They're Back..

[DEpup]

I can't link the screen shot but the thing around her wrist is very clearly neither as sweat band or tape. its some sort of electronic devise covered by tape, potentially a watch but since she's playing with it instead of taking it off its something she wants to practice with hence the connection to her concussions.

I wonder if it's some device that is monitoring her.

 

[Moose]

I wonder if it's some device that is monitoring her.

They use bluetooth mouthguards in elite rugby now to be precautionary about head injuries.

 

[Cuango]

Are we playing in the Mermaid League this year?

Not sure Chen is going to strike fear as a three point shooter! She’s obviously very good and an outstanding addition to the team but she is definitely not in the same category as Paige, Azzi, Allie, and Caroline When it comes to shooting threes. I believe Ash may be better as well. I would also bet hat Sarah will likely be in the high 30s as well, perhaps even 40+. This team has talent everywhere! It’s really unbelievable!

 

[RoadMaster]

Swipe..

 

[Bone Dog]

34% is respectable from the arc.

Maybe it’s just me but I think 50% is a solid 2 pt percentage. Less than that is okay but not stellar. By that thinking, 34% from 3 is ‘break even,’ because it’s the scoring equivalent of 50% from 2. It’s solid, but not spectacular. 40% is spectacular. There’s something to be said for the idea that long rebounds can be an advantage. But I suspect not every team is really built to take full advantage of this. A team like Creighton or Iowa with effectively 4 scrappy guards on the floor does well here. Some of Geno’s guards have also been built for this. Evina Ash Nika especially. MoJeff was the queen of chasing down long rebounds.

 

[oldude]

Maybe it’s just me but I think 50% is a solid 2 pt percentage. Less than that is okay but not stellar. By that thinking, 34% from 3 is ‘break even,’ because it’s the scoring equivalent of 50% from 2. It’s solid, but not spectacular. 40% is spectacular. There’s something to be said for the idea that long rebounds can be an advantage. But I suspect not every team is really built to take full advantage of this. A team like Creighton or Iowa with effectively 4 scrappy guards on the floor does well here. Some of Geno’s guards have also been built for this. Evina Ash Nika especially. MoJeff was the queen of chasing down long rebounds.

Again, the original question asked what a “respectable” 3-pt percentage is? To me, the answer is 34%. As info, last season Paige & Nika both shot over 40% from the arc, Ashlynn & Q were both around 35% and KK was at 33%.

 

[BobbyJ]

Not sure Chen is going to strike fear as a three point shooter! She’s obviously very good and an outstanding addition to the team but she is definitely not in the same category as Paige, Azzi, Allie, and Caroline When it comes to shooting threes. I believe Ash may be better as well. I would also bet hat Sarah will likely be in the high 30s as well, perhaps even 40+. This team has talent everywhere! It’s really unbelievable!

It’s true that Chen doesn’t scare anyone as a career 29% from 3. So why do so many people think Ducharme is elite from the arc at a career 30%? Bueckers is elite at 42% and Fudd is merely very good at 38%. Ducharme is not in that league and Ziebell needs to get in a college game first.

 

[Bone Dog]

It’s true that Chen doesn’t scare anyone as a career 29% from 3. So why do so many people think Ducharme is elite from the arc at a career 30%? Bueckers is elite at 42% and Fudd is merely very good at 38%. Ducharme is not in that league and Ziebell needs to get in a college game first.

Paige and Azzi’s averages are dragged down by the fact of the ever present expectation that they’ll take the buzzer beater heaves. Lots of players take the occasional desperation heave. But they’re expected to do it again every game.

 

[Alydar]

It’s true that Chen doesn’t scare anyone as a career 29% from 3. So why do so many people think Ducharme is elite from the arc at a career 30%? Bueckers is elite at 42% and Fudd is merely very good at 38%. Ducharme is not in that league and Ziebell needs to get in a college game first.

Every thing you say is true however other factors come into play besides a season or career average. Like were they the one getting the ball with 2 seconds on the clock? Or were the 42% players finding themselves wide open 2 or three times in a game? Ducharme showed out as a freshman when both Bueckers and Fudd were out until she got injured. She not only was the go-to 3pt shooter but she took over leading the entire offense.

By New Years the national 3pt% stat leaders will have taking 2.5 a game and making 53%. To me an elite 3pt shooter needs to have games when they go 5-6 or 8-11. I remember that during KML's senior year she was top 5 in both made 3's and 3pt%. UConn has several players on the roster who could do that. Ziebell is one. She hit her first 6 threes in a game this summer at Rucker Park. She isn't a sure thing but I'd bet on yes.

 

[Cuango]

It’s true that Chen doesn’t scare anyone as a career 29% from 3. So why do so many people think Ducharme is elite from the arc at a career 30%? Bueckers is elite at 42% and Fudd is merely very good at 38%. Ducharme is not in that league and Ziebell needs to get in a college game first.

Caroline came in with the reputation of an elite three point shooter. While you are correct that she has not (as yet) lived up to that reputation, considering what she has been through, I do not believe that question is settled yet. Based on what I have read and seen of her in high school, I would put her above Chen as a three point threat. Sure, she has not shown herself to be in the same class as Paige or Azzi, but I would be very surprised if ( assuming she can stay healthy for a full season) she did not prove to be a 35%+ shooter from the arc. As for Allie, I’ll just say she was elite in high school (as were KML, Katie Lou, Sue, Paige, and Azzi) and given the ultimate production of those players in college, I think it’s reasonable to expect she will do the same, more or less.
Finally, you say Azzi is “merely very good at 38%”, remember we are talking about a player that has yet to play a fully healthy year and who was often not at 100% when she did play! Given that and the fact that every truly great shooter who watches her shoot raves about the perfection of her shot, I’m gonna give her the benefit of the doubt as well until she has played a fully healthy season! I do not expect outside shooting to be a problem on this team unless the injury bug strikes again!

 

[Dogstar]

Again, the original question asked what a “respectable” 3-pt percentage is? To me, the answer is 34%. As info, last season Paige & Nika both shot over 40% from the arc, Ashlynn & Q were both around 35% and KK was at 33%.

Your stats are right on point

 

[Dogstar]

It’s true that Chen doesn’t scare anyone as a career 29% from 3. So why do so many people think Ducharme is elite from the arc at a career 30%? Bueckers is elite at 42% and Fudd is merely very good at 38%. Ducharme is not in that league and Ziebell needs to get in a college game first.

Sooooo True!

 

[Dogstar]

Every thing you say is true however other factors come into play besides a season or career average. Like were they the one getting the ball with 2 seconds on the clock? Or were the 42% players finding themselves wide open 2 or three times in a game? Ducharme showed out as a freshman when both Bueckers and Fudd were out until she got injured. She not only was the go-to 3pt shooter but she took over leading the entire offense.

By New Years the national 3pt% stat leaders will have taking 2.5 a game and making 53%. To me an elite 3pt shooter needs to have games when they go 5-6 or 8-11. I remember that during KML's senior year she was top 5 in both made 3's and 3pt%. UConn has several players on the roster who could do that. Ziebell is one. She hit her first 6 threes in a game this summer at Rucker Park. She isn't a sure thing but I'd bet on yes.

I've watched tht game at Ruckers and it's a glorified all star game with VERY little defense, and tbh Allie, Sarah and Morgan have to show tht they can adapt to D-1 competition. I believe that they'll all do well within the Uconn system. And while I Love Caroline she only has a 30% career 3-pt avg with her best year being her sophomore year at 33%

 

[AmeriConn]

Are we playing in the Mermaid League this year?

 

[NycUcWbbFan]

That leaves out one factor. Players attempting two points shots draw far more fouls than players attempting three point shots. That is a significant factor. Not only does this generate extra points, but it also gets the other teams players in foul trouble and also gets a team to the bonus faster.

One good source in studying this issue is Pomeroy’s true shooting percentage, which incorporates the value of free throws drawn. According to his numbers, there is a huge advantage in effective shooting percentage for players who take shots in the paint.

The extra possibility of making 3 straight free throws #2 seems to tilt the calculus to the 3-pt shot.

• UConn seems to get around 11 FTMs / game; even if 8 FTMs were due to 2-pt attempts, 8 vs 3 is not so different from 2 vs 1 (2FGA vs 3FGA in UConn’s schemes);
• UConn’s 2015-16 team shot 60% from 2 and 38% (not 40%) from 3, and that was optimal #2 (see below);

===

The binary decision to go for a two or for a three at a granular level is straightforward:

• Note that not all two’s are the same level of difficulty (e.g. an uncontested layup is generally easier than an uncontested jumper);
• also note that almost all three’s are the same level of difficulty, without regard to contestabilty;
• for the same player, a step-back three is better than the closest long two;
• KML would take an uncontested 3 vs driving to the basket;
• Azzi for 3 is probably better than Ayanna for two at the foul line but not necessarily better than Sarah near the basket (the Pomeroy feature you highlighted); note that paint opportunities are not always available;
• and so on.

With UConn’s versatile (all mostly 3-level) players in a read-and-react motion offense to find the best shot:

• practices will tell the coaches the relative team efficiency in two’s vs. threes;
• with such knowledge, coaches can set the percentages of threes vs twos, as a way to optimize the offense — generally 31-33% although it dipped (28%) in the 2009-10 team (Maya-Tina);
• if UConn, as a (homogeneous — sort of) team can make two’s at a 60% rate #1, make free throws at an 80% rate, gets fouled with FTs awarded (mostly in the act of shooting a two) 10% of the time and gets fouled in the act of shooting a three 10% of the time, the team must be making three’s close to 38.00% #2, for such fact pattern to be optimal;
• the fact-pattern above matches the 2015-16 team, with 64.6 FGA/game at 1.32 pts per FGA (modeled points of 85 pts / game vs 88 pts / game (actual));
• This episodic optimization will apply to this hypothetical situation and mostly not necessarily apply to others.

For teams with similarly well-defined two’s vs three’s profile, the binary decision team optimization could be well-defined:

• Teams with various credible 3-point threats but with a measly post offense will most often prefer the three to a two;
• And vice versa (e.g. pre-Tehina Pao Pao/Tessa Johnson South Carolina years).

Another thread also attempted to discuss this.

#1 At 50% 2-pt accuracy, 3-pt accuracy must be close to 31% to be optimal. Counter intuitively, 31% is lower than 33%. The possibility of making 3 straight FT’s tilts the calculus towards the 3-point shot.

#2 Comparing Bayesian means of 2-pt attempts vs 3-pt attempts: made FGA with no foul, made FGA with foul, missed FGA with foul.

 

[oldude]

One last comment on shooting percentage. The “holy grail” for shooters is the elusive 50-40-90 percentage. 50 is overall shooting from the floor, 40 is from the arc and 90 from the FT line. Only a handful of great shooters have ever achieved this feat in college. Sabrina Ionescu comes to mind.

Paige has been close, but she’s come up short several times on the FT line. Last season Paige shot a remarkable 53-41-83.

 

[Bone Dog]

The extra possibility of making 3 straight free throws #2 seems to tilt the calculus to the 3-pt shot.

• UConn seems to get around 11 FTMs / game; even if 8 FTMs were due to 2-pt attempts, 8 vs 3 is not so different from 2 vs 1 (2FGA vs 3FGA in UConn’s schemes);
• UConn’s 2015-16 team shot 60% from 2 and 38% (not 40%) from 3, and that was optimal #2 (see below);

===

The binary decision to go for a two or for a three at a granular level is straightforward:

• Note that not all two’s are the same level of difficulty (e.g. an uncontested layup is generally easier than an uncontested jumper);
• also note that almost all three’s are the same level of difficulty, without regard to contestabilty;
• for the same player, a step-back three is better than the closest long two;
• KML would take an uncontested 3 vs driving to the basket;
• Azzi for 3 is probably better than Ayanna for two at the foul line but not necessarily better than Sarah near the basket (the Pomeroy feature you highlighted); note that paint opportunities are not always available;
• and so on.

With UConn’s versatile (all mostly 3-level) players in a read-and-react motion offense to find the best shot:

• practices will tell the coaches the relative team efficiency in two’s vs. threes;
• with such knowledge, coaches can set the percentages of threes vs twos, as a way to optimize the offense — generally 31-33% although it dipped (28%) in the 2009-10 team (Maya-Tina);
• if UConn, as a (homogeneous — sort of) team can make two’s at a 60% rate #1, make free throws at an 80% rate, gets fouled with FTs awarded (mostly in the act of shooting a two) 10% of the time and gets fouled in the act of shooting a three 10% of the time, the team must be making three’s close to 38.00% #2, for such fact pattern to be optimal;
• the fact-pattern above matches the 2015-16 team, with 64.6 FGA/game at 1.32 pts per FGA (modeled points of 85 pts / game vs 88 pts / game (actual));
• This episodic optimization will apply to this hypothetical situation and mostly not necessarily apply to others.

For teams with similarly well-defined two’s vs three’s profile, the binary decision team optimization could be well-defined:

• Teams with various credible 3-point threats but with a measly post offense will most often prefer the three to a two;
• And vice versa (e.g. pre-Tehina Pao Pao/Tessa Johnson South Carolina years).

Another thread also attempted to discuss this.

#1 At 50% 2-pt accuracy, 3-pt accuracy must be close to 31% to be optimal. Counter intuitively, 31% is lower than 33%. The possibility of making 3 straight FT’s tilts the calculus towards the 3-point shot.

#2 Comparing Bayesian means of 2-pt attempts vs 3-pt attempts: made FGA with no foul, made FGA with foul, missed FGA with foul.

I like your analysis. I'd add in one caveat that the 2 v 3 question is not just a scoring issue. The psychology of dominance also plays a role and contributes to defense as well. This is one reason why a smart player -- like Paige -- is key. A well-timed shot takes into account more factors than just the likelihood of it going in. A dagger from 3 can be devastating, but so can a seemingly effortless 2 pt shot.

This is going to get anecdotal, but it's still objectively valid: many times we've seen Paige sink a quick 2 in the midrange when the rest of the team's offensive confidence is shot. This can be like a shot in the arm for her teammates, and is something she is very attuned to. Similarly, after a tough defensive stand in which the girls force the other team into a tough shot at the end of the shot clock (or maybe even force a a shot clock violation), if Paige sinks an immediate midrange or perimeter jumper before any time has elapsed on the shot clock, it can be utterly demoralizing to an opponent. It also puts even more pressure on the opponent's shotmaking confidence -- they struggle to get even an awkward shot off and then Paige converts it to 2 pts at the other end in the blink of an eye.

Similarly with transition 3s. Paige can sink those all day, but she only takes them under certain conditions. If she has a numbers advantage, she'll often pass for the transition layup. But if her teammates are following close behind and she's about to have an advantage she'll take that 3 because she knows the team will be in better position for a long rebound. That's the PG mentality she has, in addition to everything else: court balance is always on her mind. An ill-timed perimeter shot that leads to a transition layup is like a gift to the opponent, and Geno teaches them to do this to others, not to themselves.

 

[PacoSwede]

...
Finally, you say Azzi is “merely very good at 38%”, remember we are talking about a player that has yet to play a fully healthy year and who was often not at 100% when she did play! Given that and the fact that every truly great shooter who watches her shoot raves about the perfection of her shot, I’m gonna give her the benefit of the doubt as well until she has played a fully healthy season! ...

azzi shows she is a great shooter -- when practicing.

at times, she brings it to actual games. then, she lives up to her reputation. yet she hasn't done so as often as we had hoped (and as some are projecting). her misfortune with injuries indeed may be the cause, i can buy that. and there's no doubt she's 'perfection' when chucking them up in practice.

but 'cause' shouldn't be an excuse. there may be causes other than injuries for her gametime inconsistency. when (if) she is injury-free we could see the 'shooting practice' azzi on the court during games. that's everyone's hope, but there are no guarantees.

personally, i think it's foolish to assume your dreams will become reality just around the corner. i'd rather address the current reality and what -- other than a healthy body -- might change that.

 

[GirlBoo1020]

azzi shows she is a great shooter -- when practicing.

at times, she brings it to actual games. then, she lives up to her reputation. yet she hasn't done so as often as we had hoped (and as some are projecting). her misfortune with injuries indeed may be the cause, i can buy that. and there's no doubt she's 'perfection' when chucking them up in practice.

but 'cause' shouldn't be an excuse. there may be causes other than injuries for her gametime inconsistency. when (if) she is injury-free we could see the 'shooting practice' azzi on the court during games. that's everyone's hope, but there are no guarantees.

personally, i think it's foolish to assume your dreams will become reality just around the corner. i'd rather address the current reality and what -- other than a healthy body -- might change that.

Idk what you are talking about. In games where Azzi has been healthy, she has been an elite shooter. Games where we know she is not healthy or is returning form injury, her shot wasn't there. Overall those two realities have balanced out to her to be a very good shooter. But to deny that she hasn't show in-games that she is an elite shooter is to disregard the truth.

 

[PacoSwede]

Idk what you are talking about. In games where Azzi has been healthy, she has been an elite shooter. Games where we know she is not healthy or is returning form injury, her shot wasn't there. Overall those two realities have balanced out to her to be a very good shooter. But to deny that she hasn't show in-games that she is an elite shooter is to disregard the truth.

not reliably ... percentages cited in this threat indicate that

 

[GirlBoo1020]

not reliably ... percentages cited in this threat indicate that

39% is actually QUITE reliable.

 

[NycUcWbbFan]

I like your analysis. I'd add in one caveat that the 2 v 3 question is not just a scoring issue. The psychology of dominance also plays a role and contributes to defense as well. This is one reason why a smart player -- like Paige -- is key. A well-timed shot takes into account more factors than just the likelihood of it going in. A dagger from 3 can be devastating, but so can a seemingly effortless 2 pt shot.

This is going to get anecdotal, but it's still objectively valid: many times we've seen Paige sink a quick 2 in the midrange when the rest of the team's offensive confidence is shot. This can be like a shot in the arm for her teammates, and is something she is very attuned to. Similarly, after a tough defensive stand in which the girls force the other team into a tough shot at the end of the shot clock (or maybe even force a a shot clock violation), if Paige sinks an immediate midrange or perimeter jumper before any time has elapsed on the shot clock, it can be utterly demoralizing to an opponent. It also puts even more pressure on the opponent's shotmaking confidence -- they struggle to get even an awkward shot off and then Paige converts it to 2 pts at the other end in the blink of an eye.

Similarly with transition 3s. Paige can sink those all day, but she only takes them under certain conditions. If she has a numbers advantage, she'll often pass for the transition layup. But if her teammates are following close behind and she's about to have an advantage she'll take that 3 because she knows the team will be in better position for a long rebound. That's the PG mentality she has, in addition to everything else: court balance is always on her mind. An ill-timed perimeter shot that leads to a transition layup is like a gift to the opponent, and Geno teaches them to do this to others, not to themselves.

Agree. The analysis above is based on team optimization of 2 vs 3 selection, without regard to remarkable go-to players (even more so if they are true three-level threats) and the vagaries of shot-making to affect momentum.

At the optimized percentages (e.g. 60% for twos, 38% for threes, assuming 80% FT%, etc.), the offense can choose the best shot, and the defense has to respect the possibility of all shots because they are equally lethal, probability-wise.

Paige is unique (as Boston was unique), because they are crunch-time players who are lethal in their chosen shots. And Paige is lethal in almost all her shots, whether contested or not.

With expected better spacing, pace and quality shots of the current talented deep team, shot efficiency should go up. Paige, Azzi, perhaps Sarah, perhaps Jana are unique crunch time players giving the offense that extra oomph. It will probably be open season for the midrange jumper (which you posted on before).

 

[Cuango]

Agree. The analysis above is based on team optimization of 2 vs 3 selection, without regard to remarkable go-to players (even more so if they are true three-level threats) and the vagaries of shot-making to affect momentum.

At the optimized percentages (e.g. 60% for twos, 38% for threes, assuming 80% FT%, etc.), the offense can choose the best shot, and the defense has to respect the possibility of all shots because they are equally lethal, probability-wise.

Paige is unique (as Boston was unique), because they are crunch-time players who are lethal in their chosen shots. And Paige is lethal in almost all her shots, whether contested or not.

With expected better spacing, pace and quality shots of the current talented deep team, shot efficiency should go up. Paige, Azzi, perhaps Sarah, perhaps Jana are unique crunch time players giving the offense that extra oomph. It will probably be open season for the midrange jumper (which you posted on before).

While I admire Boston and wish she had been a Husky, I’m not sure I would characterize her as being”lethal”. I seem to recall multiple missed layups in several high pressure situations! One, at least was her multiple misses against Stanford as time ran out In the FF! Those misses almost certainly kept her from being a two time NCAA champion! There were several other similar situations where she missed point blank put backs that would have won the game. Again, I love her not only as a player but as a person of high class and integrity but she imo was maddeningly prone to not only missed bunnies but also would produce 4 for 17 games, 4 for 13 games more often than she should have. Of course she would also have games where she shot 9 for 12 and grabbed 18 boards! I believe she, CC, and Kelsey Mitchell are already a top 4 threesome in the W and are likely to really terrorize the W starting next year. However, any comparison to Paige is a real reach. Boston was/is a very good post player while Paige is a once in a lifetime player.

 

[MSGRET]

To get back to the subject, I can't wait for the official start of organized practices. That means that the regular season is about to begin. These young ladies seem to be jelling and enjoying each other as a team. I believe that if they can get through the season without any season ending injuries that they will bring home #12 for Paige and Azzi so that they can leave with at least one NC.

 

[NycUcWbbFan]

While I admire Boston and wish she had been a Husky, I’m not sure I would characterize her as being”lethal”. I seem to recall multiple missed layups in several high pressure situations! One, at least was her multiple misses against Stanford as time ran out In the FF! Those misses almost certainly kept her from being a two time NCAA champion! There were several other similar situations where she missed point blank put backs that would have won the game. Again, I love her not only as a player but as a person of high class and integrity but she imo was maddeningly prone to not only missed bunnies but also would produce 4 for 17 games, 4 for 13 games more often than she should have. Of course she would also have games where she shot 9 for 12 and grabbed 18 boards! I believe she, CC, and Kelsey Mitchell are already a top 4 threesome in the W and are likely to really terrorize the W starting next year. However, any comparison to Paige is a real reach. Boston was/is a very good post player while Paige is a once in a lifetime player.

Diana also had a 1 for 15 night as a freshman vs Notre Dame in the 2001 NCAA semi-finals. In UConn’s DT championship seasons, UConn had DT. But the margin of error wasn’t big.

South Carolina had Boston and, unfortunately (for us), UConn was greatly hobbled. In addition, their defense was great. While their offense pales in comparison with UConn’s dominant championship teams, SC’s defense gives them a large enough margin of error. Boston can slack off and it need not matter.

In the Paige-Boston championship matchup, Henderson had a unicorn great game. But how much of that was facilitated by the defense’s attention to Boston (on top of the hobbled status of Paige’s team)?

Part of Paige’s genius is her crafty way to maneuver herself to a spot to take a routine shot (for her). She can make crafty contested shots too, if she has to. Boston is generally reliant on others to give her the ball at a spot to make a shot. She might have preferred a better (timed/placed/situational) pass to make the shot more routine (for her) — which she is assuredly getting from her Fever team.

But I do get your point that Paige is more lethal in almost every type and circumstances of possessions than Boston.

All that said, it is a shame that Paige did not have a full team behind her in prior years. That would have been epic.