I understand not wanting kids to be camping out at the 3pt line, jacking up shots. Some of those kids dont have the ball handling skills to get to the rim. Probably never will get above average. The 3pt shot gives them a role in a game.

When the NBA is mostly 3pt shooters, with no dribble, then we will have gone too far. In the meantime, better D. There are teams out there which are good at it. They often win titles.

Philc1 wrote:“Becoming”?

Right

If Mitch had a 3pt game, he wouldn't be a knick. So be careful what you ask for. That worked out in our favor because of this 3pt shooting era we are in.

I never had a problem with the 3pt line. My problem is when non shooters or terrible shooters are taking 3pt shots when there are better 3pt shooters on the same team. You really see this during any pickup game.

Before everybody wanted to be like Mike. Now everybody wants to be a 3pt shooter.

Vmart wrote:I still believe they should remove the corner three. Line needs to be redrawn.

Who’s responsible for that anyway? I’m assuming when adding the 3pt line they forgot how wide the court was?

blkexec wrote:

Vmart wrote:I still believe they should remove the corner three. Line needs to be redrawn.

Who’s responsible for that anyway? I’m assuming when adding the 3pt line they forgot how wide the court was?

The theory is you have less of a target to aim your shot at from the corner so the less distance evens the odds.

BRIGGS wrote:Please change the balance back

I agree, its unwatchable garbage on most nights.

gradyandrew wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Please change the balance back

We're finally getting back to the pace and scoring of the pre Bad Boys Pistons era. Basketball should be about making baskets, not assaulting guys under the rim. Please keep your 75-82 finals games to yourself.

gradyandrew wrote:The most efficient shot is.a free throw, so the easiest way around it is just to call more fouls in the paint. This is also unwatchable. I think the biggest?issue is the money involved now is so huge so the players are just better at all aspects of the game, on average. I don't really see any problems though. I thought last night was a great example of good team defenses and excellent shooting. Ingles and Holiday earned that win.

I think RJ would’ve guarded Ingles better than EF.

And Grimes should’ve known when you hold an 18pts per game player well below his average, and he makes 2 in a row in crunch time, gotta do something different.

But they stepped up and our best player didn’t. I agree it’s that’s simple.

Seriously, is the increased prevalence of 3 point shooting the result of some rule change? Or have players actually worked on their 3 point shot and become better at it? Now you have centers who can actually shoot, and the "7ft+6fouls" lumbering bodies are on their way out. How is it a bad thing? Why penalize the results of hard work and improvement of actual fundamental basketball skills like shooting or drive-n-kicks?

Or do we want to go back to a league where many ppl could hardly hit the side of a barn? What's the fun of that? If I wanted to watch bricklaying, I would rather tune in to the Home Improvement channel.

HofstraBBall wrote:Let me guess, some are complaining (Briggs) about three points shots because the Bucks exploited it to come back and win?

What happened to no one likes the Iso game? The stand around and feed the low block game?
May be what one is used to but the three point game has added much more excitement to the game.
You look at Mondays game vs Bucks, without the three point shot, you turn that off midway through the third. Three point shooting also adds more passing, ball movement, off ball movement. Without it, we go back to wings pounding the ball inside and watching ow big man pound the ball and slowly back his defender down. Just a much slower paced game. Not to mention how the three point shot has created much more skilled players. Including big men.

The NEW NBA is much better than old tight short, two hand passing, pound the ball inside basketball.
Are we also going to start complaining about the Alley OOP and 24 second clock?

I would agree, except some of those old Celtics and Lakers ran beautiful sets off of motion. For me, and the Bucks game has nothing to do with this take, the thing is that the game has become sloppy. It's easy to point to the threes, but refs don't seem to call traveling or walking violations anymore. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Also, while there are teams that do run aesthetically pleasing offenses, there are a lot that just run drive and kick offenses that have guys loafing around the three-point line, waiting for the shot. Pretty much the same concept as the post and kick out.

franco12 wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

franco12 wrote:
The game has changed because the athletes have gotten bigger, taller, faster.

They have not gotten taller for sure, there are stats that say that league heights peaked out in 1987.

https://www.thehoopsgeek.com/average-nba-height/

People have gotten heavier, more muscular, but how does that help with the 3 point shot?

My point is specific to the size of the court from when the game of basketball started to now. And that goes for just about every sport.

That is an interesting link. I played with it and Centers are getting shorter in the last couple years - probably because teams are emphasizing shooting from distance, ability to pass and space the court.

Would Mark Eaton get minutes in today's game? Would Karl Malone instead be the center? And he would definitely be shooting 3's, likely well and with volume.

Mark Eaton seemed like he was a one trick pony. I just looked at Eaton's stats and I think it says lot that Malone and Stockton were able to have offensive success in spite of have Eaton on the court A more interesting question is how would Shaq do if he played today. Obviously, he's still a starting level player, but would he still be SHAQ!!!?