PDA

View Full Version : time to move the 3 pt arch back?



krazylegz
03-15-2017, 09:02 PM
with,as it goes now,8 of the 10 players on the floor being able to hit the 3 pointer with decent efficiency...is it time we move the arch back maybe like 2-ft. and expand the court on the sides??
times have changed and if this progression continues,how is the nba going to be watchable when these freak athletes,who are able to do soooo many breath taking things,waste their talent on taking outside shots that i'd take if i were in the nba....maybe moving the distance back wouldnt change how many 3 pointers are taken...but it cant hurt

HandsOnTheWheel
03-15-2017, 09:17 PM
Not gonna happen. As much as 3 pointers are ruining the NBA, it would just be too drastic to move it back IMO.

valade16
03-15-2017, 09:28 PM
I'd be more in favor of getting rid of the 3pt line than moving it back.

IndyRealist
03-15-2017, 10:17 PM
The NBA likes high scoring games. The 3pt line lets them score more. Why would they move it?

Delrayhc
03-15-2017, 10:23 PM
Id be in favor of a new rule of 3s having to be banked in to count

Blink
03-16-2017, 12:06 AM
My team cant shoot them as it is...no!

More-Than-Most
03-16-2017, 04:42 AM
I never understood this moronic argument of the 3point shooting is destroying the NBA... Its not like you are getting 4 or 5 points... You are getting 1 extra point for a shot that not many players make more than 33 percent of the time... There are how many teams now taking a ton of 3 pointers? Cavs/Rockets/Warriors? Yet that is destroying the NBA? Its a small market of teams being able to play this way and it just so happens 2 of those teams are loaded... If we get rid of the 3 point line you basically are saying you know what perimeter defense is basically now irrelevant... Just defend it jesus christ... Stop *****ing about 3s and defend against them. We act like everyone in the NBA is prime Allen... Curry that guy that gets stroked for his shooting had 1 ridiculous season last year and now has fallen back down to earth a bit from 3 and its killing his team... Teams that live and die by the 3 actually have a ton of risk... Worry less about getting rid or moving back something and make these teams defend. This is such a ludicrous notion its mind boggeling... the league average for 3 point shooting is what 34 percent? 1 in every 3 attempts that is a good number... if it was 40 percent id be a little more worried. If you take away the 3 you now handicap the bigs that actually do more then just take up space in the paint which isnt fair either... Why handicap a Towns/Porz/Blake/Embiid and so on down the list? You basically limit these big guys if you push it back or remove it whom have worked their ***** off to not be a typical big... yup thats fair.... Its such a stupid argument... How about we stop worrying about stupid non issues and worry more about things like home court advantage and only having 1 game benefit for winning 30-40 percent more games then the other team you have home court against at times.... Or how about we worry about how stupid games are officiated late in games when fouls all of a sudden arent fouls because we want to let the players decide the game even though that in itself gives a ******** unfair advantage to the defense whom know they can destroy a guy and it wont be called.... Or how about we do something about the obvious top heavy teams and oh yea giving seattle back a team or giving canada another team?

The 3 point line is fine... its basketball... DEFEND IT BETTER... Its that simple.

HandsOnTheWheel
03-16-2017, 05:46 AM
Lol

sep11ie
03-16-2017, 07:19 AM
The NBA already doesn't let players play D, they want high scoring games.

Heediot
03-16-2017, 07:39 AM
Apply FIBA international universal regulated rules. Move the 3 point line in, and allow true zones and some hand checking. Scoring will go down but it will make for better basketball. Of course, the NBA won't agree because it's all about the cash.

Vinylman
03-16-2017, 08:46 AM
actually, all you need to do is cut off the corner 3s ... it would totally change the spacing and force guys to add to their offensive games. Watching teams shooting bombs all game is boring but it is good for the casual fan and fantasy sports sites which the league has invested in...

remember... the NBA is becoming less and less of a sport and just more and more flat out entertainment for the casual observer.

Chronz
03-16-2017, 08:57 AM
actually, all you need to do is cut off the corner 3s ... it would totally change the spacing and force guys to add to their offensive games. Watching teams shooting bombs all game is boring but it is good for the casual fan and fantasy sports sites which the league has invested in...

remember... the NBA is becoming less and less of a sport and just more and more flat out entertainment for the casual observer.
This

nycericanguy
03-16-2017, 09:18 AM
The NBA already doesn't let players play D, they want high scoring games.

all star game is high scoring and its unwatchable.

was watching the Nets the other day and even Brook Lopez was bombing away from 3... saw a stat that he's already attempted way more 3's in 60 games this year than he had in his previous 8 seasons combined. he's hitting as many 3's this year as Reggie Miller did in his career...lol

its getting out of hand with no sign of slowing down.

I think they should at least get rid of the corner 3 and see how that goes, guys are always stepping out of bounds anyway ttrying to shoot that corner 3. it would be better for spacing.

ewing
03-16-2017, 10:56 AM
Id be in favor of a new rule of 3s having to be banked in to count

That's a great idea


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

valade16
03-16-2017, 02:55 PM
I never understood this moronic argument of the 3point shooting is destroying the NBA... Its not like you are getting 4 or 5 points... You are getting 1 extra point for a shot that not many players make more than 33 percent of the time... There are how many teams now taking a ton of 3 pointers? Cavs/Rockets/Warriors? Yet that is destroying the NBA? Its a small market of teams being able to play this way and it just so happens 2 of those teams are loaded... If we get rid of the 3 point line you basically are saying you know what perimeter defense is basically now irrelevant... Just defend it jesus christ... Stop *****ing about 3s and defend against them. We act like everyone in the NBA is prime Allen... Curry that guy that gets stroked for his shooting had 1 ridiculous season last year and now has fallen back down to earth a bit from 3 and its killing his team... Teams that live and die by the 3 actually have a ton of risk... Worry less about getting rid or moving back something and make these teams defend. This is such a ludicrous notion its mind boggeling... the league average for 3 point shooting is what 34 percent? 1 in every 3 attempts that is a good number... if it was 40 percent id be a little more worried. If you take away the 3 you now handicap the bigs that actually do more then just take up space in the paint which isnt fair either... Why handicap a Towns/Porz/Blake/Embiid and so on down the list? You basically limit these big guys if you push it back or remove it whom have worked their ***** off to not be a typical big... yup thats fair.... Its such a stupid argument... How about we stop worrying about stupid non issues and worry more about things like home court advantage and only having 1 game benefit for winning 30-40 percent more games then the other team you have home court against at times.... Or how about we worry about how stupid games are officiated late in games when fouls all of a sudden arent fouls because we want to let the players decide the game even though that in itself gives a ******** unfair advantage to the defense whom know they can destroy a guy and it wont be called.... Or how about we do something about the obvious top heavy teams and oh yea giving seattle back a team or giving canada another team?

The 3 point line is fine... its basketball... DEFEND IT BETTER... Its that simple.

?

250/477 players who have played in the NBA this season have shot at or better than 33.3% of their 3's. That's over half.

As for teams shooting a lot of 3's, it's everybody. This year the bottom 3 teams in 3PT attempts are:

Bulls 21.6
T-Wolves 21.7
Pacers 22.8

10 years ago the top 3 3pt shooting teams were:

Suns 24.0
Warriors 24.0
Rockets 23.1

The teams that shot the least amount of 3's that season shot 10 per game.

So the teams that are shooting the least 3's this season would be near those shooting the most 10 years ago.

Chronz
03-16-2017, 03:58 PM
I'd rather have lower scoring games with more variety too but moving the line prolly wouldn't do anything. The only way you get closer to earlier eras (in terms of 3's) is if you allow teams/players to play more 1v1 and disallow zones. 3's are the counter to strongside overloads and even then, the math has made it so that we now know how dumb teams were back then for taking long 2's instead.

ewing
03-16-2017, 04:22 PM
I'd rather have lower scoring games with more variety too but moving the line prolly wouldn't do anything. The only way you get closer to earlier eras (in terms of 3's) is if you allow teams/players to play more 1v1 and disallow zones. 3's are the counter to strongside overloads and even then, the math has made it so that we now know how dumb teams were back then for taking long 2's instead.

There definately are more players with range, and an emphasis on shooting the 3 instead of a long two but you don't think increased physicality would limit space as well. At my best I did nothing but run like Rip Hamilton to try and find space or scheme to make you fall asleep and people held the **** out of me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

COOLbeans
03-16-2017, 04:51 PM
The league has suffered due to the rules there's no denying that

Chronz
03-16-2017, 05:01 PM
There definately are more players with range, and an emphasis on shooting the 3 instead of a long two but you don't think increased physicality would limit space as well. At my best I did nothing but run like Rip Hamilton to try and find space or scheme to make you fall asleep and people held the **** out of me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed, it would make a difference but the game has evolved beyond just the rules. There are execs who believe the no handchecking rule isn't as strict as it once was, especially come playoffs, but teams still launch away.

There have been other reffing changes that could be affecting that however, like how much space shooters are given to land today compared to years ago. IDK man, its all guesswork

IndyRealist
03-16-2017, 05:05 PM
I've been saying the corner 3 needs to go away for years. It's too close. Just have the 3pt line run into the sideline and it will vastly change spacing.

Chronz
03-16-2017, 05:06 PM
The league has suffered due to the rules there's no denying that

Depends on how you view it. I wish there was a harmonious balance, and there was once the rules were initially made, its just that defenses haven't countered this and maybe they never will. Maybe we need to go back to the old rules now that we can identify the value of certain shots.

But to say it hurt the league sounds wrong. The league HAD to be changed, there was too much confusion from players/teams and not enough viewership from the fans because the interpretation of the rules had become so muddied by the strategy of the time.

Put it this way, what if the NBA had many more work stoppages because they kept the old rules in tact, would you say thats better for the game? Because thats where it was going, not only were todays athletes superior, but so too were the rules gaming against them.

ewing
03-16-2017, 05:23 PM
I've been saying the corner 3 needs to go away for years. It's too close. Just have the 3pt line run into the sideline and it will vastly change spacing.

The one thing I don't like about is the corner is such a weapon for shooters. In transition or a scramble everyone hugs the basket. The corner is the place to be

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

flea
03-16-2017, 05:56 PM
As long as we keep pretending that James Harden jumping into a defender on a 3 point shot attempt to get 3 FTs is a beautiful display of skill in athletics I'm okay with whatever they do. Nothing amps me up like some intense charity stripe action.

FOXHOUND
03-16-2017, 06:04 PM
Here's an interesting article from way back in 2001, when the rule changes were first becoming reality.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/12/sports/pro-basketball-nba-s-illegal-defense-rule-will-most-likely-be-eliminated.html

Funny to see how some great basketball minds were so wrong on the outcome.


''I think it's a huge mistake,'' Miami Coach Pat Riley said last week. ''There's not going to be anybody able to drive. With these rules, you're going to be back in the 70's in scoring. You can't force pace.''


''People will be coming up with all kinds of crazy defenses,'' Tomjanovich said. ''I want what's best for the N.B.A. I'm not sure these rule changes are.''

Thibs certainly liked the rule changes haha.

For 3-point shooting, it's just a matter of the game becoming far more skilled while also having more talent than ever. For all of the hoopla of GS last year, did the Cavs not stop them defensively? They dared Green and Barnes to take those open 3's and played on the reality that no one is going to consistently hit that many 3's whether they're open or not. They put Thompson on Curry for his size to give him issues, and him being athletic enough to do so. All of these things are just the same of adjustments that happen over time.

Offense always innovates first, then defense adjusts. The talent and skill level is forcing the absolute best from everyone and, slowly, the slow plodding big men are being eliminated from the game. Post play is requiring absolute skill and speed in moves with the ability to pass rather than some guys just being too big to consistently stop. Defense requires quick feet and deft hands instead of someone big and strong being able to muscle players to death (hello, DPOY Ron Artest vs after).

All of these things are increasing the quality of the game, not diminishing it. The standards of quality have never been higher. What's unfortunate is that two teams currently have 7 of the top 15-20 players in the league, but that has nothing to do rule changes or 3 point shots. Hell, some people call the 80's the golden era of basketball and you can argue it was no different with the Lakers and Celtics.

Heediot
03-16-2017, 06:06 PM
Agreed, it would make a difference but the game has evolved beyond just the rules. There are execs who believe the no handchecking rule isn't as strict as it once was, especially come playoffs, but teams still launch away.

There have been other reffing changes that could be affecting that however, like how much space shooters are given to land today compared to years ago. IDK man, its all guesswork

True about hand-checking and 3's. In Europe they probably launch 3's at a higher rate then the nba (Lithuania league for sure lol).

I personally don't care how many 3's are launched. I would just rather see real basketball instead of biased rules. The top Euroleague offensive team only averages 88 PPG which translates to 105 in the nba. But the top Euroleage defense gives up about 72 which translates to 86.4. Not too sure how the math translates with better athletes and more length in the nba (Euroleague is like college, Small Ball is the name of the game).

FOXHOUND
03-16-2017, 06:06 PM
As long as we keep pretending that James Harden jumping into a defender on a 3 point shot attempt to get 3 FTs is a beautiful display of skill in athletics I'm okay with whatever they do. Nothing amps me up like some intense charity stripe action.

Guys gotta stop reaching on him. Why punish a player for being smart and having the great reflexes to instantly punish guys when they reach like that? I used to hate Harden and his ugly style, but this year he's gotten even better at drawing fouls. He is far and away the best foul drawer on 3 point shots that I have ever seen. It feels like he draws one every game.

flea
03-16-2017, 06:14 PM
Riley was right about zones until they started actually calling 3 second violations and got rid of handchecking. Now they don't really call 3 seconds anymore again because they changed the rules (yet again) in like 08 or 09 or something to let jump shooters essentially do whatever they want. That along with the lack of perimeter D has given us this watered down 7 seconds or less junk that even the worst teams in the league can run.

It's the exact reason that there are so many "great" slashing guards in the league now - actual talented scorers like Harrison Barnes are disadvantaged because they aren't quick ballhandlers and instead have basketball skill. Even a shooting guard like Rip Hamilton is going to be underrated forever because he took tough midrange shots in an oppressive defensive era whereas a guy like Klay Thompson is given every bit of leeway coming off screens and even a graze gets him 3 points. Rip and Klay are a lot closer in terms of basketball skill than the lay basketball fan would ever realize.

flea
03-16-2017, 06:15 PM
Guys gotta stop reaching on him. Why punish a player for being smart and having the great reflexes to instantly punish guys when they reach like that? I used to hate Harden and his ugly style, but this year he's gotten even better at drawing fouls. He is far and away the best foul drawer on 3 point shots that I have ever seen. It feels like he draws one every game.

LMAO please be a joke

AllBall
03-16-2017, 06:20 PM
That will work....until players start making it from the new distance at 33%+ rate. They're professional athletes. It won't take that long to master. It will also make it easier to score inside if you have to go even further out to defend it.

FOXHOUND
03-16-2017, 07:45 PM
Riley was right about zones until they started actually calling 3 second violations and got rid of handchecking. Now they don't really call 3 seconds anymore again because they changed the rules (yet again) in like 08 or 09 or something to let jump shooters essentially do whatever they want. That along with the lack of perimeter D has given us this watered down 7 seconds or less junk that even the worst teams in the league can run.

It's the exact reason that there are so many "great" slashing guards in the league now - actual talented scorers like Harrison Barnes are disadvantaged because they aren't quick ballhandlers and instead have basketball skill. Even a shooting guard like Rip Hamilton is going to be underrated forever because he took tough midrange shots in an oppressive defensive era whereas a guy like Klay Thompson is given every bit of leeway coming off screens and even a graze gets him 3 points. Rip and Klay are a lot closer in terms of basketball skill than the lay basketball fan would ever realize.

They didn't change the 3 second rule, everyone stole Thibs great coaching. Thibs coached Garnett to stand in the paint and step out every 2.9 seconds. Now everyone does it but Thibs was the mastermind and innovator behind that loophole in the 3 second rule which allowed him to create his amazing strong side zone D that wrecked LeBron, Kobe and every other star. Everyone else followed along and offenses have adjusted with the cross court bullet passes and 3 point shooting barrage as a counter. If the worst teams could run it then I'm pretty sure the 76ers would rather have the Rockets offensive rating of 115.6 instead of their 102.8.

Why is being a quick ball handler not a basketball skill? Wouldn't Barnes be better if he was a more skilled ball handler? It's not like he isn't athletic enough. Also don't see how Barnes is disadvantaged because he's by far the most frequent ISO using player in the league. Maybe if he was a better ball handler or had better off the ball/catch and shoot skills, he would be an even better player? I fail to see how these things are not skills.

I wouldn't bog it down to simply their ability to run around screens and catch and shoot, but yeah Klay is just the evolved form of Rip because he lines up from deeper. Reggie did it before Rip, though. Klay still dropped 60 in 3 quarters, you need to give him a lot more credit than that. That's just the general evolution of basketball. You can make a through line with Reggie-Rip-Klay and you can make a through line with Dr. J-Jordan-Kobe.

FOXHOUND
03-16-2017, 07:50 PM
LMAO please be a joke

So if a player is reaching in and a player pulls up, causing him to rake his arm, that shouldn't be called a shooting foul? Why, because you don't like James Harden? How can you praise Harrison Barnes' skills and knock Harden? He's so much more skilled than Barnes. I don't like the guy either but give credit where it's due. If Barnes could draw 11 FTA a game trust me, he would no matter what he had to do.

AllBall
03-16-2017, 11:25 PM
So if a player is reaching in and a player pulls up, causing him to rake his arm, that shouldn't be called a shooting foul?

No, for the same reason if the offensive player runs into the a defensive player standing still with his feet set and the offensive player had enough time to avoid it (more than a step). The defender was already in the way, how can you call a foul on the defender?

Same deal, the defender's hand/arm was already in the way, why call a foul because you decided to run into the defender who was set?

Currently, it's a dumb technicality they're calling but I don't believe it's in the spirit of what a foul is supposed to be. The broadcasters have been criticizing it for years, eventually it will get changed.

Quinnsanity
03-17-2017, 12:04 AM
Here's what I don't understand about the "three-pointers are destroying the league" idiots: what exactly does destroying the league even mean?

From a popularity standpoint, the league is in a healthier place than it has ever been on just about every front. More people are watching and going to games. More people are buying jerseys. Fans are more actively engaged with the league thanks to social media. The league is making money and fans are enjoying the product more than ever.

Has it somehow impacted the talent pool? I would argue we have a larger and more diverse set of star players than ever before. Hell, I could name an All NBA team of non-shooters right now off the top of my head: Russ at point, Giannis and Butler on the wings, Davis and Gobert as the bigs. I could keep going. DeMar, DeAndre, Wiggins, Blake, Bledsoe, Wade, there are high end plays all over the court who aren't shooters. The only thing we're missing from previous eras is the plodding low-post center, except those still exist. If you really are obsessed with those guys, you can get them for short stretches: Jahlil Okafor, Valanciunas, Al Jefferson, Kanter, Monroe. They exist, they've just been properly minimized, partially because they aren't very effective, partially because they're ****ing boring to watch. Shouldn't we be glad that we exist in a league that now emphasizes learned skills over natural athleticism? Isn't it great that the league is now configured in a way where a 5'9'' point guard can basically average the same amount of points per game as Shaq did at his peak, isn't watching Isaiah jitterbugging around the floor and hitting crazy shots more fun than watching Shaq just be bigger than everyone else? Isn't it a good thing that kids can now identify with the reigning MVP in Steph Curry and say, "he looks like me, maybe I could do this?" Why is that not better for everybody? Why is that not more enjoyable?

Is the league somehow less fundamentally sound? That's utter ********. Teams are passing more than ever. Golden State is leading the league with 30.2 assists per game. Phoenix led the league 10 years ago at 25.4. Isolation is at an all time low, passing is at an all time high. I swear, some of you people pine for the olden days and it's like you never actually watched those games. They were boring as ****. Outside of a few teams, most basketball was just plopping the ball into the center and watching him try a jump hook, or clearing out for a guard to dribble for 15 seconds and then try a mid-range jumper. You all complain about Carmelo and Dwight Howard on offense? The entire ****ing league was Carmelos and Dwight Howards back then with only a few enjoyable players.

So what is it? What's so wrong with this? Why is an offense-first league worse than a defense-first league? Why is that more fun, or morally superior, or whatever it is that you're arguing? I seriously don't get it. What am I missing?

Vinylman
03-17-2017, 06:54 AM
?

250/477 players who have played in the NBA this season have shot at or better than 33.3% of their 3's. That's over half.

As for teams shooting a lot of 3's, it's everybody. This year the bottom 3 teams in 3PT attempts are:

Bulls 21.6
T-Wolves 21.7
Pacers 22.8

10 years ago the top 3 3pt shooting teams were:

Suns 24.0
Warriors 24.0
Rockets 23.1

The teams that shot the least amount of 3's that season shot 10 per game.

So the teams that are shooting the least 3's this season would be near those shooting the most 10 years ago.

BAM!!!!!

Nice analysis

Vinylman
03-17-2017, 07:13 AM
Here's what I don't understand about the "three-pointers are destroying the league" idiots: what exactly does destroying the league even mean?

From a popularity standpoint, the league is in a healthier place than it has ever been on just about every front. More people are watching and going to games. More people are buying jerseys. Fans are more actively engaged with the league thanks to social media. The league is making money and fans are enjoying the product more than ever.

Has it somehow impacted the talent pool? I would argue we have a larger and more diverse set of star players than ever before. Hell, I could name an All NBA team of non-shooters right now off the top of my head: Russ at point, Giannis and Butler on the wings, Davis and Gobert as the bigs. I could keep going. DeMar, DeAndre, Wiggins, Blake, Bledsoe, Wade, there are high end plays all over the court who aren't shooters. The only thing we're missing from previous eras is the plodding low-post center, except those still exist. If you really are obsessed with those guys, you can get them for short stretches: Jahlil Okafor, Valanciunas, Al Jefferson, Kanter, Monroe. They exist, they've just been properly minimized, partially because they aren't very effective, partially because they're ****ing boring to watch. Shouldn't we be glad that we exist in a league that now emphasizes learned skills over natural athleticism? Isn't it great that the league is now configured in a way where a 5'9'' point guard can basically average the same amount of points per game as Shaq did at his peak, isn't watching Isaiah jitterbugging around the floor and hitting crazy shots more fun than watching Shaq just be bigger than everyone else? Isn't it a good thing that kids can now identify with the reigning MVP in Steph Curry and say, "he looks like me, maybe I could do this?" Why is that not better for everybody? Why is that not more enjoyable?

Is the league somehow less fundamentally sound? That's utter ********. Teams are passing more than ever. Golden State is leading the league with 30.2 assists per game. Phoenix led the league 10 years ago at 25.4. Isolation is at an all time low, passing is at an all time high. I swear, some of you people pine for the olden days and it's like you never actually watched those games. They were boring as ****. Outside of a few teams, most basketball was just plopping the ball into the center and watching him try a jump hook, or clearing out for a guard to dribble for 15 seconds and then try a mid-range jumper. You all complain about Carmelo and Dwight Howard on offense? The entire ****ing league was Carmelos and Dwight Howards back then with only a few enjoyable players.

So what is it? What's so wrong with this? Why is an offense-first league worse than a defense-first league? Why is that more fun, or morally superior, or whatever it is that you're arguing? I seriously don't get it. What am I missing?

This mentality is the type of fan the leagues marketing is after...

Again, if you are ok with the league becoming more entertainment than sport then this era is great... unfortunately, the league just wants the offensive side of the ball to have a huge advantage because it plays into their fanatasy sports efforts (additional revenue).

The chickens will come home to roost in the next set of tv deals... people don't understand what a massive overpay ESPN / TNT engaged in to keep FS1 out... I mean... the people being layed off at ESPN understand it but not the fans of the league...

Enjoy it while it lasts

Heediot
03-17-2017, 09:15 AM
I don't he get how lower scoring effects fantasy sports, the point system is still the same, you just get lower overall totals for everyone.

Once you have money invested in the action, you will watch whether it's high scoring or low scoring.

Vinylman
03-17-2017, 10:06 AM
I don't he get how lower scoring effects fantasy sports, the point system is still the same, you just get lower overall totals for everyone.

Once you have money invested in the action, you will watch whether it's high scoring or low scoring.

spoken like a NON-novice... more scoring is more exciting which is how they market to the fringe dolts...

fantasy sports is a volume enterprise...

flea
03-17-2017, 03:04 PM
They didn't change the 3 second rule, everyone stole Thibs great coaching. Thibs coached Garnett to stand in the paint and step out every 2.9 seconds. Now everyone does it but Thibs was the mastermind and innovator behind that loophole in the 3 second rule which allowed him to create his amazing strong side zone D that wrecked LeBron, Kobe and every other star. Everyone else followed along and offenses have adjusted with the cross court bullet passes and 3 point shooting barrage as a counter. If the worst teams could run it then I'm pretty sure the 76ers would rather have the Rockets offensive rating of 115.6 instead of their 102.8.

Why is being a quick ball handler not a basketball skill? Wouldn't Barnes be better if he was a more skilled ball handler? It's not like he isn't athletic enough. Also don't see how Barnes is disadvantaged because he's by far the most frequent ISO using player in the league. Maybe if he was a better ball handler or had better off the ball/catch and shoot skills, he would be an even better player? I fail to see how these things are not skills.

I wouldn't bog it down to simply their ability to run around screens and catch and shoot, but yeah Klay is just the evolved form of Rip because he lines up from deeper. Reggie did it before Rip, though. Klay still dropped 60 in 3 quarters, you need to give him a lot more credit than that. That's just the general evolution of basketball. You can make a through line with Reggie-Rip-Klay and you can make a through line with Dr. J-Jordan-Kobe.

Ball handling is a skill. Ball handling in the NBA is not so much anymore because playing perimeter defense is all but illegal. You have to let the ball handler go where ever he wants. It used to take skill just to get to the paint in the NBA (not score, just physically get to the paint with the ball). Now literally any player on a 10 day contract can do it Why do you think every team runs P&R offense almost every possession? Nobody realized that P&R was a thing until Nash's Suns came along? No, it's because it's easy. You don't have to be Stockton anymore to base your offense around what used to be a gimmicky feature of Ivy League college teams.

Shooting is a skill, but shooting in the NBA is basically the same as shooting in a HORSE game now because rules say that there is some magic tunnel where you're entitled not to be even breathed upon if you're a shooter (note this doesn't apply to post players or slashers). And if you're Harden that magic tunnel extends into where the defender is because he should know better than try to defend superstars. And why? Do you watch the NBA to see people shoot jumpers? You can get a front row seat to that at your local park.

PhillyFaninLA
03-17-2017, 03:55 PM
Apply FIBA international universal regulated rules. Move the 3 point line in, and allow true zones and some hand checking. Scoring will go down but it will make for better basketball. Of course, the NBA won't agree because it's all about the cash.

This is very similiar to my thoughts. Go back to old rules, require players to actually be tough, and not "Ref that guy on the bench playing for a team that is off tonight and on the other side of the country took a normal breath when I shot so give me free throws" bring back actual adversity and defense. I like bringing back the hand checking rule, and I'd not have it be a penalty because you intentionally get yourself mildly bumped by an opposing player...no gimicky things like moving the 3 point line, why not add a 10 point circle somewhere on the floor if your going to do that.

tp13baby
03-17-2017, 04:43 PM
It would eventually make defense even harder. It would spread the floor out even more making help side impossible so pick and rolls would be easy easy or you could help off and make it impossible to close out on the shooter. These are athletes and putting back the 3 will maybe lower percentages by a little bit but they will adapt to it. Pick and rolls on the other hand would be too easy.

Quinnsanity
03-17-2017, 05:57 PM
This mentality is the type of fan the leagues marketing is after...

Again, if you are ok with the league becoming more entertainment than sport then this era is great... unfortunately, the league just wants the offensive side of the ball to have a huge advantage because it plays into their fanatasy sports efforts (additional revenue).

The chickens will come home to roost in the next set of tv deals... people don't understand what a massive overpay ESPN / TNT engaged in to keep FS1 out... I mean... the people being layed off at ESPN understand it but not the fans of the league...

Enjoy it while it lasts

I love that you feel you can condescend to me for enjoying something it is pretty universally enjoyed. It's such a masochistic approach to this as well, this idea that a more entertaining league is somehow a less compelling competitive product. Why? Why are they mutually exclusive? Nobody seems able to explain to me why the boring slog that was old school basketball is better than what we have now. Why is isolation more noble than this? Why are 7-footers taking jump hooks while everyone else watches better for the league than having an all time high in passing? Why is a defense heavy league better than an offense heavy league? Nobody seems to have a legitimate answer to this.

People just go way too far in the other direction and claim there's no defense at all. That's ridiculous. Forget about three-pointers for a second. The league as a whole is shooting 50% on two-pointers this season. It was 48% 20 years ago, in 1997. Isn't 50% on two-pointers the ideal balance between offense and defense anyway? And most of that difference comes from teams taking smarter shots. This season, 24.2% of field goals are two-pointers that were 10-feet or longer this year. In the first season that Basketball Reference tracked it, 2000-01, that number was 39%. Do you want to see more mid-range jumpers? If so, might I direct you to college basketball? Because that seems more your speed. Or is the problem that the league isn't tough anymore and everything gets called a foul? Because that's empirically wrong. Teams shoot an average of 23.3 free throws per game this season. In 1996-97 it was 25.3. They're just making more of them because, you know, the players are better.

I just don't understand where this hatred comes from. What is worse about this? What has generally happened is that the most boring parts of basketball (isolation, post ups, mid range jumpers) are being phased out in favor of smarter plays that happen to be more entertaining. What is bad about that?

Argue about the ratings and what the rights were worth all you want. It's totally naive in either direction to predict what the next deal will look like. The media landscape is increasingly digital and ESPN/Turner haven't figured out how to monetize that fully yet when it comes to airing games online or creating revenue from short highlights. The league is growing faster internationally than any other sport on Earth and is going to have significantly more total fans by the end of this deal than it has now. It's ridiculous to suggest you know what the media landscape is going to look like eight years from now. Eight years ago we were just getting Twitter, DVR wasn't ubiquitous, NBA League Pass was in its infancy and didn't yet have a digital component. The media landscape as a whole is completely different now than it was then, and it's going to be completely different eight years from now as well.

But regardless, I don't care all that much about the ratings. I care about having an entertaining, competitive and stylistically diverse league, which we absolutely do. Arguing otherwise is just intentional contrarianism.

Heediot
03-17-2017, 06:19 PM
I love that you feel you can condescend to me for enjoying something it is pretty universally enjoyed. It's such a masochistic approach to this as well, this idea that a more entertaining league is somehow a less compelling competitive product. Why? Why are they mutually exclusive? Nobody seems able to explain to me why the boring slog that was old school basketball is better than what we have now. Why is isolation more noble than this? Why are 7-footers taking jump hooks while everyone else watches better for the league than having an all time high in passing? Why is a defense heavy league better than an offense heavy league? Nobody seems to have a legitimate answer to this.

People just go way too far in the other direction and claim there's no defense at all. That's ridiculous. Forget about three-pointers for a second. The league as a whole is shooting 50% on two-pointers this season. It was 48% 20 years ago, in 1997. Isn't 50% on two-pointers the ideal balance between offense and defense anyway? And most of that difference comes from teams taking smarter shots. This season, 24.2% of field goals are two-pointers that were 10-feet or longer this year. In the first season that Basketball Reference tracked it, 2000-01, that number was 39%. Do you want to see more mid-range jumpers? If so, might I direct you to college basketball? Because that seems more your speed. Or is the problem that the league isn't tough anymore and everything gets called a foul? Because that's empirically wrong. Teams shoot an average of 23.3 free throws per game this season. In 1996-97 it was 25.3. They're just making more of them because, you know, the players are better.

I just don't understand where this hatred comes from. What is worse about this? What has generally happened is that the most boring parts of basketball (isolation, post ups, mid range jumpers) are being phased out in favor of smarter plays that happen to be more entertaining. What is bad about that?

Argue about the ratings and what the rights were worth all you want. It's totally naive in either direction to predict what the next deal will look like. The media landscape is increasingly digital and ESPN/Turner haven't figured out how to monetize that fully yet when it comes to airing games online or creating revenue from short highlights. The league is growing faster internationally than any other sport on Earth and is going to have significantly more total fans by the end of this deal than it has now. It's ridiculous to suggest you know what the media landscape is going to look like eight years from now. Eight years ago we were just getting Twitter, DVR wasn't ubiquitous, NBA League Pass was in its infancy and didn't yet have a digital component. The media landscape as a whole is completely different now than it was then, and it's going to be completely different eight years from now as well.

But regardless, I don't care all that much about the ratings. I care about having an entertaining, competitive and stylistically diverse league, which we absolutely do. Arguing otherwise is just intentional contrarianism.

With the stats and numbers available of shot charts and selection percentages, I don't think there will be less 3's if fiba and euro ball are any indication. There is still post play in Europe but there are way more 3's. There is less easy drives to the basket though as the lane tends to be more clogged like college, but there are instances of drive and kicks.

Ball movement is mostly the norm in Europe and even though teams take 3's at a certain rate the close outs and help defense forces offense to be more crisp and creative to get cleaner looks.

Personally, I still believe teams will launch threes with the current rules, the 90's rules or international rules. Launching three's and even ball movement to create spacing to launch them is just the evolution of the game, thanks to the data available like Chronz mentioned. I think iso ball has become less and less, but will always be a part of the game.

As for what's more entertaining, it's different strokes for different folks. I can watch nba rules or other rules, I just prefer rules that don't bias towards certain skill positions or certain facets of the game (offense) like the nba intentionally does.

da ThRONe
03-17-2017, 06:52 PM
The 3pt line is one of the last things that needs to be changed.

COOLbeans
03-17-2017, 10:40 PM
I love that you feel you can condescend to me for enjoying something it is pretty universally enjoyed. It's such a masochistic approach to this as well, this idea that a more entertaining league is somehow a less compelling competitive product. Why? Why are they mutually exclusive? Nobody seems able to explain to me why the boring slog that was old school basketball is better than what we have now. Why is isolation more noble than this? Why are 7-footers taking jump hooks while everyone else watches better for the league than having an all time high in passing? Why is a defense heavy league better than an offense heavy league? Nobody seems to have a legitimate answer to this.

People just go way too far in the other direction and claim there's no defense at all. That's ridiculous. Forget about three-pointers for a second. The league as a whole is shooting 50% on two-pointers this season. It was 48% 20 years ago, in 1997. Isn't 50% on two-pointers the ideal balance between offense and defense anyway? And most of that difference comes from teams taking smarter shots. This season, 24.2% of field goals are two-pointers that were 10-feet or longer this year. In the first season that Basketball Reference tracked it, 2000-01, that number was 39%. Do you want to see more mid-range jumpers? If so, might I direct you to college basketball? Because that seems more your speed. Or is the problem that the league isn't tough anymore and everything gets called a foul? Because that's empirically wrong. Teams shoot an average of 23.3 free throws per game this season. In 1996-97 it was 25.3. They're just making more of them because, you know, the players are better.

I just don't understand where this hatred comes from. What is worse about this? What has generally happened is that the most boring parts of basketball (isolation, post ups, mid range jumpers) are being phased out in favor of smarter plays that happen to be more entertaining. What is bad about that?

Argue about the ratings and what the rights were worth all you want. It's totally naive in either direction to predict what the next deal will look like. The media landscape is increasingly digital and ESPN/Turner haven't figured out how to monetize that fully yet when it comes to airing games online or creating revenue from short highlights. The league is growing faster internationally than any other sport on Earth and is going to have significantly more total fans by the end of this deal than it has now. It's ridiculous to suggest you know what the media landscape is going to look like eight years from now. Eight years ago we were just getting Twitter, DVR wasn't ubiquitous, NBA League Pass was in its infancy and didn't yet have a digital component. The media landscape as a whole is completely different now than it was then, and it's going to be completely different eight years from now as well.

But regardless, I don't care all that much about the ratings. I care about having an entertaining, competitive and stylistically diverse league, which we absolutely do. Arguing otherwise is just intentional contrarianism.

Isolation, postups and mid range jumpers are apart of the fabric of basketball and the removal of those moves makes the NBA an entirely different game than the original and most exciting times of watching basketball. The NBA has been desecrated which is the point. Those skill sets really showcase the individual talent of guys and when the defense is tougher guys can display more heart, and have to or they wont score.

The heart is gone from NBA basketball because of the new systems, analytics and the reliance on those things to manage all aspects of the game, including the removal of the original rules of defensive basketball. If the defense could play more physical there would have to be more skilled post players and guys who can individually breakdown a defense. To me, thats not boring its basketball.

flea
03-17-2017, 11:03 PM
Isolation, postups and mid range jumpers are apart of the fabric of basketball and the removal of those moves makes the NBA an entirely different game than the original and most exciting times of watching basketball. The NBA has been desecrated which is the point. Those skill sets really showcase the individual talent of guys and when the defense is tougher guys can display more heart, and have to or they wont score.

The heart is gone from NBA basketball because of the new systems, analytics and the reliance on those things to manage all aspects of the game, including the removal of the original rules of defensive basketball. If the defense could play more physical there would have to be more skilled post players and guys who can individually breakdown a defense. To me, thats not boring its basketball.

To be honest I think the poster you quoted is trolling most of the time. I mean he's basically saying he dislikes the game of Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Hakeem Olajuwon, Charles Barkley, Kobe Bryant, Dirk, Duncan, Drexler and virtually every other great in NBA history and that he wishes they all flopped and shot 3s like some sort of Robert Horry-like superstar-role player.

I don't think he even likes basketball.

Jeffy25
03-18-2017, 05:35 AM
Learn to defend it, don't get rid of it

Quinnsanity
03-18-2017, 06:59 PM
To be honest I think the poster you quoted is trolling most of the time. I mean he's basically saying he dislikes the game of Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Hakeem Olajuwon, Charles Barkley, Kobe Bryant, Dirk, Duncan, Drexler and virtually every other great in NBA history and that he wishes they all flopped and shot 3s like some sort of Robert Horry-like superstar-role player.

I don't think he even likes basketball.

Huh? First of all, those guys are the exception to the rule. Guys like Magic and Larry generally played team-oriented basketball. The passing on those teams was remarkable for its time. Jordan was such an exception because he was so freaking good, and Kobe got there at points as well. Barkley's fast break was one of the most exciting plays in basketball, Hakeem and Dirk's footwork were remarkable and great to watch.

There will always be a place in basketball for transcendent talents like that. When Jordan was at his peak watching him create buckets out of thin air was remarkable. You know what wasn't? Watching lesser players on every other team try and fail to emulate that, because that's what basketball was at that point. Hakeem post ups were a thing of beauty. Tree Rollins post ups were not. You could build an efficient offense around Kobe isolations because he was good enough at them. You could not build an efficient offense around Monta Ellis isolations, or Ben Gordon isolations, or Corey Maggette isolations, or Ricky Davis isolations.

Now we get a league that's far more team-oriented, that prizes ball movement and smart shots, and that's a bad thing? You're telling me you'd rather watch Carmelo jab step seven times than the Warriors zip the ball around the court?

There's still a place in the league for people who are exceptionally good at old school skills. LaMarcus Aldridge is still a superstar as a mid-range shooter. There are still some exceptional isolation players left, and guys like Giannis, Jimmy Butler and Andrew Wiggins have turned themselves into great scorers without needing to shoot 3's. Those guys are never going away. But we don't have to suffer through entire offenses built around Al Jefferson anymore, or Jason Richardson, or anyone who grinds the game to a halt just so they can put up a bad shot. Those guys can still be a part of the game, but they're rightfully no longer the main part.

What's funny is you accuse me of not liking basketball when you're the one who's openly admitting you don't like basketball. This is what basketball was meant to be. Team-oriented with lots of passing, fundamentally sound, smart shots, that's what coaches want out of their teams, that's what fans want to see, and if you don't like it go watch Joe Johnson youtube videos to remind yourself of the days of yore. Sports change. They get better as they get smarter. This is the natural evolution of basketball. Don't act all high and mighty because I, and most people, prefer it to ugly *** Dwight Howard post ups.

Oh, and you're factually wrong with this flopping nonsense. Teams shoot less free throws now than they did in the past despite taking virtually exactly as many shots close to the rim. Take this season vs. the 2001-02 season, 15 years ago. This season teams take 23.3 free throws per game and take 28.8% of their shots within three feet of the rim. In '01-'02, they took 23.8 free throws per game and took 28.7% of their shots within three feet of the rim. If you think that's an outlier, you're wrong, in '00-'01 teams took 24.9 free throws per game on only 27.3% of shots coming from within three feet of the hoop, so they were getting more calls on less shots near the hoop, and the same was true a year later than our original sample ('02-'03, 24.4 free throws on 28.6% of shots being within three feet of the hoop). If you're thinking that guys are just getting insane amounts of fouls called on three's, that's really only true of James Harden and Lou Williams (https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/5nd5by/james_harden_king_of_3pa_fouls_indepth/). Otherwise, rates are pretty consistent, the more three-pointers taken, the more fouls are called on three-pointers, but on a per-three pointer basis, besides Harden and Lou Will, there hasn't been some great jump. If you want to hate on Harden and Lou Will be my guest, I despise Lou and am pretty split on Harden, but don't pretend that this is some epidemic when it really isn't. The notion that guys are just flopping left and right and getting every call is factually wrong.

flea
03-18-2017, 08:27 PM
I'll give you credit in that you're a high-effort troll. I'm not going to wade through that post to figure out why you think post-ups and midrange are bad but somehow make an exception for basically every star. If you like watching the Princeton offense so much then why don't you just watch Ivy League college ball? NBA is for the stars, or at least it was. Now it's for youtube highlight reels.

Quinnsanity
03-18-2017, 10:54 PM
I'll give you credit in that you're a high-effort troll. I'm not going to wade through that post to figure out why you think post-ups and midrange are bad but somehow make an exception for basically every star. If you like watching the Princeton offense so much then why don't you just watch Ivy League college ball? NBA is for the stars, or at least it was. Now it's for youtube highlight reels.

I make exceptions for stars because they're so good at it. That's common sense. I don't like watching isolation or post ups, but there's no part of basketball that's boring if it's done at a high enough level. Watching Hakeem dream shake was really fun. Watching Dwight Howard struggle with basic footwork and put up an ugly jump hook is not. I don't think I'm breaking new ground with that.

One of the great things about this new NBA is that those less entertaining plays still exist, but generally only with people who do them well. Only seven players in the league isolate more than 4.5 times per game this season. Five of them were All Stars this year, a sixth was last year and the seventh is Harrison Barnes, which isn't the worst floor to have. Post ups tell a similar tale, with only the best guys taking a lot of them. For those who can do these things well? Meh, I can live with them. But in the past, so many people were doing them poorly that it made basketball a lot less entertaining. Replacing bad isolations and post ups, plays that are inherently individual and ineffective, with selfless and efficient team basketball is not a bad thing. If you're honestly saying that more passing is a bad thing for basketball, I don't know what to tell you.

FOXHOUND
03-19-2017, 06:51 AM
No, for the same reason if the offensive player runs into the a defensive player standing still with his feet set and the offensive player had enough time to avoid it (more than a step). The defender was already in the way, how can you call a foul on the defender?

Same deal, the defender's hand/arm was already in the way, why call a foul because you decided to run into the defender who was set?

Currently, it's a dumb technicality they're calling but I don't believe it's in the spirit of what a foul is supposed to be. The broadcasters have been criticizing it for years, eventually it will get changed.

I don't think that example works. In play A, your example, the offensive player is moving and invading the defenders space. In play B, the Harden special, the defender reaching in is invading the offensive players space. Players have the right to their space, which is why things like verticality exist. Therefore, as long as he's pulling straight up, the defenders arm raking the shooters arm should be called a foul every time. If you're going to reach in you better have your hand on or over the ball. You reach, I teach.

The old Durant special, where he and other stars would jump into the defender, is more like your example play. That has almost been fully eliminated as they made an effort to focus on correcting that before last season.

FOXHOUND
03-19-2017, 07:50 AM
Ball handling is a skill. Ball handling in the NBA is not so much anymore because playing perimeter defense is all but illegal. You have to let the ball handler go where ever he wants. It used to take skill just to get to the paint in the NBA (not score, just physically get to the paint with the ball). Now literally any player on a 10 day contract can do it Why do you think every team runs P&R offense almost every possession? Nobody realized that P&R was a thing until Nash's Suns came along? No, it's because it's easy. You don't have to be Stockton anymore to base your offense around what used to be a gimmicky feature of Ivy League college teams.

Shooting is a skill, but shooting in the NBA is basically the same as shooting in a HORSE game now because rules say that there is some magic tunnel where you're entitled not to be even breathed upon if you're a shooter (note this doesn't apply to post players or slashers). And if you're Harden that magic tunnel extends into where the defender is because he should know better than try to defend superstars. And why? Do you watch the NBA to see people shoot jumpers? You can get a front row seat to that at your local park.

Take it as a Knicks fan who has watched some of the worst PG play in the NBA over the last decade, it's not as easy to get into the paint as you think lol. If you want to say ball handling is less skilled than it used to be then I would point to the leeway they give ball handlers on palms and carries now vs then. All things being equal, the ball handling skills put on display by Kyrie Irving on the regular is as good as anyone from back then - if not better.

I think teams run the P&R now because there is more space to do so and they're just simply better at it. What makes the P&R more difficult to defend now is 100% attributed to the raise in skill from players. The skill of spot up shooters is what creates the extra space. In the P&R, ball handlers are more deft as pull up shooters and craftier passers. Bigs are either more athletic - alley oop machine DeAndre Jordan, for example - or have an insane shooting skill set which allows them to pop as deep as 3 point range now a days - Kristaps Porzingis.

Back in the day, all you mainly had to defend was a rolling big and occasionally a skillful shooting PG as many were not much scorers. Today, any PG worth their salt can pull up and shoot off the dribble and the best can do it at 3 point range. Bigs are now a threat to set up for a spot up shot as much as they are to dive. There are still teams who defend the P&R very well, usually because they have very physical wings and/or very athletic bigs, and there are teams who are horrendous at it and it's usually because they don't have the talent to do so.

The talk about hand checking gets overblown. Hand checking was not eliminated in 2004-05, it was eliminated in 1978-79. This is the language of the rule change in 1978-79,


1978-79
• Clarification added to prohibit hand-checking through “rigid enforcement” of rule allowing a defensive player to retain contact with his opponent so long as he does not impede his opponent’s progress.

Here's a clip of a player being called for hand checking - this isn't from the 2000's.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23m25FXgK-Y

It was also altered in 94-95.


1994-95
• Hand-checking eliminated from the end line in the backcourt to the opposite foul line.

Know what else was altered in 94-95?


1994-95
• Shortened the three-point line (22 feet in the corners extending to 23 feet, nine inches at the top of the key) to a uniform 22 feet around the basket.

Imagine that happening with today's shooters? They moved it back in 97-98, but plenty of players saw a very noticeable uptick in their 3 point shooting during that time.

What they did in 2004-05 was make a change to eliminate the guiding hand and to focus on better enforcing the existing rules. Even then, while they were anal about it at first, players get that guiding hand in there a fair amount today. Did players get away with legit hand checks at times in the 80's/90's? Of course, just like players now get away with the guiding hand and even hand checking at times. The other rule changes in 04-05 have had a bigger impact than the change in interpretation to the existing hand check rule.

Still, it's not just the rules. If you reverted all rules to the 90's it's not going to change the fact that shooters are far more skilled than ever. There is no benefit to move players into the mid range area so it just wouldn't happen. Scoring is way up from the early 00's and the 90's but so is talent and skill. What about the 80's?

The most infamous defense of the 1980's was the Bad Boy Pistons. Let's look at their back-to-back championship years.

1988-89 - Defensive Rating of 104.7, 3rd best in NBA. Utah was 1st at 101.5. League avg - 107.8
1989-90 - Defensive Rating of 103.5, 2nd best in NBA. Houston was 1st at 103.4. League avg - 108.1

2016-17 - San Antonio Spurs currently leads the NBA with a Defensive Rating of 103.5. League avg - 108.6

While there has been a scoring uptick this season, it seems like this is not something unseen. The 80's has many times been called the "Golden Era" of the NBA. A time when players were more skilled and had better fundamentals.

So, I guess we're in a new Golden Era.