Something Has Flown Over All Our Heads

[3ball]

.
MJ GOAT Pull-Up Jumpshot


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/a0d91726a38975e6c3083fb083317d39.gif


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/Jordan_Fadeaway_Hangtime_VS_En_f2e6935bf43334e8c5c 30c1b2b6489d8.gif


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/df36ffb9c60eef07f527c9dd40c12598.gif


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/Jordan_Monster_Hangtime_vs_Cel_0258c960587084ddc92 3a2b465cbd531.gif

[Milbuck]

First warning. Watch it.

[mehyaM24]

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=358346&page=4

^^^^^ you were exposed as samurai. nobody takes you seriously anymore. :facepalm

[RRR3]

Swoosh isn't 3ball.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Swoosh isn't 3ball.
kuntniva thinks he's on True Detective or something.

:oldlol:

[3ball]

.
COMMON examples of defenders helping from further distances due to spacing and defensive 3 seconds


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/fa322e569c8c0b0e413a45e58bb9e54a.gif


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/10f1c13acb043d8be838b7cd90e5c5fd.gif


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/c33b0be11565b94476f8e7a7e9902217.gif

[mehyaM24]

Swoosh isn't 3ball.
he is obsessed with jordan and always defending 3ball. i am convinced.

[Crose]

if swish is 3ball then every member of the stupid "lebron family" is the same person. and every kobe stan is the same person. and all durant fans are the same person.

[RRR3]

he is obsessed with jordan and always defending 3ball. i am convinced.
Um I've seen Swoosh disagree with 3ball. Try again.

[SamuraiSWISH]

3ball is one of the most annoying posters here.

[chazzy]

he is obsessed with jordan and always defending 3ball. i am convinced.
Ok, then you're dubeta

[SugarHill]

lol bipolar rat

[mehyaM24]

if swish is 3ball then every member of the stupid "lebron family" is the same person. and every kobe stan is the same person. and all durant fans are the same person.
how so? swish and 3ball agree too much for them not to be the same person. i dont think kuniva is trolling either.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=348428&page=2

and countless more. he is 3ball i just didnt think about it until now.

[SamuraiSWISH]

lol bipolar rat
Along with this try too hard comedian. Get a job Moe

[RRR3]

Mehya and dubeta agree too much for them not to be the same person. I don't think chazzy is trolling either.

[mehyaM24]

Mehya and dubeta agree too much for them not to be the same person. I don't think chazzy is trolling either.
i have never called dubeta a good poster. nice try dingleberry.

[3ball]

So..... nobody cares that the old defensive 3 second rule says defenders only need to be guarding a player that's adjacent to the paint to stay in the lane, and adjacent is frequently out of "armslength" reach, the requirement for today's players to stay in the lane.

[oarabbus]

So..... nobody cares that the old defensive 3 second rule says defenders only need to be guarding a player that's adjacent to the paint to stay in the lane, and adjacent is frequently out of "armslength" reach, the requirement for today's players to stay in the lane.

Nope, nobody cares :confusedshrug:

[3ball]

Today's defensive 3 seconds rule requires defenders to stay out of the lane, unless they are within "armslength" of an opponent.. http://www.nba.com/nba101/misunderstood_0708.html


The original rule from 1982 said a defender could stay in the lane if his man was "adjacent to the paint": (http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_history.html)


1981-82
"Defender on post player is allowed in defensive three-second area (A post player is any player adjacent to paint)".

So just by substituting the rule's own parenthetical reference, the rule translates EXACTLY to: "Defender on player adjacent to the paint is allowed in defensive 3 second area."


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/b209aeddf6bfaaa9fcaed8eea3c72c65.gif


in this clip, Klay Thompson's dad (#43 in the middle of lane) would get a tech after 3 seconds in today's game because his man is out of "armslength".... but back then, he was legal because his man was "adjacent to the paint", which was the only requirement at the time - as you can see, "adjacent to the paint" (outside the paint) is out of "armslength" reach... also, notice how there is no need for Thompson to tippy-toe in and out of the paint.


in previous eras, guys didn't have to worry about staying out of the lane or tippy-toeing - the 3 seconds rule was very simple back then: as long as their man was "adjacent to the paint", defenders could stay in the lane... so usually, they could camp in the lane for the entire possession because the paint is huge, and "adjacent to the paint" covers a ton of ground... Furthermore, "adjacent to the paint" could mean right next to the paint, a few feet outside the paint, or all the way out to the 3-point line - defenders routinely camped in the paint while their man was behind the 3-point line (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10695139&postcount=1).

contrastingly, today's rule makes sure defenders can physically touch their man to stay in the lane, by requiring defenders be within "armslength" of an opponent - since players that are "adjacent to the paint", or outside the paint, are OUT of armslength reach to defenders inside the paint, players in today's game are not allowed to stay in the lane if their man is outside the paint.

[Asukal]

well, at least the proof is now out there in the public domain for anytime misguided fans want to think the two defensive 3 second rules are comparable in any way.

Man you still at it? :facepalm

You sound butthurt so let it go. :confusedshrug:

[G0ATbe]

Didn't read. GOATbe >>>>>>>>>>>>> MJ.

[3ball]

Man you still at it? :facepalm

You sound butthurt so let it go. :confusedshrug:
that's impossible when people keep claiming today's paint defense is better... ignorant fans are like mosquitos... can't ignore them.

[Fire Colangelo]

Doesn't change the fact that zone defense was not allowed back then.

[3ball]

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/728b10a2dca8fca89dca89f115243b29.gif


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/51d9024d465f70980f24451de018c34f.gif

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/7e44d85387f4182e201cdf91a4c77847.gif

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/c2bdc97f50bdc6f9fb0d44ff4f53f8f6.gif

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/9b10ddb7e1e76caea618aa30238c52dd.gif

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/9452b82cec96338b7f838b67c9198694.gif

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/b9c0187c5dc3ee97acbcc67731478c5e.gif


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/d49cc288b5ba52bf1187c11a3c0912f3.gif


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/195978136246ae632e28024e8446e0f3.gif

[3ball]

Doesn't change the fact that zone defense was not allowed back then.

but they could camp in the paint, so the paint defense was better.

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/71cf54bff7eeb11e7ad0da2af5d3536f.gif


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/f146c70a7004553934af954360a444b2.gif

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/d6c47d055cfff266f26bde61297986cf.gif

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/5d5e26c895c980290e7fd57547827d59.gif

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/6c822484c69a1826b1c1a01515bfae5c.gif

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/23853678fb5e0af755c3f831665324ee.gif

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/d7821303425e7393bf4711800224841e.gif


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/54cd4db17a9330ca58b8e33a0b6f9b2f.gif

[Fire Colangelo]

but they could camp in the paint, so the paint defense was better.

Yeah, and it's harder to get into the paint in today's game. What's your point?

[3ball]

Yeah, and it's harder to get into the paint in today's game.

What's your point?


My point is: it was just as hard to score in previous eras as it is today because defense over the years has been a zero-sum game - i.e. where the defense gained by being able to play a quasi-zone, it lost it's ability to camp in the paint indefinitely (or play physical).

The zero-sum game is reflected in the stats... The stat measuring how hard it is to score - league-wide ORtg - is the same today as it was 30 years ago.

i don't think it has ever been the nba's intention to give a blatant advantage to one side (defense or offense) over the other; but the league has definitely tried to influence the style of play.

Think about how simple the original 3-seconds rule was, and was meant to be: anytime your man is "adjacent" to the paint, you can stay in the lane.

The paint is a huge area - the lane is 16 feet... No one's wingspan is even half of that, so someone standing outside the paint is unlikely to be within armslength of a defender who is inside the paint - so most of the time in today's game, if your man is outside the paint, you can't be in the paint... but it was the opposite in previous eras - i'm surprised we didn't figure this out sooner.... and the "adjacent" word in the previous rule mean right next to the paint, a few feet outside the paint, or all the way out to the 3-point line.

[Asukal]

that's impossible when people keep claiming today's paint defense is better... ignorant fans are like mosquitos... can't ignore them.

Only these kids really believe that. If you need to make 10+ threads to prove a point then you look like the one losing the arguments. :confusedshrug:

[3ball]

Only these kids really believe that.

If you need to make 10+ threads to prove a point then you look like the one losing the arguments.


i'm not though, so it's fine.

[Fire Colangelo]

My point is: it was just as hard to score in previous eras as it is today because defense over the years has been a zero-sum game - i.e. where the defense gained by being able to play a quasi-zone, it lost it's ability to camp in the paint indefinitely (or play physical).

The zero-sum game is reflected in the stats... The stat measuring how hard it is to score - league-wide ORtg - is the same today as it was 30 years ago.

i don't think it has ever been the nba's intention to give a blatant advantage to one side (defense or offense) over the other; but the league has definitely tried to influence the style of play.

Think about how simple the original 3-seconds rule was, and was meant to be: anytime your man is "adjacent" to the paint, you can stay in the lane.

The paint is a huge area - the lane is 16 feet... No one's wingspan is even half of that, so someone standing outside the paint is unlikely to be within armslength of a defender who is inside the paint - so most of the time in today's game, if your man is outside the paint, you can't be in the paint... but it was the opposite in previous eras - i'm surprised we didn't figure this out sooner.... and the "adjacent" word in the previous rule mean right next to the paint, a few feet outside the paint, or all the way out to the 3-point line.

I agree that it's been a zero sum game.

Realistically, it's harder to pack the paint than it was before, even if you were allowed to. Think about it, players like Kevin Love, Dirk, Chris Bosh, etc would draw their defender out of the paint regardless of whether you're allowed to camp inside the paint or not.