Eliminate the Corner 3?

[Dogen]

Sort of a variation of the "bring pets to the game" argument, but has the league considered leaving the corner 3 as is, but posting small, angry dogs in the corners?

This way, players would still be able to shoot those corner threes, but they would have the additional distraction of small, angry dogs nipping at their heals. Kicking or stepping on a dog (whether on offense or defense) results in a tech 2.

I think this would reduce the corner threes, at least until playoffs start. Thoughts?

[nshidbaby]

Why not just remove hand checking, sweep under rule, and defensive/offensive 3 seconds?

Those are the real issues when it comes to 3 pointers. Defenders are not allowed to touch a player or make contact and players need to dance to stay out of the lane. Offensive 3 seconds promotes many 3 pointers and defensive 3 seconds makes it hard to focus the defense. They are very awkward rules and difficult to call anyway.

The best basketball in the playoffs is a grind and 3 pointers will not be falling when players are tired or defended well.

[Myth]

While we're at it, lets introduce judges who award points based on how difficult or cool the shot that went in was. Like a 7 point granny shot from half court would be fun. Made contested shots would also be worth more, so defenses can use strategies based on how sure they are that the defense will stop the shot, thus sometimes it is best to leave the shooter wide open and hope the judges don't give too many points.

[Parataxis]

it's geometry. if you make all threes the same distance you either shorten the 3 at the top of the key or make the corner 3s longer distance, which would mean widening the court unless you are thinking of players shooting corner 3s from out of bounds.

The thread is about 'eliminate the corner 3' not moving it back. The point is not having a corner three to shoot.

oh.... thats even worse tbh. helping one pass away in the corner on the strong side is a bad idea because it gives up a 3. changing this to a two because that player would be standing in an area that only rewards 2 points for a make would result in " no middle defenses being wildly overpowered and the game would result in an isofest and a ton of threes off the bounce because you cant drive and shooting 34 percent from 28 feet is still more efficent than posting up at 50 percent, which only 3 guys usually do every year.

ball movement would totally die, and your goal of reducing 3 points wouldnt be met because getting teams to stop shooting 3s will never ever happen unless you make scoring inside easier, which removing the corner 3 doesnt do... it makes it harder to score inside.

information moves too fast in todays world and there will always be a meta strategy barring a few guys like jokic embiid and durant who are the best ever at what they do.

See, this is much better analysis.

[BK_2020]

Better to readjust goal weighting by making all twos into threes, and all threes into fours.
That way a three pointer is not so much better than a two.

[LakersLegacy]

NBA offense feels like inflation. Miss more post and slash play.

[celticfan42487]

The Suns definitely don't play the same way as the Mavs who don't play the same way as the Warriors and neither play the same way as the Sixers or Bucks who also don't play like the Bulls or Celtics, so I don't know what kind of variety you are referring to. If by variety we mean the locations of spot up shots, I wouldn't really call that variety of styles, just shot location.

The NBA is always copying, so whatever rule change and style we have, you'll have teams that differentiate, then half of the league will play a similar way, though personell always impacts how you play.

I seem to hit a bit of a nerve being quoted like 5 times in this thread lol. I'll just quote you because you were the last one as my comment isn't something new and it's something that fans have complained about for about a decade.

I'd suggest just seeing the difference in approaches and how teams are built 20 years ago versus today pretty much sums it up.

There was a chance to win with a big man approach, there was a chance to win with a mid range apporach, and there was a chance to win with a 3 point focused attack back then.

At the moment there is only one single way to win, be the team that hits 3 at a higher rate than the other team.

And it's because it's the only way to win with how the rules are currently written/officiated.

I'm not saying this rule change would change that up at all, in reality it would have to be rule changes that allow physicality back into the game. But I'll support anything that helps get it back to the point of where you can approach a game differently and play to different players strengths with the expectation you could actually win.

The past 10ish years is a credit to Curry destroying the league and setting team win records though as a sign with how the current league rules are written and officiated you can't help but play Curry ball. It's his greatness and that's awesome but I miss diversity.

And if the NBA doesn't want to allow players to be able to play defense, or use their strength and actually have little guys have to deal with things like hand checking... the one rule I favor most to bring some balance is making a 3 worth a 4 and a 2 worth a 3. Just to even out the point value discrepancy. Then maybe we would once again see players seek out the best shot they can for their basketball skills and not just desperately trying to find the next best 3 pointer they can which isn't always open.

Or we'd see players actually try to take wide open mid range shots as more than a novelty other than just the elite of the elite doing it, ect.

No nerve was hit, I just thought it was a short sighted generalization

The Suns won 64 games ranked 26th in 3PA/G and 21st in makes per game. I think they won quite a lot of games where they lost the 3PT battle since on the season both them and their opponents made 11.6 per game. Vs Dallas they lost the 3PT battle in 2/3 wins.

Sorry I didn't imply I hit a nerve with you specifically, just in general in the thread. Given the amount of quotes to a common observation and something that is commonly dismayed over for the state of the game in the NBA.

[SonicMcMahon]

The thing that sucks about this idea is that it's not accounting for all the extra consequences this ruling would bring. Making the 3-ball less accessible is one factor this alters, among many:
- Creates a dead zone in the court that completely alters the geometry of the game. Instead of the half-circle shape of offenses/defenses we have right now (and have always had with some variety), we now have this strange T. You'd space out towards above the break 3s, defenders follow you, and everything else would happen in the paint. It wouldn't just eliminate a 5'x5 corner spot, it would make a huge chunk (starting from the corner) this useless part of the court that would only be useful for screening actions into other areas of the floor.
- Total inversion of defenses. The best defense would be funneling shots/offensive players into the corners. The best defenses would yield a bunch of corner 2s. Every team would probably play 3-2 zone, or a 4-1 zone against shooting teams. T ball!

You're kind of creating a new sport by doing this. It would be like turning baseball into cricket. It would change so much more than just "less 3s" (I'm not convinced it would create less 3s).

ps I still think Kirk Goldsberry had the only good idea to fix "sprawl ball" as he calls is. Shrink the key. Make post ups start closer to the basket, make it hard to help in the paint from the perimeter, and consequently open up the midrange.

All really thoughtful points. No doubt it would change a ton about the present game.

But I can envision this being a change for the better depending how the next decade of basketball goes. I've found the playoffs exciting, and indeed, the four finalists are diverse. However, for me and for many, there are long-term concerns about the overuse of the 3 ball and that it is (at least somewhat) homogenizing the game to a degree and that this trend will continue, simply: bc 3>2.

You probably don't agree with the premise that the 3-ball IS homogonizing the game, or that it threatens to. But I'll pose this. Say we get to a point where the 3-ball makes up over 50% of every team's total FGA, would you a) consider that a problem and b) consider this a possible solution?

[Nate505]

At this point I'm damn near for eliminating the 3 altogether, or at least moving it back to a point where the percentages drop and the analytics guys can do their thing and have the shot reduced.

[Nate505]

Its actually comical if you think about what the other 3 major sports are doing to increase scoring and then we have NBA fans wanting to REDUCE scoring and get back to the 85-80 battles. So bizarre.

The scoring is totally based on an arbitrary value that is put on a basket.

If they made basketball really, really, really, really hard to score, to the point that a team could only make 10 shots a game, but they made every shot worth 20 points, you could have games in the 400 total point range. But it would be a far worse game than a team making 40 or whatever shots a piece at 2 points a bucket in the 160 total point range.

[babyjax13]

Hear me out, the lack of diversity on offense is killing the game. Everything is just threes and layups. I've finally thought of the perfect solution to this: make the basketball heavier. If the basketball were, say, three pounds, only the strongest players could shoot from three - but if you get too strong you won't be able to move well enough on defense. This means that what are now centers would become the most prolific three-point shooters, and all the smaller players would operate in the midrange or the post. Players would also have to limit their three point attempts because of how hard the shot would be on their elbows and wrists, it's a perfect solution.

[G35]

Any widening of the court will just make closing out more difficult at cause more threes to go up with slightly lower percentages. Other negative side effect is that lesser shooters park it in the corner and master that shot. Widening the line means they won’t get played, thus, more three point shooting.

Making the shot harder isn’t going to do anything, the problem is the value of the shot. A better idea is to make it harder to get open threes by killing blatantly illegal screening and making it easier to close out on drivers without a guy flopping with a playing on their hip when they drive

You don't have to widen the court. Just stop the 3pt line about 10ft from the baseline. Right where the line goes from a curve to a straight line is where it stops. Eliminates those short 3pt shots.

[chicago paxsons]

I like it because i think it would make offenses less predictable. It's not like removing the 3pt line in the corner would remove all value of scoring in the corner and along the baseline. Without the 3pt line in the corner there would be no go to strategy in the corner that is clearly more valuable than the other options, it would then force teams to have different focuses in the corners.

Do you shoot the less efficient formerly 3pt shot to maximise spacing? Do you focus instead on easier to make mid range jumpers? Do you more emphasize cutting along the baseline or does it give some value back to the post game? Each team offense would have make that choice without a clearcut best option. How teams construct their offenses and what skillsets teams value would vary more which would make more varied offenses that are less predictable to strategize against and watch overall.

I don't agree that every team plays the exactly the same, but the teams that truly play different have some of the best offensive strategists in the league while the rest of the league plays very similarly with varying levels of success.

[Capn'O]

Why don't we outlaw the dunk? Players like DeAndre Jordan would be bagging groceries.

Because dunking is awesome.

So is the three. Players that can't do need to get better at it. Don't see why the corner 3 has to go. Steph Curry's don't come around very often. Why ruin it for the others?

While Steph Curry still takes the most 3s, he was 63rd in 3pt% this year and 37th in 3pt shots as a percentage of total field goal attempts (61% of his shots were 3s). This most certainly isn't about him.

123 players shot 40% or more of their shots from 3 point range. 125 players shot over 35% from 3.

Nobody is arguing that it should be eliminated. The conversation is around making it a shot whose difficulty is commensurate with it's relative value to other shots. It's too easy for NBA players to hit 3s and it's taking away from other portions of the game that fans found enjoyable.

[Mickey8]

Maybe they should eliminate threads like this one, just saying

[Mickey8]

At this point I'm damn near for eliminating the 3 altogether, or at least moving it back to a point where the percentages drop and the analytics guys can do their thing and have the shot reduced.

We should just watch dunks and lay ups, 50's basketball style

[LuDux1]

Sort of a variation of the "bring pets to the game" argument, but has the league considered leaving the corner 3 as is, but posting small, angry dogs in the corners?

This way, players would still be able to shoot those corner threes, but they would have the additional distraction of small, angry dogs nipping at their heals. Kicking or stepping on a dog (whether on offense or defense) results in a tech 2.

I think this would reduce the corner threes, at least until playoffs start. Thoughts?

Replace the ball with dog skull

[LuDux1]

Sort of a variation of the "bring pets to the game" argument, but has the league considered leaving the corner 3 as is, but posting small, angry dogs in the corners?

This way, players would still be able to shoot those corner threes, but they would have the additional distraction of small, angry dogs nipping at their heals. Kicking or stepping on a dog (whether on offense or defense) results in a tech 2.

I think this would reduce the corner threes, at least until playoffs start. Thoughts?

Replace the ball with dog skull

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w500/hWIDNOsF1yeGTR7jG42VzS1AHmI.jpg

[dhsilv2]

I'm a big fan of dropping the corner 3.

Anything to get variety of styles back. So I support it.

This era has developed clones of every team with each other and it sucks.

I'm still at a loss where a league with the suns, warriors, celtics, and heat all playing that we're being told all the teams play the same...they don't.

Maybe all highlights look the same!

I'm with you. How could anyone who watched Suns vs. Mavs, Mavs vs. Warriors, Nuggets vs. Warriors, Raps vs. Sixers, Celtics vs. Bucks... walk away with the conclusion that all teams look the same.

I remember when people were very worried about the homogenization of the league. With the rise of Morey ball/Harden ball, some were concerned that every team would have to become a threes and layups machine. But it just never happened. Teams still tend to prioritize high value shots (duhhh), but to me one would have to ignore 90% of what happens in a basketball game to come to the conclusion that teams are too similar. There are very unique teams in this league.

I don't think that homogenization is an issue as much as the corner three is just too easy to be augmented that much. Plus, I like the big man game. Post offense ftw.

I hate the post and don't' think there's ANY way to bring it back. But that said, removing the corner 3 would assure us of never seeing the post used again. Letting defenses sag in off the corners would just make it that much harder to even consider the RARE post players (embiid, jokic) who can work there, from getting the ball. You'd just crowd the paint even more than today!

[DaPessimist]

I'd rather widen the court and extend the corner 3.