Everyone's talking about how teams' over-reliance on the 3 is ruining basketball, and there are several suggestions that seem to be gaining a lot of traction/public support. So which is your favorite?
3pt alley-oop. If the shot is thrown behind the 3pt line it counts as 3pts. It would open the court more, lead to more dunks, and feature more exciting and dynamic plays.
Would love it, though I doubt it would reduce 3-point shots. Still, you've got the power--add it to the poll.
Not having the 3s for certain quarters is interesting as you'd need totally different lineups and kind of have a rush to maximize your shots there if you had a big team or such. Just seems to wild to actually be considered. Allowing some hand checking is just how the game used to be played so it's a traditional thing. That's totally feasible. Moving the line back just adjusts to current skills of players. When the 3pt line was introduced nobody was skilled at shooting that far out so it was a difficult shot. Now it's a shot half the roster can hit 40-50% of the time since players have become so skilled at it. Moving the line back just adjusts to the way the 3pt line was originally intended.
I enjoyed watching some of those great defensive teams. The 2004 Pistons were a ton of fun to watch and could shut teams down. They had 5 straight games in March holding opponents under 70 points. The last 30 games of the season none of their opponents scored 100. They went on to win the finals. Now there were other teams like Mavs that year that averaged 105 points and had a super exciting offense. So not every game was low scoring like the Pistons. There were tons of different way to construct a winning team and many different strategies teams could play with. That actually made the 3s way more exciting because they meant something and to have those shooters it meant you were giving up defense or rebounding or some other compromise. It was a chess game where teams could have different pieces that all had advantages and disadvantages. The Drexler Blazers were a ton of fun to watch too. They had good defense, solid offense, but mostly they would RUN! It was running over the opponent to get a dunk. Today teams just run down on a fast break to jack up a 3. I can't imagine how boring it would've been to see Kersey and Buck fast break to shoot 10 threes per game. Today every team jacks a ton of 3s and it's just made all the teams very similar which is super boring. I used to love watching good 3pt shooters.... But when the majority of attempts are 3s there's nothing exciting or special about it.
Seems to me that those are the two most reasonable/obvious options. Would doing both simultaneously be too drastic?
Eliminate the three point shot and make them play basketball. Or at least let them hand check and tighten up three point defense. This would reduce the number of threes and force teams to move the ball, and it would open up the defense so the ball could move more freely nearer to the basket. The three point shot, as Ralph Miller predicted, has ruined the game of basketball and reduced it to a boring shooting contest. Get rid of it.
So, is this the “we hate Steph Curry and Dame Lillard rule? I think people love the long threes. It’s the over reliance on the 3 ball, especially by brick mason shooters, that’s annoying. How about only allowing 3s to count when they are below a set percentage of shots? Have an extra light that goes on when the threshold is open. Always on in the last two minutes of the game.
Not so much hate for them as much as hate what their success--and the success of the Celtics' offense this season--has done to the rest of the NBA.
Biggest change I want to see is for the refs to stop calling so many sissy fouls. Let them play, allow for some contact.
The only 3-pointer that should count is dunks or finger rolls taking off from behind the line. If you haven't entered the paint's airspace by the time you shoot, it's a 2-pointer. I'm okay with leaving the short corner 3's. If someone can figure out how to get a running start from there, more power to them.
Handchecking outside the arc makes total sense to me. While we're at it I'd like to get rid of goal tending like they do in Euro ball as well.
Eliminating the corner 3 would be terrible for spacing and have a huge negative trickle down. Move it back along with rest of the arc and widen the court makes sense though. Making non-paint two's worth 2.5 points would be radical but I think that might be the only way to make the mid range and post game valuable to again to more than the elite in that area.
The ultimate solution is to assign 3 points for a standard basket and 4 beyond the arc. This way, the premium is only 33% instead of 50%. Furthermore, add a 5 pointer beyond the 4 point arc Foul on 3 point shot missed Attempt #1 = 1 pt Attempt #2 = 2 pts Foul on 4 point shot missed Attempt #1 = 2 pts Attempt #2 = 2 pts Foul on 3 point shot made Attempt #1 = 1 pt Foul on 4 point shot made Attempt #1 = 2 pt Technical foul Attempt #1 = 1 pt
Without getting into half-points, you could probably accomplish the same thing by making a missed 3 be -1 points, perhaps excluding buzzer beaters (end of quarters only, not end of shot clock). That way, the mid-range 2-pointers are still encouraged, and there's no longer a bonus for sheer volume of 3-point shots. Don't take the 3 unless it's a good look for a good shooter...
Really like that idea. And yeah river, didn't address that part of your post but I agree it might but I think the results would be pretty negligible
