Analytics: 3pt shot and distance from nearest defender

[GIF REACTION]

http://www.sloansportsconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/2014-SSAC-How-to-Get-an-Open-Shot.pdf

Good read and gives a real good insight into how deep analytics in the modern game has gone...

This isn't really telling us anything that we don't already know (Open shots will be made at a higher %)

But it is interesting to see some stats behind it, especially the 3pt shot, to which so many old school minded posters on this forum don't see the value in...

There are some graphs on the start of page 2, showing 3pt FG% and distance from nearest defender...


Figure 1. (a) As the distance of the nearest defender to the shooter increases, so does the 3-point shooting percentage. When
the defender is more than 6 feet away, the shooting percentage is 40%, and increases to over 43% when the defender is more
than 9 feet away at the release point. (b) Conversely, when the defender is closer to the defender the shooting percentage
drops. When a defender is within 6 feet, the shooting percentage is approximately 32.5%. However, when a defender is
within 6 feet 0.6 seconds before the shot it drops to 26.6%

Open 3 pointers are absolutely lethal, it's no wonder why pretty much all of the top offenses of recent have shot so many of them... It is a wonderful tool in an offense, and we do not need all 5 players on the court being "fundamental" as Showtime80' would put it. These elite offenses are hitting quality looks at upwards of 40%+ which is simply lethal efficiency

[fpliii]

Interesting stuff, thanks for sharing.

Somewhat related, you hear a lot from fans how they hate how short the corner three is, and how they wish the line was extended to a full semi-circle. This article from awhile back illustrates that it's not about the shorter distance, but the fact that the corner three is on average going to be more open of a shot:

http://nyloncalculus.com/2014/11/01/geometry-distance-corner-3s/

[3ball]

Open 3 pointers are absolutely lethal, it's no wonder why pretty much all of the top offenses of recent have shot so many of them...


That's why pace is so much slower today than the 2-pointer basketball of previous eras - 3-point shots need to be OPEN, otherwise their efficiency craters... Accordingly, you need to run more offense to get open 3-point looks - that's the point of running offense - to get good looks.

But midrange and paint shots are different - their efficiency DOESN'T crater when contested - a good midrange or paint player is accustomed to making shots with defenders draped all over - contested shots is the nature of 2-point shooting, so less offense needs to be ran..

That's why previous eras ran less boring, structured offense that slowed the pace down - they just ran up and down and took contested shot after contested shot - they played off of basketball instincts and true skill, rather than manufactured offense created on a clip board.. When you don't need to run a bunch of boring, predictable offense to get open shots, the game is more free-flowing and instinctive, rather than organized, boring and marching-band-looking..
.

[GIF REACTION]

Interesting stuff, thanks for sharing.

Somewhat related, you hear a lot from fans how they hate how short the corner three is, and how they wish the line was extended to a full semi-circle. This article from awhile back illustrates that it's not about the shorter distance, but the fact that the corner three is on average going to be more open of a shot:

http://nyloncalculus.com/2014/11/01/geometry-distance-corner-3s/
Good article

http://nyloncalculus.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2014/11/Shot-vs-Distance.png

After seeing stuff like this, I can see why they teams are so crazy about the 3 today

[GIF REACTION]

That's why pace is so much slower today than the 2-pointer basketball of previous eras - 3-point shots need to be open, otherwise their efficiency craters... Accordingly, you need to run more offense to get open 3-point looks - that's the point of running offense - to get good looks.

But midrange and paint shots are different - their efficiency DOESN'T crater when contested - a good midrange or paint player is accustomed to making shots with defenders draped all over - contested shots is the nature of 2-point shooting, so less offense needs to be ran.. That's why previous eras ran less structured offense that slowed the pace down - they just ran up and down and took contested shot after contested shot - they played based more on basketball instincts and true skill, rather than manufactured offense created on a clip board.. When you don't need to run a bunch of boring, predictable offense to get open shots, the game is more free-flowing and instinctive, rather than organized, boring and marching-band-looking..

you layers are ACCUSTOMED to ttaak midrange and paint shots back when the 3-point line wasn't used,

Can you provide evidence for this? I HIGHLY doubt it

[3ball]

Can you provide evidence for this? I HIGHLY doubt it
The efficiency of any shot will decline when contested, but midrange and paint shots don't decline nearly as much as 3-pointers.. There is data on this - but just think about it - Most paint shots ARE contested.. Midrange too.

The closer a shot is to the hoop, the more it can withstand a contest without the efficiency dropping as much... Anyone - and I mean ANYONE who has played basketball will tell you this.. And anyone that isn't keenly aware of this has simply NOT played basketball and honestly, has a very shallow understanding of the game.

Btw, I wanted to add to what I said before - as I said, less offense needs to be run to obtain midrange and paint shots... However - in addition - since defenders aren't guarding the 3-point line, they run to the PAINT in transition, so transition shots were more contested - watch any old game - they're running up and down and taking contested shots in transition over and over.
.

[GIF REACTION]

An open shot and a contested shot from 18 feet is still going to dip quite a bit in %

[3ball]

An open shot and a contested shot from 18 feet is still going to dip quite a bit in %
The closer a shot is to the hoop, the more it can withstand a contest without the efficiency dropping as much

There's data on this, but it's not even necessary - just think about it - most paint shots ARE contested.. Midrange too... And anyone - and I mean ANYONE who has played basketball will tell you that shots closer to the basket can handle constests better... And anyone that isn't keenly aware of this has simply NOT played basketball and honestly, has a very shallow understanding of the game.

Btw, I wanted to add something to what I said before - as I said, less offense needs to be run to obtain midrange and paint shots... However - in addition - since defenders aren't guarding the 3-point line, they run to the PAINT in transition, so transition shots were more contested - watch any old game - they're running up and down and taking contested shots in transition over and over.

[fpliii]

Somewhat related, check this link out guys:

http://www.vantagesports.com/story/VEkOBCgAACcARDvz/everything-you-need-to-know-about-shot-selection

[GIF REACTION]

18 feet is a long way out

For reference

Corner 3 is 22 feet

And funny enough, in the 2014 season corner 3's were made at a higher % than 22 feet 2 pointers

A mid range shot from 16+ ft is still going to crater significantly when contested

[GIF REACTION]

Somewhat related, check this link out guys:

http://www.vantagesports.com/story/VEkOBCgAACcARDvz/everything-you-need-to-know-about-shot-selection
That is very nice

Pretty much everything there

[3ball]

That is very nice

Pretty much everything there
Most paint shots (which includes midrange) are highly contested - they're far more contested than three-pointers, yet their fg% is much higher than 3-pointers.

That proves paint and midrange shots handle contests better than 3-pointers.. If 3-pointers were as contested as paint shots, players would shoot 16% from three or something ridiculous like that.

Again, the 22 three-pointers attempted by today's teams slows the game down tremendously, since those looks have to be FAR more open than paint and midrange shots, so more boring offense needs to be ran to get those open looks.. Trust me - if the 3-point line were removed, teams would start running up and down again, taking contested shot after contested shot like the old days.

[GIF REACTION]

What are you suggesting?

It really isn't that simple, winning is the most important factor...

An increase in pace is usually an increase in turnovers, which gives your opposition more net possessions

[3ball]

Somewhat related, check this link out guys:

http://www.vantagesports.com/story/VEkOBCgAACcARDvz/everything-you-need-to-know-about-shot-selection
what constitutes a "contested shot"

the catch-and-shoot midrange shots are more contested than catch-and-shoot 3-pointers.

[GIF REACTION]

what constitutes a "contested shot"

the catch-and-shoot midrange shots are more contested than catch-and-shoot 3-pointers.
Probably, seeing as it is closer relatively to the basket

I'm not sure if they make the "guarded" and "contested" categories based on specific closest defender distance?

[fpliii]

what constitutes a "contested shot"

the catch-and-shoot midrange shots are more contested than catch-and-shoot 3-pointers.
Vantage's definition is a defender within three feet and hands up.

[3ball]

What are you suggesting?


Even though today's game takes 22 threes per game, Flpiii's article said the most frequent shot is off-the-dribble midrange, which you obviously don't need offense to run..

Clearly, back when they only attempted 2 threes per game, they took a lot more off-the-dribble midrange, so less offense needed to be run, which sped up the pace.

^^^^ There... I proved teams took more contested midrange in previous eras and therefore didn't need to run as much offense to get those shots, which resulted in faster pace.

[GIF REACTION]

It's a two way street remember

Playing at a faster pace gives your opposition more possessions

[3ball]

Vantage's definition is a defender within three feet and hands up.


Here's the problem: it's standard for paint and midrange shots to be taken with defenders draped all over - these shots are usually taken with lots of physical contact in a borderline AND1 situation - but that ISN'T standard for 3-pointers.

Paint and midrange shots are contested much more heavily, while still being viable from an efficiency standpoint - 3-pointers would not be viable if they were contested the same way midrange and paint shots are.

Since paint and midrange shots are still viable options despite a much higher level of contest, you don't need to run as much offense to get those shots, which is why eras that took these shots exclusively had a much faster pace.

If the 3-point line were removed, teams would start running up and down again, taking contested shot after contested shot like the old days.. Since heavily contested paint/midrange shots are the norm, why would teams run as much offense if they were seeking these shots exclusively??... Obviously, they wouldn't.

[fpliii]

Here's the problem: it's standard for paint and midrange shots to be taken with defenders draped all over - these shots are usually taken with lots of physical contact in a borderline AND1 situation - but that ISN'T standard for 3-pointers.

Paint and midrange shots are contested much more heavily, while still being viable from an efficiency standpoint - 3-pointers would not be viable if they were contested the same way midrange and paint shots are.

Since paint and midrange shots are still viable options despite a much higher level of contest, you don't need to run as much offense to get those shots, which is why eras that took these shots exclusively had a much faster pace.

If the 3-point line were removed, teams would start running up and down again, taking contested shot after contested shot like the old days.. Since heavily contested paint/midrange shots are the norm, why would teams run as much offense if they were seeking these shots exclusively??... Obviously, they wouldn't.
I'm not sure if you clicked the link, but it separates into contested and open shots. So you can compare apples with apples.

It's not speaking about averages. Rather, it says of shots that are contested and aren't contested, how often heard made. It breaks down shots into off the dribble vs spotting up as well (in addition to open/contested and at rim/mid range/three).

But the article contains numerical proof that *contested* threes on a per shot basis are more valuable than *open* mid range shots (again, using the same definition of contested vs open for all shot types).

(Do note that I'm not arguing that you're right or wrong. Just provided a link. There's not really anything subjective about it so there's no need for me to take a position.)

[3ball]

Playing at a faster pace gives your opposition more possessions




But those possessions include far more paint/midrange shots, which were more highly contested.. But regardless, MJ's 2nd three-peat came in the slowest era of all time (mid-90's) and his per 100 possession stats were GOAT anyway:


JORDAN:. 43.3 pts.. 32.5 fga.. 118 ORtg.. 56.8 ts.. 2.2 oreb.. 6.1 dreb.. 7.4 ast.. 4.0 tov.. 2.7 stl.. 1.1 blk
LEBRON:. 36.5 pts.. 26.8 fga.. 114 ORtg.. 56.5 ts.. 2.0 oreb.. 9.3 dreb.. 8.6 ast.. 4.5 tov.. 2.2 stl.. 1.2 blk
DURANT:. 35.8 pts.. 25.8 fga.. 114 ORtg.. 58.3 ts.. 1.2 oreb.. 9.1 dreb.. 4.8 ast.. 4.1 tov.. 1.4 stl.. 1.5 blk
KOBE:..... 34.7 pts.. 27.7 fga.. 110 ORtg.. 54.1 ts.. 1.4 oreb.. 5.5 dreb.. 6.4 ast.. 4.0 tov.. 1.9 stl.. 0.9 blk
WADE:.... 32.2 pts.. 24.5 fga.. 108 ORtg.. 55.4 ts.. 2.0 oreb.. 5.4 dreb.. 7.1 ast.. 4.8 tov.. 2.3 stl.. 1.4 blk


Notice how MJ maintained superior efficiency despite shooting so much more.. He did exactly what Lebron or Durant did efficiency-wise, except he did MORE production at that efficiency.. So take what they did and multiply by a factor of 1.2 or something around there.. No one in history could maintain efficiency at high volume like MJ.. The gap between MJ and the others is amazing.

[3ball]

I'm not sure if you clicked the link, but it separates into contested and open shots. So you can compare apples with apples.


Vantage's definition of "contested" (within 3 feet with hands up) skews their data, because a much higher proportion of 2-pointers are shot with defenders DRAPED ALL OVER with significant physical contact, whereas that rarely happens or 3-pointers.

But yeah, I'm sure many 3-pointers are "contested" based on Vantage's criteria of the defender being within 3 feet with hands-up.. :rolleyes: .. But let's compare the proportion/frequency of fouls and AND1's on 2-pointers and 3-pointers - that will give us an idea of how much more heavily contested 2 pointers are.






But the article contains numerical proof that *contested* threes on a per shot basis are more valuable than *open* mid range shots (again, using the same definition of contested vs open for all shot types).




The argument isn't whether 3-pointers are more efficient - everyone knows they provide an extra point... The point I'm making is that 2-point attempts such as paint and midrange shots have far heavier contests than 3-point attempts - 3-pointers are almost never attempted with the kind of physical contact or borderline AND1 situations that are standard for 2-pointers.

Players have always been willing to take 2-pointers while enduring heavier contests than they'd be willing to endure for 3-pointers, which meant that the 2-point shooting eras didn't need to run as much offense to get quality looks as today's game.

The standard of settling for more heavily-contested 2-pointers in previous eras made pace faster than today's game, where teams must run more offense to get quality 3-point looks.

[fpliii]

Vantage's definition of "contested" (within 3 feet with hands up) skews their data, because a much higher proportion of 2-pointers are shot with defenders DRAPED ALL OVER with significant physical contact, whereas that rarely happens or 3-pointers.
To each his/her own. I have no problem with that definition. Three feet and hands up is awfully close. In making your arguments about illegal defense, you've said that's the strictest definition...so if you're being consistent my good man, there should be no complaints about the degree of contest.


But yeah, I'm sure many 3-pointers are "contested" based on Vantage's criteria of the defender being within 3 feet with hands-up.. :rolleyes: .. But let's compare the proportion/frequency of fouls and AND1's on 2-pointers and 3-pointers - that will give us an idea of how much more heavily contested 2 pointers are.
The dataset takes it into account. Value is measured in points per shot (which includes foul draw rate, and free throws taken), the y-axis is *not* just FG%.


The argument isn't whether 3-pointers are more efficient - everyone knows they provide an extra point... The point I'm making is that 2-point attempts such as paint and midrange shots have far heavier contests than 3-point attempts - 3-pointers are almost never attempted with the kind of physical contact or borderline AND1 situations that are standard for 2-pointers.
This dataset separates shots into close (at-rim, meaning layups, dunks, and attempts at the rim that were fouled), threes, and mid-range (everything in between). The set uses a uniform criteria for contested shots, regardless of location. Open (without a defender within three feet with his hands up) two-point shots not at the rim result in a lower value (in points per shot) than contested (*with* a defender within three feet with his hands up) threes.


Players have always been willing to take 2-pointers while enduring heavier contests than they'd be willing to endure for 3-pointers, which meant that the 2-point shooting eras didn't need to run as much offense to get open looks as today's game.

The ease of settling for more heavily-contested 2-pointers made pace faster than today's game, where teams must run more offense to get quality 3-point looks.
3ball...I have nothing against you man, but you do this shit all the time. I think you're a knowledgeable guy, but I think when you are having multiple conversations with different people at the same time, you mix up your conclusions. I didn't bring up pace or degree of offense run at all in my previous posts.

In general, you'll try and tack on conclusions at the end of some discussion (see both bolded portions), and present them as facts. Even if these things are true, the content of your post doesn't prove them definitively. When you are having a debate or any discussion, your points and evidence should logically flow from your premise to your conclusion. You can't just say "so X and Y are true, which means conclusion Z must be true", without that logical progression.

For the record, regarding the bolded, if an offense settles for sub-optimal shots, of course it will take less time to set up a shot (though that isn't just about the three, that's more about coaches becoming smarter...as you've said before, coaches in the 80s didn't have the same knowledge of coaches later on, which hindered players offensively, since their skill sets weren't optimized). But that is unrelated to the discussion you and I are having.

[chips93]

The efficiency of any shot will decline when contested, but midrange and paint shots don't decline nearly as much as 3-pointers.. There is data on this - but just think about it - Most paint shots ARE contested.. Midrange too.

Link?


The closer a shot is to the hoop, the more it can withstand a contest without the efficiency dropping as much... Anyone - and I mean ANYONE who has played basketball will tell you this.. And anyone that isn't keenly aware of this has simply NOT played basketball and honestly, has a very shallow understanding of the game.

I play semi regularly and i rarely shoot jumpers, just layupsm and i know for sure i shoot worse when there is a defender at the rim to contest.

[fpliii]

The efficiency of any shot will decline when contested, but midrange and paint shots don't decline nearly as much as 3-pointers.. There is data on this - but just think about it - Most paint shots ARE contested.. Midrange too.
Link?

Here is some research for 3ball's point:

http://i57.tinypic.com/ycqwl.png

http://i60.tinypic.com/dvghuu.png

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.0231.pdf

At-rim attempts (basis 1) are affected heavily by degree of contest (up to 1ft). In-paint attempts (basis 2) are affected further when a guy is closer (up to 1ft, though the dropoff is small after 4ft...note that these are log odds, or log[prob-make/prob-miss]). Jumpers, whether they're mid-range outside of the paint (basis 3), corner threes (basis 4), or above-the-break threes (basis 3) do not have any further meaningful dropoff in expected value after you get to that three feet range.

[fpliii]

Vantage's definition is a defender within three feet and hands up.
Here is the link to their glossary: http://www.vantagesports.com/story/VN79OCYAAJJnKXbK/vantage-stats-glossary

I was correct about contested shots:


Contested Shot: Shot defender is within 3 feet and has a hand up.

Here is their definition of open shots:


Open Shot: Shot defender is not within 5 feet of the shooter.

[3ball]

To each his/her own. I have no problem with that definition. Three feet and hands up is awfully close.



Bullshit - there's a MASSIVE difference from a defender being 3 feet away and 0-1 feet away.. Imagine a defender being 3 feet away from a someone taking a 8 foot shot and considering that "tight" defense... It obviously isn't.

If you think a 3 feet distance results in equivalent defense to 0-1 feet away - well, that's why I stopped even debating you - this kind of willful and purposeful ignorance is a testament to your disingenguous posting and willingness to say anything to support your erroneous belief.





In making your arguments about illegal defense, you've said "armslength" is the strictest definition...so if you're being consistent my good man, there should be no complaints about the degree of contest.


You're conflating the distance a defender is allowed to stand from his man from "the degree of contest", as you phrased it above.. They're two different things.. Obviously, a defender that is 3 feet away from a would-be shooter is nowhere near the tightest defense a defender can play.

Any defender that thinks being within 3 feet is sufficient defense would never make it basketball.. Imagine a defender being 3 feet away from a someone taking a 8 foot shot and considering that "tight" defense... It obviously isn't.






In making your arguments about illegal defense



I don't make "arguments" about the Illegal Defense Guidelines.. I just post the rules themselves.. You guys are the ones that dispute the actual rules and make up false arguments against them that are opposite of what the rules actually say.

i.e. you said defenders had to follow 3-point shooters to the 3-point line - this is not only false but really ignorant about how man-to-man defense works... Rule 2e allowed defenders to sag off 3-point shooters to the edge of the paint and also allowed them into the paint for 3 seconds - this is the same as today's rules allow.

Of course, the previous rules also allowed legal paint-camping - it says so in black and white - but again, you guys dispute this and treat the rules as if they're written in a foreign language that we don't understand and therefore disputable.. :rolleyes:





For the record, regarding the bolded, if an offense settles for sub-optimal shots, of course it will take less time to set up a shot


So you agree - previous eras had faster pace because they didn't need to run as much offense to get the lower quality shots they were seeking.

Again, if you removed the 3-point line and therefore didn't have higher quality shots available like 3-pointers, everyone would be forced to shoot lower quality 2-pointers and midrange, which would require less offense and provide a faster pace.

[3ball]

Jumpers do not have any further meaningful dropoff in expected value after you get to that three feet range.



What a joke - the reason there aren't continuing drop-offs in efficiency after a defender is 3 feet away or further is because when a defender is 3 feet away from his man, his man has an OPEN SHOT.

If a player takes a 10 foot shot and his defender is 3 feet away at the 7-foot mark, the shooter was OPEN... dumbass

Your ignorance of basketball is stunning.. It's like you've literally never picked up a ball in your life - you're like an alien that doesn't have basketballs on his planet but learned the game by reading books.. What a joke

[fpliii]

Bullshit - there's a MASSIVE difference from a defender being 3 feet away and 0-1 feet away.. Imagine a defender being 3 feet away from a someone taking a 8 foot shot and considering that "tight" defense... It obviously isn't.

If you think a 3 feet distance results in equivalent defense to 0-1 feet away - well, that's why I stopped even debating you - this kind of willful and purposeful ignorance is a testament to your disingenguous posting and willingness to say anything to support your erroneous belief.
I provided evidence for my claim, see the post above.

If you know anything about me, I don't care about winning a debate. I care about being right, and reaching the correct conclusion. I never enter a conversation with my mind set, and unwilling to change. I'm not saying you don't, but I always have an open mind when entering a discussion. Otherwise, we are not debating in good faith.


You're conflating the distance a defender is allowed to stand from his man from "the degree of contest", as you phrased it above.. They're two different things.. Obviously, a defender that is 3 feet away from a would-be shooter is nowhere near the tightest defense a defender can play.

Any defender that thinks being within 3 feet is sufficient defense would never make it basketball.. Imagine a defender being 3 feet away from a someone taking a 8 foot shot and considering that "tight" defense... It obviously isn't.
Then don't use that criteria for illegal defense, and call it the strictest of criteria.


I don't make "arguments" about the Illegal Defense Guidelines.. I just post the rules themselves.. You guys are the ones that dispute the actual rules and make up false arguments against them that are opposite of what the rules actually say.

i.e. you said defenders had to follow 3-point shooters to the 3-point line - this is not only false but really ignorant about how man-to-man defense works... Rule 2e allowed defenders to sag off 3-point shooters to the edge of the paint and also allowed them into the paint for 3 seconds - this is the same as today's rules allow.
3ball...illegal defense is not a conversation topic I will entertain with you. I've learned over time, that there's no point in arguing a moot point. When you do so, you give an argument, regardless of merit, attention it does not deserve.

I never disputed any rules. I said that if you left your man and didn't double somebody with the ball, you have three seconds to get to an adjacent zone. If you are not in an adjacent zone, this is an instance of illegal defense. I remember the last conversation we had on the topic very closely because I was watching some of a series between San Antonio and Golden State in the early 90s, and Robinson was drawn out of the paint, by a non-shooter. You had to double the man with the ball, or follow your man, into an adjacent zone.


Of course, the previous rules also allowed legal paint-camping - it says so in black and white - but again, you guys dispute this and treat the rules as if they're written in a foreign language that we don't understand and therefore disputable.. :rolleyes:
I'm not an idiot, and you're not either. Legal paint-camping only existed when there was a lack of spacing. If you have shooters, then you can't pack the paint. Don't play me for a fool and pretend it's a huge hassle to tip toe out of the paint or get within your man once every 2.9 seconds. Being able to roam the entire paint when your cover is within 3 feet of the paint isn't a huge advantage *if* the paint is not already packed with both offensive and defensive players, *compared to* having three seconds to step out or get close to your cover.

Proper spacing is why the paint is empty defensively.


So you agree - previous eras had faster pace because they didn't need to run as much offense to get the lower quality shots they were seeking.
No, I don't agree. I agree that they had faster pace and that they weren't seeking the same shot (though some teams even in the two-point era sought to find the best shot...I refer you to Holzman's Knicks). But I don't agree that it's the only reason. Part of it, yes, but not the entire reason (we can debate this another day).


Again, if you removed the 3-point line and therefore didn't have higher quality shots available like 3-pointers, everyone would be forced to shoot lower quality 2-pointers and midrange, which would require less offense and provide a faster pace.
Depends. Smarter coaches would try and optimize offenses even without a three.

It isn't true that 2 pointers are lower quality. A long two jumper from MJ or Dirk or Hakeem is much better than a three from a Barkley or Wade, if it's open. The data I provided speaks of averages.

Superstars are rare in this league. When you get one, assuming he is a true superstar, you build around him. True superstars are outliers. If I was a GM, I would never tell Michael Jordan to start shooting threes. I would however surround him with quality three-point shooters, and if I have a guy playing off-ball who doesn't get the same attention, I'd see if he could develop a three (see Millsap, in recent memory, or Barnes).

[fpliii]

What a joke - the reason there aren't continuing drop-offs in efficiency after a defender is 3 feet away or further is because when a defender is 3 feet away from his man, his man has an OPEN SHOT.

If a player takes a 10 foot shot and his defender is 3 feet away at the 7-foot mark, the shooter was OPEN... dumbass

Your ignorance of basketball is stunning.. It's like you've literally never picked up a ball in your life - you're like an alien that doesn't have basketballs on his planet but learned the game by reading books.. What a joke
I didn't say anything up for debate. The paper I linked used actual data, from an entire season (2013-14). You are misinterpreting what I said. When I say:


Jumpers do not have any further meaningful dropoff in expected value after you get to that three feet range
I am telling you that the data demonstrates that there is no meaningful dropoff *as you get closer to your man* than three feet. I am not presenting a subjective point to you. I am literally reading off what the data states.

[Fallen Angel]

>opens thread
>brain starts hurting
>closes thread

[3ball]

I provided evidence for my claim, see the post above.


There's a huge difference between being 0-1 feet away and being 3 feet away - and that's what I'm talking about - 3-point shooters take a much lower proportion of their shots where the defender is 0-1 feet away, which is why the Vantage's blanket "contested" definition skews their data.





Then don't use that criteria for illegal defense, and call it the strictest of criteria.


Being forced to stay within "armslength" of an offensive player is very strict defense.

Otoh, being 3 feet away from someone taking a 10 footer is LOOSE defense... Big difference.. But keep denying and being willfully ignorant.. It's free country.





I never disputed any rules.


Lies - you said that the old rules forced defenders to follow offensive players out to the 3-point line... This is false:


2e. When a strongside offensive player is above the tip of the circle extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the free-throw line extended (upper defensive area) for more than 2.9 seconds. When a weakside offensive player is above the tip of the circle, his defensive man must be no lower than the "upper defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds.


So defenders DIDN'T didn't have to follow guys to the 3-point line - they could sag off to the edge of the paint, and even dip into the paint for up to 3 seconds, just like today's game.





Don't play me for a fool and pretend it's a huge hassle to tip toe out of the paint or get within your man once every 2.9 seconds.


It's a huge deal because it's isn't just tippy-toeing in and out of the paint's edge.

Today's defender cannot remain under the rim while their man is 8 feet away on the block because that's out of "armslength"... Whereas previous defenders could remain under the rim in this spot - they could remain in the paint "with no time limitation" if their man was inside the paint already, or within 3 feet or either side.






http://i.imgur.com/rW270Q6.gif


Proper spacing is why the paint is empty defensively.



Even in today's spaced-out game, offensive players still occupy the paint or are within 3 feet of either side.. And in these situations, defenders in previous eras had more freedom - they could paint-camp and be far out of armslength of their man, while today's defender must hug their man and follow him wherever he goes around the 16 x 19 foot paint.

The gif above is a perfect example - notice Speights on baseline, left of the rim - ideally, he'd be waiting under the rim the whole time to contest Lebron.. But today's defensive 3 seconds rule doesn't allow defenders to wait in the paint if no one is within armslength (http://www.nba.com/nba101/misunderstood_0708.html) (about 3 feet).. So Speights has walk to AWAY from the rim to remain within armslength of his man, which prevents him from contesting Lebron.

Otoh, in previous eras, defenders could remain in the paint "with no time restriction" if their man was anywhere inside the paint, or within 3 feet or either side.. So in the clip above, Speights would've been waiting under the rim to contest Lebron and force him into a tougher shot.





If I was a GM, I would never tell Michael Jordan to start shooting threes.


So you'd never tell Lebron to either, since he was horrible 3-point shooter when he first came in the league, but then improved... It's ludicrous to assume MJ wouldn't do the same in today's game considering he was already a goat midrange touch and shooter, had perfect/superior form, and had superior peak 3-point shooting performance.

But MJ wouldn't need 3-pointers to dominate the game, just like Wade and Westbrook didn't need them in 2009 and 2015, when they led the league in scoring.

[3ball]

I am telling you that the data demonstrates that there is no meaningful dropoff *as you get closer to your man* than three feet.

I am not presenting a subjective point to you. I am literally reading off what the data states.


So a shooter's efficiency declines as a defender gets FURTHER than 3 feet away, but stabilizes starting when the defender is 3 feet and getting closer?

That's ludicrous - I would find another hobby if I were you - learning the game from books isn't helping you - you don't understand the simplest things about the game... It's amazing

[fpliii]

No you didn't - you said that after a defender is 3 feet away, the shooter's efficiency doesn't decline anymore - OF COURSE IT STOPS DECLINING - BEING 3 FEET AWAY MEANS THE SHOOTER IS NOW O-P-E-N.

But there's a huge difference between being 0-1 feet away and being 3 feet away - and that's what I'm talking about - 3-point shooters take a much lower proportion of their shots where the defender is 0-1 feet away, which is why the Vantage's blanket "contested" definition skews their data.
False: http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11788573&postcount=25



Being forced to stay within "armslength" of an offensive player is very strict defense.. Otoh, being 3 feet away from someone taking a 10 footer is LOOSE defense... Big difference.. But keep denying and being willfully ignorant.. It's free country.
Being armslength or out of the paint once every 2.9 seconds is very loose.


Lies - you said that the old rules forced defenders to follow offensive players out to the 3-point line... This is false:


2e. When a strongside offensive player is above the tip of the circle extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the free-throw line extended (upper defensive area) for more than 2.9 seconds. When a weakside offensive player is above the tip of the circle, his defensive man must be no lower than the "upper defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds.

Defenders didn't have to follow guys to the 3-point line - they could sag off to the edge of the paint, and even dip into the paint for up to 3 seconds, just like today's game.
Now what if a weakside defensive player is in the opposite corner, or above the line on the far wing?

What you said only applies if a guy steps beyond the arc and is not on the weakside.

[qupte]It's a huge deal because it's isn't just tippy-toeing in and out of the paint's edge.

Today's defender cannot remain under the rim while their man is 8 feet away on the block because that's out of "armslength"... Whereas previous defenders could remain under the rim - they could remain in the paint "with no time limitation" if their man was inside the paint already, or within 3 feet or either side.[/quote]

Why are you selectively quoting me?


I'm not an idiot, and you're not either. Legal paint-camping only existed when there was a lack of spacing. If you have shooters, then you can't pack the paint. Don't play me for a fool and pretend it's a huge hassle to tip toe out of the paint or get within your man once every 2.9 seconds. Being able to roam the entire paint when your cover is within 3 feet of the paint isn't a huge advantage *if* the paint is not already packed with both offensive and defensive players, *compared to* having three seconds to step out or get close to your cover.

Proper spacing is why the paint is empty defensively.



Even in today's spaced-out game, offensive players still occupy the paint or are within 3 feet of either side.. And in these situations, defenders in previous eras had more freedom - they could paint-camp and be far out of armslength of their man, while today's defender must hug their man and follow him wherever he goes around the 16 x 19 foot paint.
They could paint-camp as long as the offense was stupid enough to leave an offensive player, off-ball, by the paint. Unless you are a GOAT post player or a dominant offensive rebounder, you have no reason to be near the paint, off-ball. None.


The gif above is a perfect example - notice Speights on baseline, left of the rim - ideally, he'd be waiting under the rim the whole time to contest Lebron.. But today's defensive 3 seconds rule doesn't allow defenders to wait in the paint if no one is within armslength (http://www.nba.com/nba101/misunderstood_0708.html) (about 3 feet).. So Speights has walk to AWAY from the rim to remain within armslength of his man, which prevents him from contesting Lebron.

Otoh, in previous eras, defenders could remain in the paint "with no time restriction" if their man was anywhere inside the paint, or within 3 feet or either side.. So in the clip above, Speights would've been waiting under the rim to contest Lebron and force him into a tougher shot.
Who the hell brought up LeBron?

Nobody is preventing him from contesting LeBron. Lee had already stepped out, and was a bad defender (which is why he is a liability on the floor for GS, as a non-shooter). His lapse in judgment caused the team defense to fail. That doesn't happen when you have Noah and Gibson.

Also note I'm not getting drawn into gif bullshit. You can call them representative examples if you want, but that doesn't make them any more true. If you want, we can randomly two playoff series...one from the last few years, one from any period you choose. if we track every defensive possession, you'll see why your individual examples hold no merit.


So you'd never tell Lebron to either, since he was horrible 3-point shooter when he first came in the league, but then improved... It's ludicrous to assume MJ wouldn't do the same in today's game considering he was already a goat midrange touch and shooter, had perfect/superior form, and had superior peak 3-point shooting performance.

But MJ wouldn't need 3-pointers to dominate the game, just like Wade and Westbrook didn't need them in 2009 and 2015, when they led the league in scoring.
When did I assume MJ wouldn't? Why are you putting words in my mouth? If the bolded is true for non-shortened years, when taking into consideration volume and # of possessions, would be interesting to see. MJ is a better jumpshooter than LeBron. I believe he probably has better potential than LeBron as a 3pt shooter.

Current LeBron is a terrible, terrible shooter. He is not an historically relevant player for me at this point since his shooting fell off so much. He was terrific shooting jumpers in 13 and 14, and couldn't buy a shot for his life last year.

Anyhow leading the league in scoring != domination. I don't consider box score stats when evaluating players. Domination is being unstoppable in terms of the eye test and having legitimate data to back it up (MJ from the triple threat, Shaq at his peak, Curry last year, etc.). I think it is an insult to MJ to compare him at his peak to Westbrook last year, and Wade is a poor man's version of MJ in virtually every facet, so of course MJ is better.

[fpliii]

So a shooter's efficiency declines as a defender gets FURTHER than 3 feet away, but stabilizes starting when the defender is 3 feet and getting closer?

That's ludicrous - I would find another hobby if I were you - learning the game from books isn't helping you - you don't understand the simplest things about the game... It's amazing
It's not my opinion. It comes from the data. Read the PDF I linked. It stabilizes (or in the case of the paint, virtually stabilizes), except at the rim.

It's not up for debate. That is a record of what actually happened (I believe it says in 13-14) on ALL shots.

[3ball]

Being armslength or out of the paint once every 2.9 seconds is very loose.


Nah, "armslength" is the strictest defense outside making defenders stand shoulder-to-shoulder..

And it's more than just stepping in and out of the paint - a defender can't remain under the rim while their man is 8 feet away on the block and out of armslength, while previous era defenders could..

Here's the simplest way to say it: today's defender can't remain in the paint when there's no one else around, while previous era defenders could.





Now what if a weakside defensive player is in the opposite corner, or above the line on the far wing?


Did you even read the Rule 2e - it specified weakside AND strongside defenders:


2e. When a strongside offensive player is above the tip of the circle extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the free-throw line extended (upper defensive area) for more than 2.9 seconds. When a weakside offensive player is above the tip of the circle, his defensive man must be no lower than the "upper defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds.






They could paint-camp as long as the offense was stupid enough to leave an offensive player, off-ball, by the paint. Unless you are a GOAT post player or a dominant offensive rebounder, you have no reason to be near the paint, off-ball. None.



Are you trying to say offensive players don't stand by the paint during offensive possessions??... Are you insane?... Why are you even on here arguing with me if you're going to say stuff like that?... Are you a professional time waster or something??... Seriously, I can't figure out why anyone would try to claim that offensive players don't stand next to the paint - offensive players stand by the paint on EVERY possession in EVERY era.. If your argument is that doesn't happen, then you've lost it.

Btw, the paint-camping provision of previous eras ALSO meant defenders didn't have to follow their man around the 16 x 19 foot paint like today's "armslength" provision does... Bottom line - if Lebron was playing in 1985, he'd face no-spacing and paint-camping just like every other player did..






http://i.imgur.com/rW270Q6.gif


Nobody is preventing Speights from contesting LeBron.



The rules prevent Speights from contesting Lebron... The rules say Speights can't stand under the rim because he's out of "armslength" of his man, who is 8 feet away on the block - so Speights has to walk away from the rim towards the block to stay within "armslength" of his man.

It's clear as day... But in previous eras, he'd be allowed to stay under the rim to contest Lebron because defenders could remain in the paint if their man within 3 feet of either side of the paint.





one from the last few years, one from any period you choose. if we track every defensive possession, you'll see why your individual examples hold no merit.


What exactly would we be tracking???.. Instances where today's defender has to vacate the paint? (every possession).. Instances where defenders were standing next to the paint?? (every possession)... Instances where today's defender must stay glued to his man when inside the paint??Seriously - I don't know what we would be tracking.

Or maybe you want to measure how often the paint is wide open???.. We don't need to waste time on that - everyone can see the paint is wide open on every single possession in today's game, but was heavily congested in previous eras.





when taking into consideration volume and # of possessions, would be interesting to see.


For me personally - I don't need to see anything - I know MJ was much better on a per-possession basis.

For their playoffs careers, MJ scores 20% more per 100 possessions on better efficiency with more offensive rebounds and equal assists (when you include turnovers).





Anyhow leading the league in scoring != domination. I don't consider box score stats when evaluating players.


People think scoring was all MJ did, as your post above implies - but for their ENTIRE playoffs careers, MJ averaged 7.4 assists and 4.0 turnovers per 100 possessions, compared to 8.6 and 4.5 for Lebron.

So even using MJ's career stats, which are skewed by his non-prime years, MJ's assists were equal to Lebron, while having more offensive rebounds, steals, and of course the massive scoring edge.. Also, MJ's defense was better - I can't imagine him letting his primary defensive assignment get FMVP.. Particularly a role player, who MJ rarely guarded.. MJ's offense and defense was demonstrably better, which why he's 6/6 and Lebron is 2/6.

Btw, just for the record: scoring + clutch > any stat category, especially for #1 options..
.

[BigNBAfan]

That data is bullshit without showing the deviation

[3ball]

It's not up for debate. That is a record of what actually happened (I believe it says in 13-14) on ALL shots.


Uh, yeah it is - the data is clearly wrong or you misinterpreted it.

You are claiming that a shooter's efficiency declines as a defender gets FURTHER than 3 feet away, but stabilizes starting when the defender is 3 feet and getting closer.

That's ludicrous, and confirms your shallow understanding how the game plays.

[fpliii]

Here's the simplest way to say it: today's defender can't remain in the paint for more than 2.9 consecutive seconds when his man is within 3ft of the paint, unless he tip toes out of the paint or momentarily gets within 3ft of his man once every 2.9 seconds while previous era defenders could.

Agreed.


Did you even read the Rule 2e - it specified weakside AND strongside defenders:


2e. When a strongside offensive player is above the tip of the circle extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the free-throw line extended (upper defensive area) for more than 2.9 seconds. When a weakside offensive player is above the tip of the circle, his defensive man must be no lower than the "upper defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds.

My mistake. But how does that affect guys in the weak-side corner? You still need to follow your man there.

Either way though, that's pretty stringent. That means if the man you are guarding is above the 3pt line, you can't enter the paint, or even guard outside of the paint below the FT line (which would be helpful on the strongside) for more than 2.9 seconds unless he doubles on ball.


Are you trying to say offensive players don't stand by the paint during offensive possessions??... Are you insane?... Why are you even on here arguing with me if you're going to say stuff like that?... Are you a professional time waster or something??... Seriously, I can't figure out why anyone would try to claim that offensive players don't stand next to the paint - offensive players stand by the paint on EVERY possession in EVERY era.. If your argument is that doesn't happen, then you've lost it.
I didn't say they don't:


Unless you are a GOAT post player or a dominant offensive rebounder, you have no reason to be near the paint, off-ball. None.

I said functionally, if you are not there for post scoring or offensive rebounding, there's no reason to stay by the basket (if a guy is setting a screen or preparing to cut or flare out and begins on the block, why would he do that right by the paint and enable paint camping?). Slight hyperbole on my part (apologies for that), but why would you hang around and give the defense that advantage if you're not serving a purpose? If you are not contributing to the team offense, you are a waste of space. Why give the defense an advantage? That's why the rules and spacing go hand in hand.


Btw, the paint-camping provision of previous eras ALSO meant defenders didn't have to follow their man around the 16 x 19 foot paint like today's "armslength" provision does... Bottom line - if Lebron was playing in 1985, he'd face no-spacing and paint-camping just like every other player did..
Again with LeBron...christ, who mentioned him?

No spacing, correct. Paint camping, correct enabled by no spacing. I agree


The rules prevent Speights from contesting Lebron... The rules say Speights can't stand under the rim because he's out of "armslength" of his man, who is 8 feet away on the block - so Speights has to walk away from the rim towards the block to stay within "armslength" of his man.

It's clear as day... But in previous eras, he'd be allowed to stay under the rim to contest Lebron because defenders could remain in the paint if their man within 3 feet of either side of the paint.
Now, why did he move back, instead of meeting LeBron in front of the paint? Because he didn't want to leave his man open. That has nothing to do with the rules.

But anyhow, you're incorrect. His man (Thompson I think in that gif) was more than 3ft away when he backed off. So Thompson would have 2.9 seconds in either era.


What exactly would we be tracking???.. Instances where today's defender has to vacate the paint? (every possession).. Instances where defenders were standing next to the paint?? (every possession)... Instances where today's defender must stay glued to his man when inside the paint??Seriously - I don't know what we would be tracking.

Or maybe you want to measure how often the paint is wide open???.. We don't need to waste time on that - everyone can see the paint is wide open on every single possession in today's game, but was heavily congested in previous eras.
We would track two categories:

(1) For the 80s or 90s series, instances when, by the current rules, defense played would be illegal today (in terms of legality on the basis of rules, not defense encouraged/discouraged by spacing).

(2) For the 10s series, instances when, by the illegal defense rules, defense played would be illegal today (in terms of legality on the basis of rules, not defense encouraged/discouraged by spacing).

If you really feel strongly about this we can do this.


Uh, yeah it is - the data is clearly wrong or you misinterpreted it.

You are claiming that a shooter's efficiency declines as a defender gets FURTHER than 3 feet away, but stabilizes starting when the defender is 3 feet and getting closer.
The tables and conclusions come from optical tracking data. I am just the messenger. I am not "claiming" anything. I posted the specific links. Just because something does not agree with your opinion coming into a debate does not make it correct (same with me, or anyone else).

It separates into five bases:

Basis 1 - At rim. Closer you get, the more you are affected by contact.
Basis 2 - Paint, non-rim. Shot value decreases gradually down to 1ft. The decrease is minor.
Basis 3 - Mid-range (outside paint, inside 3pt line). Gradual decrease up until 4ft, sharp decrease to 3ft, stabilizes any closer.
Basis 4 - Corner 3s. Same as Basis 3.
Basis 5 - Above-the-break 3s. Same as Bases 3 and 4.

There is nothing to dispute about what the data says.

[3ball]

http://i60.tinypic.com/dvghuu.png


At-rim attempts (basis 1) are affected heavily by degree of contest (up to 1ft). In-paint attempts (basis 2) are affected further when a guy is closer (up to 1ft, though the dropoff is small after 4ft...note that these are log odds, or log[prob-make/prob-miss]). Jumpers..... do not have any further meaningful dropoff in expected value after you get to that three feet range.



Right before your bolded remarks above, the chart you posted directly contradicts you:



"between 0-6 feet the log odds of a made shot are nearly linear in distance. After about 6 feet, increased defender distance doesn't increase the odds of a shot."

So when a defender is within 6 feet or less of a shooter, the likelihood of a made shot increases "linearly" with defender distance.

But this actually has little to do with the issue we were discussing - the issue was that paint and midrange shots (2-pointers), have always been more contested than 3-pointers..... Since a higher level of contest on 2-pointers has always been acceptable, less offense needs to be run to get the average 2-point look, which allowed previous eras to play at a faster pace.

[3ball]

http://i.imgur.com/rW270Q6.gif


today's defender can't remain in the paint for more than 2.9 consecutive seconds when his man is within 3ft of the paint, unless he tip toes out of the paint or momentarily gets within 3ft of his man once every 2.9 seconds while previous era defenders could.



^^^^ I re-posted your interpretation word for word above..

Tippy-toeing can only be done on the edge of the paint - and I'm sure you realize the paint is 16 x 19 feet... So most of the time, the defender is nowhere near the edge of the paint, like if he's standing beside his man under the rim, and therefore 8 feet away from the edge of the paint.. When his man walks out of the paint, the defender must follow him out - he can't remain under the rim and out of armslength of his man.

Or wait a minute - are you saying Speights is allowed to stand under the rim in the gif above and wait on Lebron?.. He can't - he'd be out of armslength - otoh, defenders in previous eras COULD stay under the rim and wait on Lebron, due to here (http://nbahoopsonline.com/History/Leagues/NBA/Rules/Fouls.html) of the Illegal Defense Guidelines.






But how does that affect guys in the weak-side corner? You still need to follow your man there.


You're the one that sent me the Illegal Defense Guidelines, and now I know them way better than you:



2a. Weakside defenders may be in a defensive position within the "outside lane" with no time limit, and within the "Inside lane" for 2.9 seconds.

As you can see, weakside defenders could legally PAINT-CAMP in the outside lane "with no time limit" when their man was behind the corner/sideline 3-point line.. Today's weakside defenders can't do that - they can't stay indefinitely in the outside partition of the paint.

Also, we already discussed how Rule 2e allows defenders to sag back into the paint for 2.9 seconds when their man is ABOVE the tip of the circle extended... Rule 2e also allows defenders to paint-camp indefinitely in the "middle defensive area", which is the upper part of the paint, when their man is BELOW the tip of circle and above the free throw line:


2e. When a strongside offensive player is above the free throw line extended (but not above tip of circle), his defensive man may be no lower than the "middle defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds.. When a weakside offensive player is above the free throw line extended (but not above tip of circle), his defensive man may be no lower than the "middle defensive area" extended for more than 2.9 seconds.

[fpliii]

Right before your bolded remarks above, the chart you posted directly contradicts you:



"between 0-6 feet the log odds of a made shot are nearly linear in distance. After about 6 feet, increased defender distance doesn't increase the odds of a shot."

So when a defender is within 6 feet or less of a shooter, the likelihood of a made shot increases "linearly" with defender distance.

All five bases are relatively linear, within the ranges specified (<1 to <6 feet for basis 1, <1 to <6 feet for basis 2, and <3 to <8 feet for bases 3-5; note that the graph does not contain). Note that the y-axis is log-odds. That's log(P-make/P-miss). All three of the jump-shooting bases (mid-range 2, corner 3, above-the-break 3) are around -0.6, -0.7, and -0.8. That means taking the inverse of log(P-make/P-miss), the ratio of makes to misses are around .55, .50, and .45 (just eyeballing), or shooting percentages of about .350, .333, and .310, at that 3 foot boundary on jumpers. Interestingly enough, Vantage also has contested threes in the low 30s (https://web.archive.org/web/20150318123954/http://blog.cacvantage.com/2014/01/defending-three.html).

I have no issue with either source. If you do, we'll have to agree to disagree. But I am very comfortable with the current criteria for contesting shots, especially on jumpers.


But this actually has little to do with the issue we were discussing - the issue was that paint and midrange shots (2-pointers), have always been more contested than 3-pointers..... Since a higher level of contest on 2-pointers has always been acceptable, less offense needs to be run to get the average 2-point look, which allowed previous eras to play at a faster pace.
I never argued against the bolded, especially in the paint. The rest does not interest me one way or the other. When did I bring up how much offense has to be run or the pace required? Those issues stem from your debate with GIF REACTION.


^^^^ I re-posted your interpretation word for word above..

Tippy-toeing can only be done on the edge of the paint - and I'm sure you realize the paint is 16 x 19 feet... So most of the time, the defender is nowhere near the edge of the paint, like if he's standing beside his man under the rim, and 8 feet away from the edge of the paint.. When his man walks out of the paint, the defender must follow him out - he can't remain standing under the rim and out of armslength of his man.

Or wait a minute - are you saying Speights is allowed to stand under the rim in that gif and wait on Lebron?.. He can't - he'd be out of armslength - otoh, defenders in previous eras COULD stay under the rim and wait on Lebron.
You only have to tip toe out of the paint while you are not on your man.

He had three options:

(1) Stick with Thompson (which he did) to prevent the offensive rebound or alley-oop.

(2) Double LeBron (not wait, but move up).

(3) Remain in the paint for 2.9 seconds after leaving Thompson. As long as he is within armslength of LeBron, by the end of those 2.9 seconds, it is legal defensively.



But how does that affect guys in the weak-side corner? You still need to follow your man there.
You're the one that sent me the Illegal Defense Guidelines, and now I know them way better than you:



2a. Weakside defenders may be in a defensive position within the "outside lane" with no time limit, and within the "Inside lane" for 2.9 seconds.

As you can see, weakside defenders could legally PAINT-CAMP in the outside lane "with no time limit" when their man was behind the corner/sideline 3-point line.. Today's weakside defenders can't do that - they can't stay indefinitely in the outside partition of the paint.

Also, we already discussed how Rule 2e allows defenders to sag back into the paint for 2.9 seconds when their man is ABOVE the tip of the circle extended... Rule 2e also allows defenders to paint-camp indefinitely in the "middle defensive area", which is the upper part of the paint, when their man is BELOW the tip of circle and above the free throw line:


2e. When a strongside offensive player is above the free throw line extended (but not above tip of circle), his defensive man may be no lower than the "middle defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds.. When a weakside offensive player is above the free throw line extended (but not above tip of circle), his defensive man may be no lower than the "middle defensive area" extended for more than 2.9 seconds.

The entirety of the illegal defense guidelines:


(1) Penalties for Illegal Defenses.

On the first violation, the 24-second clock is reset to 24. On the second and succeeding violations, the clock is reset to 24 and one free throw (technical) is attempted. When a violation occurs during the last 24 seconds of any period (including overtime), regardless of the number of prior offenses, one free throw is awarded for the violation. (On all violations, the ball is awarded to the offended team out-of-bounds at the free throw line extended on either side of the court.)

EXCEPTION: If a field goal attempt is simultaneous with a whistle for an illegal violation, and that attempt is successful, the basket shall count and the violation is nullified.

(2) Guidelines for Defensive Coverage

a. Weakside defenders may be in a defensive position within the "outside lane" with no time limit, and within the "Inside lane" for 2.9 seconds. The defensive player must re-establish a position with both feet out of the "Insidelane" to be considered as having legally cleared the restricted area.

b. When a defensive player is guarding an offensive player who is adjacent (posted-up) to the 3-second lane, the defensive player may be within the "inside lane" area with no time limitations. An offensive player shall be ruled as "postedup" when he is within 3' of the free throw lane line. A hash mark on the baseline denotes the 3' area.

c. An offensive player without the ball may not be double-teamed from the weakside. Only the player with the ball may be double-teamed by a weakside defensive player. Weakside and strongside restrictions shall extend from the baseline to the midcourt line.

d. When an offensive player, with or without the ball, takes a position above the foul line, the defensive player may be no farther (toward the baseline) than the "middle defensive area." Defensive player(s) may enter and re-enter the "lower defensive area" as many times as desired, so long as he does not exceed 2.9 seconds.

e. When a weakside offensive player is above the free throw line extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the "middle defensive area" extended for more than 2.9 seconds. When a weakside offensive player is below the free throw line extended, his defensive man must vacate the "inside lane" unless his man is positioned adjacent (posted up) to the threesecond lane extended. When a weakside offensive player is above the tip of the circle, his defensive man must be no lower than the "upper defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds. When a strongside offensive player is above the tip of the circle extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the free-throw line extended (upper defensive area) for more than 2.9 seconds. When a strongside offensive player is above the free throw line extended "upper defensive area, his defensive man may be no lower than the "middle defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds. When an offensive player on the strongside is below the free throw line extended "middle defensive area," his defender must take a position below the free throw line extended immediately or double-team the ball as soon as the ball crosses midcourt. There is no 2.9 time limit. If the offensive player relocates to a position above the free throw line extended, his defender may take a similar position no farther than one defensive area away within 2.9 seconds. In all of the situations above, a defensive player may always aggressively double-team the ball regardless of his previous position on the floor.

f. When an offensive player takes a position above the tip of the circle, with or without the ball, the defensive player may be no farther (toward the baseline) from him than the "upper defensive area."

g. A defensive player must follow his weakside offensive man, switch to another man at an area of intersection, or double-team the ball. There is no 2.9-second time limit on this play. A defensive player must execute one of these three options or he is guilty of an illegal defense immediately.

h. A defensive player must follow his strongside offensive man, switch to another man at an area of intersection, or double-team the ball. There is a 2.9-second time limit on this play which commences when the defensive player reaches the weakside and "opens up."

i. A double team is when two or more defenders aggressively pursue a player with the ball to a position close enough for a held ball to occur. Failure to comply with paragraphs (a) through (i) above will result in an Illegal Defense violation.
The bolded portions govern the weakside corner.

That is to say, according to the guidelines, if your man is in the corner (or anywhere on the weakside below the FT line extended):

• You can leave him, but you cannot leave to double someone without the ball.
• You can venture out as far as the outer lane on the weakside (the outer lane being the college lane, which extends two feet deep into the paint from the weakside)
• If your man changes zones and you are caught below the FT line extended without following your man, switching onto another player, or doubling the ball, illegal defense is called immediately.

[fpliii]

Time for me to sleep.

Have a good one 3ball.

[3ball]

that's ish for you.. flpiii agrees that midrange and paint shots are more contested, but still posts a long, unnecessary, time-wasting article on defender distance?
.
.

[3ball]

if you agree that paint and midrange are more contested and lower quality, then you agree that less offense needs to be run to get these shots, which means you understand why previous eras ran less offense and had faster pace.

[3ball]

http://i.imgur.com/rW270Q6.gif


Options for Speights:

(3) Remain in the paint for 2.9 seconds after leaving Thompson. As long as he is within armslength of LeBron, by the end of those 2.9 seconds, it is legal defensively.



Thompson can't remain in the paint.. He's 8 feet from the edge of the paint and only has 2.9 seconds to make it out, so he must vacate immediately - if he waits at all, he won't make it out in time.

Look at the gif and how big the paint and court is - no defender is zippy enough to cover the kind of ground you're talking about - that's a pretty ridiculous assumption by you.

The reality is that Speights can't wait under the rim to contest Lebron in today's game, because he's out of armslength of his man Tristan Thompson... But defenders in previous eras COULD stay under the rim to contest Lebron, because Thompson is within 3 feet of either side of the paint..

Ultimately, defenders in previous eras could remain in the paint with no one else around, while today's defenders can't.. Today's defenders must vacate, which creates spacing in the paint and means the armslength requirement is rules-enforced spacing.






2e. When a weakside offensive player is below the free throw line extended, his defensive man must vacate the "inside lane"



Rule 2a gives weakside defenders 3 seconds to vacate the inside lane and lets them paint-camp in the outside lane INDEFINITELY:


2a. Weakside defenders may be in a defensive position within the "outside lane" with no time limit, and within the "Inside lane" for 2.9 seconds.
The "outside" lane refers to the outer partition of the paint that runs along the SIDES of the paint - so Rule 2a refers to defenders guarding offensive players that are below the FT line on the weakside, including sideline/corner shooters.

[fpliii]

that's ish for you.. flpiii agrees that midrange and paint shots are more contested, but still posts a long, unnecessary, time-wasting article on defender distance?
.
.
The topic of the thread is threes and defender distance. My links are relevant to the OP.


so he must vacate immediately - if he waits at all, he won't make it out in time.

Look at the gif and how big the paint and court is - no defender is zippy enough to cover the kind of ground you're talking about - that's a pretty ridiculous assumption by you.
:kobe:

Again telling me that from the second his man is no longer arms length, it will take 3+ seconds to double the ball or vacate the paint. If you believe that, we'll have to agree to disagree.


The "outside" lane refers to the outer partition of the paint that runs along the SIDES of the paint - so Rule 2a refers to defenders guarding offensive players that are below the FT line on the weakside, including sideline/corner shooters.
Three rules govern the weak side corner and baseline simultaneously. Rule 2a which you quoted, the portion of rule 2e I bolded, and rule 2g. You can't enter the college lane (2e in its entirety doesn't even say 2.9 seconds, it's an automatic violation), and if your guy moves to a different zone (say above the FT line extended, to the wing), you have to double the ball, switch, or move.

[3ball]

http://i.imgur.com/rW270Q6.gif


Again telling me that from the second his man is no longer arms length, it will take 3+ seconds to double the ball or vacate the paint. If you believe that, we'll have to agree to disagree.



The bolded above is the same thing - if he doubles the ball, he IS vacating the paint... Either way, Speights must vacate the paint immediately - he can't remain standing under the rim.. In this case, Speights opted to NOT double Lebron, and vacates the paint by following Thompson instead.






Three rules govern the weak side corner and baseline simultaneously. Rule 2a which you quoted, the portion of rule 2e I bolded, and rule 2g. You can't enter the college lane (2e in its entirety doesn't even say 2.9 seconds, it's an automatic violation), and if your guy moves to a different zone (say above the FT line extended, to the wing), you have to double the ball, switch, or move.



Rule 2e doesn't mention that weakside defenders are allowed 2.9 seconds in the "inside" lane, nor does it mention how weakside defenders are allowed unlimited paint-camping in the "outside" lane, **because Rule 2a already covered these aspects** - that's the way the rules are written throughout - if one rule covers it, another rule won't mention it:


2a. Weakside defenders may be in a defensive position within the "outside lane" with no time limit, and within the "Inside lane" for 2.9 seconds.


If a defender didn't have 3 seconds to vacate the inside lane, the offensive player could just tippy-toe back and forth over the 3 foot hash mark and draw an instant violation on every single possession... This never happened because Rule 2a gives defenders 3 seconds to vacate the inside lane AND allows defenders to paint-camp indefinitely in the "outside" lane.
.

[fpliii]

3ball...I think there might be an issue with our rule source then.

Because from what you are saying, the bolded portion in 2e would never come into play, because rule 2a concerns the weakside in its entirety. Why would it be in the rules then?

Rule 2a contradicts rule 2e.

[aj1987]

3ball...I think there might be an issue with our rule source then.

Because from what you are saying, the bolded portion in 2e would never come into play, because rule 2a concerns the weakside in its entirety. Why would it be in the rules then?

Rule 2a contradicts rule 2e.
Nah, the issue is with the dude you're arguing with. He's clinically retarded.

[3ball]

3ball...I think there might be an issue with our rule source then.

Because from what you are saying, the bolded portion in 2e would never come into play, because rule 2a concerns the weakside in its entirety. Why would it be in the rules then?

Rule 2a contradicts rule 2e.


Dude, you can read right??.... READ the words in the rule - they aren't contradictory:


2a. Weakside defenders may be in a defensive position within the "outside lane" with no time limit, and within the "Inside lane" for 2.9 seconds.

2e. When a weakside offensive player is below the free throw line extended, his defensive man must vacate the "inside lane"


How are they contradictory exactly?

Rule 2e says defenders must vacate the "inside" lane - it doesn't mention defenders have 3 seconds to vacate or that defenders can stay in the OUTSIDE lane "with no time limit", because Rule 2a already says those things.

[fpliii]

Dude, you can read right??.... READ the words in the rule - they aren't contradictory:


2a. Weakside defenders may be in a defensive position within the "outside lane" with no time limit, and within the "Inside lane" for 2.9 seconds.

2e. When a weakside offensive player is below the free throw line extended, his defensive man must vacate the "inside lane"


How are they contradictory exactly?.. Rule 2e says defenders must vacate the inside lane... It doesn't mention defenders have 3 seconds to vacate or that defenders can stay in the OUTSIDE lane "with no time limit", because Rule 2a already says those things.
Never mind, sorry, I misread.

So how is my post above invalid?

[QUOTE]he bolded portions govern the weakside corner.

That is to say, according to the guidelines, if your man is in the corner (or anywhere on the weakside below the FT line extended):

[GIF REACTION]

That is all well and good 3ball, but paint camping didn't occur without the positioning of offensive players

You are trying to make it seem as though defenders could hang out in the paint without clearly defending an offensive player. We know this didn't go down

[3ball]

2g. A defensive player must follow his weakside offensive man, switch to another man at an area of intersection, or double-team the ball. There is no 2.9-second time limit on this play. A defensive player must execute one of these three options or he is guilty of an illegal defense immediately.


Please tell me why rule 2g doesn't come into play.



It's like you can't read for yourself - Rule 2g has nothing to do with how far defenders can sag off 3 point shooters.

Rule 2g deals with the times a 2nd offensive player is crossing paths with the defender's man - the defender must "follow his weakside offensive man, switch to another man at an area of intersection, or double-team the ball."... Otoh, Rules 2a and 2e deal with how far a defender can sag off a perimeter offensive player, articulated AGAIN below.

Rule 2a specifically references the "outside" lane (the outer, side portion of the paint), so it deals with sideline and corner 3-point shooters - in these instances, defenders may be "within the "outside lane" with no time limit, and within the "Inside lane" for 2.9 seconds.".. That's word-for-word from Rule 2a.

Rule 2e specifically references the FT line and tip of circle, so it deals with how far defenders can sag off 3-point shooters that are out front - Rule 2e states "When a strongside (or weakside) offensive player is above the tip of the circle extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the free-throw line extended (upper defensive area) for more than 2.9 seconds.".. Again, that's word-for-word (except for the "weakside" parenthetical, since the rule says the same thing about the weakside)

[3ball]

Three rules govern the weak side corner and baseline simultaneously


Two rules actually - Rule 2g doesn't relate to sagging off perimeter offensive players.. Of course, you've just now learned about all these rules, even though you were the one that originally sent ME a copy of the rule.. That's turning out to be a bad idea....

Do you realize that you've been dead wrong on the idea you've been selling for a while now that defenders had to follow shooters out to the 3-point line?.. Rule 2a and 2e allows defenders of 3-point shooters to sag back and paint-camp indefinitely in the "outside" lane, and 2.9 seconds in the "inside" lane.. Due to the paint-camping allowed in the "outside" lane, that's MORE freedom that today's defenders get when sagging off shooters.

So you couldn't have been more wrong on this issue, and quite frankly, you should be embarrassed that you were clueless about such basic things like whether man-to-man defenders have to hug shooters or not.. You were also wrong about the notion that previous era defenders couldn't paint-camp - the Illegal Defense Guidelines provided instances where defenders could stay in the paint "with no time limits" even though they were out of armslength of their man.. Today's rules don't allow that - defenders can NEVER remain in the paint when there man is out of "armslength".
.

[GIF REACTION]

The end point is still that they have to clear the paint. That cannot be debated. The spacing was still achieved from a basis of the Illegal Defense Rules.... coupled with the specific rules on how man defense can be played (Must switch/hard double/follow) and the fact that you couldn't double players off-ball and weakside doubling restriction, that gives good players more than enough room to work with. Just look at the gifs in the Rule Enforced Spacing vs. Shooting Encouraged Spacing thread.... Yes I am aware that the man defenders sagged off a bit, but it is irrelevant when elite post players like Barkley or Robinson are allowed to gain easy post entry/position, and waltz in to the paint, only seeing predictable double teams, which usually led to a rotation and an open 3 in the corner

[fpliii]

Rule 2g deals with the times a 2nd offensive player is crossing paths with the defender's man - the defender must "[I]follow his weakside offensive man, switch to another man at an area of intersection, or double-team the ball.
Incorrect. Looks like it concerns cutters. Look at the rules on nba.com:


1981-82
• Zone defense rules clarified with new rules for Illegal Defensive Alignments.
a. Weak side defenders may come in the pro lane (16’), but not in the college lane (12’) for more than three seconds.
b. Defender on post player is allowed in defensive three-second area (A post player is any player adjacent to paint area).
c. Player without ball may not be double-teamed from weak side.
d. Offensive player above foul line and inside circle must be played by defender inside dotted line.
e. If offensive player is above the top of the circle, defender must come to a position above foul line.
f. Defender on cutter must follow the cutter, switch, or double-team the ball.
Rule g is a formalization of rule f above.


Do you realize that you've been dead wrong on the idea you've been selling for a while now that defenders had to follow shooters out to the 3-point line?.. Rule 2a and 2e allows defenders of 3-point shooters to sag back and paint-camp indefinitely in the "outside" lane, and 2.9 seconds in the "inside" lane.. Due to the paint-camping allowed in the "outside" lane, that's MORE freedom that today's defenders get when sagging off shooters.

So you couldn't have been more wrong on this issue, and quite frankly, you should be embarrassed that you were clueless about such basic things like whether man-to-man defenders have to hug shooters or not..
Nope. You are correct about the far corner - I will agree that you can stay in the pro lane (but not the college lane). But the bolded could not be more wrong in general:


When a weakside offensive player is above the tip of the circle, his defensive man must be no lower than the "upper defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds. When a strongside offensive player is above the tip of the circle extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the free-throw line extended (upper defensive area) for more than 2.9 seconds. When a strongside offensive player is above the free throw line extended "upper defensive area, his defensive man may be no lower than the "middle defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds.

You have three 2.9 seconds to get back to get above the FT line, whether your man is on the strongside or weakside. That is following your man, like it or not. If he cuts, you have to adjust to the regulation of the new zone, or you are in violation.


You were also wrong about the notion that previous era defenders couldn't paint-camp - the Illegal Defense Guidelines provided instances where defenders could stay in the paint "with no time limits" even though they were out of armslength of their man.. Today's rules don't allow that - defenders can NEVER remain in the paint when there man is out of "armslength".


This is enabled by SPACING and by SPACING ALONE. If you are unable to understand this, or are going to push this crap that stepping out or meeting your man once every 2.9 seconds is a hindrance, in the absence of ANY other language, then this conversation is over.

[3ball]

The spacing was still achieved from a basis of the Illegal Defense Rules.... coupled with the specific rules on how man defense can be played (Must switch/hard double/follow)


The only time the Illegal Defense Guidelines mentions a defender having to "follow" his man is in describing what happens when a 2nd offensive player crosses paths with the defender's original man - the defender must either follow his man or hard double the man with the ball - this is Rule 2g.

But regarding defenders being able to sag off shooters - they could sag off 3-point shooters into the paint for up to 2.9 seconds just like today's defenders.. They could paint-camp in the "outside" lane against sideline/corner 3-point shooters, which is MORE than today's defenders could do.

Then of course, there's the legal paint-camping.. the Illegal Defense Guidelines provided instances where defenders could stay in the paint "with no time limits" even though they were out of armslength of their man.. Today's rules don't allow that - defenders can NEVER remain in the paint when there man is out of "armslength".. Defenders must "vacate" the paint when out of armslength, which creates spacing in the paint, and therefore means that the "armslength" provision constitutes a specific example of rules-enforced spacing.

[3ball]

lol.. gif reaction is a funny guy

[3ball]

he always posts something crazy and then he's ghost :lol

[3ball]

(Rule 2g) looks like it concerns cutters.


Exactly - Rule 2g refers to CUTTERS, not shooters on the perimeter.. Rule 2g doesn't relate to whether defenders can sag off shooters at the 3-point line.





You're correct about the far corner - I will agree that you can stay in the pro lane (but not the college lane).


If you agree with Rule 2a when it says defenders can paint-camp in the pro lane indefinitely, then you how can you not agree with Rule 2a when it says defenders can remain in the college lane for 2.9 seconds??... It's like you're a stubborn crazy man - getting mad and ignoring parts of the rules that you don't like.

Defenders of corner and sideline 3-pointers can remain the college lane for 2.9 seconds and paint-camp in the pro lane - that's what Rule 2a says, so you were wrong when you said defenders can't sag off corner or sideline shooters and now you're crazy for accepting one part of the rule but not the other.. :facepalm






Defenders in previous eras had 2.9 seconds to get back to get above the FT line, whether your man is on the strongside or weakside. That is following your man



The bolded above is the same as today - when today's defender is guarding a 3-point shooter out front, they ALSO have only 2.9 seconds in the paint before they must get back above the FT line.. You're starting to be ridiculous and wasting my time... Defenders in previous eras could sag off shooters into the paint for up to 2.9 seconds, just like today - it's clear as day:


2e. When a strongside offensive player is above the tip of the circle extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the free-throw line extended (upper defensive area) for more than 2.9 seconds. When a weakside offensive player is above the tip of the circle, his defensive man must be no lower than the "upper defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds.





This is enabled by SPACING and by SPACING ALONE. If you are unable to understand this, then this conversation is over.


Even without today's spacing, defenders wouldn't be allowed to stand under the rim when their man is outside the paint.. And they can't run 8 feet back and forth from under the rim to outside the paint like you claim they can.. That's ridiculous - so accept your defeat and go read some more books... Or learn HOW to read, since your reading comp is very poor.

Btw, why would I be able to understand something that doesn't make sense?... I'm thrilled for the conversation to be over - you thought man-to-man defense meant you had to hug your man at the 3-point line - that means you don't know shit and it's laughable - I don't really have time to educate guys who THINK they know about the game, but in reality have gross misunderstandings like that..
.

[fpliii]

If you agree with Rule 2a when it says defenders can paint-camp in the pro lane indefinitely, then you how can you not agree with Rule 2a when it says defenders can remain in the college lane for 2.9 seconds??... It's like you're a stubborn crazy man - getting mad and ignoring parts of the rules that you don't like.
2.9 seconds is not staying (indefinitely). The bolded is ironic, since that is literally what you've been doing over the course of this 'debate' over all these months.


Defenders of corner and sideline 3-pointers can remain the college lane for 2.9 seconds and paint-camp in the pro lane - that's what Rule 2a says, so you were wrong when you said defenders can't sag off corner or sideline shooters and now you're crazy for accepting one part of the rule but not the other.. :facepalm
Only if your man is below the FT line.


The bolded above is the same as today - when today's defender is guarding a 3-point shooter out front, they ALSO have only 2.9 seconds in the paint before they must get back above the FT line.. You're starting to be ridiculous and wasting my time... Defenders in previous eras could sag off shooters into the paint for up to 2.9 seconds, just like today - it's clear as day:


2e. When a strongside offensive player is above the tip of the circle extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the free-throw line extended (upper defensive area) for more than 2.9 seconds. When a weakside offensive player is above the tip of the circle, his defensive man must be no lower than the "upper defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds.
No. Today you can remain below the FT line outside of the paint as long as you like, regardless of where your man is. You can go anywhere you want outside of the paint as long as you want. You can stay in the paint for 2.9 seconds at a time, and only have to tip toe out or approach your man to reset it. How great is that lack of limitations for the defense? Until spacing comes into play, of course.


Even without today's spacing, defenders wouldn't be allowed to stand under the rim when their man is outside the paint for more than 2.9 seconds before easily tip-toeing out of the paint or getting within armslength of his man.. And they can run 8 feet back and forth from under the rim to outside the paint like you claim they can.. That's ridiculous - so accept your defeat and go read some more books... Or learn HOW to read, since your reading comp is very poor.

Btw, why would I be able to understand something that doesn't make sense?... I'm thrilled for the conversation to be over - you thought man-to-man defense meant you had to remain in the adjacent zone to your man as dictated by the stringent illegal defense guidelines posted above - that means you don't know shit and it's laughable - I don't really have time to educate guys who THINK they know about the game, but in reality have gross misunderstandings like that..
Personal attacks again. If you're not capable of debating without childish insults, then don't engage me. All they do is expose the lack of evidence and/or an argument.

Just because you don't like statements or data doesn't mean they're going away. You have to accept them in their entirety, whether they support your beliefs or not.

[aj1987]

Personal attacks again. If you're not capable of debating without childish insults, then don't engage me. All they do is expose the lack of evidence and/or an argument.

Just because you don't like statements or data doesn't mean they're going away. You have to accept them in their entirety, whether they support your beliefs or not.
http://i.imgur.com/wC5IgeU.gif

3ball getting bodied ITT.

[3ball]

2.9 seconds is not staying (indefinitely).


Do you have a bad memory - we've been over this - weakside defenders may be in the "outside" or "pro" lane "with no time limit":


2a. Weakside defenders may be in a defensive position within the "outside lane" with no time limit, and within the "Inside lane" for 2.9 seconds.







"Defenders of corner and sideline 3-pointers can remain the college lane for 2.9 seconds and paint-camp in the pro lane"


Only if your man is below the FT line



That's what sideline 3-pointers ARE - when a player is standing below FT line but behind 3-point line, that means they're standing behind the sideline 3-point line.





No. Today you can remain below the FT line outside of the paint as long as you like, regardless of where your man is. You can go anywhere you want outside of the paint as long as you want. You can stay in the paint for 2.9 seconds at a time, and only have to tip toe out or approach your man to reset it. How great is that lack of limitations for the defense? Until spacing comes into play, of course.


Today's defender can sag off further when the paint ISN'T in the way... But previous era defenders could sag off more on sideline and corner 3's, since they can paint-camp indefinitely in the "outside" or "pro" lane... Today's defenders can only stay in the pro lane for 2.9 seconds, just like the rest of the paint.

Also, there's something we haven't talked about - Rule 2e allows defenders to paint-camp with no time limit in the upper part of the paint (middle defensive area) when their man is above the FT line but below the tip of circle:


2e. When a strongside offensive player is above the free throw line extended (but not above tip of circle), his defensive man may be no lower than the "middle defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds.. When a weakside offensive player is above the free throw line extended (but not above tip of circle), his defensive man may be no lower than the "middle defensive area" extended for more than 2.9 seconds.





If you're going to engage in personal attacks then don't engage me


You don't get it - your belief that man-to-man defenders had to "follow their man to the 3-point line" is a gross misunderstanding of one of the most basic aspects of the game: man-to-man defense... And it's caused me to take you through a painstaking, unnecessary, education process that shouldn't ever need to occur.

So how could I possibly have a respectful dialogue with you?... Think about it from my perspective - due to your ignorance, I'm being forced to use the NBA's rules to show you how man-to-man defense is played when I shouldn't have to - it's common knowledge that man-to-man defenders are allowed to sag off their man!!!!!

[fpliii]

we've been over this
I said this already (3rd point). (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11790100&postcount=57)


That's what sideline 3-pointers ARE
You said "Defenders of corner and sideline 3-pointers", so you chose to distinguish between the two (second point). (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11790180&postcount=61) I did not. The corner three begins near where the three point arc meets the FT line extended. You are separating sideline threes out from corner threes even though they comprise a minuscule area of he floor.

Today's defender can sag off further when the paint ISN'T in the way...
Glad we agree.

Also, there's something we haven't talked about
That is a rule enabled only by poor spacing. Like I said over here (fourth point), poor strategy (staying by the paint on offense if you aren't a post up or rebounding threat, or hanging out in the high post) enabled the paint-camping. (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11789051&postcount=39) Proper spacing eliminates it.


had to "follow their man to the 3-point line"

e. When a weakside offensive player is above the free throw line extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the "middle defensive area" extended for more than 2.9 seconds. When a weakside offensive player is below the free throw line extended, his defensive man must vacate the "inside lane" unless his man is positioned adjacent (posted up) to the threesecond lane extended. When a weakside offensive player is above the tip of the circle, his defensive man must be no lower than the "upper defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds. When a strongside offensive player is above the tip of the circle extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the free-throw line extended (upper defensive area) for more than 2.9 seconds. When a strongside offensive player is above the free throw line extended "upper defensive area, his defensive man may be no lower than the "middle defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds. When an offensive player on the strongside is below the free throw line extended "middle defensive area," his defender must take a position below the free throw line extended immediately or double-team the ball as soon as the ball crosses midcourt. There is no 2.9 time limit. If the offensive player relocates to a position above the free throw line extended, his defender may take a similar position no farther than one defensive area away within 2.9 seconds. In all of the situations above, a defensive player may always aggressively double-team the ball regardless of his previous position on the floor.

[3ball]

e. When a weakside offensive player is above the free throw line extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the "middle defensive area" extended for more than 2.9 seconds. When a weakside offensive player is below the free throw line extended, his defensive man must vacate the "inside lane" unless his man is positioned adjacent (posted up) to the threesecond lane extended. When a weakside offensive player is above the tip of the circle, his defensive man must be no lower than the "upper defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds. When a strongside offensive player is above the tip of the circle extended, his defensive man may be no lower than the free-throw line extended (upper defensive area) for more than 2.9 seconds. When a strongside offensive player is above the free throw line extended "upper defensive area, his defensive man may be no lower than the "middle defensive area" for more than 2.9 seconds. When an offensive player on the strongside is below the free throw line extended "middle defensive area," his defender must take a position below the free throw line extended immediately or double-team the ball as soon as the ball crosses midcourt. There is no 2.9 time limit. If the offensive player relocates to a position above the free throw line extended, his defender may take a similar position no farther than one defensive area away within 2.9 seconds. In all of the situations above, a defensive player may always aggressively double-team the ball regardless of his previous position on the floor.



Sweet - so this discussion has taught you that previous era defenders of 3-point shooters could sag off all the way to FT line and into the paint for 2.9 seconds.. Whereas you didn't know that before I educated you on it.. You thought defenders had to follow 3-point shooters to the 3-point line.

You've also learned that previous era defenders could sag off more on sideline/corner 3's, since they can paint-camp indefinitely in the "outside" or "pro" lane... Whereas today's defenders can only stay in the pro lane for 2.9 seconds, just like the rest of the paint.





Glad we agree that today's defender can sag off further when the paint ISN'T in the way...


That's fine - because again, this discussion has taught you that previous era defenders of 3-point shooters could sag off all the way to FT line and into the paint for 2.9 seconds.. Whereas you didn't know that before I educated you on it.. You thought defenders had to follow 3-point shooters to the 3-point line... :roll:

Also, previous era defenders could sag off more on sideline/corner 3's, since they can paint-camp indefinitely in the "outside" or "pro" lane... Whereas today's defenders can only stay in the pro lane for 2.9 seconds, just like the rest of the paint.
.

[fpliii]

defenders had to follow 3-point shooters as outlined by 2e

Whereas today's defenders can only stay in the pro lane for 2.9 seconds before easily moving to their man or tip toeing out of the paint to reset, just like the rest of the paint.

Wait - so just like you said above

He had three options:

(1) Stick with Thompson (which he did) to prevent the offensive rebound or alley-oop.

(2) Double LeBron (not wait, but move up).

(3) Remain in the paint for 2.9 seconds after leaving Thompson. As long as he is within armslength of LeBron, by the end of those 2.9 seconds, it is legal defensively.
:cheers:

Don't expect further responses from me, my work here is done.

[3ball]

http://i.imgur.com/rW270Q6.gif


don't act like tip-toeing out of the paint to reset once every 2.9 seconds is a hindrance....



Wait - so you think Speights can run from under the rim to the edge of the paint (8 feet) and get back to contest Lebron in time?... So why doesn't he do it... What is he, the ****ing roadrunner?... beep beep!... :roll:

Man, you're starting to crack me up.


And I'm glad this thread has taught you that previous era defenders of 3-point shooters could sag off all the way to FT line and into the paint for 2.9 seconds.. Whereas you didn't know that before I educated you on it.. You thought defenders had to follow 3-point shooters to the 3-point line.. Embaaaarasinggg...

You've also learned that previous era defenders could sag off more on sideline/corner 3's, since they can paint-camp indefinitely in the "outside" or "pro" lane... Whereas today's defenders can only stay in the pro lane for 2.9 seconds, just like the rest of the paint.
.

[3ball]

http://lookingforamerica.us/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Nba-Basketball-Court-Dimensions-300x300.jpg


In today's game, if a defender's man is behind the 3-point line (with or without the ball), the defender can sag off an unlimited amount, even all the way to the baseline, BUT ONLY IF the paint doesn't get in the way.

Unfortunately, as the diagram shows, almost nowhere on the 3-point arc can a defender sag off and not eventually meet the paint - in these instances, the defender only has 3 seconds in the paint, which is the same as previous eras, who were also allowed to sag into the paint for 3 seconds.

However, defenders in previous eras had an advantage specifically when sagging off corner/sideline 3-point shooters - they were allowed to paint-camp "with no time limits" in the "outside" lane, which is the outer partition running up the sides of the paint, shown above.. Today's defenders can't do this - they have 3 seconds in the "outside" lane, just like they do in the inside lane.. Given this disadvantage in sagging off on corner/sideline 3-point shooters, today's defender has less freedom in sagging off shooters than previous eras.
.