Flpiii found ORIGINAL 3 seconds rule from NBA rulebook... PAINT-CAMPING WAS LEGAL

[QUOTE=fpliii]

There were all kinds of rules about staying above and below the FT line.

[/quote]
for this scenario, the rules today are very close to the rules in previous eras - if the offensive player is above the FT line at the top of the key, the defender can't dip into the paint for more than 3 seconds... this part of the rule hasn't changed much over the eras.


[quote]

But 2b is interesting. I think it's nice to have clear language about distance permitted when players are within the 3 foot hatchmarks. I think in that regard, it confirms that defense *in the paint* was allowed to be tougher from 81-82 through 00-01 than 01-02 to the present.

[/QUOTE]
do you think there is merit to the following math - the paint is 16 feet wide, and a defender's arm is only 3 feet - this indicates that if an offensive player is outside the paint, a defender can't REMAIN in the paint under today's rules, unless they are on the very edge of the paint, which would allow their 3-foot arm to reach their man and fulfill today's "armslength" requirement...

the requirement of being within armslength is why today's defenders have to tippy-toe in and out of the paint.


[QUOTE]

Still though, I think spacing has a huge effect. The fact that there weren't as many shooters (particularly in the 80s, before the 3pt shot was adapted) made things congested.

[/QUOTE]
that's what people don't understand - the fact that no one was a good shooter back then, made the paint defense tougher because defenders didn't have to guard the perimeter... the eye test fully backs this up... what am i missing here?

I feel like we need to invest more money into our schools. Reading comprehension is shit in this country.

[QUOTE=3ball]that's what people don't understand - the fact that no one was a good shooter back then, made the paint defense tougher because defenders didn't have to guard the perimeter... the eye test fully backs this up... what am i missing here?[/QUOTE]
A bit OT, but that hurt Wilt, Baylor, and Dr. J (during his first few years in the NBA) especially, even before the 81-82 rules. Wilt had defenders sagging on him (especially after Arizin retired, and before he was traded to the Sixers), and Baylor/Erving had little room to maneuver getting to the hole.

[QUOTE=3ball]this forum is for dummies[/QUOTE]
Then this is the perfect place for you, dude.

I may have missed a rule change, but I thought Zone Defense was currently legal? Does that not include allowing defenders to stay in the paint? Or is the 3-second defensive rule still in effect with zone?

[QUOTE=kshutts1]I may have missed a rule change, but I thought Zone Defense was currently legal? Does that not include allowing defenders to stay in the paint? Or is the 3-second defensive rule still in effect with zone?[/QUOTE]
Here's the current rule (01-02 to the present; rule in the OP was in effect from 81-82 through 00-01):

[QUOTE]Section VII—Defensive Three-Second Rule

a. The count starts when the offensive team is in control of the ball in the frontcourt.

b. Any defensive player, who is positioned in the 16-foot lane or the area extending 4 feet past the lane endline, must be actively guarding an opponent within three seconds. Actively guarding means being within arms length of an offensive player and in a guarding position.

c. Any defensive player may play any offensive player. The defenders may double-team any player.

d. The defensive three-second count is suspended when: (1) a player is in the act of shooting, (2) there is a loss of team control, (3) the defender is actively guarding an opponent, (4) the defender completely clears the 16-foot lane or (5) it is imminent the defender will become legal.

e. If the defender is guarding the player with the ball, he may be located in the 16-foot lane. This defender is not required to be in an actively guarding/arms distance position. If another defender actively guards the player with the ball, the original defender must actively guard an opponent or exit the 16-foot lane. Once the offensive player passes the ball, the defender must actively guard an opponent or exit the 16-foot lane.

PENALTY: A technical foul shall be assessed. The offensive team retains possession on the sideline at the free throw line extended nearest the point of interruption. The shot clock shall remain the same as when play was interrupted or reset to 14 seconds, whichever is greater.

If a violation is whistled during a successful field goal attempt, the violation shall be ignored and play shall resume as after any successful basket.[/QUOTE]

source: [url]https://turnernbahangtime.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/2014-15-nba-rule-book.pdf[/url]

A pure zone wouldn't have defensive 3 seconds (they still do today, that's why if you listen closely, you'll sometimes hear guys yelling "2 9!!" when teammates need to leave the paint).

[QUOTE=Smook A.]Then this is the perfect place for you, dude.[/QUOTE]


No Smook don't say that. He said he was "almost done" with this forum we can only hope he follows through on his words.

[QUOTE=Smook A.]

Then this is the perfect place for you, dude.

[/QUOTE]
you right.

this is a good place for me... we're all dummmies at one point or another... heck, before i began to fully understand the way today's gaame worked with the spacing, i swore anthony davis would be another john salleey.. i believe that's exactly what i said.. many times.

on this topic however, i do think i'm on the right track - but my argument has never been that one era's OVERALL defense is better than another's... i've never said that... instead, my argument has only been that it isn't any harder to score today, than in prevoius eras - defensive effectiveness remains relatively stable over the eras as teams adjust and as rule changes take some things away but add others - i've made threads about this.

i've only railed against people saying today's defenses are BETTER... so i point out things like how [I]a strong-side floood is not applicable when there is no spacing[/I].. anyone think the weakside guy needs to be brought over to the strongside here?... that's like telling a girl with massive FF's that she needs a boob job.

[IMG]http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/573113292e852dcb8f5fe242c53e3982.gif[/IMG]

[QUOTE=3ball]you right.

this is a good place for me... we're all dummmies at one point or another... heck, before i began to fully understand the way today's gaame worked with the spacing, i swore anthony davis would be another john salleey.. i believe that's exactly what i said.. many times.

on this topic however, i do think i'm on the right track - but my argument has never been that one era's OVERALL defense is better than another's... i've never said that... instead, my argument has only been that it isn't any harder to score today, than in prevoius eras - defensive effectiveness remains relatively stable over the eras as teams adjust and as rule changes take some things away but add others - i've made threads about this.

i've only railed against people saying today's defenses are BETTER... so i point out things like how [I]a strong-side floood is not applicable when there is no spacing[/I].. anyone think the weakside guy needs to be brought over to the strongside here?... that's like telling a girl with massive FF's that she needs a boob job.

[IMG]http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/573113292e852dcb8f5fe242c53e3982.gif[/IMG][/QUOTE]

Okay, here we can agree.

Defenses today aren't necessarily better, but they can be different at times. In past eras, the paint can be crowded at times because offensive sets were geared to take the closest shot to the rim, so most off. players converged around the paint.

Today, it can be wide open, at times, because off. players have learned to react to this by spreading the court, and shooters are better today than they have ever been.

[QUOTE=3ball]i don't understand why people are so afraid to admit that players could camp in the paint in previous eras - the rules say they could, as long as their man was within 3 feet of either side of the paint... naturally, [url=http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10866902&postcount=134]the eyetest backs up the rule[/url], not that we need to verify it, since the rule already says it in black and white.

more importantly, teams didn't shoot 3's in previous eras, so MOST SHOTS WERE TAKEN WITHIN 3 FEET OF THE PAINT.... that means players, especially big men, could camp in the paint for entire possessions, as long as their man remained within 3 feet of either side of the paint.

and the rule says that hashmarks on the baseline denote the 3 feet... imagine how lax refs were about the 3 foot hashmarks... which is why defenders could frequently [url=http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10695139&postcount=1][u]camp in the paint while guarding 3-point shooters[/u][/url].

honestly, i'm about to be done with this forum... posters are actually quite dumb and can't understand advanced concepts, so if you post something remotely nuanced, it gets misunderstood... most importantly, even when you definitively prove something like we've done here proving players could camp in the lane in previous eras, posters will be immature and call you names.

this forum is for dummies.[/QUOTE]
You missed the nuance yourself. And it wasn't even nuanced.

It isn't camping that is important, it's the stupid circle around the basket. What's so hard to understand about it?

You think you know more than anybody on Ish? Tell us, O Wise One, how Kareem "camped in the paint" against Dave Cowens. How'd that work out for him?
You think nobody watched Calvin Murphy & Tiny & Lucas and Earl Monroe drive right through your 70s & 80s paint with great ease, just like moving through air?

You think all Chamberlain did was ballhoggery? Did he play defense in Philly? Did you ever watch Artis Gilmore or Dan Issel line up on Mel Daniels?

Back on up with your arrogance 3ball there's guys on this board that know more or saw more or played more hoops than 90% of the planet. [b]They aren't bothering to post on your threads.[/b] Do you wonder why that is?

[QUOTE=La Frescobaldi]You missed the nuance yourself. And it wasn't even nuanced.

It isn't camping that is important, it's the stupid circle around the basket. What's so hard to understand about it?

You think you know more than anybody on Ish? Tell us, O Wise One, how Kareem "camped in the paint" against Dave Cowens. How'd that work out for him?
You think nobody watched Calvin Murphy & Tiny & Lucas and Earl Monroe drive right through your 70s & 80s paint with great ease, just like moving through air?

You think all Chamberlain did was ballhoggery? Did he play defense in Philly? Did you ever watch Artis Gilmore or Dan Issel line up on Mel Daniels?

Back on up with your arrogance 3ball there's guys on this board that know more or saw more or played more hoops than 90% of the planet. [b]They aren't bothering to post on your threads.[/b] Do you wonder why that is?[/QUOTE]
what's your point - i posted the actual rules and i'm right, so stop your whining just because the rules back up everything i've ever said on the topic.

i'll keep posting the truth, and you'll keep whining.... and most ex-players don't know much about the game, other than playing... i'm an exception.... aw, did that make you mad?

[QUOTE=3ball]what's your point - i posted the actual rules and i'm right, so stop your whining just because the rules back up everything i've ever said on the topic.

i'll keep posting the truth, and you'll keep whining.... and most ex-players don't know much about the game, other than playing... i'm an exception.... aw, did that make you mad?[/QUOTE]

no bro I don't get mad from a forum. Nor do I disagree about the paint in today's nba.
But you overstate your argument and drone on and on endlessly. It's boring bro try a new topic

[QUOTE=La Frescobaldi]no bro I don't get mad from a forum. Nor do I disagree about the paint in today's nba.
But you overstate your argument and drone on and on endlessly. It's boring bro try a new topic[/QUOTE]
glad you agree, but you are the one that came on here responding to me, by saying paint-camping didn't matter and it was all about the circle or some dumb shit, and then insulting me.

[QUOTE=Dr.J4ever]

the paint can be crowded at times because offensive sets were geared to take the closest shot to the rim, so most off. players converged around the paint.

[/QUOTE]
the tippy-toeing in and out of the paint that we see in today's game has nothing to do with 3-point shooting - it is ONLY a result of today's defensive 3 seconds rule that requires defenders be within [I]armslength[/I] of their man to stay in the lane.

a man's arm is 3 feet long... so under today's 3 seconds rule, if an offensive player is 3 feet outside the paint, his defender must be right on the very edge of the paint in order to fulfill today's requirement of being within armslength.

it's spelled out in the NBA rulebook in black and white.

in previous eras, defenders could stay in the lane if their man was up to 3 feet outside the paint on either side - the paint is 16 FEET WIDE - so defenders could be 19 feet away from their man and stay in the paint, which is way more than the 3 feet away indicated by today's armslength requirement.

and remember, the rulebook states that mere hash marks on the baseline mark the 3 ft distance outside the paint on each side of the lane... [i]it's just a hash mark[/I] - refs were not like "oh, it looks like he's FOUR feet outside the hash mark, maybe even FIVE... time to call defensive 3 secs!!!"... heck no.. they didn't monitor it at all, which is why defenders frequently camped in the lane [url=http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10695139&postcount=1][u]while their man was behind the 3-point line[/u][/url].
.

Biggest difference is the frequency and proficiency with which PF's and centers shoot the 3 now, it makes 3 second calls more apparent and easier to make.

I most of those gifs there's such a mass a bodies in a spall space who's going to even be paying attention to 3 secs?

Nowadays you run a 1 four flat set (for eg.) and there's no way anyone can camp in the paint without it being obvious.