clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Ducks' Defense: Not so good?

Well, found some good stuff on the OregonLive forum today.  Thanks to GoDucks811.

We have all said that the reason that Oregon's defensive intensity is the reason that, despite not shooting terribly well against Rice, Georgetown, and Nebraska, the Ducks were able to gut out and win those games.  However, ESPN insider Ken Pomeroy doesn't believe in the Ducks' defense:

Look at it this way: If teams truly could make only about one in four 3s against the Ducks, why would they try any at all? Currently, Oregon is yielding a 2-point percentage of 49.3 percent, which barely ranks them in the top 150. Opponents are getting more bang for their shooting buck by going inside, so I'm guessing teams are still attempting 3s against Oregon because they are getting open looks.
Those open shots eventually are going to start falling with the same regularity they do against other teams. Well, nearly the same regularity, as the Ducks have had solid 3-point defenses under Ernie Kent. Last season, though, UNC Wilmington led the nation in 3-point defense at around 28 percent, so it figures that Oregon's 3-point defense will approach a more realistic number in the coming weeks.

Pomeroy believes that there really is no such thing as three point defense, and that over the course of a season, only a teams shooting ability will determine their three point percentage.  Apparently, old fashioned fundamentals such as closing out hard on the shooter, getting a hand in their face, and playing a hard zone that requires the opposition to shoot outside shots do not factor into three point defense.  

Pomeroy makes interesting points, and uses statistics to back them up, but I'm not sure that I agree with him here.  As a high school basketball coach, I would not want my players to believe tha tthey had no control over opponents three point shooting.
Interesting article, but I don't put much stock in it.