one of the few times when pop made a dumb comment. if he hated 3pt shots so much, he can adopt the same system as Byron Scott
Now that we can identify the spot people take their shots from with computers, they should award points worth between 0.0 (under the basket) and 5.0 points (half-court line and beyond), correct to 1 decimal place, based on the distance of the shooter from the basket.
3 pointers are fine. If you don't like 3 pointers you don't like 2pt conversion in football. You also probably go to bed at 8 and get mad when you miss wheel of fortune. I can't imagine watching basketball without the 3 point shot. It's like when the field goal posts were at the front of the end zone in football.
Hey all, long time no see. The problem with the 3-pointer is simply that players have become to proficient at it. The idea is that it is supposed to be a difficult shot-- that's why it is worth 50% more than a normal shot. But because players train it so much, they actually hit it at a higher rate than mid-range, which means there is absolutely no value in even taking a mid-range shot anymore (aka Moreyball). This has the effect of "solving" the game because a good percentage of the court isn't even in play anymore. Further, the problem has been exacerbated by the extremely tight defensive rules so that it is near impossible to check a player on the perimeter. Personally, I think the game would be better with no 3-pointer, but this will never happen. Instead, the league will probably move the goalposts and keep tweaking the rules to make for an enjoyable product. The absolute worst thing they can do would be introducing a "4 point" line, because then we'll just get a generation of players training half-court shots (which may seem laughable now, but back in the 70s no one would envision a league where players were routinely taking 25 foot heaves). A better solution, albeit a temporary one, would be to widen the court and move the line back five or six feet; this would have the effect of at least eliminating the 40% shooters and making the shot the specialty bail-out weapon it was intended to be ... at least until players start getting better at this shot. This is very unlikely to happen too. Perhaps the league cold re-introduce hand-checking to at least shift the balance back to the defender a bit. A lot of fans may like the way the game is now. On its surface, it does seem to be more team-oriented because there is an emphasis on passing to get an open look (from three mostly). I find it to be boring. Teams don't even care about interior play anymore because it's just not statistically viable to toss it into the post and put up a 55-60% 2-pointer when you can get a 40% 3-pointer almost anytime you want. Look at the last Finals-- even though Mozgov was playing well (and is one of the better post-players in the league), the Cavs eventually benched him because even at his most efficient he was a liability against the perimeter 3-ball offense. Similarly, GSW didn't even bother using Bogut, who was a former #1 pick and forgotten as one of the better bigmen in the game. On offense, the game is basically a shooting contest now. I wouldn't be surprised to see the gimmick extended as Grinnell has done in college, where we get teams whose sole intention is to jack up as many 3s as possible and not even bothering to defend 2s. If it gets to the point where entire teams can hit 45-50% on 3s, this is a totally viable strategy and it will force the league to once again re-adjust the rules. Ironically, they had it right in the 70s and early 80s, but they just didn't know it then.
the goal of basketball is to put the ball in the basket. if you do it from far away..then u should get more points. i don't see what the issue here is?
They should make the 3pt shooting much harder, since it counts 50% more than a 2pt. If the owner won't want to wide the court, then make the ring a little smaller
From bball reference, league averages: FG AVG .443 3P AVG .348 FT AVG .755 So true value: FG .886 ppa 3P 1.044 ppa FT .775 ppa 3P seems to have more value, but getting FT attempts is much more common when taking a FG. So it in terms of opportunity cost and reward, it seems very fair atm and teams should not shy away from 2's, especially when it's one with contact.
I like the various factors involved in hitting/missing. You miss and it's potentially a 4 point turnaround for the other team (assuming they've just hit 2 and get another 2 from the rebound). I love the clutch 3's, especially when the games close at the end. BUT.... I hate it when players have an open lane, but choose to shoot the 3. And kids see this and want to do the same. So many times I've seen coaches yelling at kids because they want to shoot the 3, rather than drive to an open hoop.
Hard to believe but in the 1986 finals, the rockets shot 5/17 on threes and the Celtics shot 12/34 on threes in the ENTIRE 6 game series. Teams exceed that in single games now. Bird who won the 1986 3 point contest and was the marksman of the time shot 7/19 on threes in 6 games. Kobe jacked up 17 last week and Klay had 16 three point attempts the other night.
The 3 was pretty much a desperation shot throughout the 80's the Celtics were the first team to use it as a weapon with Bird but compared to today he didn't take many at all. Its funny that the Celtics were the first team to use it as a weapon when they were one of the teams that voted against it when it was adopted in 1979. The 3 really became a offensive weapon in the 90's and teams have shot more and more ever since. Its sad that the mid range game has disappeared because its a shot that is always open but all guys want to do now is shoot 3's or dunk and they have no 15ft game anymore.
The best solution is: Make the current 3pt shot = 2.5 points. Also, take away the line on the court and just have it visible to viewers on TV like in football And while you're at it, change FTs to 1st shot = 0.5pts, 2nd shot = 1.5pts. And 1s stay the same.
the game evolves. the next evolution is defenses and players designed to limit three point shooting. watch, it'll happen. some innovative coach will start playing 'prevent' defenses.
