"Back in the 90's, the game was more tough and physical"

Also, you guys can't just remove "stars" or "elite players" from the analysis...they are the driving force of the league.

We are talking about offenses making life easier on defenses by not taking enough 3's...I have no idea why you guys think stars aren't part of that.

Stars taking too many long 2's makes their offense worse and makes life easier on the defense.

In addition, talking about driving/kicking...being able to sag off players on the perimeter knowing that they aren't going to take shots from certain areas on the court...congests the paint and makes it harder to do the very thing you are referencing.

So, yes...it is all connected in the way you guys are talking...but it is also connected the other way as well...that is why I keep bringing it back to that.

You can't ignore that it is easier to guard teams taking such a low amount of 3's.

[QUOTE=NBAGOAT]Yea I saw your comment later. Definitely agree there are less drive and kicks but I would argue to explain the % not being significant that there were other ways to get role players open jumpshots. Kick outs on postups, bad rotations, just having someone like Jordan who demanded hard doubles, and open shots in fast breaks which you saw plenty of in the 80s at least[/QUOTE]

Yeah. I agree.

And the stars would adjust.

But I do wonder if guys like James Harden would still be able to create as many shots using his style? I think it's safe to assume that he, himself, won't be as efficient due to his performance in the playoffs.

I was thinking initially that they would have to put the back to the basket and post up more instead of taking them off the dribble.

That still won't change the amount of 3s. I thought it would change the amount of open 3s thus reducing the %, but probably not. I dunno. As you said, the % probably won't be significant enough.

And definitely in transition and open shots, teams would shoot 3s. But there are other ways with use of the picks.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]I don't mean to be rude, but you really need to take the time to read if you are going to post. I have already said, a number of times, that of course the rules play a role and of course the league is softer on perimeter players now than it used to be.

Of course they could not do the same efficiency under the rules back in the late 90's or early 00's...I have made that abundantly clear.

I've already answered the other two parts as well. I won't pretend to know what the optimal amount of 3's was in previous eras. However, I will say that it sure as hell wasn't 5 in the 80's...and it sure as hell wasn't around 15 in the 90's or early 00's. Mainly because, again, you are giving those up in favor of long 2's a lot...and that is just dumb.

I think you are confusing how role players generally score. In no era were role players consistently beating their man to score. Doesn't happen today and it didn't happen in the past that often.[/QUOTE]
I actually said in the statement that you agreed to that but i guess you didnt read that either.

And i obviously know how role players score but im not sure you do based on that statement because theres more role players ever scoring lots of points and shooting lots of threes. As you say its not because they're breaking guys down so whats it because of? Its because theyre open more often than not because of these defensive rules. Guys like vanfleet, dangelo Russell, lou williams, jj Reddick ect are all role players who look like border line stars in this era because of the rules. Then you have border line stars like beal, siakam, young,wiggins, booker ect who look like super stars.

[QUOTE=Bronbron23][B]I actually said in the statement that you agreed to that but i guess you didnt read that either. [/B]

And i obviously know how role players score but im not sure you do based on that statement because theres more role players ever scoring lots of points and shooting lots of threes. As you say its not because they're breaking guys down so whats it because of? Its because theyre open more often than not because of these defensive rules. Guys like vanfleet, dangelo Russell, lou williams, jj Reddick ect are all role players who look like border line stars in this era because of the rules. Then you have border line stars like beal, siakam, young,wiggins, booker ect who look like super stars.[/QUOTE]

You asked the question and then said "it sounds like"...when I've made that abundantly clear.

I'm saying this;

The rules absolutely make offense easier in the league now than it was from 98 to 04. This is without question for me.

However, before we go much further I think it is important to note that offenses made life easier on defenses back then by taking a suboptimal amount of 3's. Again, it isn't just about role players...stars didn't take enough either back then. You can't just remove stars from the equation.

Certainly there were no "rules" preventing teams from taking more 3's back in 06...I hope you'd agree with that as the perimeter rules back then might be just as soft. So, what was it....if it wasn't teams being slow to realize how many 3's they should be taking...???

Lastly, when you bring up guys like Fred...what era are you comparing now to? Are you comparing it to the 80's when teams scored about as much and played at the same pace despite not even shooting any 3's really? The early 90's when it was about the same?

That is my point...you can't start bemoaning JJ unless you tell me which era you are comparing it to. Because outside of the late 90's or early 00's...you just don't see a huge difference league wide...and, again, those old teams were not taking enough 3's by your own admission...which made defense easier.

[QUOTE=Micku]Yeah. I agree.

And the stars would adjust.

But I do wonder if guys like James Harden would still be able to create as many shots using his style? I think it's safe to assume that he, himself, won't be as efficient due to his performance in the playoffs.

I was thinking initially that they would have to put the back to the basket and post up more instead of taking them off the dribble.

That still won't change the amount of 3s. I thought it would change the amount of open 3s thus reducing the %, but probably not. I dunno. As you said, the % probably won't be significant enough.

And definitely in transition and open shots, teams would shoot 3s. But there are other ways with use of the picks.[/QUOTE]

Harden wouldn

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]Okay, I'll try to make this as clear as possible.

It is easier now on perimeter players and to answer your question...role players wouldn't be as open as they are now.

However, not taking enough 3's is also easier to defend...so when we evaluate this stuff...we can't only look at one side of it.

The offenses back then made life easier on the defenses by not taking better shots.

Teams settled for way too many long 2's rather than taking 3's...both from stars and role players.

Think about the Bibby/Webber pick and pop...just as an example...they should have been doing that higher and both of them should have been shooting more 3's...

Yes, it was harder back then, but not to the point that it makes taking long 2's better.[/QUOTE]

Oh yeah. We don't really disagree on much other than the "open shot" thing I was trying to point out. Which I feel doesn't have a significance thing anyway after checking. As Warriorsfan said as simple as possible lol,

"No hand checking = can

This really isn't that complicated. For 35 years after the three-point shot was introduced, teams would rather have a player at the three-point line step up and take a long two than shoot the three. It was ignorant, it was bad basketball, but that is what was taught and believed to be the right way to play. After all, the thinking went, if you step forward it's a higher percentage shot. So time and again guys who had an opportunity to take a 3-point shot would instead step up and take a two-point shot. It had nothing to do with any rule in play at the time. Players consistently chose not to shoot open threes and instead stepped into long twos.

Then finally someone realized the math says the higher percentage volume two point shot does not generate as many points as the lower percentage three-point shot. That ephiphany is what changed the game far more than any rule change.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]You asked the question and then said "it sounds like"...when I've made that abundantly clear.

I'm saying this;

The rules absolutely make offense easier in the league now than it was from 98 to 04. This is without question for me.

However, before we go much further I think it is important to note that offenses made life easier on defenses back then by taking a suboptimal amount of 3's. Again, it isn't just about role players...stars didn't take enough either back then. You can't just remove stars from the equation.

Certainly there were no "rules" preventing teams from taking more 3's back in 06...I hope you'd agree with that as the perimeter rules back then might be just as soft. So, what was it....if it wasn't teams being slow to realize how many 3's they should be taking...???

Lastly, when you bring up guys like Fred...what era are you comparing now to? Are you comparing it to the 80's when teams scored about as much and played at the same pace despite not even shooting any 3's really? The early 90's when it was about the same?

That is my point...you can't start bemoaning JJ unless you tell me which era you are comparing it to. Because outside of the late 90's or early 00's...you just don't see a huge difference league wide...and, again, those old teams were not taking enough 3's by your own admission...which made defense easier.[/QUOTE]
Ive made it clear myself i was talking about the 90's.

And its a copy cat league so yeah it took it bit of time for teams to realize that the rules made the 3 ball more useful. Phonix with nash started and teams followed and then orlando increased it a few years after and teams followed and then houston with morey after that and teams followed again. So yeah it was a slow realization But ive already agreed with you on that part. Again where we differ is how much of that increase would of been possible if the rules were different. I dont think anyone knows for sure. Again hopefully they bring back physical defence and we can find out.

[QUOTE=Bronbron23]Ive made it clear myself i was talking about the 90's.

And its a copy cat league so yeah it took it bit of time for teams to realize that the rules made the 3 ball more useful. Phonix with nash started and teams followed and then orlando increased it a few years after and teams followed and then houston with morey after that and teams followed again. So yeah it was a slow realization But ive already agreed with you on that part. Again where we differ is how much of that increase would of been possible if the rules were different. I dont think anyone knows for sure. Again hopefully they bring back physical defence and we can find out.[/QUOTE]

When in the 90's though? 91 is a whole lot different than 98.

In 98 the drtg was 105 and the pace was 90.

In 91 the drtg was 108 and the pace was 98.

Completely different.

I don't even care to argue about what would or wouldn't have been possible to realize without the rules changing...I'm saying that it is objectively dumber to shoot so few 3's in favor of long 2's that the league used to do for most of the last 40 years.

And to ignore that taking more bad shots, like teams did, makes defense easier...is missing part of the equation.

[QUOTE=Ainosterhaspie]This really isn't that complicated. For 35 years after the three-point shot was introduced, teams would rather have a player at the three-point line step up and take a long two than shoot the three. It was ignorant, it was bad basketball, but that is what was taught and believed to be the right way to play. After all, the thinking went, if you step forward it's a higher percentage shot. So time and again guys who had an opportunity to take a 3-point shot would instead step up and take a two-point shot. It had nothing to do with any rule in play at the time. Players consistently chose not to shoot open threes and instead stepped into long twos.

Then finally someone realized the math says the higher percentage volume two point shot does not generate as many points as the lower percentage three-point shot. That ephiphany is what changed the game far more than any rule change.[/QUOTE]

:applause:

[QUOTE=NBAGOAT]Harden wouldn

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]:applause:[/QUOTE]
It's what you've been saying and you're right.

[QUOTE=Ainosterhaspie]It's what you've been saying and you're right.[/QUOTE]

I definitely think there is some nuance here, but broadly speaking I completely agree with what you wrote.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]I definitely think there is some nuance here, but broadly speaking I completely agree with what you wrote.[/QUOTE]

Yeah.

From what I understood, could be mistaken, but I don't think anybody is disagreeing with the notion that 3pt>long 2s or anything of the sort. Or that offense now is more efficient than 80s or so.

It's the minor things. Like the rules made it easier to be able to shoot the 3 at a higher chip and/or they are more open to shoot the 3. Almost like a domino effect or the rules change just indirectly made it easier for teams to get 3pt shots.

[QUOTE=Micku]Yeah.

From what I understood, could be mistaken, but I don't think anybody is disagreeing with the notion that 3pt>long 2s or anything of the sort. Or that offense now is more efficient than 80s or so.

It's the minor things. Like the rules made it easier to be able to shoot the 3 at a higher chip and/or they are more open to shoot the 3. Almost like a domino effect or the rules change just indirectly made it easier for teams to get 3pt shots.[/QUOTE]

Absolutely.

My main point was just that while defense was harder to score against at times in the past...especially 98-04...offense simply wasn't as good back then either because teams simply did not understand how dumb it was to take a ton of long 2's.

That really was it...and that if you played that era again with teams knowing what they do now...I'd bet a lot of money that those offenses would shoot considerably more 3's and far less long 2's.

Shit, just look at 07...again, after the rules change;

07 - 23% were long 2's...21% were 3's

20 - 8% are long 2's...38% are 3's

You can't explain that by the rules alone. It was a shift in the mindset of players/teams because of analytics.

In no way would teams ever take 24% or whatever of their shots from 16 ft to the 3 point line like they did in the past.