Three-Point Percentage

Three-point percentage is a statistical measure that calculates the proportion of three-point field goal attempts that result in made baskets, expressed as a decimal or percentage. This fundamental metric has become increasingly important in modern basketball analytics, serving as a key indicator of a player's perimeter shooting efficiency and a team's offensive effectiveness from beyond the arc. The calculation is straightforward: divide the number of successful three-point field goals by the total number of three-point attempts, then multiply by 100 to convert to a percentage. For example, a player who makes 40 three-pointers on 100 attempts has a three-point percentage of 40 percent. The significance of three-point percentage extends far beyond simple shooting accuracy. In the contemporary NBA, where the three-point shot has evolved from a specialty weapon into a central offensive strategy, this metric directly correlates with team success and individual player value. Teams that shoot higher three-point percentages generally score more efficiently, as the mathematical advantage of three points versus two points compounds over the course of a game. A team shooting 38 percent from three-point range scores 1.14 points per attempt, which exceeds the efficiency of many two-point shooting percentages and rivals all but the most efficient interior scoring. Historical context reveals the dramatic evolution of three-point percentage importance. When the NBA introduced the three-point line in 1979, most teams viewed it as a gimmick, and league-wide three-point percentage hovered around 28 percent with minimal volume. Players who specialized in three-point shooting were often considered one-dimensional, and teams rarely built strategies around perimeter shooting. The intervening decades witnessed gradual appreciation for the three-point shot's value, accelerating dramatically in the 2010s as analytics departments demonstrated the efficiency advantages of high-volume, high-percentage three-point shooting. Benchmark three-point percentages help contextualize player and team performance. In the modern NBA, league average three-point percentage typically ranges between 35-37 percent. Players who consistently shoot above 40 percent are considered elite shooters, while those below 33 percent are generally viewed as poor perimeter shooters. Teams prioritize acquiring players who can maintain high three-point percentages on significant volume, as these players provide efficient spacing and scoring that opens driving lanes for teammates and creates favorable offensive mathematics. Volume considerations significantly impact how three-point percentage should be interpreted. A player shooting 45 percent on two attempts per game demonstrates different value than one shooting 38 percent on eight attempts per game. The high-volume shooter provides greater offensive utility despite the lower percentage, as they force defenses to account for their shooting threat continuously and generate more total points. Advanced metrics like "three-point points above average" account for both percentage and volume, offering more comprehensive evaluation of shooting contribution. Situational factors influence three-point percentage in meaningful ways. Catch-and-shoot opportunities generally yield higher percentages than pull-up three-pointers, as the former allows shooters to set their feet and rise into their shot rhythm. Corner three-pointers typically produce higher percentages than above-the-break attempts due to the shorter distance and better shooting angles. Assisted three-pointers usually result in higher percentages than unassisted ones, as the passer creates optimal shooting conditions. Understanding these contextual elements helps analysts evaluate whether a player's three-point percentage reflects true shooting ability or situational advantages. Defensive pressure and shot quality dramatically affect three-point percentage outcomes. Open three-pointers—shots taken with the nearest defender more than six feet away—convert at significantly higher rates than contested attempts. Elite shooters distinguish themselves not only by their percentage but by their ability to maintain efficiency despite tighter defensive pressure. Players like Stephen Curry and Klay Thompson shoot high percentages even when heavily contested, demonstrating shooting skill that transcends mere mechanical proficiency. Sample size concerns require careful consideration when evaluating three-point percentage. Small sample sizes can produce misleading percentages—a player making their first three attempts starts at 100 percent, obviously unsustainable. Statistical analysis suggests meaningful three-point percentage evaluation requires minimum sample sizes of approximately 100 attempts, with larger samples providing more reliable indicators of true shooting ability. Season-long percentages offer more validity than month-long or game-long figures, though multi-season averages provide the most accurate assessment of shooter capability. The regression toward the mean phenomenon affects three-point percentage interpretation. Players experiencing shooting percentages significantly above or below their career averages tend to regress toward their historical norms over time. A career 36 percent shooter enjoying a 44 percent stretch will likely cool off, while one struggling at 28 percent will probably improve. Smart analysts account for this statistical tendency when projecting future performance and making personnel decisions. Positional differences in three-point percentage expectations reflect varying roles and responsibilities. Point guards and shooting guards typically post higher percentages than forwards and centers, partly due to shot selection and partly due to positional specialization. Modern basketball has blurred these distinctions, with "stretch" big men shooting significant three-point volume and posting respectable percentages. Teams value positional versatility, and big men who shoot above 35 percent from three provide enormous strategic advantages by pulling opposing shot blockers away from the basket. Playoff three-point percentage often differs from regular season numbers, as increased defensive intensity and game-planning affect shooting opportunities. Some shooters maintain their percentages or even improve in playoff settings, demonstrating mental toughness and ability to perform under pressure. Others experience significant percentage drops as defenses key on them and reduce their quality looks. Championship teams typically feature multiple players who sustain or elevate their three-point percentage during postseason play. Three-point percentage variance exists across different shot types and creation methods. Pull-up three-pointers generally yield lower percentages than catch-and-shoot attempts. Step-back threes, while aesthetically impressive, typically produce below-average percentages except for elite shooters who master the technique. Transition three-pointers can vary wildly—some players thrive on these fast-break opportunities while others rush their mechanics and shoot poorly. Development of consistent three-point percentage requires extensive practice and mechanical refinement. Players dedicate thousands of hours to shooting drills, working on footwork, hand placement, follow-through, and shot selection. Modern training incorporates sports science, biomechanical analysis, and data tracking to optimize shooting form and identify improvement areas. Teams employ shooting coaches who specialize in developing and maintaining three-point shooting proficiency. The three-point percentage metric has spawned derivative statistics that provide additional analytical depth. True shooting percentage incorporates three-pointers along with two-pointers and free throws for comprehensive efficiency measurement. Effective field goal percentage weights three-point makes at 1.5 times two-point makes, acknowledging their greater value. These advanced metrics complement basic three-point percentage to create fuller pictures of offensive efficiency and player value.