Always live and die by the 3

[mkirsh]

Exactly. "Live by the three, die by the three," is a meaningless quip. You might as well say "if you miss a whole lot of your shots, you'll probably lose." Well no duh. Some FG attempts are for two points and others are for three. And the 3pt attempts are less likely to be as stiffly contested, and include the extra point, in many cases offsetting the higher percentage of a closer shot.

Teams that shoot as badly as Duke did on Sunday (and turn the ball over a lot, and play long stretches of lousy defese) tend to lose.

I'm trying to imagine a post-1987 team that hardly attempts any threes. If there is one, I bet their message board is full of complaints flying under the banner "live by the two, die by the two."

Best example this year happened a week ago. Kansas is the best 2 point shooting team in the country, hitting 58% of their 2's so far. When they lost to Texas last week they shot only 38% from 2, and shot fewer threes than they normally do (30% of FGA vs 38% on the year). Bad shooting nights happen to all teams, regardless of whether they are shooting 3's or 2's. Should Kansas fans argue that the team should have shot more 3's (since they hit 32% in the game and the expected value was higher than what they were doing from 2)?

[UrinalCake]

Should Kansas fans argue that the team should have shot more 3's (since they hit 32% in the game and the expected value was higher than what they were doing from 2)?

They should argue that the Kansas coaches should create a time machine so that once they know that they would not shoot well from two, they could then go back in time and make the decision to shoot more threes.

That's essentially the same thing I hear when people claim we should shoot fewer threes after a loss.

[Scorp4me]

That's essentially the same thing I hear when people claim we should shoot fewer threes after a loss.

I think we should miss fewer 3's after a loss

[DukieTiger]

A few various thoughts about this:

-Last year's Duke team was a historically bad 2pt shooting team as far as National Champions go. Pomeroy and Gasaway talked about this periodically throughout last year. Duke was 270th in the country in the percentage of points it got off of 2pt fgs (48.5%.) While offensive rebounds was a strength, Duke greatly depended off of made shots off their ORebs- so it could be argued that our beloved 2010 national champions definitively lived by the three. It was just cushioned by the strength of their offensive rebounding.

-This year's Duke team is GREATLY improved in its 2pt shooting. Attribute that to a number of factors, but they are in the top 25 in the country in 2pt%, while getting a comparable % of its points off those 2pt shots- 47.8%. Duke is an above average offensive rebounding team- not near the elite level of last year- but that is made up for by a very significant increase in shooting percentage. 3pt% is about equal to last year.

What this tells me is that Duke isn't more reliant on 3pt shooting, but that it is more susceptible to a bad shooting night due to the inferior Offensive Rebounding compared to last year. When Duke isn't hitting from 3, this year it should play to its relative strength- the 2pt shot. (Also, it should fall back on its defense- but that's a given as a part of Duke culture.)

The trap we have fallen into in our losses is that we are getting punched in the mouth and have been unable to match our opponent's intensity. We lack aggression- on offense and defense. In both cases, this takes away from our 2pt opportunities (defensively, we don't force as many turnovers and have minimal fast break opportunities on offense we have subpar ball movement and dribble penetration- which turns us into a team of jump shooters- in which case we really are living by the three.