Interesting Analysis, 3-pt vs. 2-pt shots

[tornado]

Ken Pomeroy analyzed the value of 2-point jump shots vs. 3-pointers.

Of course we'd all just assume the 2-pointers go in at a much greater frequency, so they are a better shot to take, right?

NOT SO!

Layups and dunks were eliminated, as of course they are always a pretty high percentage shot.
And he looked at all the shots in the NCAA Tournament, figuring these are a good sample of the best teams in the nation.
But guess what the shooting percentage was for all the other 2-point jump shots inside the 3-point arc?
We are talking the actual jump shots from a few feet to 19 feet away.

The shooting pct. was = .330.
Now compare that to the shooting percentage of all 3-point shots = .352!

So what seems like a better deal? It would seem the only shots a team should be taking are the dunks,
layups, and 3-pointers. All the 2-point jump shots are apparently the worst percentage shots....PLUS
they pay off so much less with only 2 points rewarded instead of 3.
Wonder why they are hit at such a low percentage?
Maybe because they aren't practiced as much.
Maybe the defense is tougher.
Maybe fewer of those shots are being taken by the best shooters, who are generally the guards.

Here is the full story:

http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/a_little_something/

[BradleyBrave]

Re: Interesting Analysis, 3-pt vs. 2-pt shots

Ken Pomeroy analyzed the value of 2-point jump shots vs. 3-pointers.

Of course we'd all just assume the 2-pointers go in at a much greater frequency, so they are a better shot to take, right?

NOT SO!

Layups and dunks were eliminated, as of course they are always a pretty high percentage shot.
And he looked at all the shots in the NCAA Tournament, figuring these are a good sample of the best teams in the nation.
But guess what the shooting percentage was for all the other 2-point jump shots inside the 3-point arc?
We are talking the actual jump shots from a few feet to 19 feet away.

The shooting pct. was = .330.
Now compare that to the shooting percentage of all 3-point shots = .352!

So what seems like a better deal? It would seem the only shots a team should be taking are the dunks,
layups, and 3-pointers. All the 2-point jump shots are apparently the worst percentage shots....PLUS
they pay off so much less with only 2 points rewarded instead of 3.
Wonder why they are hit at such a low percentage?
Maybe because they aren't practiced as much.
Maybe the defense is tougher.
Maybe fewer of those shots are being taken by the best shooters, who are generally the guards.

Here is the full story:
http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/web...tle_something/

If anything, it supports the contention that the mid-range jumper is a lost art, likely never to return with the 3-point line located where it is. What's the point of shooting a 16-17 footer when you can take a step back and shoot a 3?

[tornado]

Then following your logic, in the ABA, shooters should just forget the 3's and take a few steps back and take the 4-point shots?


(for those who don't know, in the new ABA pro league, there are 4-point shot attempts
if they occur from beyond half court.)


Seriously, I do agree....because if everything was equal (practice time, etc..) then the closer you get to the basket,
the shooting pct. should go up.
So the only way to explain the lower shooting pct. for mid-range jumpers is the failure for players to work on them.

[BradleyBrave]

Then following your logic, in the ABA, shooters should just forget the 3's and take a few steps back and take the 4-point shots?


(for those who don't know, in the new ABA pro league, there are 4-point shot attempts
if they occur from beyond half court.)


Seriously, I do agree....because if everything was equal (practice time, etc..) then the closer you get to the basket,
the shooting pct. should go up.
So the only way to explain the lower shooting pct. for mid-range jumpers is the failure for players to work on them.

Agree 100%. Most offenses these days consist of 2 shot areas - the paint and the perimeter. Even the vaunted 'flex' offense has been pushed out from the elbow of the lane out to the 3-point line. And like you said, it all comes down to practice. Very few offenses anymore are practicing the 10-15 footer, and the numbers reflect this.

[thefish7]

I think one cause could be the conditions under which most threes are taken. Generally teams only put up a three when they get a "good look" from a "3-pt shooter."

Mid-range shots, however, are taken by a much wider number of players under much wider set of circumstances, off the dribble, turn around, etc. So I think that could be part of it.

Another thing I'd be curious about is how rebounds fall when seperated into 3 pt and 2 pt shots... Seems to me that a missed 3 pointer is more likely to carom out wildly, while mid-range shots seem a bit less unpredictable. I have no idea if the unpredictability will favor the shooting or defending team, but would like to see how the stats of that fall out... as a second chance at a shot makes a miss more palatable.

[Stryker]

Stats can be decieving, you need more than just the shot percentage to do any sort of analysis on it, like how many shot were attempted for each.

[Da Coach]

So the only way to explain the lower shooting pct. for mid-range jumpers is the failure for players to work on them.

The closer shots are much more aggressively defended. I think that is the bigger reason for the lower percentage than the fact players don't practice them.
It will always be harder to defend the 3-point shot since it spreads the defense out too much, and detracts from rebounding.

[Dallas Brave]

So the only way to explain the lower shooting pct. for mid-range jumpers is the failure for players to work on them.

The closer shots are much more aggressively defended. I think that is the bigger reason for the lower percentage than the fact players don't practice them.
It will always be harder to defend the 3-point shot since it spreads the defense out too much, and detracts from rebounding.

A team's better shooters are also the ones taking the 3's. You get a bunch of brick layers putting up 2's.

I would be willing to bet that Jeremy Crouch will hit a higher percentage of uncontested 15 foot shots than uncontested 3 point shots.

[thefish7]

So the only way to explain the lower shooting pct. for mid-range jumpers is the failure for players to work on them.

The closer shots are much more aggressively defended. I think that is the bigger reason for the lower percentage than the fact players don't practice them.
It will always be harder to defend the 3-point shot since it spreads the defense out too much, and detracts from rebounding.

A team's better shooters are also the ones taking the 3's. You get a bunch of brick layers putting up 2's.

I would be willing to bet that Jeremy Crouch will hit a higher percentage of uncontested 15 foot shots than uncontested 3 point shots.

But I won't take that bet with Danny Adams.

[tornado]

like how many shot were attempted for each.

It's all in there over 1400 2-pt jump shots and over 1600 3-point shots.

In 46 NCAA tournament games:
........... M - A Pct
2-pt J 465-1410 .330
3-pt J 575-1635 .352

[Dallas Brave]

So the only way to explain the lower shooting pct. for mid-range jumpers is the failure for players to work on them.

The closer shots are much more aggressively defended. I think that is the bigger reason for the lower percentage than the fact players don't practice them.
It will always be harder to defend the 3-point shot since it spreads the defense out too much, and detracts from rebounding.

A team's better shooters are also the ones taking the 3's. You get a bunch of brick layers putting up 2's.

I would be willing to bet that Jeremy Crouch will hit a higher percentage of uncontested 15 foot shots than uncontested 3 point shots.

But I won't take that bet with Danny Adams.

ouch

[thefish7]

ouch

That may have been a bit below the belt.

Actually though, Danny was really streaky from 3pt land also.. once he hit one, he'd put in 3 or 4 in a row... so I wonder if he'd've drained a buncha FTs in a row if he hit a couple.

[Anthony Parker is my Hero]

you're also less likely to have to alter a shot from 3, than you would by driving, possibly getting blocked, etc. the 3 is generally a set shot, while jump shots are usually off of screens. it still doesn't answer the problem that if you dont shoot 2s, then there is no way you are going to ever have a chance to hit a 3. because the d would just stretch out that much more