60s/70s players that would be helped most by the 3 point line

[penbeast0]

Guys with both great outside shooting and some slashing ability rather than working opponents in the midrange as their bread and butter:

Jerry West (classic long ball or slash and finish superstar)
Downtown Freddie Brown
Paul Westphal
Calvin Murphy

Roger Brown
Rick Barry
Walter Davis
Dick Van Arsdale

Dolph Schayes
Jerry Lucas
Alvin Adams
Jack Sikma

Lesser 3 and D type guys:
Larry Steele
Dave Twardzik
Adrian Smith

Don Chaney
Chris Ford
Steve Mix
John Beasley

[70sFan]

Jim Krebs at least wouldn't be scrub with three point line. Connie Dierking would be in better situation too.

Most guard would fare better with three point line. Even someone like Walt Hazzard (who probably didn't have three point range) would like to play with better spacing.

[penbeast0]

Clyde Lovellette and Mel Counts used to shoot from out there occasionally as centers too, forgot about them.

[Johnlac1]

Pete Maravich is the likeliest choice. Maravich loved jump shots too much, including long, low percentage jumpers. Maravich could also hit long jumpers off the dead run. In today's game Maravich's penchant for long jumpers would be far more valuable. His only year shooting threes, his last year in the league, he shot 10-15 form three ball distance. But since his coach, Bill Fitch, didn't like him, Maravich played sparingly off the bench behind a clearly inferior player, Chris Ford. Fitch's failure to play Maravich in the playoffs might have cost them their series against the Sixers.
Some of the Knicks teams from the early seventies started three players who could hit from three ball distance....Jerry Lucas, Dave DeBusschere, and Bill Bradley. I think Earl Monroe could have made that shot too. Walt Frazier usually didn't like shots further than about 15-18 feet.
Many forwards could hit the corner three... Bob McAdoo would have liked the three ball.
Rick Barry's last year in the league was the first year of the three point shot. Barry took the second highest number of three ball shots in the league hitting at 33%. I would think that with if the shot had been implemented in the sixties, Barry's career three ball percentage would have been much better.
But usually every team had a player or two who could hit from distance.
The Bucks had Jon McGlocklin who was excellent from distance.

[cecilthesheep]

World B. Free is someone not mentioned yet who actually had a demonstrably good track record from three during the couple of years when he actually shot them. He did play most of his career with a three-point line and rarely took very many threes except for a two-year stretch when he shot .392 on 2.5 attempts, but I think his scoring prowess could have had much more of a consistent impact on how his team played if he'd spent his whole career in a league that knew how to make use of the three-point shot.

[Owly]

Guys with both great outside shooting and some slashing ability rather than working opponents in the midrange as their bread and butter:

Jerry West (classic long ball or slash and finish superstar)
Downtown Freddie Brown
Paul Westphal
Calvin Murphy

Roger Brown
Rick Barry
Walter Davis
Dick Van Arsdale

Dolph Schayes
Jerry Lucas
Alvin Adams
Jack Sikma

Lesser 3 and D type guys:
Larry Steele
Dave Twardzik
Adrian Smith

Don Chaney
Chris Ford
Steve Mix
John Beasley

Won't do a deep dive. In general, better than 85% FT% probably indicates a purity of shot that could (given adjustment) translate unless form is very specifically limited to middle distance or not an in-game shot [e.g. underarm].

But Freddie Brown warrants highlighting. Don't want to say he'd have made more money in the ABA because there was always controversy over when/if they saw that money. But he was good as it was without the line, had a FT% that we an be confident in (.858 - i.e 3s aren't a small sample fluke) and is among the most accurate and most voluminous (in terms of makes) 3 point shooters of the early days of the line in the NBA. Having the line for his career/prime (especially if given the modern, no long twos, coaching) could have changed how he was perceived (I think in reality, somewhat of a footnote and less than he deserved), imo.

[Samurai]

Pete Maravich is the likeliest choice. Maravich loved jump shots too much, including long, low percentage jumpers. Maravich could also hit long jumpers off the dead run. In today's game Maravich's penchant for long jumpers would be far more valuable. His only year shooting threes, his last year in the league, he shot 10-15 form three ball distance. But since his coach, Bill Fitch, didn't like him, Maravich played sparingly off the bench behind a clearly inferior player, Chris Ford. Fitch's failure to play Maravich in the playoffs might have cost them their series against the Sixers.
Some of the Knicks teams from the early seventies started three players who could hit from three ball distance....Jerry Lucas, Dave DeBusschere, and Bill Bradley. I think Earl Monroe could have made that shot too. Walt Frazier usually didn't like shots further than about 15-18 feet.
Many forwards could hit the corner three... Bob McAdoo would have liked the three ball.
Rick Barry's last year in the league was the first year of the three point shot. Barry took the second highest number of three ball shots in the league hitting at 33%. I would think that with if the shot had been implemented in the sixties, Barry's career three ball percentage would have been much better.
But usually every team had a player or two who could hit from distance.
The Bucks had Jon McGlocklin who was excellent from distance.

McGlocklin is a great callout who did shoot from that distance even without the 3-point line.

I have my doubts about McAdoo; he had sort of a funky release that was deadly out to 18 feet but I am not sure if that release would affect his accuracy from 23 feet and beyond. Much more confident that Rick Barry would be deadly from deep if he practiced it as much as today's players do. I think Bill Bradley could be as good from the corners as Danny Green, which is pretty darn good.

The other name I would add is Bob Lanier. His shooting stroke seemed very similar to Chris Bosh. If Bosh was able to go from a sub 30% shooter on less than 1 attempt/game for most of his career to 37% on 4 attempts/game by his last 2 seasons, I think Lanier should be able to replicate that if he were born around 1993 and focused extensively on 3's growing up.

Jeff Mullins of the Warriors also had a shooting style that looked like it could be repeatable and consistent from 3-point range. George Gervin has stated repeatedly that he didn't like the 3-point shot and thus did not practice or attempt them much. If his attitude was more a product of his time and if he felt very differently about it if he were born around 1993, he certainly had the shooting skill to excel at it if he grew about launching 3's as a youngster.

[Johnlac1]

Pete Maravich is the likeliest choice. Maravich loved jump shots too much, including long, low percentage jumpers. Maravich could also hit long jumpers off the dead run. In today's game Maravich's penchant for long jumpers would be far more valuable. His only year shooting threes, his last year in the league, he shot 10-15 form three ball distance. But since his coach, Bill Fitch, didn't like him, Maravich played sparingly off the bench behind a clearly inferior player, Chris Ford. Fitch's failure to play Maravich in the playoffs might have cost them their series against the Sixers.
Some of the Knicks teams from the early seventies started three players who could hit from three ball distance....Jerry Lucas, Dave DeBusschere, and Bill Bradley. I think Earl Monroe could have made that shot too. Walt Frazier usually didn't like shots further than about 15-18 feet.
Many forwards could hit the corner three... Bob McAdoo would have liked the three ball.
Rick Barry's last year in the league was the first year of the three point shot. Barry took the second highest number of three ball shots in the league hitting at 33%. I would think that with if the shot had been implemented in the sixties, Barry's career three ball percentage would have been much better.
But usually every team had a player or two who could hit from distance.
The Bucks had Jon McGlocklin who was excellent from distance.

McGlocklin is a great callout who did shoot from that distance even without the 3-point line.

I have my doubts about McAdoo; he had sort of a funky release that was deadly out to 18 feet but I am not sure if that release would affect his accuracy from 23 feet and beyond. Much more confident that Rick Barry would be deadly from deep if he practiced it as much as today's players do. I think Bill Bradley could be as good from the corners as Danny Green, which is pretty darn good.

The other name I would add is Bob Lanier. His shooting stroke seemed very similar to Chris Bosh. If Bosh was able to go from a sub 30% shooter on less than 1 attempt/game for most of his career to 37% on 4 attempts/game by his last 2 seasons, I think Lanier should be able to replicate that if he were born around 1993 and focused extensively on 3's growing up.

Jeff Mullins of the Warriors also had a shooting style that looked like it could be repeatable and consistent from 3-point range. George Gervin has stated repeatedly that he didn't like the 3-point shot and thus did not practice or attempt them much. If his attitude was more a product of his time and if he felt very differently about it if he were born around 1993, he certainly had the shooting skill to excel at it if he grew about launching 3's as a youngster.

I should add that I was watching a Bucks-Knicks game from 1970 on YT recently. The Knicks had one play where DeBusschere came around a curl about four feet from the top of the key and sank the jump shot. This showed that a number of players from that time didn't just shoot long catch and shoot jumpers. What DeBusschere did takes a lot more skill.
As far as McAdoo I recall him taking and making many corner shots. I don't think he'd have a problem from the elbow or top of the key.
Lanier was one of the centers with the form to make threes. Willis Reed was another center with good form who could go out to 20 feet occasionally. I don't think either would have had problems shooting threes.
But that goes for a lot of players from that era.
There just wasn't any kind of benefit from taking long shots if they could get closer.
The presence of a three point line would have forced many players to improve their shooting mechanics. That's, of course, if the coaches and front office had been aware of the benefits of the three ball and made their teams play accordingly. There was little in the way of analytics in those days.
It took many teams more than ten years from the implementation of the rule before they started using the three point shot as a deliberate strategy.
But it still almost twenty years before it became common to see them taken in large numbers.
Even then, the '99-'00 season the Kings took five less three ball shots per game than the team that took the least amount last season, the Spurs.
Twenty years after the implementation of the shot, the league average was still only about fourteen shots per game. Last season it was thirty two-shots per game.

[OdomFan]

I wouldn't be surprised if Wilt would have learned them.

[poopdamoop]

I wouldn't be surprised if Wilt would have learned them.

He could barely shoot free throws and you think he'd start draining 3s?

[countryboy667]

Jerry Lucas would kill it in a small-ball era playing the five. He had legit three-point range, as good as anyone in the league today, including Curry.

[countryboy667]

I wouldn't be surprised if Wilt would have learned them.

He could barely shoot free throws and you think he'd start draining 3s?

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

Nobody today, people who never saw him play, understands how immeasurably great Wilt was...take him even the last three-four years of his career...he would DESTROY even today's three-point crazy league...there will likely never be another one even remotely like him.

[Buckets22]

Wilt would benefit for sure - it would create a lot of space in the paint for him to go to work and make the double teams costlier.

Jerry West would probably have 2-3 championship rings with the 3pt line for sure...1970 would be for the Lakers for example.

[trex_8063]

I'm sure they've been said already, but Pete Maravich and Jerry West are the two that come most prominently to mind as those who'd be helped most with a 3pt line. Rick Barry's definitely worth mentioning, too.

[NW BBALL]

I think it is more than just the presence of a 3 pt line though. I think the real question is who among the classic 60s and 70s players would benefit most from today’s current style of play, in which 3 pt shooting is heavily emphasized. The 3 pt line has been around in the NBA for nearly 40 years but only in the last decade has the shot become a critical part of a team’s offensive repertoire. I kind of liken this gradual evolution to the forward pass in football.

With modern offensive schemes, I think West, Maravich and Barry would benefit greatly.

[bledredwine]

I wouldn't be surprised if Wilt would have learned them.

He could barely shoot free throws and you think he'd start draining 3s?

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

Nobody today, people who never saw him play, understands how immeasurably great Wilt was...take him even the last three-four years of his career...he would DESTROY even today's three-point crazy league...there will likely never be another one even remotely like him.

It's so disrespectful when people call Shaq more physically imposing or more dominant.

It's nowhere remotely close. Wilt is the greatest athlete that this sport has scene, bar none.

When I meet people in-person and have GOAT discussion, I'll state my case but there are two players that I always entertain- Wilt and Kareem. When others start talking about those two, I tell them that they both have a valid case, Kareem for achievements and Wilt for his unreal abilities... and sadly, we'll never know just how great Wilt was. He's the greatest enigma. Russell being better is a myth fabricated by Realgm. He certainly won more, and perhaps he was better for that reason, but Wilt was known by professional players specifically as the greatest in his era.

I don't see one reason why he wouldn't kick the **** out of the league today. Would he average 50? Obviously not, but somewhere between 30-40 isn't out of the equation.