Corner Three Percentage

Corner Three Percentage in basketball measures the success rate of three-point field goal attempts taken from the corner areas of the court, calculated as corner three-point field goals made divided by corner three-point attempts. This specialized shooting metric has gained significant importance in modern basketball analytics because corner threes represent the most efficient three-point attempts due to shorter distance (22 feet from the basket versus 23.75 feet above the break), higher success rates (typically 2-3 percentage points above non-corner threes), and offensive system value through spacing. Corner Three Percentage serves as a crucial indicator of spot-up shooting ability, floor spacing contribution, role player value, and offensive system effectiveness in contemporary pace-and-space basketball. The calculation formula for Corner Three Percentage is: (Corner Three-Point Field Goals Made / Corner Three-Point Attempts) × 100 percent. A player who makes 35 corner threes on 90 attempts shoots 38.9 percent from the corners. The corner regions are defined by the three-point line's intersection with the baseline extending a few feet along both the sideline and baseline, creating roughly 5-7 foot areas in each corner where the three-point line is closer to the basket. Geometric advantage of corner threes stems from the three-point line's shape. Above-the-break threes are 23 feet 9 inches from the basket (7.24 meters), while corner threes are only 22 feet (6.71 meters) due to court dimensions limiting how far the arc can extend. This 21-inch shorter distance significantly affects success probability: league-average corner three percentage typically runs 38-39 percent versus 35-36 percent above the break, a meaningful 2-3 percentage point efficiency advantage. Shot quality factors beyond distance also favor corner threes. Corner attempts are disproportionately catch-and-shoot opportunities created by drive-and-kick actions, pick-and-roll rotations, and defensive help situations, resulting in more open looks than above-the-break threes. Tracking data shows corner threes average greater defender distance at release than above-the-break attempts. This combination of shorter distance and better shot quality makes corners the most efficient three-point locations. Offensive system value of corner three shooting extends beyond individual efficiency to include floor spacing benefits. Corner three threats force defenses to respect the corners, stretching defenses baseline-to-baseline and sideline-to-sideline. This spacing creates driving lanes through the middle of the floor for penetrators and clears out the paint for rim attacks. Teams with multiple capable corner three shooters create optimal spacing for offensive systems. Role player specialization in corner three shooting has become a defined NBA role: the "3-and-D" wing who spaces the floor from the corners and defends multiple positions. Players like P.J. Tucker, Robert Covington, and countless others have built valuable careers primarily through elite corner three shooting (40+ percent) combined with defensive versatility. This role requires high corner three volume, good efficiency, and willingness to station in corners for spacing. Corner three frequency within overall three-point attempts reveals shot distribution and role. Pure corner specialists might take 60-80+ percent of their threes from corners through positional emphasis and system role. Versatile scorers distribute threes more evenly across locations, perhaps 25-35 percent from corners. Understanding corner frequency within three-point attempts clarifies whether a player is a corner specialist versus a multi-location threat. Catch-and-shoot corner three percentage specifically measures efficiency on catch-and-shoot attempts from corners, the most common and valuable corner three type. Elite catch-and-shoot corner shooters convert at 42-45+ percent, excellent efficiency generating 1.26-1.35 points per shot. Even average catch-and-shoot corner percentages (38-40 percent) provide solid efficiency. This metric identifies pure spot-up value for role player evaluation. Pull-up corner threes represent rare attempts as corners provide limited space for dribble creation before going out of bounds. Players occasionally pull up from corners in transition or attacking closeouts, but volume remains low. Corner three percentage predominantly reflects catch-and-shoot ability rather than pull-up creation, unlike above-the-break three percentage which includes substantial pull-up volume for creators. Defensive attention to corner threes has intensified as offenses increasingly emphasize corner shooting. Modern defensive schemes prioritize rotating to contest corner threes over helping in the paint, recognizing corner three efficiency. "No threes, no corner threes" defensive mantras emphasize above all preventing clean corner looks. This defensive evolution makes creating open corner threes more challenging, though efficiency advantages persist. Corner three value in expected points terms demonstrates why they're prioritized. A 40 percent corner three shooter generates 1.20 expected points per attempt (0.40 × 3). This matches or exceeds most two-point attempts: a player must shoot 60 percent on twos to match 40 percent corner three efficiency. The combination of efficiency and floor spacing makes corner three shooting exceptionally valuable even before accounting for spacing benefits. Transition corner threes in early offense represent particularly high-value attempts. Teams running to corners in transition before defenses rotate create wide-open corner three opportunities succeeding at 42-45+ percent. Some systems emphasize immediate corner fills in transition, hunting these high-efficiency early offense corner threes before half-court defense sets. Transition corner three frequency indicates offensive pace and transition philosophy. Left corner versus right corner three percentage sometimes shows handedness effects, though less pronounced than might be expected. Right-handed shooters might marginally prefer right corner angles for some players, but elite shooters show balanced efficiency from both corners. Significant corner-to-corner efficiency gaps (beyond sample noise) might indicate mechanical issues or role asymmetries worth investigating. Corner three percentage stability across seasons shows moderate correlation (0.40-0.50), similar to overall three-point shooting. Single-season corner percentages contain substantial sample noise due to limited attempts (most players attempt 50-150 corner threes per season). Multi-year corner percentages provide more reliable skill estimates. Extreme single-season percentages often regress toward career averages in subsequent seasons. Volume requirements for reliable corner three percentage estimates vary by role. Shooters attempting 100+ corner threes per season provide reasonably reliable percentage estimates. Those with 50-75 attempts show higher uncertainty. Under 50 attempts, percentages become very noisy. Proper statistical interpretation requires acknowledging sample size limitations and confidence intervals around percentage estimates. Corner three development has become standard emphasis for young players across all positions. Modern development programs include extensive corner catch-and-shoot repetitions, training players to quickly catch, set feet, and shoot from corners. Even centers now develop corner three shooting to provide spacing in modern offensive systems. Corner three competency has shifted from specialized skill to expected baseline for most rotational players. Lineup corner three shooting affects offensive efficiency significantly. Lineups with multiple capable corner three shooters (38+ percent) create optimal spacing enabling efficient offense. Lineups lacking corner three shooting allow defenses to pack the paint, reducing driving efficiency and rim attempt quality. Roster construction increasingly prioritizes acquiring players with proven corner three shooting. Defensive scheme effects on opponent corner three percentage provide measures of defensive effectiveness. Elite defenses reduce opponent corner three percentage through excellent rotations and contesting. Poor defenses allow high opponent corner percentages through rotation breakdowns and closeout failures. Tracking opponent corner three percentage reveals defensive attention to this crucial area. Corner three percentage in clutch situations reveals pressure shooting ability. Some players maintain corner three efficiency in crucial moments, demonstrating composure and skill. Others show efficiency drops under pressure. Clutch corner three percentage data, though limited by small samples, provides evidence about reliable late-game spacing threats. Age effects on corner three percentage show relatively stable patterns, as corner shooting relies more on shooting mechanics and timing than athleticism. Young players develop corner shooting through practice, prime players maintain it through peak skill, and aging players often preserve corner shooting even as overall athleticism declines. Corner three ability tends to age better than finishing at the rim. Playoff corner three percentage often remains stable or improves slightly from regular season despite overall three-point percentage declines, as playoff offenses emphasize creating high-quality corner looks through drive-and-kick rather than contested above-the-break pull-ups. Players with reliable playoff corner shooting provide valuable spacing in crucial games. Corner three benchmarks for evaluation indicate 38+ percent represents solid efficiency, 40+ percent very good, and 42+ percent elite. Combined with volume (2+ corner three attempts per game), these percentages identify valuable spacing threats. Players below 35 percent on corners struggle providing reliable spacing value from those locations despite geometric advantages. Shot chart analysis focusing specifically on corner regions reveals whether players have corner hot zones or cold zones. Some players show significantly better corner efficiency than above-the-break (corner hot zone), confirming their spacing role. Others show similar or worse corner efficiency (no corner advantage), suggesting limited value from corner positioning. Opponent-adjusted corner three percentage accounts for defensive contest quality. Maintaining high corner percentage against teams that emphasize contesting corners demonstrates skill translating against serious defensive attention. Corner percentage inflating against poor perimeter defenses might not translate against quality opponents. Corner three percentage limitations include sample size issues creating noisy estimates, missing information about shot creation context (wide open vs contested), and inability to capture spacing value beyond makes. Not all corner threes are equal quality. Spacing gravity exists even without high volume or efficiency if defenders respect the threat. System effects on corner three percentage show that offensive systems emphasizing drive-and-kick create more open corner looks, potentially inflating individual percentages. Players might show higher corner efficiency in spacing-oriented systems than traditional offenses. System context helps interpret whether corner efficiency reflects individual skill or scheme-generated quality. The future of corner three percentage analysis will likely involve more granular shot quality metrics: expected corner three percentage based on defender distance and creation method, corner three shooting adjusted for contest quality, and corner three value including spacing gravity beyond makes. Enhanced tracking enables more sophisticated corner three evaluation. In contemporary basketball analytics, Corner Three Percentage represents a crucial metric for evaluating spot-up shooting ability, floor spacing contribution, and role player value. The geometric and shot quality advantages of corner threes make them the most efficient three-point attempts, driving offensive system emphasis on corner shooting. Teams use corner three percentage for player evaluation, role definition, lineup construction, and strategic planning. As modern basketball continues emphasizing spacing and three-point shooting, corner three percentage will remain essential for understanding offensive efficiency and player value in pace-and-space systems.