, which forced their opponents to have to play catch up from long distance.

 

[Archer2]

It's a consistency in philosophy between Dean and Roy. But it's also the evolution of the game where teams are shooting more 3's every year. It's the best way to combat teams like UNC that generally have a significant size/talent advantage inside. But it also leads to long rebounds and run outs that typically play into the advantage of UNC. This years team some guys just haven't grasped the concept of help defense off the drive and kick. Also not sure what the numbers say.? But I don't feel like this team makes others pay in transition as well as the typical Roy teams.

Spot on post.

 

[ElizabethtownHeel]

Giving up wide open 3s is something I have complained about as long as i can remember. For a good college shooter the 3 is not a really hard shot and UNC let's you shoot it all day.

 

[ChiShankCity]

7 of those 10 UNC teams went to the final four and 2 won national championships. Dean always felt like 3 pointers were "fools gold" and I've always assumed we, to a degree, invite other teams to jack up 3s as part of our defensive philosophy. That doesn't mean we don't need to contest them better than we have for the last month or so, but I also think it means we are a lot closer to being good defensively than we've played recently. Just a few minor adjustments and focus on getting a hand up and the percentages should go down, even if it's down from 10.5/game to 9/game, that's 5 points per game better defensively.

So I disagree with the premise that 3 point defense should be defined by what percentage your opponent shoots from 3. We only do that with 3's. We don't define quality free throw defense with the percentage the opponent shoots from the free throw line. We define free throw defense by how often the opponent gets to the free throw line.

There is obviously more that can be done defending a 3 than defending a free throw, but once the ball is in the air, it's an uncontrollable variable at that point.

KenPom did a blog post about this several times. I'll put part of one referencing St. Louis' defense from a while back (before the 3 point barrage truly hit basketball the way it has now).

So on average over the rest of the season, there will be a roughly a 1-2 percent difference between the teams currently in the top and bottom 20 of opponents’ 3-point percentage. We’re talking about a difference of one make every two or three games between the best and worst groups. Without more analysis, one can’t say precisely how much skill a team has at influencing its opponents’ three-point percentage, but there’s a fair amount of evidence it’s not much, and even end-of-season figures are the result of significantly more noise than skill.

With few exceptions, the best measure of three-point defense is a team’s ability to keep the opponents from taking 3’s. This is what the Majerus defense did, and fortunately for Billiken fans, Jim Crews is carrying on that tradition as SLU is currently allowing the nation’s second-fewest 3PA%.

When people say that advanced-stats users are a bunch of nerds, I can only think the people that don’t use them are the real dorks. Nobody with any knowledge of the game would talk about free throw defense using opponents’ FT% as if it was a real thing, yet we’ll hear plenty of references to three-point defense in that way from famous and respected people. Of course, both free-throw defense and three-point defense exist, but it’s much better measured in the amount of shots taken and not in the noisy world of the percentage of shots an opponent makes.

For reference, here’s a rough analysis of how well various team shooting stats currently identify greatness (or awfulness). The left column is the 12/4 difference between the average of the top 20 and bottom 20 in each category, and the right column is the difference between the same groups of teams over the rest of the season. Essentially, the larger the difference going forward, the less noise the stat contains. Only data from last season is used in this comparison.

When someone discusses three-point defense in terms of three-point percentage, they might as well make the leap to discuss free-throw defense in similar terms. Teams have much more control over how many three’s their opponents shoot than how many they make.

 

[imajericho]

It is supposed to be easier to push fast breaks / transition buckets off of long rebounds.

 

[uncboy10]

Giving up wide open 3s is something I have complained about as long as i can remember. For a good college shooter the 3 is not a really hard shot and UNC let's you shoot it all day.

You don't have to be a college player for a wide open 3 to be an easy shot. I know plenty of guys playing pickup who shoot above 50% if you leave them wide open

 

[NCAAUCoach]

A lot of times it’s because UNC’s talent is better, especially on the post. UNC’s defensive philosophy is to stop the drive, help....which leads to open looks from 3. Teams who have less talent can often compete against and beat more talented teams with the 3 point shot. Plus, it seems teams seem to be up to play UNC and hit a higher than normal % frequently.

 

[DSouthr]

Roy learned from Dean, Dean believed that te4ams could not hit enough 3s to beat his teams hitting a very numb re of easier 2s, considering that for my money Dean was the best coach in the game ever, it isn't hard to understand why Roy does not see it so much different. Thing is Dean seemd more willing to change based on who he had where Roy seems to try to fit whom ever he has in to the same mold. REALLY wish Roy would have embraced Dean's multiple defenses actually including a lot of different zone looks!

 

[al would]

Times have changed. For the most part kids now days, big or small, simply spend more time shooting and developing their game from the outside more than the inside.

 

[gunslingerdick]

FT defense? I’ve heard it all now. Why would the OP choose FT % as a comparable metric versus FG%? Silly.

 

[Spacegrass]

Spot on post.

 

[GoNtheDistance]

theres no doubt that our defensive philosophy has been such for a long time, however, once must also consider our pace of play. despite the fact that it's alarming the number of 3's we give up, you must also consider that due to our pace of play, we, as well as the opposing team tend to get more possessions than you'd see in a traditional game where teams play at a slow to moderate pace. This lends itself to more shot attempts, which in our case tend to be 3's based on our philosophy. I think this year it's been highlighted more because of the exaggerated collapse we have seen in the paint, leading to more wide open looks from 3. we simply haven't contested shots as good this year on the perimeter.

 

[midline]

Times change. Figure if Dean we’re still coaching he would have adjusted in some way. But maybe not. Nowadays all the kids do is either shoot the three or go for the dunk. Not nearly the in between game of 12-15 footers as there was in Deans day. But Roy has still managed to win three titles by following that philosophy. Truth be told though, this years team has a hard time stopping much of anything. I think they try. They just don’t have the skill sets to play defense effectively

 

[DSouthr]

Times change. Figure if Dean we’re still coaching he would have adjusted in some way. But maybe not. Nowadays all the kids do is either shoot the three or go for the dunk. Not nearly the in between game of 12-15 footers as there was in Deans day. But Roy has still managed to win three titles by following that philosophy. Truth be told though, this years team has a hard time stopping much of anything. I think they try. They just don’t have the skill sets to play defense effectively

Yeah, but I would say as what I believe to be a fact that Dean would have adjusted, he always did adjust based on the players he had. The only thing predictable with Dean is that his defense was going to change you had tio constantly change how you attacked Dean's teams because the looks he gave you were going to change, many times in the same possession. My by far greatest criticism of Roy is that we are just so predictable defensively, we just are not often going to shake things up so it does makes us some what easier to game plan for.

Want to add however, great execution on either side of the ball wins, you can know what Roy's teams are going to do but defeating it is easier said than done. But Roy's schemes do depend in a big way on great front court play and we just do not have that right now, I think we have guys able down the road but today is about learning. Just IMO !

 

[franklin street]

dean was a stats guy, not an analytic guy.
players have spots they want to shoot from and when they get that shot their numbers go up.
when they're left alone their numbers go up.
we're giving up too many 3's that the other team wants to take.