NBA - Abolish 3-Point Line?

[Aloysius]

Oh - older article (not sure if this has been on the table again since the 2004/05 season) contemplating 3-point rule change:

[ QUOTE ]
NBA ponders alterations to 3-point rules

Bloomberg News
Oct. 14, 2004 12:00 AM

The NBA is considering a plan to abolish the three-point shot until the end of games to increase shooting percentages and make the sport more aesthetically pleasing.

The NBA may ban three-pointers until there's five minutes left in the game in its development league this season, Stu Jackson, NBA senior vice president of basketball operations, said in a telephone interview.

"We've talked about it," Jackson said. "We're wrestling with the idea." He said it was too early to tell if the NBA would change the rule.

"I don't want to jump that far ahead," he said. "It's a very radical change, certainly one that would take a great deal of time to get support if there were positive aspects."

Banning the three-point shot until late in the game might lead to a more up-tempo style and higher shooting percentages because players would be encouraged to take shots closer to the basket. It also would stop players on fast breaks from pulling up for a shot from the three-point line instead of going for layups.

The NBA instituted the three-point shot in 1979. Last season, teams shot a combined 34.7 percent from beyond the three-point line, which ranges from 22 feet to 23 feet, 9 inches from the basket.

One of the reasons the NBA started the six-team development league in 2001 was to use it as a testing ground for rules changes, Jackson said.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am pretty sure they instituted this rule (3 pointers only in last 5 minutes of game) in NBDL. Anyone know how that turned out? Sounds like a disaster.

-Al

[NozeCandy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What about moving it back a foot? Or to the point where it starts in the corners of the court?

[/ QUOTE ]

How about making every basket be worth a number of points equal to the number of feet ther the shot is taken from. Not only would it encourage more outside shooting, but games would have scores in the thousands (and thus would be more exciting to watch).

[/ QUOTE ]
I considering how much I would pay to watch a game like this on TV. $50 maybe?

[MyTurn2Raise]

[ QUOTE ]
The college 3 line is a joke.

I think the argument is legitimate, but I can't ever see getting rid of it. It's a two-edged sword: it provides some really exciting moments, but I think it ultimately makes the game less fun to watch.

[/ QUOTE ]

the stats don't back it up


It created negative effects in the WNBA as well IMO.

These are dynamic systems that require alot of deep analysis.

[kidcolin]

I think 20-6 is a joke too.

And a big part of those stats are due to lane widening, which I wasn't talking about at all.

[Big Poppa Smurf]

changing the 3-point line to make the game more "aesthetically pleasing"? wtf?

one dude: i think field goals are ugly and i don't like the fact that sometimes people fumble in football, i find it unattractive

another dude: yeah lets change the game!

[DesertCat]

Scoring is always downtrending in the NBA because players keep getting longer and more athletic. My guess is that taking away the 3 pt line would probably drop scoring (and pace) substantially. It would be back to pack it in zone defense.

I've always been an advocate of enlarging the court. The court size was designed over a hundred years ago for a bunch of 5 foot 8 white guys, not for Kevin Garnett, et al. Add another 10-20 feet in length, and another 10 feet in width, and a 4 pt line so the offense can use all that room. Then you'd see teams go back to running and gunning again. Cherry picking and baseball passes would come back in vogue. Big guys like Shaq would be very tough to double team if their team had any shooters. Run a motion offense if you want, there is plenty of room for cutting through the lane now.


It would still be ugly when teams have off shooting nights, but no more uglier than those old 69-60 wrestling matches the NBA was regularly televising before the last round of rule changes.

[kidcolin]

Big Poppa,

Use your head. When the 3-pt line got implemented, it wasn't used nearly as widely as it is today. So teams actually had flowing offenses that looked quite nice. Turn on ESPN Classic or find any footage of mid 80s basketball. It's just awesome. So yeah, a more "aesthetically pleasing" game is more entertaining.

I caught the '86 All Star game last weekend.. I couldn't BELIEVE how entertaining it was.

However, I don't think the relatively boring, stagnant offenses that are being run can really be blamed on the 3pt line. Maybe a little, but a lot of it is coaching.. or lack there of.

DC,
"It would be back to pack it in zone defense."

I'm fairly certain that if they got rid of the 3-line, they'd abolish zone D's too.

You might have a point with increasing the court size though. I had never considered that.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Add another 10-20 feet in length, and another 10 feet in width

[/ QUOTE ] I would say add 5-10 feet in length, but 10 in width sounds great. Make the court bigger, why not!?

[MyTurn2Raise]

[ QUOTE ]
However, I don't think the relatively boring, stagnant offenses that are being run can really be blamed on the 3pt line. Maybe a little, but a lot of it is coaching.. or lack there of.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the difference is in what they allow dribblers/ball-handlers to do. By loosening up palm/travel/etc calls, they made it very hard to stop players one-on-one. Teams no longer have to use off-the-ball movement and quick passing to get the best looks. They get their best looks by breaking guys down 1-on-1 or 2-on-2 now.

[imitation]

Wider court would really be interesting.