They shoot a lot of 3s - hence a 3-point shooting team. But don't have a great percentage.
Whether it's assessing teams or individual players, people get too caught up in comparing percentages without accounting for volume.
All those 3 they take are opening up easy looks. Credit them for finding those.
Exactly. Shooting a ton of 3s at a mediocre clip stretches a defense more than shooting very few 3s at a higher percentage. They force you to defend the 3-point line, which helps create easier looks closer to the basket.
Thabo Sefolosha had a two-year stretch in OKC where he was hitting more than 40% of his 3s, but he didn't really force opposing defenses to account for him because he wouldn't shoot when faced with any half-decent closeout attempt. His shooting percentage was so high because he was only taking completely wide-open looks with no one within several feet of him. A 35% shooter with a quick trigger would have put more pressure on opposing defenses, thereby opening up the floor for the rest of the offense.
Shooting a ton of 3s at a mediocre rate is also efficient, in and of itself. A 35.4% 3-point clip is worth 1.062 points per shot. That's the same as shooting 53.1% inside the arc.
Ideally, you want to shoot a ton of 3s AND convert at a high rate, as OU does, but that's pretty rare. But failing to match OU in that department doesn't negate Villanova or any other team from being a 3-point shooting team. Villanova's 3-point rate (3PA/FGA) is .431, compared to .406 for OU. In that sense, Villanova is more reliant than OU is on making 3s.
As for defensive FG%, it's a misleading number for multiple reasons. For one, it doesn't factor in the reality that 3-pointers are worth more than 2-pointers, so it makes look as if giving up a bunch of 3s at a 40% clip is better than giving up 2s at a 45% clip. eFG% is a better standard, but even that doesn't take into account factors like defensive rebounding percentage, foul rate, and turnover rate. There are more holistic measures, such as defensive efficiency (adjusted or unadjusted), and Nova is ahead of OU in those measures, largely due to forcing a higher percentage of turnovers.
First, comparing any team's 3 point shooting to OU this season is a little unfair. Second, I think the "Nova is a 3 point shooting team" narrative is a little bit of a carryover from last season where they averaged a solid 39% from 3 as a team.
In reality, Nova's a defensive team. They're 7th in KenPom AdjD, 15th in scoring defense, and they've only allowed more than 80 points in regulation twice all season. They haven't allowed anyone to score more than 71 points in the month of March, and held everyone in the NCAA tournament under 70. This will be a tough test for OU's offense.
Nova is a very good defensive team, but those PPG figures are also largely a function of playing at a slow pace (fewer possessions = fewer points). PPG is a garbage measure of offense and defense. Stick to the KenPom stats.
