3 point shots

[Rastapopoulos]

Here's a crazy/stupid suggestion: get rid of the 3 point shot.

Why? Because it's taking over! The percentage of a team's shots that are 3-pointers has risen precipitously in recent years (somebody else can research the full details - I'm too lazy) and I just don't like it. Do I not like it because it makes Golden State effectively unbeatable? Maybe. But also because I just don't like watching nothing but long jumpers.

Downside: big leads would be unassailable. But as we're usually the ones giving UP big leads, I don't mind. And besides, BUILDING a big lead would be harder.

As it is, the big men have been effectively rendered obsolete. Pity the poor Okafors, Kanters, Marjanovics and Monroes, who would be much sought-after in prior eras. Now we get every 7-footer practicing his 3-pointers. It's unnatural! Where can tall people go if not into basketball?

Who's with me!

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Here's a crazy/stupid suggestion: get rid of the 3 point shot.

Why? Because it's taking over! The percentage of a team's shots that are 3-pointers has risen precipitously in recent years (somebody else can research the full details - I'm too lazy) and I just don't like it. Do I not like it because it makes Golden State effectively unbeatable? Maybe. But also because I just don't like watching nothing but long jumpers.

Downside: big leads would be unassailable. But as we're usually the ones giving UP big leads, I don't mind. And besides, BUILDING a big lead would be harder.

As it is, the big men have been effectively rendered obsolete. Pity the poor Okafors, Kanters, Marjanovics and Monroes, who would be much sought-after in prior eras. Now we get every 7-footer practicing his 3-pointers. It's unnatural! Where can tall people go if not into basketball?

Who's with me!

Don't want to get rid of it completely, because it helps with spreading the floor, but I wouldn't be opposed to moving it back to 25 ft, and removing the sideline break in the arc so as to eliminate the corner 3.

 

[Stevenson]

Here's a better idea:

Institute a 4 point shot.

It would rid us of the insufferable, never successful, foul-foul-foul-and-pray-for-a-missed- freethrow BS at the end of games.

 

[BonesJones]

Don't want to get rid of it completely, because it helps with spreading the floor, but I wouldn't be opposed to moving it back to 25 ft, and removing the sideline break in the arc so as to eliminate the corner 3.

Can't get rid of the corner 3.. If anything, extend it a foot and widen the court by a foot on each side.

 

[BonesJones]

Getting rid of the 3pt shot would be one of, if not the worst thing the NBA could do.

 

[BonesJones]

Here's a crazy/stupid suggestion: get rid of the 3 point shot.

Why? Because it's taking over! The percentage of a team's shots that are 3-pointers has risen precipitously in recent years (somebody else can research the full details - I'm too lazy) and I just don't like it. Do I not like it because it makes Golden State effectively unbeatable? Maybe. But also because I just don't like watching nothing but long jumpers.

Downside: big leads would be unassailable. But as we're usually the ones giving UP big leads, I don't mind. And besides, BUILDING a big lead would be harder.

As it is, the big men have been effectively rendered obsolete. Pity the poor Okafors, Kanters, Marjanovics and Monroes, who would be much sought-after in prior eras. Now we get every 7-footer practicing his 3-pointers. It's unnatural! Where can tall people go if not into basketball?

Who's with me!

I hate when people feel bad for current players because they'd be "more valuable" in previous areas. Monroe, Okafor, and Kanter are all horrible defenders, and the latter two are still making $17M a year.

If they could defend they'd be sought after. Nurk without a jumpshot is still a max contract level player.

 

[BigGameDamian]

Can't get rid of the corner 3.. If anything, extend it a foot and widen the court by a foot on each side.

Why not?

Don't want to get rid of it completely, because it helps with spreading the floor, but I wouldn't be opposed to moving it back to 25 ft, and removing the sideline break in the arc so as to eliminate the corner 3.

I like it and I have said the same before.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Can't get rid of the corner 3.. If anything, extend it a foot and widen the court by a foot on each side.

I have to echo BGD--why do we need to keep the corner 3? What's the value to the game in having one section of the 3 point arc that is significantly closer/easier than the rest of it?

 

[Mr. Robot]

Getting rid of the 3pt shot would be one of, if not the worst thing the NBA could do.

couldnt agree more, thats just nonsense

 

[BonesJones]

I have to echo BGD--why do we need to keep the corner 3? What's the value to the game in having one section of the 3 point arc that is significantly closer/easier than the rest of it?

The value is stretching the defense to all parts of the court. You'd have no room in the paint to score because every defender would collapse hard from the sides.

 

[SportsAndWhine]

Last year, the league average for 2-point FG% was 50.3%. That’s the same as a 33.5% 3-point shooter. But the league average 3-point FG% was 35.8%. So the 3-pointer is more valuable than a 2-pointer for an average team shooting average percentages. In fact, only two teams shot the two pointer better than 53.7%, which is what the league average 3-point FG% is worth as a two point shot. So the 3-pointer is really valuable right now.

Really they should make the courts six feet wider and extend the three point line one foot out, to keep it in line with that 33.5%. Then in a few years extend it out another foot. It’d be like Social Security inflation adjustment. If 3-point FG% is 36% or higher for three straight seasons, extend the line. Just make it a normal thing that adjusts every few years.

 

[blue9]

The value is stretching the defense to all parts of the court. You'd have no room in the paint to score because every defender would collapse hard from the sides.

If that were the case Dame, CJ, Curry, etc would just gobble up wide open 2-pointers. Shooters space the floor, not painted lines.

 

[Natebishop3]

What needs to happen is another Shaq or Hakeem come along and completely decimate teams like the Warriors in the paint. That will change the way teams approach the game.

 

[SportsAndWhine]

What needs to happen is another Shaq or Hakeem come along and completely decimate teams like the Warriors in the paint. That will change the way teams approach the game.

The Warriors were the best 2-point shooting team in the league last year. Maybe a big center beats them that way but probably not. The best defense is still a good offense... and being able to nut shot anyone you like.

I do have to say that we were 27th in the league in FG% at the basket (0-3 feet). But above average in all other categories. Nurkic might lift us up a lot there and that makes us pretty dangerous.

 

[Natebishop3]

The Warriors were the best 2-point shooting team in the league last year. Maybe a big center beats them that way but probably not. The best defense is still a good offense... and being able to nut shot anyone you like.

I do have to say that we were 27th in the league in FG% at the basket (0-3 feet). But above average in all other categories. Nurkic might lift us up a lot there and that makes us pretty dangerous.

The Warriors are an outlier, brought on because of extremely lucky drafting and timing. There's no way in hell they sign Durant if Curry was making the kind of money that he should have been making. That team won't be together forever, and the rest of the league is manageable.

 

[mook]

What needs to happen is another Shaq or Hakeem come along and completely decimate teams like the Warriors in the paint. That will change the way teams approach the game.

It's interesting to think about. Would Shaq have all those rings if he came up in the current era? I'm not so sure. Yeah, he'd get his 30 in the paint, but his lack of mobility would mean pretty much any team with elite perimeter shooting would create all kinds of havoc.

 

[dviss1]

OK so something's wrong with the title.

What are 3 point shots?

Does he mean Swish3s?

 

[dviss1]

Don't want to get rid of it completely, because it helps with spreading the floor, but I wouldn't be opposed to moving it back to 25 ft, and removing the sideline break in the arc so as to eliminate the corner 3.

The top of the key 3 is ridiculously long. To get rid of the sideline angle, they must get rid of the first row of seats. Ain't happenin'.

 

[dviss1]

It's interesting to think about. Would Shaq have all those rings if he came up in the current era? I'm not so sure. Yeah, he'd get his 30 in the paint, but his lack of mobility would mean pretty much any team with elite perimeter shooting would create all kinds of havoc.

Even the Warriors start Zsa Zsa. Jussayin.

 

[dviss1]

Here's a better idea:

Institute a 4 point shot.

It would rid us of the insufferable, never successful, foul-foul-foul-and-pray-for-a-missed- freethrow BS at the end of games.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

The top of the key 3 is ridiculously long. To get rid of the sideline angle, they must get rid of the first row of seats. Ain't happenin'.

No--I'm not suggesting widening the court at all. I'm saying that the arc would continue unchanged until it intersects the sideline, and that there would be no 3 point shot within (approximately) 10 feet of the baseline.

EDIT: Actually, for some reason I didn't realize that the court is exactly 50 ft wide, so if there were no break, there could technically be a corner 3, but you'd have to be super precise with your foot placement to make it possible.

 

[Natebishop3]

It's interesting to think about. Would Shaq have all those rings if he came up in the current era? I'm not so sure. Yeah, he'd get his 30 in the paint, but his lack of mobility would mean pretty much any team with elite perimeter shooting would create all kinds of havoc.

I think if you slowed the pace down, fed the big fella, and just pounded away.... yes. I think he could have beaten the Warriors. If they're not even going to try to guard him in the post, how many dunks do you think he could get and what would his FG% look like?

Unrelated, but how well do you think our team could have guarded the Warriors? Greg Anthony, Stacy Augmon, Pippen, Sheed, and Brian Grant out on defense. Could we have stopped them?

 

[rasheedfan2005]

Here's a better idea:

Institute a 4 point shot.

It would rid us of the insufferable, never successful, foul-foul-foul-and-pray-for-a-missed- freethrow BS at the end of games.

Need the circle game implemented. I invented it in high school. The part of the half court graphic closest to hoop his 4 points. The half court line is 5 points and the part of circle on the opposing teams court farthest from your hoop is 6 points. A right handed hook from the same spot is double and a left handed hook is triple. This rule might need to be modified with left handed hookers in the nba. I always won cause i shoot a higher percentage half court hook than meyers leonard shoots regular 3s in games that matter.

 

[theprunetang]

No--I'm not suggesting widening the court at all. I'm saying that the arc would continue unchanged until it intersects the sideline, and that there would be no 3 point shot within (approximately) 10 feet of the baseline.

EDIT: Actually, for some reason I didn't realize that the court is exactly 50 ft wide, so if there were no break, there could technically be a corner 3, but you'd have to be super precise with your foot placement to make it possible.

So teams will start looking at predraft foot sizes and draft the guys with the smallest feet. I can just imagine people on the board getting all excited over 13inch feet.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

So teams will start looking at predraft foot sizes and draft the guys with the smallest feet. I can just imagine people on the board getting all excited over 13inch feet.

Could put a premium on dudes 5'8" and below. "He wears a size 9? We gotta get him!"

 

[dviss1]

No--I'm not suggesting widening the court at all. I'm saying that the arc would continue unchanged until it intersects the sideline, and that there would be no 3 point shot within (approximately) 10 feet of the baseline.

EDIT: Actually, for some reason I didn't realize that the court is exactly 50 ft wide, so if there were no break, there could technically be a corner 3, but you'd have to be super precise with your foot placement to make it possible.

Yeah, I'm one for widening the sidelines but it'll never happen.

 

[Blazers Roy]

They just need to allow 90's defense again.

3 point % are so high right now because no one is allowed to touch soft players like Steph Curry when they are behind the 3 point line. You put your hand on him - he jumps for the shot and it's an automatic foul, if he puts the ball to the floor and you touch him it's a foul because you interrupt his movement, if you stand too close to him he can jump into you and it's a foul or he can just shoot it and fall on his ass afterwards (aka The Jamal Crawford special).

How crazy is that? defenders are just too timid to do anything nowadays.
Big guys however, are not as protected under NBA rules:

Hand Checking: A defender may not place and keep his hand on an opponent unless he is in the area near the basket with his back to the basket

Basically, this whole problem exists because people like Adam Silver who only care about ratings and revenue are sitting at the helm.
Their ignorance dictates that:
90's basketball = ugly and boring. No one likes to watch post plays.
Two teams having a 3 point contest = Exciting and good for business.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

They just need to allow 90's defense again.

3 point % are so high right now because no one is allowed to touch soft players like Steph Curry when they are behind the 3 point line. You put your hand on him - he jumps for the shot and it's an automatic foul, if he puts the ball to the floor and you touch him it's a foul because you interrupt his movement, if you stand too close to him he can jump into you and it's a foul or he can just shoot it and fall on his ass afterwards (aka The Jamal Crawford special).

How crazy is that? defenders are just too timid to do anything nowadays.
Big guys however, are not as protected under NBA rules:


Basically, this whole problem exists because people like Adam Silver who only care about ratings and revenue are sitting at the helm.
Their ignorance dictates that:
90's basketball = ugly and boring. No one likes to watch post plays.
Two teams having a 3 point contest = Exciting and good for business.

This.

Let the bigs bang. No more touch fouls. If the little guys want to play in the trees, they are going to have to pay for it.

 

[theprunetang]

Could put a premium on dudes 5'8" and below. "He wears a size 9? We gotta get him!"

Exactly. People would treat it like they do standing reach now.

 

[SIeepwalker]

What needs to happen is another Shaq or Hakeem come along and completely decimate teams like the Warriors in the paint. That will change the way teams approach the game.