UConn national statistical rankings, 1/5/26

[HuskyNan]

Against one of the better schedules - 4 ranked teams, 4 Quad 1 and 5 Quad 2

 

[oldude]

And, as the conference schedules continue, many of UConn’s stats will significantly improve while many of the P4 team stats will decline. For instance, LSU had been the leader in per game scoring at over 100 pts per game, a stat largely attributed to an OOC schedule of cupcakes. In the past 2 games LSU has scored 78 & 60 points against KY & Vandy, both losses…….

 

[ucmiami2]

Thanks for posting Nan - can you give a link to the site that has this data. (I know where I can find the individual data points, but this seems like a site with all the data points organized very nicely for a team.)

I am curious to see if a theory holds up with other good FG percentage defensive teams. It stands to reason that a team that allows <35% FG shooting would have teams shooting more threes against them. I can't find the overall 3 pt % for women's D1 basketball, but the range is #1 Uconn's 41% to #359 FL A&M's 18.4% - Taking out the outliers:
#20 is 37.5 and #339 is 24.4 and the median is #179 30.4

Real percentages are 37.5 = 56.3 (1.5x 37.5), 24.4 = 36.6, and the median value 30.4 = 45.6.

My theory is that even if your team is not particularly good at 3 point shooting, if you are playing against a great defensive team that is going to force <35% shooting (while forcing a lot of turnovers) why not chuck up threes - they will tend to be less well defended than say a foul line shot and even if you are at the bottom end of D1 (24.4%) your real shooting percentage will be above the average field goal percentage allowed. And more 3 shots taken means you will more likely even out to 'average' whatever that is for your team.

There was a year where Hillman at Syracuse put this theory to the test and he made it to the championship game. And Karl Smesko built his career at FGCU on the same basic principle with 611 wins at .845. It is a little different to make a change for a single opponent, of course, but not a bad approach.

 

[VaConnFan11]

I think the actual stats are going to be misleading this year, because the starters are probably going to play the fewest minutes they've played in a long time.

The "real" stats and rankings will actually be better.

 

[JRRRJ]

Thanks for posting Nan - can you give a link to the site that has this data. (I know where I can find the individual data points, but this seems like a site with all the data points organized very nicely for a team.)

I am curious to see if a theory holds up with other good FG percentage defensive teams. It stands to reason that a team that allows <35% FG shooting would have teams shooting more threes against them. I can't find the overall 3 pt % for women's D1 basketball, but the range is #1 Uconn's 41% to #359 FL A&M's 18.4% - Taking out the outliers:
#20 is 37.5 and #339 is 24.4 and the median is #179 30.4

Real percentages are 37.5 = 56.3 (1.5x 37.5), 24.4 = 36.6, and the median value 30.4 = 45.6.

My theory is that even if your team is not particularly good at 3 point shooting, if you are playing against a great defensive team that is going to force <35% shooting (while forcing a lot of turnovers) why not chuck up threes - they will tend to be less well defended than say a foul line shot and even if you are at the bottom end of D1 (24.4%) your real shooting percentage will be above the average field goal percentage allowed. And more 3 shots taken means you will more likely even out to 'average' whatever that is for your team.

There was a year where Hillman at Syracuse put this theory to the test and he made it to the championship game. And Karl Smesko built his career at FGCU on the same basic principle with 611 wins at .845. It is a little different to make a change for a single opponent, of course, but not a bad approach.

I don't lnow where Nan's image is from, but there is a page on the NCAA stats site that shows all this information and a few more, in a not-as-compact format. If UConn doesn't lead for a stat, it shows which team does. And it does the same for the team's ranking within the Big East. It also allows you to choose different years and different teams from all NCAA divisions.

If you're into stats you might find this page on my site of interest for links to many of the NCAA stat pages. There are also many, many, many more links in the dropdown menus of the NCAA page.

 

[Cuango]

Pretty impressive! Free throw and three point defense are the outliers. Not too worried about free throw stats but it would be nice if we could tighten up on the three point defense. Thanks for posting this.

 

[diggerfoot]

More pertinent than 3 point percentage defense is 3 point attempts defense. Players will shoot more contested 2 pointers, particularly near the basket, than they will 3 pointers. A good perimeter defense will make open 3 pointers harder to take, but the percentage made of these mostly open shots are a function of how well the opponents shoot for that game.

I would like to see us do better than the 24 average attempts we allow, but the 226 ranking for percentage is misleading.

 

[Bigboote]

I think the actual stats are going to be misleading this year, because the starters are probably going to play the fewest minutes they've played in a long time.

The "real" stats and rankings will actually be better.

On a related note, UConn is 8th in bench points per game.

 

[HuskyNan]

Thanks for posting Nan - can you give a link to the site that has this data. (I know where I can find the individual data points, but this seems like a site with all the data points organized very nicely for a team.)

I am curious to see if a theory holds up with other good FG percentage defensive teams. It stands to reason that a team that allows <35% FG shooting would have teams shooting more threes against them. I can't find the overall 3 pt % for women's D1 basketball, but the range is #1 Uconn's 41% to #359 FL A&M's 18.4% - Taking out the outliers:
#20 is 37.5 and #339 is 24.4 and the median is #179 30.4

Real percentages are 37.5 = 56.3 (1.5x 37.5), 24.4 = 36.6, and the median value 30.4 = 45.6.

My theory is that even if your team is not particularly good at 3 point shooting, if you are playing against a great defensive team that is going to force <35% shooting (while forcing a lot of turnovers) why not chuck up threes - they will tend to be less well defended than say a foul line shot and even if you are at the bottom end of D1 (24.4%) your real shooting percentage will be above the average field goal percentage allowed. And more 3 shots taken means you will more likely even out to 'average' whatever that is for your team.

There was a year where Hillman at Syracuse put this theory to the test and he made it to the championship game. And Karl Smesko built his career at FGCU on the same basic principle with 611 wins at .845. It is a little different to make a change for a single opponent, of course, but not a bad approach.

NCAA College Women's Basketball DI Stats | NCAA.com

Discover the current NCAA Division I Women's Basketball leaders in every stats category, as well as historic leaders.

www.ncaa.com

 

[HuskyNan]

I don't lnow where Nan's image is from, but there is a page on the NCAA stats site that shows all this information and a few more, in a not-as-compact format. If UConn doesn't lead for a stat, it shows which team does. And it does the same for the team's ranking within the Big East. It also allows you to choose different years and different teams from all NCAA divisions.

If you're into stats you might find this page on my site of interest for links to many of the NCAA stat pages. There are also many, many, many more links in the dropdown menus of the NCAA page.

I took a screenshot on my iPad. What you see on a laptop may be different

 

[DennieEddy]

NCAA College Women's Basketball DI Stats | NCAA.com

Discover the current NCAA Division I Women's Basketball leaders in every stats category, as well as historic leaders.

www.ncaa.com

lot of information above

 

[WiseWillie]

All very interesting for anyone into analyzing stats. It would be even more interesting to know to what extent the winningest head coach in women's basketball pays attention to these data.

 

[Veteran]

All very interesting for anyone into analyzing stats. It would be even more interesting to know to what extent the winningest head coach in women's basketball pays attention to these data.

Can statistical science measure something that low?

 

[Topdawg]

We need to not lose sight of the fact that some stats are anti-correlated. If the perimeter defense is tight and there are more turnovers created and steals, there will be fewer defensive rebounds. Also, the competition will be forced to take more 3 point shots. I need to think more deeply about the stats to figure out which stats we want to lead on and which ones matter less for our team.

At the end of the season, the only stat that matters is no losses??!!

 

[Phil]

More pertinent than 3 point percentage defense is 3 point attempts defense. Players will shoot more contested 2 pointers, particularly near the basket, than they will 3 pointers. A good perimeter defense will make open 3 pointers harder to take, but the percentage made of these mostly open shots are a function of how well the opponents shoot for that game.

I would like to see us do better than the 24 average attempts we allow, but the 226 ranking for percentage is misleading.

I see it little differently but I have to start by noting that I did not see three-point attempts defense (as opposed to three point percentage defense) on that page. Did I miss it?

My impression is that when our aggressive half-court defense is working well, we are in the face of the player with the ball, preventing them from an open jumper, guarding the paint to prevent layups in short jump shots in the lane, and ready to switch instantly, because the pain of in-your-face defense is backdoor cuts and those don't seem to bite us very often.

But you can't be everywhere all the time, so the plan is that the offensive team keeps passing the ball around looking for a weakness but as the shot clock winds down they either force shot near the basket the gets blocked or picked off, or heave it to the perimeter for someone to take a Hail Mary three-point attempt. In my opinion, if our opposition wants to take a Hail Mary desperation three point attempt (as opposed to an undefended set shot just beyond the arc), that I say more power to them, and I'll be happy with 50 such attempts securing the notion that only a few percent will go in.

 

[diggerfoot]

I see it little differently but I have to start by noting that I did not see three-point attempts defense (as opposed to three point percentage defense) on that page. Did I miss it?

My impression is that when our aggressive half-court defense is working well, we are in the face of the player with the ball, preventing them from an open jumper, guarding the paint to prevent layups in short jump shots in the lane, and ready to switch instantly, because the pain of in-your-face defense is backdoor cuts and those don't seem to bite us very often.

But you can't be everywhere all the time, so the plan is that the offensive team keeps passing the ball around looking for a weakness but as the shot clock winds down they either force shot near the basket the gets blocked or picked off, or heave it to the perimeter for someone to take a Hail Mary three-point attempt. In my opinion, if our opposition wants to take a Hail Mary desperation three point attempt (as opposed to an undefended set shot just beyond the arc), that I say more power to them, and I'll be happy with 50 such attempts securing the notion that only a few percent will go in.

The shot clock running out is an even better outcome of tenacious defense. It’s also more common than Hail Mary attempts, which usually happen when the clock is about to run out. I predict the percentage of Hail Mary attempts to regular ones is very low. If I remember to do so I will keep track of wild three point attempts by the opponent next game.

When the UConn men demolished Purdue in the 2024 championship, the Boilermakers had seven three point attempts. Had they shot 100% they would have scored the same amount as a team that shot 35% on 20 attempts, and in both cases they would still have lost that game. Their three point defense was that good.

 

[Charliebball]

Free throws attempted/made/percentages are simply not good enough........may not matter now but will when the big tournament starts....

 

[Gael]

I did not see three-point attempts defense (as opposed to three point percentage defense) on that page. Did I miss it?

Check the OP again. We average 23.8 three point attempts allowed per game.

I believe @Phil was asking about the opponents' three-point attempts per game, not UConn's.

 

[diggerfoot]

I believe @Phil was asking about the opponents' three-point attempts per game, not UConn's.

Ah, thanks. My apologies to both you and @Phil