The one hole in Villanova’s offense

Early in the first half of Villanova’s recent loss to Butler, Josh Hart had the ball on the left side of the court with just a few seconds left on the shot clock. The senior guard — Nova’s top offensive option and a consensus player of the year candidate — drove left before momentarily losing his defender courtesy of a step back in the left corner. As he rose to take the 3-pointer, Tim Brando, the game’s play by play announcer, said, “Josh Hart, up against the clock, who would you rather have?”

In past seasons, Brando’s statement would simply be the icing that followed a made basket, but Hart’s jumper barely drew iron, falling well short of the front of the rim. And while that miss didn’t necessarily contribute to the Wildcats’ loss, that possession has been the norm in 2017 for the Wildcats: as efficiently as the offense has performed (1.23 points per possession, ranked third nationally by Ken Pomeroy) and as seamlessly as the wins have pilled up (27, and with one game remaining on the Big East slate, a top seed in the NCAA tournament all but locked up), Villanova isn’t invincible. The squad’s struggles to execute in late shot clock situations might have significant impacts if Nova hopes to become just the third team in three decades to win consecutive NCAA titles.

According to Hoop-Math.com, the dip is significant. Roughly 20 percent of the team’s field goals come within the final five seconds of a possession, which is about the same as a year ago, but Villanova’s 2017 effective field goal percentage in those situations is just a shade over 50 percent (down from 55 percent in last season). What’s even more interesting is how poorly the team has fared from beyond the arc in those scenarios: nearly 50 percent of those late-clock possessions end in a 3-point attempt, and the team converts a scant 29 percent them this season. Of course, it makes sense that Villanova would take that many 3s — only two other high-major squads attempt as many 3s as the Wildcats, and neither of those (Vanderbilt and Michigan) are contenders for a top seed in the NCAA tournament — but the success rate hasn’t been anywhere near as consistent (Nova made 39 percent from the perimeter in 2016).

Read More: What’s the deal with the Kansas Jayhawks’ defense?

The squad is scoring 0.82 points per end of shot clock possession, a sizable drop from the 0.92 PPP the team scored last season (per Synergy Sports). And while some may wonder how a tenth of a point could be considered ‘sizable,’ Villanova is one of the nation’s slowest teams, using 64 or so possessions a game. There is a razor thin margin for offensive error. Since the team had the Big East’s second highest minutes continuity rate, coach Jay Wright can afford to run a more vice-like, grinding offense. Stocked with players like Hart, Jalen Brunson, and Kris Jenkins, the team doesn’t lack for scoring. But what is interesting is that those same players have struggled as the seconds dwindle. The patented head-fakes, shoulder pumps, and jab steps that worked so well during last season’s March Madness have been well studied, and defenders seem more accustomed and well-versed in the Wildcats’ offensive intricacies.

What happened? For starters, Hart’s role within Villanova’s offense changed. Without a secondary ball-handler — Phil Booth has been sidelined for the year, and Donte DiVincenzo is much more scorer than playmaker at the moment — the senior has been pigeonholed as a facilitator. Of course, he kept the offense humming as a junior, but he is now looking more to set his teammates up than he ever has in his Nova career. As a result, his own effectiveness has been diminished: attempting roughly the same amount of shots as he did as a junior, Hart’s late possession effective field goal percentage has dropped from more than 60 percent to 49 percent. Hart isn’t getting to the rim as effortlessly as he did in 2016, and is forcing more perimeter shots (which, per Hoop-Math.com, constitute nearly 50 percent of his output).

The same can be said for Jenkins. As much as it sounds oxymoronic that the 6-foot-6 Jenkins, whose offensive rating hovers around 1.14, has had a largely up-and-down senior season, he has struggled mightily in short shot clock situations, making just 30 percent of his 3s. (The only Wildcat who has flourished is Brunson; the sophomore has transformed into one of the country’s most effective late possessions scorers, making an astounding 78 percent of the shots he takes at the rim.) Predictability could also be an underlying cause; as rudimentary as Daniel Ochefu’s offensive game was last season, the senior forward still made 63 percent of his 2-pointers and was a nearly automatic low-post threat. This Nova team lacks that option, and without at least the threat of an interior scorer, opponents can guard the perimeter a bit tighter than in the past.

And yet, could Villanova’s diminished effectiveness be a cause for concerns in March? Part of winning in the NCAA tournament is absorbing an opponent’s defense, and then executing regardless of the wrinkles specifically thrown in for postseason play. This was a crucial aspect of how the 2016 squad functioned throughout its championship run, but that element has been notoriously missing for much of this season.

It hasn’t totally disappeared, though. Against Providence in early February, Villanova ran through two offensive sets before Jenkins drove the lane, hit Darryl Reynolds for a drop off pass, and then faded to beyond the arc to connect on a 3-pointer off a post feed from Reynolds. The play was reminiscent of what Villanova does best — patiently wait for an opening and then attacking with the most efficient shot possible — and for now, Nova’s late possessions deficiencies won’t matter: as long as the Wildcats post an efficiency margin of +.32, the team won’t need to drain an possession to its final second.

Next: The best college basketball player from every state

But there could come a time in the postseason in which Villanova reaches for its customary last second magic and suddenly fails to deliver.