Question: If you took the 3 point line out...

[Showtime80']

If you took the 3 point line out of the current NBA, taking into account the death of low post play and plethora of shoot first PG's how much would the league scoring average plummet and which players would be more affected? Would it create the necessity to go back to more fundamental inside out basketball or would the current trend of drive or jumpers prevail while teams score in the 70's?

Would like to hear some opinions

[Velocirap31]

They should do this and make a dunk worth 3 points. Could you imagine the scene as a team is down by 3 points and needs a dunk with seconds left to tie? Seems childish, but would be pretty cool to see.

[Mass Debator]

They should do this and make a dunk worth 3 points. Could you imagine the scene as a team is down by 3 points and needs a dunk with seconds left to tie? Seems childish, but would be pretty cool to see.
That'd be pretty cool. lol

The defense would just pack the paint though. The offense would need to fling one player up like a trampoline or something.

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view1/4757556/dwight-howard-superman-o.gif

Would this be worth 2 or 3?

[Rose'sACL]

if you play with current defensive rules without a 3 point line then even if you bring prime shaq and hakeem back, the scoring would suffer a lot.
most good defensive teams would hold teams to 80 points a game.

spacing has become way more important now because current rules make it very hard to dominate in the post for long stretches.

bigs with good post game are rare because they notice even before college that getting good at shooting mid range jumpers is almost as good as getting good in the post with current rules in the nba plus you don't get as physically tired shooting jumpers as compared to banging in the post. big with better post game will not make a come back unless rules changes occur which make banging in the post more rewarding than shooting mid range jumpers while spacing the floor for other players.

[Showtime80']

Actually that does not sound have bad! Take toe flagrant foul rule out and let that paint turn blood red!

What would you think of only putting the line in for the last 3 to 5 minutes of each quarter only?

[ISHGoat]

They should do this and make a dunk worth 3 points. Could you imagine the scene as a team is down by 3 points and needs a dunk with seconds left to tie? Seems childish, but would be pretty cool to see.

as a fan of the game, i would like to see this.

so you have to try to block the shot, because it is worth more, but if you try and fail and foul, BAM 4 POINT PLAY.

part of the body must touch the rim for it to count as a dunk. there can be a sensor on the rim that detects when it is a 'dunk' vs 'throw-in'.

[Velocirap31]

as a fan of the game, i would like to see this.

so you have to try to block the shot, because it is worth more, but if you try and fail and foul, BAM 4 POINT PLAY.

part of the body must touch the rim for it to count as a dunk. there can be a sensor on the rim that detects when it is a 'dunk' vs 'throw-in'.

:cheers: It's all coming together. This makes sense.

[ButterFace]

That'd be pretty cool. lol

The defense would just pack the paint though. The offense would need to fling one player up like a trampoline or something.

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view1/4757556/dwight-howard-superman-o.gif

Would this be worth 2 or 3?

Though I consider this a dunk, I think to make it objective you would have to say the hand touches the rim.

[Showtime80']

That's were I disagree Rose's ACL.

The NBA changed the rules in 2002 but the erosion in skillful post play started to appear way before that. Like I said in another thread, Tim Duncan was the last true back to the basket low post 4/5 and he came in 1996! What happened between then and 2002 when the "old" rules were still in place and still no truly great low post centers were coming into the league?

To me the decay started WAY before the rule changes. The NBA has just used the rules excuse to explain the lack of true centers.

And again, why could college basketball produce so many great centers for 50 years with a true zone and no 3 point line to promote spacing?

To me the attitude towards post play changed and I blame the MJ marketing machine and Kevin Garnet. Those two factors altered the perception of the old school big man permanently and NOT in a good way!

[iamgine]

They should do this and make a dunk worth 3 points. Could you imagine the scene as a team is down by 3 points and needs a dunk with seconds left to tie? Seems childish, but would be pretty cool to see.
There'd be a lot more hard fouls and people would get injured left and right.

[Rose'sACL]

That's were I disagree Rose's ACL.

The NBA changed the rules in 2002 but the erosion in skillful post play started to appear way before that. Like I said in another thread, Tim Duncan was the last true back to the basket low post 4/5 and he came in 1996! What happened between then and 2002 when the "old" rules were still in place and still no truly great low post centers were coming into the league?

To me the decay started WAY before the rule changes. The NBA has just used the rules excuse to explain the lack of true centers.

And again, why could college basketball produce so many great centers for 50 years with a true zone and no 3 point line to promote spacing?

To me the attitude towards post play changed and I blame the MJ marketing machine and Kevin Garnet. Those two factors altered the perception of the old school big man permanently and NOT in a good way!
because almost all good young players want to get to nba.they want to shape their game which will help them the most in the nba and not in college. winning in college is not their top priority......it is more of a hurdle if anything.
also, may be there was a few years without good big men with back to the basket play but it wasn't too long and may be it was just a few years drought if not for rule changes. it happens with every position but with big men it has stayed the same because rule changes don't make it worth it.

[Rose'sACL]

There'd be a lot more hard fouls and people would get injured left and right.
also, dunk is such a high efficiency shot that you would rather foul the guy and let him shoot 3 free throws than dunk it.
even open 3 pointers with great shooters like we have today are not close to being as sure shot as a dunk.
if i am a coach then i tell my player to foul instead of dunking because you can't miss a open dunk but you can miss a open 3 pointers. defending a 3 pointer also rarely cause a serious injury but fouling every player who is close to dunking(3 points) will sooner or later result in a lot of hurt players as most guys will try to dunk instead of laying it in.

[Showtime80']

I see your point but I feel the rule changes is just an easy cop out to explain the situation.

I dated 1996 as the last year that a true great classic center came into the league but I can take it back to 1992 as well when Shaq and Zo came in! Who came in between 1992 and 1996?

A lot people say the 90's were the "golden age of centers" so why only 3 great classic big man came into the league in that decade when the old rules were still in place and playing inside out ball was still the norm?

Wasn't it worthwhile to play like a "true big" in that decade going into the NBA? or did the "I wanna be like Mike" syndrome already started to creep around the potential big men coming up?