
If you’re waiting for UNC’s love of two-point jumpers to doom its offense, well, keep waiting.
This season North Carolina is rather rudely meddling with the primal forces of analytic nature, ranking near the top of Division I in offensive efficiency at kenpom.com yet doing so by shooting more two-point jumpers than any team in the country. The sport as a whole is moving emphatically toward the threes-and-dunks approach on shot selection, yet here are the Tar Heels still firing away on low-efficiency jumpers inside the arc like it’s 1986.
Then again Roy Williams may not be as antiquarian as that sounds. In recent years Carolina has copped a page from Bo Ryan, and this season the team’s posting its lowest turnover percentage (15.5) ever in ACC play under Williams. That plus garden-variety beastly offensive rebounding — par for the course in Chapel Hill — means the Heels attempt a tremendous number of shots (which, indeed, tend to be of the two-point jumper variety).
Kentucky is working this same angle in 2016. It’s hardly news that programs like UK and UNC are excellent at offensive rebounding, but what’s changing is the willingness and ability of elite teams to bring their turnover rates down to the same level as all those plucky yet disciplined underdogs they’re always trampling underfoot. Taking care of the ball and rebounding your misses is a good way to safely navigate your way around an off night on the perimeter.
Kentucky basketball shows it doesn’t have to hit threes to play well https://t.co/xifbKASCeS
— John Clay (@johnclayiv) February 24, 2016
Years ago I referred to this combination of voluminous offensive rebounding and scarce turnovers as a team’s barrage factor. Today I’ve decided that’s a dumb name. Now I much prefer “shot volume,” and to measure it I’ve come up with what I call the Easy Shot Volume Solver. (What a great idea!) ESVS is simply a team’s offensive rebound percentage added to its percentage of effective (turnover-less) possessions in conference play.
For instance North Carolina’s pulling down 38.9 percent of its misses in ACC play, and holding onto the ball 84.3 percent of the time. The sum of those two numbers is 123.2.
The ESVS rankings for all 75 major-conference teams are posted below, but your top 10 looks like this:
ESVS 1. North Carolina 123.2 2. Kentucky 122.5 3. Baylor 120.9 4. Notre Dame 120.8 5. Pitt 120.6 6. NC State 120.1 7. West Virginia 119.6 8. Georgia Tech 119.0 9. Michigan State 118.2 10. Iowa 117.8
The ACC does this whole shot volume thing quite well. NC State and Pitt do so primarily by crashing their offensive glass. Notre Dame and Georgia Tech get the job done by never committing turnovers. And Carolina is the best combination of all of the above.
Or consider Tom Izzo’s team. When you combine 46 percent three-point shooting with a very high number of shots, you have one scary offense. People can fret all they want about what will happen to the Spartans “if the threes don’t fall.” For my part I don’t see that as being an insuperable obstacle for MSU.
Looking at the other end of the spectrum, not every great offense generates a high volume of shots. Kansas and Duke, for example, look pretty vanilla in terms of volume, but the true outlier in this discussion is plainly Iowa State.
The Cyclones clearly have an outstanding offense (No. 1 in Big 12 play, at 1.14 points per trip), yet they rank No. 53 out of 75 major-conference teams in terms of shot volume. This is primarily due to poor offensive rebounding which, in ISU’s case, appears to be purely a function of ineptitude and not volition. (Iowa State is equally awful on the defensive glass.) Feel free to draw one or both of two mutually compatible conclusions. If Steve Prohm’s guys ever pull down a few misses, this offense will be unstoppable; if the Cyclones’ shots don’t fall, they’ll be at a loss for Plan B.
Here are your comprehensive ESVS rankings, complete with pithy category titles at the plus and minus one standard deviation lines. Enjoy.
Gluttonous ESVS 1. North Carolina 123.2 2. Kentucky 122.5 3. Baylor 120.9 4. Notre Dame 120.8 5. Pitt 120.6 6. NC State 120.1 7. West Virginia 119.6 8. Georgia Tech 119.0 9. Michigan State 118.2 10. Iowa 117.8 11. South Carolina 117.8 12. Purdue 117.7 Normal ESVS 13. Louisville 117.4 14. Tennessee 117.3 15. Arizona 116.2 16. Oregon 116.1 17. Indiana 115.9 18. Ole Miss 115.9 19. Butler 115.8 20. Nebraska 115.8 21. Colorado 115.8 22. Syracuse 115.7 23. Florida 115.6 24. Texas A&M 115.6 25. Seton Hall 115.5 26. Kansas State 115.1 27. Miami 114.6 28. Clemson 114.5 29. Washington 114.5 30. Texas Tech 114.4 31. Xavier 114.3 32. Kansas 114.1 33. UCLA 114.1 34. LSU 114.1 35. Duke 113.8 36. Arkansas 113.8 37. Florida State 113.6 38. Northwestern 113.3 39. Wisconsin 113.3 40. Providence 113.2 41. USC 113.1 42. Georgia 112.1 43. Oklahoma 112.0 44. Stanford 112.0 45. Arizona State 111.8 46. Oregon State 111.7 47. Utah 111.5 48. Mississippi State 111.3 49. Texas 111.2 50. Ohio State 111.1 51. Villanova 111.0 52. Cal 111.0 53. Iowa State 110.9 54. Oklahoma State 110.6 55. Penn State 110.5 56. Alabama 109.9 57. Wake Forest 109.8 58. Maryland 109.8 59. Virginia 109.6 60. DePaul 109.1 61. Michigan 109.1 62. Georgetown 108.9 63. Missouri 108.7 64. Creighton 108.6 Starving ESVS 65. Minnesota 107.9 66. Vanderbilt 107.7 67. Virginia Tech 107.4 68. Auburn 107.4 69. TCU 106.9 70. St. John's 104.9 71. Illinois 104.8 72. Marquette 104.7 73. Rutgers 103.3 74. Washington State 101.0 75. Boston College 97.9