Three pt line
- Thread starter allfourcy
- Start date
Kids rarely shoot at the line anyways, they are usually a couple feet back it seems. I think this impacts teams like Virginia and Texas Tech the most due to defensive philosophy.
It'll only help good offensive teams like ours. It naturally stretches the floor out and makes the defense have to defend more space. That feeds right in to what Prohm likes to do.
It will however lead to a ton of annoying "why the long 2pt shots" threads on here, it opens up the mid range game (old 3pt range) even more, so get ready for those.
It will however lead to a ton of annoying "why the long 2pt shots" threads on here, it opens up the mid range game (old 3pt range) even more, so get ready for those.
Not to sound clueless, but part of the ‘stretch the floor more’ concept is understandable but also confusing. While I get the more spread out on offense thing, and defense more space to cover, the made percentages of longer 3’s will go down I would think. Wouldn’t teams actually be more likely to sag off and dare longer shots (in some cases)?
I read a study that charted every NBA shot and they found that outside 4-5 ft that percentages went down to the low 40% mark which would be equivalent to 0.8+ pts/shot. The average out at the 3pt line was in the mid 30% or 1.05 pts/shots. As long as you are shooting north of 30% from 3 it is still a better shot than anything in the mid-range.
The extra ft will not impact shooters very much but will make it harder to help off and recover.
The extra ft will not impact shooters very much but will make it harder to help off and recover.
I hope it doesn't happen, it's fine the way it is.
Be nice if they cracked down on their current rules and called them well, but we won't get that. Instead we get new rules. Add the rule of holding refs more accountable and that's one I'd get behind.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
What is the problem this is trying to solve? The college game seems pretty good with the current 3-line. About the only reason might be to ease the transition from college to the pros, but that is not really necessary.
The problem is that shot values are out of whack. The midrange and back to the basket games are being slowly eliminated because the shot values are off. Pack line type defenses are effective, and that’s not good for the sport. I think basketball will go the way of baseball if they don’t work on making it a more beautiful sport.
I think that basketball courts will eventually need to be widened to keep the character of the game the same.
Last edited:
This. Lots of stuff needs fixing, like the insanely inconsistent reffing so they tinker with stuff like the tree point line. Then again, they should just settle on a single distance, maybe FIBA's, since NBA, NCAA, international and HS are all different.
Not all 3 point shots are created equal, though. A wide open mid range 2 is generally going to be better than a tightly contested 3.
I'm assuming moving the line will have a few minor effects.
Those who have shot too close to the line may find their shooting percentages reduced for the first year. Freshman especially might struggle to migrate to the longer 3 at first.
Defenses may begin to adopt a touch of Virginia's packline habits. Not a full implementation, but less than full press on 3pt defense unless the offensive player shows the need for tighter guarding.
And for us, i can't help but wonder if this impacts our decision on who to play at the 4. Players like Jacobson, Griffin, Anderson may become less ready or less equipped to play at the 4 effectively. Lewis may become an interesting option under the right conditions (read big jump over what we have seen).
Those who have shot too close to the line may find their shooting percentages reduced for the first year. Freshman especially might struggle to migrate to the longer 3 at first.
Defenses may begin to adopt a touch of Virginia's packline habits. Not a full implementation, but less than full press on 3pt defense unless the offensive player shows the need for tighter guarding.
And for us, i can't help but wonder if this impacts our decision on who to play at the 4. Players like Jacobson, Griffin, Anderson may become less ready or less equipped to play at the 4 effectively. Lewis may become an interesting option under the right conditions (read big jump over what we have seen).
