Is the 3pt shot impacting the league too much?

[HurricaneKid]

The EV (expected value) of the league avg 3 pt shot is worth ~5% more than the league avg 2 pt shot. That includes dunks, etc.

The 5 most prolific 3 pt shooting teams last year were the last 5 teams left in the playoffs.

Is anyone getting sick of all the 3 point shooting? Because its going to continue to go up and up and up...

[sd3035]

sounds like a butthurt fan of a guy with no outside shooting ability lol

[AlphaWolf24]

way better then watching hack ball of the 90's...

[Akrazotile]

It would be nice to see more variety but on the other hand, three point shooting does produce better ball movement than heroball iso chucking. And you could still mix it up, if the Grizzlies would have gotten one god damn reliable three point shooter to play with marc, zach, and mike they very well might have made a finals at some point with an offense based on post play and cutting to the basket, but with some supplementary shooting.

Things will never he perfect. Yeah all the three jacking is a lil much, but I dunno what the solution is in terms of legislating an actual improvement.

[pastis]

no. 3pt shot forces players to develop their game, to boost their game.

[fpliii]

From his book "Practical Modern Basketball":


The Three-Point Goal

There has been considerable discussion and experimentation in the last several years in regard to this new rule, which was adopted for the 1986-87 season. Although there seems to be a favorable reaction to the rule by most coaches, many feel the 19-feet, 9-inch distance is too close.

I personally concur with this reaction as I feel the distance should be a minimum of 21 feet. However, the 1986-87 season provided a good test.

If the rule was adopted to discourage the use of zone defenses, then I think it is wrong. However, if it was to diminish some of the physical play in the deep-post area and cut down on fouls, then it certainly was worth adopting. Not only is the latter thought a good possibility, but the rule may help the smaller, quicker player by forcing the defense to extend out a little farther and thus open up more driving room for the more maneuverable player.

Since I think that basketball was meant to be a game of finesse and maneuverability rather than physical strength and brute force, I am hopeful that this rule may lead us back toward that style of play.

[HurricaneKid]

The GSW small ball lineup (Curry/Klay/Iggy/Barnes/Dray) has played 48 min this season and is +61.

Last night that lineup went on the floor with 5:41 to go in the 4th down 10. They had 10 possessions the rest of the way and scored 25 points (250 ORTG).

We are going to see a LOT MORE 5 man units with 5 shooters. That means no helping and no C on the floor.

Curry is a complete outlier but I do fear that we are going a little too far with this.

EDIT: Not trying to get rid of the 3 pt shot. I just think it should be moved farther out, or SOMETHING so we don't see the game transform to nothing but 6'6-6'9" players playing drive and kick.

[WorldWarriors]

The GSW small ball lineup (Curry/Klay/Iggy/Barnes/Dray) has played 48 min this season and is +61.

Last night that lineup went on the floor with 5:41 to go in the 4th down 10. They had 10 possessions the rest of the way and scored 25 points (250 ORTG).

We are going to see a LOT MORE 5 man units with 5 shooters. That means no helping and no C on the floor.

Curry is a complete outlier but I do fear that we are going a little too far with this.

If the Warriors are the only team that does this, how is it going to far?

Before you can say that its gone too far we will need other teams to follow suit. Which I doubt very seriously will happen. First of all to make this even a thing you have to have players that can switch positions and still do well including defend. That's where Iggy and Draymond come in. Especially Draymond. It's not just the 3 point shooting.

[Straight_Ballin]

If anything the rules need to be changed so that it's not a top heavy offensive oriented game. We don't need scores of 101 to 99.

What other sport has this high of point totals?

Soccer - no
Hockey - no
Baseball - no
Football - no

Why? Because it's HARD to score in those sports.

In basketball it's easy to score, hence the high point totals.

[fpliii]

The GSW small ball lineup (Curry/Klay/Iggy/Barnes/Dray) has played 48 min this season and is +61.

Last night that lineup went on the floor with 5:41 to go in the 4th down 10. They had 10 possessions the rest of the way and scored 25 points (250 ORTG).

We are going to see a LOT MORE 5 man units with 5 shooters. That means no helping and no C on the floor.

Curry is a complete outlier (GOAT shooter by a good margin IMO) but I do fear that we are going a little too far with this.

EDIT: Not trying to get rid of the 3 pt shot. I just think it should be moved farther out, or SOMETHING so we don't see the game transform to nothing but 6'6-6'9" players playing drive and kick.
I don't know how much moving it further out would help though. Shooting distance doesn't affect league-wise percentages until you get pretty far out. Something in the high 20s feet from the graph here:

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

Curry is an outlier as you noted, but pushing the line out might do nothing but exacerbate the advantages of the best shooters.

Corner threes are also a big deal, because by that same link, they end up being open shots a lot of the time. Maybe if you make the court wider it would allow you to push the line out, but keep in mind that it's more distance a defender has to cover when rotating/recovering.

Unless you decrease the value of the three on the scoreboard (which unless it's fractional, you can't really do) your options are limited.

(To be clear, saying this as someone who has no problem with the volume of 3pt shooting today.)

[oarabbus]

If anything the rules need to be changed so that it's not a top heavy offensive oriented game. We don't need scores of 101 to 99.

What other sport has this high of point totals?

Soccer - no
Hockey - no
Baseball - no
Football - no

Why? Because it's HARD to score in those sports.

In basketball it's easy to score, hence the high point totals.

yeah bruh remove the shot clock and the 3point line and reinstitute handchecking, so we can watch those riveting 18-14 games again :biggums:

[bdreason]

I think the danger is that every team starts to build their offense around the 3pnt shot, even if they don't have the personnel. I see a lot of guys shooting lots of 3 pointers these days... who shouldn't be shooting lots of 3 pointers.

[fpliii]

If anything the rules need to be changed so that it's not a top heavy offensive oriented game. We don't need scores of 101 to 99.

What other sport has this high of point totals?

Soccer - no
Hockey - no
Baseball - no
Football - no

Why? Because it's HARD to score in those sports.

In basketball it's easy to score, hence the high point totals.
It's the nature of the sport though. Transition opportunities have a very high yield, the floor isn't very crowded, and there isn't much distance to cover.

Maybe if you completely eliminate goaltending, remove the restricted area, give each team an extra player on the floor to use as a rim protector, and start with a jump ball after each tip you'd reduce scoring significantly. You'd lose all the casual fans with those changes though.

[Straight_Ballin]

yeah bruh remove the shot clock and the 3point line and reinstitute handchecking, so we can watch those riveting 18-14 games again :biggums:

No fan of any of the other sports I mentioned complains about the low scoring. Basketball should be no different.

If the game needs to have such high scores just to be enjoyable for you to watch, then is sounds like a rules problem to me.

[Straight_Ballin]

Transition opportunities are plentiful, the floor isn't very crowded, and there isn't much distance to cover.

You just described hockey.

Again, in basketball it's TOO EASY to score.

[SexSymbol]

You just described hockey.

Again, in basketball it's TOO EASY to score.
That's why it's great.
There's a huge variety of things happening on the court that you can get excited about.
Meanwhile football is boring for 85 minutes out of 90

[fpliii]

You just described hockey.

Again, in basketball it's TOO EASY to score.
Hockey players are incredibly skilled skaters and have amazing control over their sticks, but both of those are factors making it more difficult than physically handling the ball. I do think having a dedicated keeper (aside from end-game desperation situations) changes things.

The only other factor is the shot clock. There were some incredibly low scores in thhe 40s and 50s (even keeping in mind a field goal is worth 2 points). If you add a dedicated rim protector, eliminate the restricted area and goal tending, scores would be very low.

[Nuff Said]

It's the nature of the sport though. Transition opportunities have a very high yield, the floor isn't very crowded, and there isn't much distance to cover.

Maybe if you completely eliminate goaltending, remove the restricted area, give each team an extra player on the floor to use as a rim protector, and start with a jump ball after each tip you'd reduce scoring significantly. You'd lose all the casual fans with those changes though.
Best way to reduce scoring is remote the shot clock. Harden and lebron will pound the ball for minutes at a time before they make their move.

[HurricaneKid]

If the Warriors are the only team that does this, how is it going to far?

Before you can say that its gone too far we will need other teams to follow suit. Which I doubt very seriously will happen. First of all to make this even a thing you have to have players that can switch positions and still do well including defend. That's where Iggy and Draymond come in. Especially Draymond. It's not just the 3 point shooting.

WHAT?? 3FGAs have gone up every single year for like 15 years. FOR THE ENTIRE LEAGUE.

The rate at which they are going up is only increasing. The NBA record for 3s in a season is 287 (Curry ast year, might be a few off). He is now on pace to hit 429. Larry bird was 31 and in his 9th season when he hit his 429th 3pter.

[MMKM]

I'm shocked by the overreaction about the Warriors winning 1 championship and how it is impacting the league. So many teams trying to emulate them and don't have the personnel to do it.

It's almost like people think shooting 3's is the only way to win now. Look back through history at how many basketball dynasties have been created around dominant big men. It goes in phases, and the Warriors are fortunate to be in an era with the weakest group of big men maybe in NBA history.

The pendulum will eventually swing back the other way. There is no magic formula and with regards to the OP's stat of 3 point efficiency vs 2 point efficiency, that doesn't factor in the difference in second chance opportunities you will get playing small ball vs playing pound it inside ball, the number of fast break opportunities a missed 3 can create for the other team, or the fact that by playing grind it out ball with a good big man, you'll put the other team into foul trouble. There are too many variables to ever establish that shooting 3's is a better formula for winning than playing an inside game. It all depends on who you have on your roster.

Up and up and up, will not be the case. Everything has its cycle.

[Funktion]

Learn how to shoot instead of dunking at an early age. Its Basketball not Jungle Ball. The league should change rules because the silent masses want more slop, and lower scores?

[oarabbus]

No fan of any of the other sports I mentioned complains about the low scoring. Basketball should be no different.

If the game needs to have such high scores just to be enjoyable for you to watch, then is sounds like a rules problem to me.


It's a different game. Are you serious? Have you played basketball before?

You know, pick up basketball, first to 11? It is REAL EASY to score, that's the nature of the game itself.

[WorldWarriors]

WHAT?? 3FGAs have gone up every single year for like 15 years. FOR THE ENTIRE LEAGUE.

The rate at which they are going up is only increasing. The NBA record for 3s in a season is 287 (Curry ast year, might be a few off). He is now on pace to hit 429. Larry bird was 31 and in his 9th season when he hit his 429th 3pter.

My bad. I was talking about small ball in general. Not just the 3 point shooting.

[FKAri]

Those sports are about a build up to a grand score. It's about doing the little things things that build up anticipation to the big thing.

Basketball is about tempo and going back and forth like tennis is.

[HurricaneKid]

I'm shocked by the overreaction about the Warriors winning 1 championship and how it is impacting the league. So many teams trying to emulate them and don't have the personnel to do it.

It's almost like people think shooting 3's is the only way to win now. Look back through history at how many basketball dynasties have been created around dominant big men. It goes in phases, and the Warriors are fortunate to be in an era with the weakest group of big men maybe in NBA history.

The pendulum will eventually swing back the other way. There is no magic formula and with regards to the OP's stat of 3 point efficiency vs 2 point efficiency, that doesn't factor in the difference in second chance opportunities you will get playing small ball vs playing pound it inside ball, the number of fast break opportunities a missed 3 can create for the other team, or the fact that by playing grind it out ball with a good big man, you'll put the other team into foul trouble. There are too many variables to ever establish that shooting 3's is a better formula for winning than playing an inside game. It all depends on who you have on your roster.

Up and up and up, will not be the case. Everything has its cycle.

Thats kind of the entire point of the thread. The rules changes and emphasis' have all but ended post play and have led to the dramatic rise in 3s.

Larry Bird led the league in 86-87 with that all time Celtics squad with 91 3s made. The team made 131. The TWolves were last in the NBA last year with >3 times as many. Bird's 91 that led the league would have placed him 86th in the league last year. And its getting exponentially worse.

last year there were 15840 more 3s taken than 10 years ago. This is NOT just Curry. This is the whole league.

EDIT: YES. That figure is CORRECT. Almost 16000 more 3s taken.

[BoutPractice]

Players that make 3s off the dribble like they're layups aren't likely to proliferate.

They may try, but only one has been able to pull it off so far.

Without the Curry cheat code, the 3 is just one weapon among many in a mostly well balanced game.

[FKAri]

Players that make 3s off the dribble like they're layups aren't likely to proliferate.

They may try, but only one has been able to pull it off so far.

Without the Curry cheat code, the 3 is just one weapon among many in a mostly well balanced game.

It is rare but I don't think many have tried. Look at the all time made 3pt FG list. It's surprisingly lopsided. Modern guys will destroy that list.

[Jameerthefear]

I think offenses have become too fomulaic. Which is funny for me to say since the '09 Magic were basically the original 3 and D team.

[MMKM]

Thats kind of the entire point of the thread. The rules changes and emphasis' have all but ended post play and have led to the dramatic rise in 3s.

Larry Bird led the league in 86-87 with that all time Celtics squad with 91 3s made. The team made 131. The TWolves were last in the NBA last year with >3 times as many. Bird's 91 that led the league would have placed him 86th in the league last year. And its getting exponentially worse.

last year there were 15840 more 3s taken than 10 years ago. This is NOT just Curry. This is the whole league.

EDIT: YES. That figure is CORRECT. Almost 16000 more 3s taken.

I see your point that the league as a whole will continue to shoot far more threes than it used to. However I don't think there will ever be a consistent correlation that the team that shoots the most 3s wins the most games. It is a foolish strategy. Last I checked this year the lakers were leading the league in 3pt attempts. I just think the disappearance of the big man has a lot less to do with rule changes than it has to do with talent. In terms of dynasties Hakeem passed the torch to Shaq who passed it (or shared it) with Duncan, who passed it to.....who? Dwight? Lmao. So there's currently a void. At some point the void will be filled and that team will have a better chance to win rings than any team that jacks threes. I agree, the league will always shoot more threes than it did in the 80s. I'm just saying there will be no correlation between 3 point attempts and winning.

[Straight_Ballin]

It's a different game. Are you serious? Have you played basketball before?

You know, pick up basketball, first to 11? It is REAL EASY to score, that's the nature of the game itself.

Yes I know. Because it's easy to score you don't have to wait as long to get into the next game since the score is up to 11 and the games go quick. If the rules were different and they were applied to pick up ball, the final score that you play up to would be changed such that those sitting on the sideline wouldn't have to wait forever to get into the next game! If it takes 15 minutes to score 11 points under current rules and 30 minutes to score 11 points under new rules, pick up games would probably only go up to 4 or 5 points, assuming these hypothetical new rules were applied.

[dhsilv]

The EV (expected value) of the league avg 3 pt shot is worth ~5% more than the league avg 2 pt shot. That includes dunks, etc.

The 5 most prolific 3 pt shooting teams last year were the last 5 teams left in the playoffs.

Is anyone getting sick of all the 3 point shooting? Because its going to continue to go up and up and up...

My dad is not a big sports fan. I recall our early days watching of basketball. I was UK games and with Pitino in his early days. Sure I was a bit older than most to get into sports, but I wasn't raised in a sports family so my watching wasn't with dad. Anyway he he just such a HUGE fan of a deep shot. The way the ball splashed through that net.

I say this because to me visually only a handful of players were more fun to watch score in a 2 than a guy like curry swishing a 3. Seeing a 3 point shot nailed is just a work of art, and it is what basketball is all about.

More 3's being a "bad" thing is just beyond my ability to understand. Sure if a team is just bricking it, that would be awful, but that isn't what is happening.

Basketball is just getting better to watch. Dunks are boring next to perfect 3 point shooting.

[MMKM]

More 3's being a "bad" thing is just beyond my ability to understand. Sure if a team is just bricking it, that would be awful, but that isn't what is happening.

Have you seen the Lakers yet this year?:biggums:

[dhsilv]

I don't know how much moving it further out would help though. Shooting distance doesn't affect league-wise percentages until you get pretty far out. Something in the high 20s feet from the graph here:

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

Curry is an outlier as you noted, but pushing the line out might do nothing but exacerbate the advantages of the best shooters.

Corner threes are also a big deal, because by that same link, they end up being open shots a lot of the time. Maybe if you make the court wider it would allow you to push the line out, but keep in mind that it's more distance a defender has to cover when rotating/recovering.

Unless you decrease the value of the three on the scoreboard (which unless it's fractional, you can't really do) your options are limited.

(To be clear, saying this as someone who has no problem with the volume of 3pt shooting today.)

The really only alternative is to make the court wider AND expend the 3 so it is a full arche. Without that kind of radical change...we haev what we have.

[dhsilv]

Have you seen the Lakers yet this year?:biggums:

No, I don't hate myself :)

[AnaheimLakers24]

Only thing that i hate is when dumbass players pull up for 3 on a fastbreak with an open lane.

[Mr. Jabbar]

sounds like a butthurt fan of a guy with no outside shooting ability lol

:roll: :roll:

"beyond 5 ft"

[warriorfan]

I dont know about you guys but I much prefer watching LeBron James Bulldoze his way to the hoop and finish with a herky jerky baby hook.

[Duffy Pratt]

Games where scoring is rare are much more subject to luck. It's easy enough to see this in soccer, hockey, and baseball. Even in football, so much is determined by just a few key plays. I think there are fewer lucky outcomes in basketball than in other games. (Compare this to tennis, where there is a ton of scoring compared with almost any other sport, and luck almost never has anything to do with the outcome.)

I'm not a fan of the three point shot. There are things that could be done, if you are only concerned about the shot. You could "normalize" the scoring from three pointers by lowering their value so that a three point is no more efficient than say, a fifteen footer. That would mean that you would have a variable, and fractional value, for a three point attempt on any given night. But there's no reason it couldn't be done. Certainly, computers are capable of dealing with such complexities. So, if the three point shot, at three points is 20% more efficient than a 15 footer, then its value gets cut back to 2.4 points. Right now, if it is truly 5% more efficient, then we simply cut back its value by 5%, so it would be worth 2.85 points.

If relative efficiency is the concern, there are two ways to deal with it. Make the shot more difficult, or lower the value.

[Straight_Ballin]

Only thing that i hate is when dumbass players pull up for 3 on a fastbreak with an open lane.

In the days of kids basketball league I use to leap with one foot behind the 3 line on a break and go for the long range floater if I was the only one running with the defense behind me. If I missed, just get the quick rebound and lay it in. Worked every time. Why try for just 2 when you can try for a low % 3 attempt and a guaranteed 2 every time if you missed. Of course as I got older, I was never alone on a break and stopped doing it. :lol

[Straight_Ballin]

Games where scoring is rare are much more subject to luck. It's easy enough to see this in soccer, hockey, and baseball. Even in football, so much is determined by just a few key plays. I think there are fewer lucky outcomes in basketball than in other games. (Compare this to tennis, where there is a ton of scoring compared with almost any other sport, and luck almost never has anything to do with the outcome.)

I'm not a fan of the three point shot. There are things that could be done, if you are only concerned about the shot. You could "normalize" the scoring from three pointers by lowering their value so that a three point is no more efficient than say, a fifteen footer. That would mean that you would have a variable, and fractional value, for a three point attempt on any given night. But there's no reason it couldn't be done. Certainly, computers are capable of dealing with such complexities. So, if the three point shot, at three points is 20% more efficient than a 15 footer, then its value gets cut back to 2.4 points. Right now, if it is truly 5% more efficient, then we simply cut back its value by 5%, so it would be worth 2.85 points.

If relative efficiency is the concern, there are two ways to deal with it. Make the shot more difficult, or lower the value.

The more I think about it the more I realize we should keep the rules the same until there is a new GOAT. Stern has tried everything in his power to give players the opportunity to be the next GOAT with rule changes and still they come up short. Let these lesser men playing in current era first demonstrate that they can become better than MJ before we make any more changes. Let't at least TRY to keep it consistent. It's bad enough that there's no hand checking and touch fouls for them to deal with let alone taking away their 3 point shot from them....