It might actually be time to get rid of the three point line

[Ritzo]

Another week, another thread of crying about the 3 point line. This is probably the 50th thread in the past 12 months

[doogie_hauser]

The game would be 1000 x more boring and conjested if we got rid of the three point line.

[Braggins]

Every game should begin with a coin flip. Heads = 3 pointers are allowed. Tails = only 2 point shots!

heads = you can bring your dog to the game
tails = you can bring your cat to the game

[JujitsuFlip]

Every game should begin with a coin flip. Heads = 3 pointers are allowed. Tails = only 2 point shots!

And if it does the unthinkable, lands on it's end, all shots count as 1 point lol

[jasonxxx102]

I do not think thats the good argument for why we would need to get rid of 3 point line. Scoring averages always differed between eras, for example 80s scored far more than 90s and 00s, so what? Why do we need to measure to the 90s in particular?

I think the best argument against 3 point line that I have heard here, and maybe its not an argument, rather just poking a hole in overly pro spacing talk, was - if teams care about spacing so much, ok, they can space with shooters even without 3 point line if they want, but why does a shot from certain area should give you more points? Pace the court without the 3 point line, if spacing is the reason why Basketball offenses are so good.

I am not saying they should get rid of 3 point line, but that was the best thing I heard regarding the topic. And not even an argument in itself, more of the counterpoint to those who pretend its not because of more points of why people shoot 3s, but because of the ''spacing'' in creates.

This. The rationale for a 50% higher score for a 3pter is that it's at least 50% harder. Once it's becomes such a widespread skill at a near 40% clip, what's the point in awarding it 50% extra value? You're just penalising other shot types.

But that doesn't mean that teams won't shoot the outside shot. In the same way teams still score inside.

I think making the 3pt line an even 24 feet all the way around and eliminating the corner 3 is the best and easiest solution by far.

There's really no good reason why the corner 3 still exists from a competitive standpoint. Just it's existence massively favors the offense. It's like a first down being 8 yards outside the hashes in the NFL.

This is complete nonsense and would require every basketball court on earth to be redrawn.

Terrible idea and would never happen anyways

[UcanUwill]

This. The rationale for a 50% higher score for a 3pter is that it's at least 50% harder. Once it's becomes such a widespread skill at a near 40% clip, what's the point in awarding it 50% extra value? You're just penalising other shot types.

But that doesn't mean that teams won't shoot the outside shot. In the same way teams still score inside.

I think making the 3pt line an even 24 feet all the way around and eliminating the corner 3 is the best and easiest solution by far.

There's really no good reason why the corner 3 still exists from a competitive standpoint. Just it's existence massively favors the offense. It's like a first down being 8 yards outside the hashes in the NFL.

This is complete nonsense and would require every basketball court on earth to be redrawn.

Terrible idea and would never happen anyways

People bring up elimiation of corner 3 all the time, It sounds crazy, but I believe it could actually happen. I think one solution would be making basketball court bigger, wider, so corner 3 would be further away, but I don't know how spacing would impact the game. People will always hoot the 3 no matter how further away you will make it, but maybe more spacing would create more 2 shots again?

WHat is stupid to me, that FIBA and most of International leagues still have different 3 point line and dimensions, and 3 point is still even closer than NBA line. I like International basketball far more than NBA overall, but one thing they need to adopt from NBA, is court dimensions, FIBA, Euroleague, all these things should have NBA courts IMO. Less than 20 years ago, Euro and FIBA 3 pointer was even closer, it was same as college I believe, looking back at those games, 3 point shot looked so easy, time to move a 3 point line again, especially in international ball, but maybe in the NBA too.

[og15]

This. The rationale for a 50% higher score for a 3pter is that it's at least 50% harder. Once it's becomes such a widespread skill at a near 40% clip, what's the point in awarding it 50% extra value? You're just penalising other shot types.

But that doesn't mean that teams won't shoot the outside shot. In the same way teams still score inside.

I think making the 3pt line an even 24 feet all the way around and eliminating the corner 3 is the best and easiest solution by far.

There's really no good reason why the corner 3 still exists from a competitive standpoint. Just it's existence massively favors the offense. It's like a first down being 8 yards outside the hashes in the NFL.

This is complete nonsense and would require every basketball court on earth to be redrawn.

Terrible idea and would never happen anyways

The NBA changing it's 3PT line would not require every basketball court on earth to do anything. It would only require the NBA to do something which they easily can do.

[jasonxxx102]

I think making the 3pt line an even 24 feet all the way around and eliminating the corner 3 is the best and easiest solution by far.

There's really no good reason why the corner 3 still exists from a competitive standpoint. Just it's existence massively favors the offense. It's like a first down being 8 yards outside the hashes in the NFL.

This is complete nonsense and would require every basketball court on earth to be redrawn.

Terrible idea and would never happen anyways

The NBA changing it's 3PT line would not require every basketball court on earth to do anything. It would only require the NBA to do something which they easily can do.

Cmon man. You think the NBA would eliminate the corner 3 (btw it’s barely 10% of all shots) and then think that other lower leagues would not do the same thing?

[jasonxxx102]

FIBA has a shorter 3pt line than the NBA so why don’t they have the same “problems”?

[og15]

This is complete nonsense and would require every basketball court on earth to be redrawn.

Terrible idea and would never happen anyways

The NBA changing it's 3PT line would not require every basketball court on earth to do anything. It would only require the NBA to do something which they easily can do.

Cmon man. You think the NBA would eliminate the corner 3 (btw it’s barely 10% of all shots) and then think that other lower leagues would not do the same thing?

The lower leagues don't currently have the same 3PT line as the NBA and haven't in the past. When the NBA moved their line in, the lower leagues didn't proportionally move theirs. There's certainly absolutely no reason that highschool would change it's setup because the NBA did, and why would college need to?

There are lots of things the NBA does that lower leagues don't do.

[jasonxxx102]

The NBA changing it's 3PT line would not require every basketball court on earth to do anything. It would only require the NBA to do something which they easily can do.

Cmon man. You think the NBA would eliminate the corner 3 (btw it’s barely 10% of all shots) and then think that other lower leagues would not do the same thing?

The lower leagues don't currently have the same 3PT line as the NBA and haven't in the past. When the NBA moved their line in, the lower leagues didn't proportionally move theirs. There's certainly absolutely no reason that highschool would change it's setup because the NBA did, and why would college need to?

There are lots of things the NBA does that lower leagues don't do.

But this isn't about moving the line within the dimensions of the court. Eliminating the corner 3 entirely dramatically changes the game itself.

It's a bad suggestion. People are trying to eliminate a part of the court arbitrarily because they are upset over the number of 3s per game. Corner 3s are a small percentage of overall shots.

Getting rid of the corner 3 would just make teams pack the middle and you'd see even more 3s. People think that moving a line 1 or 2 feet is gonna disincentivize 3pt shooting, it makes no sense. This whole discourse about changing the court and doing dumb gimmicks with point values is just mind numbing. People don't even know what they want to solve for. Do they want less 3s and willing to make the game objectively worse to do it? Will people be happy if we go back to 2000s hero ball?

Simply calling moving screens would cut down on 3s immediately.

[MVP1992]

.

[og15]

Cmon man. You think the NBA would eliminate the corner 3 (btw it’s barely 10% of all shots) and then think that other lower leagues would not do the same thing?

The lower leagues don't currently have the same 3PT line as the NBA and haven't in the past. When the NBA moved their line in, the lower leagues didn't proportionally move theirs. There's certainly absolutely no reason that highschool would change it's setup because the NBA did, and why would college need to?

There are lots of things the NBA does that lower leagues don't do.

But this isn't about moving the line within the dimensions of the court. Eliminating the corner 3 entirely dramatically changes the game itself.

It's a bad suggestion. People are trying to eliminate a part of the court arbitrarily because they are upset over the number of 3s per game. Corner 3s are a small percentage of overall shots.

Getting rid of the corner 3 would just make teams pack the middle and you'd see even more 3s. People think that moving a line 1 or 2 feet is gonna disincentivize 3pt shooting, it makes no sense. This whole discourse about changing the court and doing dumb gimmicks with point values is just mind numbing. People don't even know what they want to solve for. Do they want less 3s and willing to make the game objectively worse to do it? Will people be happy if we go back to 2000s hero ball?

Simply calling moving screens would cut down on 3s immediately.

Whether it is a good decision or not is a different point than whether or not it's effect would be that the lower leagues would have to change their courts.

It would make spacing below the arc different, and teams would have to organize differently, but leagues and coaching and strategy adjust, so they would find a way. It's not something I'm asking for myself, but I simply think the specific counter reason of effect on lower leagues is not the issue.

[jasonxxx102]

The lower leagues don't currently have the same 3PT line as the NBA and haven't in the past. When the NBA moved their line in, the lower leagues didn't proportionally move theirs. There's certainly absolutely no reason that highschool would change it's setup because the NBA did, and why would college need to?

There are lots of things the NBA does that lower leagues don't do.

But this isn't about moving the line within the dimensions of the court. Eliminating the corner 3 entirely dramatically changes the game itself.

It's a bad suggestion. People are trying to eliminate a part of the court arbitrarily because they are upset over the number of 3s per game. Corner 3s are a small percentage of overall shots.

Getting rid of the corner 3 would just make teams pack the middle and you'd see even more 3s. People think that moving a line 1 or 2 feet is gonna disincentivize 3pt shooting, it makes no sense. This whole discourse about changing the court and doing dumb gimmicks with point values is just mind numbing. People don't even know what they want to solve for. Do they want less 3s and willing to make the game objectively worse to do it? Will people be happy if we go back to 2000s hero ball?

Simply calling moving screens would cut down on 3s immediately.

Whether it is a good decision or not is a different point than whether or not it's effect would be that the lower leagues would have to change their courts.

It would make spacing below the arc different, and teams would have to organize differently, but leagues and coaching and strategy adjust, so they would find a way. It's not something I'm asking for myself, but I simply think the specific counter reason of effect on lower leagues is not the issue.

Yea, I was probably overstating the impact on other leagues. Regardless it's a non-starter with the NBA. The line isn't getting moved, and they aren't going to make any dramatic changes regarding total 3s taken

[Gus McCrae]

I’ve been saying this for awhile. Rather than pushing the line back just count all buckets as 2.

NBA needs to handle so many things right now. Top priorities would be shorten the season and address the spamming of threes.

[bkkrh]

The main issue of the discussion is that a lot of people fail to understand that the 3 point line is not the actual issue.

I personally could care less if a player shoots beyound the 3 point line, or steps a few more feet closer to shoot from the midrange.

What 3 points critics miss in most cases is the style of Basketball they watched in the past and that will not just come back through that change. Jayson Tatum won't be magically turning into Dominique Wilkins, Jalen Brunson won't be AI.

Teams won't just move back to 90s and 2000s style Iso Ball, because they have figured out it's inneffective. It's fun to watch, I also enjoy watching 1 on 1 games, but everybody that has played Basketball themselves knows that it's not a great approach. Players like Kobe where masters of making difficult shots, but that is a skill that in best case you rarely need to showcase.

Also, a change like this will most likely have no direct impact. The reason the 3 point line had such a low usage rate in the beginning was that it was before an uncommon shot to use for players. If I grew up playing Basketball in the 70s I will not switch to a completely new distance from one day to another. Coaches will stick with their tactics they ran successfully for years and not throw it all out of the window for one rule change.

So if we remove the 3 point line, players like Steph Curry, Damian Lillard and so will still use those kind of shots. Maybe we see some adjustment, that players get a bit closer to the Basket, basically shooting from the distance they have the highest percentage, but the game will not magically change over night. And the same goes for all current young players that are now watching and adapting their game after players like Steph.

As some already mentioned, the only way to address this has to come from a defensive side.

[zero rings]

The game would be 1000 x more boring and conjested if we got rid of the three point line.

Yeah but the stats would go down and 50 year old men who worship MJ could finally sleep easy

[cornchip]

Cmon man. You think the NBA would eliminate the corner 3 (btw it’s barely 10% of all shots) and then think that other lower leagues would not do the same thing?

The lower leagues don't currently have the same 3PT line as the NBA and haven't in the past. When the NBA moved their line in, the lower leagues didn't proportionally move theirs. There's certainly absolutely no reason that highschool would change it's setup because the NBA did, and why would college need to?

There are lots of things the NBA does that lower leagues don't do.

But this isn't about moving the line within the dimensions of the court. Eliminating the corner 3 entirely dramatically changes the game itself.

It's a bad suggestion. People are trying to eliminate a part of the court arbitrarily because they are upset over the number of 3s per game. Corner 3s are a small percentage of overall shots.

Getting rid of the corner 3 would just make teams pack the middle and you'd see even more 3s. People think that moving a line 1 or 2 feet is gonna disincentivize 3pt shooting, it makes no sense. This whole discourse about changing the court and doing dumb gimmicks with point values is just mind numbing. People don't even know what they want to solve for. Do they want less 3s and willing to make the game objectively worse to do it? Will people be happy if we go back to 2000s hero ball?

Simply calling moving screens would cut down on 3s immediately.

The corner 3 itself is pretty arbitrary and has really no good reason to exist today. There is just no reason for a shot with the same added value to be shorter.

I could see an argument after the 3pt line was first introduced for more adoption and because you don't necessarily have the backboard as a reference, the corner 3 was a legitimately harder shot. But it's been decades now and players practice the shot extensively by the time they become pros so there's just no reason for it to be shorter. Again, it's like a NFL first down being 8 yards outside the hashes and we would all think that's stupid. So if you're not trying to widen courts (which you're completely wrong about getting rid of corners being hard to implement but court widening would), then redrawing the three point line and eliminating corners is a good solution.

Corner 3's are about a quarter of all 3's taken, so it's pretty silly to argue that getting rid of them wouldn't considerably cut down 3pt volume. You could argue that teams would just shoot more above the break 3's. But corner 3's are around 40% of the current 3pt lines diameter. That means players would have to cover 40% less distance to defend the 3. Even if you extended above the break 10%, 30% less space is still considerable (another huge benefit is that it may potentially cut down on injuries).

As far as spacing goes...players, coaches, and teams will just have to adjust. Maybe teams start there offense from the baseline more, maybe low block post players come back, maybe you have PG's run more sets than just high screen and roll (or DHO) and drive, finish or kick. I don't know. But the NBA would be stupid not to consider it.

Seriously, what's the harm in trying it out in the G-League for a year?

[jasonxxx102]

The lower leagues don't currently have the same 3PT line as the NBA and haven't in the past. When the NBA moved their line in, the lower leagues didn't proportionally move theirs. There's certainly absolutely no reason that highschool would change it's setup because the NBA did, and why would college need to?

There are lots of things the NBA does that lower leagues don't do.

But this isn't about moving the line within the dimensions of the court. Eliminating the corner 3 entirely dramatically changes the game itself.

It's a bad suggestion. People are trying to eliminate a part of the court arbitrarily because they are upset over the number of 3s per game. Corner 3s are a small percentage of overall shots.

Getting rid of the corner 3 would just make teams pack the middle and you'd see even more 3s. People think that moving a line 1 or 2 feet is gonna disincentivize 3pt shooting, it makes no sense. This whole discourse about changing the court and doing dumb gimmicks with point values is just mind numbing. People don't even know what they want to solve for. Do they want less 3s and willing to make the game objectively worse to do it? Will people be happy if we go back to 2000s hero ball?

Simply calling moving screens would cut down on 3s immediately.

The corner 3 itself is pretty arbitrary and has really no good reason to exist today. There is just no reason for a shot with the same added value to be shorter.

I could see an argument after the 3pt line was first introduced for more adoption and because you don't necessarily have the backboard as a reference, the corner 3 was a legitimately harder shot. But it's been decades now and players practice the shot extensively by the time they become pros so there's just no reason for it to be shorter. Again, it's like a NFL first down being 8 yards outside the hashes and we would all think that's stupid. So if you're not trying to widen courts (which you're completely wrong about getting rid of corners being hard to implement but court widening would), then redrawing the three point line and eliminating corners is a good solution.

Corner 3's are about a quarter of all 3's taken, so it's pretty silly to argue that getting rid of them wouldn't considerably cut down 3pt volume. You could argue that teams would just shoot more above the break 3's. But corner 3's are around 40% of the current 3pt lines diameter. That means players would have to cover 40% less distance to defend the 3. Even if you extended above the break 10%, 30% less space is still considerable (another huge benefit is that it may potentially cut down on injuries).

As far as spacing goes...players, coaches, and teams will just have to adjust. Maybe teams start there offense from the baseline more, maybe low block post players come back, maybe you have PG's run more sets than just high screen and roll (or DHO) and drive, finish or kick. I don't know. But the NBA would be stupid not to consider it.

Seriously, what's the harm in trying it out in the G-League for a year?

ATB 3s have been increasing at a much faster rate than the corner 3. Which makes sense because it takes a lot better offense to generate open corner 3s. Eliminating it would just make that 1/3rd of the court useful only to have guys standing around to open the floor for others and would just open up even more wing 3s.

There is no good reason to eliminate the corner 3. The only reason people are even suggesting it is because they are being told to be angry about the total number of 3s taken in a game and thinking of the easiest ways to decrease the total. It's a bad idea.

[GeorgeMarcus]

But this isn't about moving the line within the dimensions of the court. Eliminating the corner 3 entirely dramatically changes the game itself.

It's a bad suggestion. People are trying to eliminate a part of the court arbitrarily because they are upset over the number of 3s per game. Corner 3s are a small percentage of overall shots.

Getting rid of the corner 3 would just make teams pack the middle and you'd see even more 3s. People think that moving a line 1 or 2 feet is gonna disincentivize 3pt shooting, it makes no sense. This whole discourse about changing the court and doing dumb gimmicks with point values is just mind numbing. People don't even know what they want to solve for. Do they want less 3s and willing to make the game objectively worse to do it? Will people be happy if we go back to 2000s hero ball?

Simply calling moving screens would cut down on 3s immediately.

The corner 3 itself is pretty arbitrary and has really no good reason to exist today. There is just no reason for a shot with the same added value to be shorter.

I could see an argument after the 3pt line was first introduced for more adoption and because you don't necessarily have the backboard as a reference, the corner 3 was a legitimately harder shot. But it's been decades now and players practice the shot extensively by the time they become pros so there's just no reason for it to be shorter. Again, it's like a NFL first down being 8 yards outside the hashes and we would all think that's stupid. So if you're not trying to widen courts (which you're completely wrong about getting rid of corners being hard to implement but court widening would), then redrawing the three point line and eliminating corners is a good solution.

Corner 3's are about a quarter of all 3's taken, so it's pretty silly to argue that getting rid of them wouldn't considerably cut down 3pt volume. You could argue that teams would just shoot more above the break 3's. But corner 3's are around 40% of the current 3pt lines diameter. That means players would have to cover 40% less distance to defend the 3. Even if you extended above the break 10%, 30% less space is still considerable (another huge benefit is that it may potentially cut down on injuries).

As far as spacing goes...players, coaches, and teams will just have to adjust. Maybe teams start there offense from the baseline more, maybe low block post players come back, maybe you have PG's run more sets than just high screen and roll (or DHO) and drive, finish or kick. I don't know. But the NBA would be stupid not to consider it.

Seriously, what's the harm in trying it out in the G-League for a year?

I'm not sure where you got this but according to CtG, only 10.2% of shots are corner 3s, up from 9.6% the previous year.

ATB 3s have been increasing at a much faster rate than the corner 3. Which makes sense because it takes a lot better offense to generate open corner 3s. Eliminating it would just make that 1/3rd of the court useful only to have guys standing around to open the floor for others and would just open up even more wing 3s.

There is no good reason to eliminate the corner 3. The only reason people are even suggesting it is because they are being told to be angry about the total number of 3s taken in a game and thinking of the easiest ways to decrease the total. It's a bad idea.

You're saying 10.2% of all shots are corner 3s whereas he said 1/4 of all 3s are from the corner. That might be the disconnect- both can be true.