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

[PostGameDaVinci]

The whole 3pt conversation is overblown. I haven't seen data showing increased 3PA led to decreased ratings, only vague correlation. Some people just don't like basketball. Players hit free throws at like 80%, maybe they should shoot from the 3pt line instead. Why don't we make the ball wider so it's less likely to go in? See how silly that sounds??

Corners 3s are such a relatively small part of teams shot diet, I don't know why it's becoming a point of contention for rule changes. We need to allow the game to grow and adjust. Defenses will adjust and statistical models will improve. The game will swing back to more post presence and mid range play in the next few years.

[jasonxxx102]

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.

I edited my post after I re-read it. I just misread his post.

I was only trying to point out that corner 3s themselves are already a pretty limited part of the game.

[sfernald]

Want to lower scoring?

Easy just tilt reffing to heavily favor defenses. Make sure winning team rarely scores over 100.

At the same time might as well train refs to keeps score as close as possible by games end to improve product.

[cornchip]

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.

Arguably the greatest basketball player of all time who is also an active NBA player publicly stated there's too many threes. Corner 3's are not the most 3's taken but it still is a significant percentage. Eliminating them would make a difference, it just would.

But that's just one reason. The other major reason is that it doesn't make sense for a shot of the same value to be shorter. It's silly and is just a structural advantage for the offense.

And I'm a little confused by you saying that guys would be just standing around to space the floor. Well of course that may happen, but you also said that eliminating the corner 3 would kill spacing. Which is it?

Fact is, a number of strategies may happen if the corner 3 is eliminated and the 3pt line is made uniform. We won't completely know until it's tried. What's the harm in trying? Just dismissing it as a "stupid idea" is short sighted especially for such an easy thing to do.

[jasonxxx102]

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.

Arguably the greatest basketball player of all time who is also an active NBA player publicly stated there's too many threes. Corner 3's are not the most 3's taken but it still is a significant percentage. Eliminating them would make a difference, it just would.

But that's just one reason. The other major reason is that it doesn't make sense for a shot of the same value to be shorter. It's silly and is just a structural advantage for the offense.

And I'm a little confused by you saying that guys would be just standing around to space the floor. Well of course that may happen, but you also said that eliminating the corner 3 would kill spacing. Which is it?

Fact is, a number of strategies may happen if the corner 3 is eliminated and the 3pt line is made uniform. We won't completely know until it's tried. What's the harm in trying? Just dismissing it as a "stupid idea" is short sighted especially for such an easy thing to do.

It would create dead zones on 1/3 of the floor lol. There would be no reason for anyone to be in the corners now other than to keep the other side of the floor open and would just result in more ATB 3s.

Like I said, you're trying to solve for something that isn't a problem. Nobody thinks the game would be better by just arbitrarily eliminating a shot.

[cornchip]

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.

Arguably the greatest basketball player of all time who is also an active NBA player publicly stated there's too many threes. Corner 3's are not the most 3's taken but it still is a significant percentage. Eliminating them would make a difference, it just would.

But that's just one reason. The other major reason is that it doesn't make sense for a shot of the same value to be shorter. It's silly and is just a structural advantage for the offense.

And I'm a little confused by you saying that guys would be just standing around to space the floor. Well of course that may happen, but you also said that eliminating the corner 3 would kill spacing. Which is it?

Fact is, a number of strategies may happen if the corner 3 is eliminated and the 3pt line is made uniform. We won't completely know until it's tried. What's the harm in trying? Just dismissing it as a "stupid idea" is short sighted especially for such an easy thing to do.

It would create dead zones on 1/3 of the floor lol. There would be no reason for anyone to be in the corners now other than to keep the other side of the floor open and would just result in more ATB 3s.

Like I said, you're trying to solve for something that isn't a problem. Nobody thinks the game would be better by just arbitrarily eliminating a shot.

Again, you don't know that. There's a number of things that would or would not happen if you eliminated it.

Many, many people...even high profile active players think too many 3's are a problem. Eliminating the corner 3 would an easy and direct solution. Whether or not teams would just shoot more ATB 3's or adjust differently is anyone's guess. The league won't know until it tries it out.

[Nate505]

If the number of 3s being shot really isn't a big deal, why not move the line further in? Then we get a chance to have even more 3s!

If a shot hit at a 36% rate and makes up 40% of all shots is exciting, think of how exciting a shot that can be hit at a 50% that makes up 60% of all shots would be!

[trickshot]

Problem is most ideas to nerf 3s nerf 2 point scoring even worse. Handchecking for example encourages settling for jumpers more than it encourages drives.

[Prestige]

As someone who has watched for over 30 years, the league has never been as boring as it is now. I rarely watch games and when I do the constant pick and rolls and 3s force me to change the channel.

[yannisk]

1st step rename 3 point shots "long shots"
2nd step make long shots count for 2.5 points

[TheGOATRises007]

NBA fans complain about the sport more than any other sports fandom.

The NBA is not getting rid of the 3 pt line.

[wade44]

Get rid of the corner 3 to allow defenses to shift easier guarding wing and top of the key 3s. Really that simple

[Nate505]

NBA fans complain about the sport more than any other sports fandom.

Do they? Baseball fans have complained for years about analytics turning the game into a snorefest. Finally, MLB tried to do something about it, and thus the complaints stopped.

Football fans complain about the rules a lot, but football is far less rigid in their thinking and actually do make rule changes that make sense most of the time. At least lately. For decades the two point conversion wasn't allowed for some weird reason, but someone grew a brain and finally allowed it.

Guess what the NFL would ban if it were successful 70% of the time? The two point conversion, because at that point it would become overpowered.

In the 90s, soccer finally made it so goalies could only use their feet if they got a passback from their team. Why? Because the old rule was **** horrible.

Sports leagues do actually make changes when it is good for the game.

[floppymoose]

I low key wish they would get rid of the 3pt line so that you could all see what would happen.

[homecourtloss]

I personally would just bring back hand checking. That would make things way more even between defender and shooters.

But getting rid of the three point line is a decent idea. I do wonder if it would swing things back over to big men a bit too much though, not sure I want to go back to watching unskilled bigs post up all the time.

Hand checking exists in today’s game. Pull up any highlight of SGA being defended or any guard or any wing or anybody out in the perimeter and you see hand-checking on every single play.

[Black Jack]

I personally would just bring back hand checking. That would make things way more even between defender and shooters.

But getting rid of the three point line is a decent idea. I do wonder if it would swing things back over to big men a bit too much though, not sure I want to go back to watching unskilled bigs post up all the time.

Hand checking exists in today’s game. Pull up any highlight of SGA being defended or any guard or any wing or anybody out in the perimeter and you see hand-checking on every single play.

It's fact that they changed the rule in 2003. Are you really denying that?

Watch on YouTube

[Black Jack]

I low key wish they would get rid of the 3pt line so that you could all see what would happen.

It would be fun if they did it for like 10 games or at least in some preseason or G league games to test it out. Let's FAFO.

[K N U C K L E S]

I think in the past, it seemed like it might be unfair to players in terms of all time statistics, to lop off a shot that inflates your ppg, but if you now look at how inflated game scores are becoming, getting rid of the three point line altogether would only make final scores lower to a point that is not that dissimilar to late 90's or early 00's or so.

Why would you want to make scores similar to those in the most boring period of modern NBA history?

I think they chose the 90's because that was the last decade without this 3 point insanity, before Mike D'antoni and his Nash era Suns created the monster.

[K N U C K L E S]

I wonder if the older you are the more you hate this 3 point insanity and the younger you are, the more you like it. Can we state our age and and our opinion on the subject from now on? I'll start. I'm 48(In 2 weeks) and I hate the 3 point explosion.

There is an argument in favor of the the people who don't hate the 3 point explosion: In the NFL, QB'S started putting up rediculous video game stats as far as TD passes and passing yards around 25 years ago. But that seems to have abated in the last 5 to 10 years. I don't know why that happened. Maybe because QBs are running more? Maybe something similar could happen with the 3 in basketball.

[K N U C K L E S]

I think in the past, it seemed like it might be unfair to players in terms of all time statistics, to lop off a shot that inflates your ppg, but if you now look at how inflated game scores are becoming, getting rid of the three point line altogether would only make final scores lower to a point that is not that dissimilar to late 90's or early 00's or so.

The lowest scoring team this year is Orlando, they score 105.6 and make 11.4 threes, so in theory would score 95.2 ppg as a team. Charlotte score 105.8 but make 14.3 threes, and would be 91.5 ppg without threes. Basically teams would be scoring somewhere between 91.5 ppg and 105 ppg which is not way less than teams were scoring a 10-15 years ago, and that is assuming they just played exactly the same way they do now, instead of taking higher percentage mid range shots or focusing on a more spread out offense, that would likely offset some of it.

In fact by doing it now, with the age of analytics and spike in scoring really just happening in the last few years, rather than doing it 10 years from now, would stop players from having career long stat inflation that is harder to roll back from.

I've been wanting somebody to calculate what today's teams' scoring average would be with previous era's 3 point scoring rates! What is your formula?