halftime observations

[Novachp]

It's not a criticism, but Nova takes a high percentage of threes, ranking 7th, 22nd, and 31st (out of 351 teams) over the last 3 seasons in percentage of field goal attempts from 3.

As far as Nova's high field goal percentage from 2, this, in part, is a reflection of the relatively low percentage of 2 point jumpers that Nova took last season. Compared to other teams, statistically, Nova tends to get to the rim on a high percentage of their 2 point field goal attempts, which is an efficient approach.

You watch Villanova far more often than I do, but the stats tell a pretty compelling story. I'm interested if you agree.

Great feedback... looking at the total stats for # of attempts, yes, Nova was up there, BUT, Nova played more games than anyone but UNC. So, I like to look at the average/ game. We were 46th in 3's made per game last year. You are right though, we are on the higher end. What is interesting is how the team trends down in general over time on the number of 3 attempts as they figure it out (penetration -kick outs to squared up shots). In the beginning of the year, they were firing away, but as the season evolved the number tends to drop.

In terms of the 2 pointer attempts, this part of it is not stats driven, but observation. Usually with a team that finishes at the rim a lot you would expect a high number of free throws. Nova wasn't in the top 50 in that category. What it seemed like was we were exceptionally good at mid range jumpers. Again, observation--not stats based.

The complete different styles, with Purdue's massive size and Nova's Wing / Guard strength is really going to be interesting. Reynolds at 6'9" clearly will be over matched one on one with your aircraft carriers! What Nova does well is defend the post as a team (see Kansas and UNC last year). The problem for us is that requires a lot of work / experience before the unit works well together in the scheme. Doubt it will be smoothly functioning by our game with you and would expect foul trouble and some gimmes this early in the year.

What is interesting is the length of the "small" ball players for Nova. Hart, Jenkins, Bridges (ridiculous wing span) and now Paschall are all very good athletes that can shoot and in most cases create their own shot. Brunson and Booth both play the 1 and 2, Hart can go to the 2,etc. There is a tremendous amount of flexibility with the Nova team. So, I can't wait to see it. I am up in Michigan and was going to go, but can't make it now so I will be watching intently on the Big Ten network.

Best of luck in conference this year!

 

[gd4now]

I am hoping it is a good game. Yet to be seen. Best of luck to you and yours as well.

 

[BoilerDaddy]

Great feedback... looking at the total stats for # of attempts, yes, Nova was up there, BUT, Nova played more games than anyone but UNC. So, I like to look at the average/ game. We were 46th in 3's made per game last year. You are right though, we are on the higher end. What is interesting is how the team trends down in general over time on the number of 3 attempts as they figure it out (penetration -kick outs to squared up shots). In the beginning of the year, they were firing away, but as the season evolved the number tends to drop.

In terms of the 2 pointer attempts, this part of it is not stats driven, but observation. Usually with a team that finishes at the rim a lot you would expect a high number of free throws. Nova wasn't in the top 50 in that category. What it seemed like was we were exceptionally good at mid range jumpers. Again, observation--not stats based.

The complete different styles, with Purdue's massive size and Nova's Wing / Guard strength is really going to be interesting. Reynolds at 6'9" clearly will be over matched one on one with your aircraft carriers! What Nova does well is defend the post as a team (see Kansas and UNC last year). The problem for us is that requires a lot of work / experience before the unit works well together in the scheme. Doubt it will be smoothly functioning by our game with you and would expect foul trouble and some gimmes this early in the year.

What is interesting is the length of the "small" ball players for Nova. Hart, Jenkins, Bridges (ridiculous wing span) and now Paschall are all very good athletes that can shoot and in most cases create their own shot. Brunson and Booth both play the 1 and 2, Hart can go to the 2,etc. There is a tremendous amount of flexibility with the Nova team. So, I can't wait to see it. I am up in Michigan and was going to go, but can't make it now so I will be watching intently on the Big Ten network.

Best of luck in conference this year!

I appreciate the insight. I'll be rooting for Nova after the Purdue game.

I agree that teams that get to the rim more often get fouled more, but I am looking at hoop-math when I say that Nova didn't take a lot of mid-range shots last season: http://www.hoop-math.com/Villanova2016.php. 25% of shots on "2 point jumpers" is very low (although not nearly as low as IU). Meanwhile, 42.7% of field goal attempts were from 3, which is high.

Even though Villanova's 42.4% on 2 point jumpers is very good compared to most competitors, their 36.2% on 3 pointers is much better from a points per shot perspective.

As far as your point that the quality of three point shots improved as the season went on, that's a good point. Balance is crucial. As important as the three point shot is in today's game, attacking inside remains as important as ever.

 

[Gemini95]

Have you watched a college hoops game before the inception of the 3PT shot? If she/he/it Gemini does, you will better understand the benefits of shooting those open shots. I think it does, it's just that players don't work on their mid-range game as much anymore.

1. An open 3 is better than an open long 2.
2. Long 2's are not the same as mid-range.
3. Stop trying to change what you originally said.
4. I always thought you were female due to user name and posting style. You are doing nothing to dispel that notion. Ultimately I don't care, I was just curious if my theory was correct.

 

[nagemj02]

1. An open 3 is better than an open long 2.
2. Long 2's are not the same as mid-range.
3. Stop trying to change what you originally said.
4. I always thought you were female due to user name and posting style. You are doing nothing to dispel that notion. Ultimately I don't care, I was just curious if my theory was correct.

So now you're trying to imply that females are unknowledgeable about basketball? Now you're just being sexist. No, I am male. Your theory is wrong he/she/it, Gemini95.

 

[Gemini95]

So now you're trying to imply that females are unknowledgeable about basketball? Now you're just being sexist. No, I am male. Your theory is wrong he/she/it, Gemini95.

Where did I say anything about knowledge?

 

[BoilerDaddy]

So now you're trying to imply that females are unknowledgeable about basketball? Now you're just being sexist. No, I am male. Your theory is wrong he/she/it, Gemini95.

Don't worry about. I thought that Dakota Girl was female for a long time. It is not an insult for someone to not be sure if some anonymous poster is male or female.