2020 NBA Playoffs

[Steven43]

I assume this is sarcasm? Okafor is about as useful on defense as a bologna sandwich.

You misinterpreted my comment. I was suggesting Okafor as a big man who fits the description of can’t shoot and doesn’t play good defense.

[flyingdutchdevil]

You misinterpreted my comment. I was suggesting Okafor as a big man who fits the description of can’t shoot and doesn’t play good defense.

Gotcha. Exactly the type of "dinosaur" that can't really excel in today's NBA.

[rsvman]

I beg you not to watch the Houston Rockets.

Thanks. I was already aware that this is the most annoying team to a person like me.

[JasonEvans]

I assume this is sarcasm? Okafor is about as useful on defense as a bologna sandwich.

And if it was a spoiled, rancid bologna sandwich -- the kind that might make you wince if you caught wind of it -- then one could argue that the processed meat would be a better defender than Jah.

[Nrrrrvous]

And if it was a spoiled, rancid bologna sandwich -- the kind that might make you wince if you caught wind of it -- then one could argue that the processed meat would be a better defender than Jah.

Ouch. Just ouch.

[House P]

I do wish the 3-point shot weren't such a dominant part of the game now, but I'm not sure what the solution would be. I don't want to do away with it altogether, and it truly is remarkable how many players can shoot it so well these days.

Here is a fun article from ESPN's Kirk Goldsberry describing a few ideas for reducing the dominance of the 3-point shot. Some of the ideas are fairly straightforward (move the line back to the point where the league wide 3pt% is 33%, make the corner three more difficult), while others are more unconventional, like allowing goaltending on 3 point attempts.

I am not sure I would advocate for it, but my personal favorite from the list is allowing each team to draw the 3-point line wherever they like on their home court. It might be a terrible idea, but it would definitely increase the variation in playing style between teams.

Here is a quote from the article.

"You might think that Golden State would put their line closer in to get more 3s; however, their shooters all thrive from deep. Curry, Kevin Durant and Klay Thompson all hit from 25-plus feet with relative ease. By drawing the line at, say, 26 feet, they would emphasize their skills while challenging their opponents to swim in the deep end ... What if a team didn't want a 3-point line at all on its home court? This might be the choice of a team with a dominant shot blocker, like Rudy Gobert"

Make it worth 2.5 points?

I assume you are joking. However, a related option which doesn't require half points would be to credit every 2nd shot made from behind the arc with 3 points. In other words, a team's first made shot made behind the arc would be worth 2 points, but their 2nd made shot behind the arc would be worth 3 points. From there, the 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, etc shots would be worth 2 points, while the 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, etc would be worth 3 points.

[rsvman]

Here is a fun article from ESPN's Kirk Goldsberry describing a few ideas for reducing the dominance of the 3-point shot. Some of the ideas are fairly straightforward (move the line back to the point where the league wide 3pt% is 33%, make the corner three more difficult), while others are more unconventional, like allowing goaltending on 3 point attempts.

I am not sure I would advocate for it, but my personal favorite from the list is allowing each team to draw the 3-point line wherever they like on their home court. It might be a terrible idea, but it would definitely increase the variation in playing style between teams.

Here is a quote from the article.

"You might think that Golden State would put their line closer in to get more 3s; however, their shooters all thrive from deep. Curry, Kevin Durant and Klay Thompson all hit from 25-plus feet with relative ease. By drawing the line at, say, 26 feet, they would emphasize their skills while challenging their opponents to swim in the deep end ... What if a team didn't want a 3-point line at all on its home court? This might be the choice of a team with a dominant shot blocker, like Rudy Gobert"

I assume you are joking. However, a related option which doesn't require half points would be to credit every 2nd shot made from behind the arc with 3 points. In other words, a team's first made shot made behind the arc would be worth 2 points, but their 2nd made shot behind the arc would be worth 3 points. From there, the 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, etc shots would be worth 2 points, while the 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, etc would be worth 3 points.

I have made this argument here before, and it's semi-ridiculous, but I'll make it again anyway. Part of the problem with the idea of the three-point shot is that shot difficulty is not a binary problem; shots become progressively difficult as the distance from the basket lengthens. Dichotomizing shot worth to 2 versus 3 points is ludicrous on its face; the implication is that a shot launched with a great toe on the line by one mm is one-third easier than if the shot were launched from 2 mm further away. Clearly not true.

So, this is the 21st century, for crying out loud. We can make phone calls on watches and we bounce a message off a satellite rather than just yelling downstairs to our spouse. We have the technology.

How about if there were actually a sliding scale of point values? Could maybe even start with 1.75 points or something for a layup and then move by realistic gradations every 6 inches or something. The whole court would be mapped. Cameras or sensors in the court would know exactly from whence a shot was launched, and would credit the team with the amount of points it was actually worth. Some of Damian Lillard's shots would be worth 5.2 points, or whatever. Computers are good at math, so they could keep a running score.

Downsides? Yeah, people hate fractional/decimal numbers, and they would be annoyed by Lakers 116.72, Clippers 109.81, or whatever, but we would get a valid score and an actual winner. And if you were behind by, say, 4 points and had only seconds to go, you would still have a chance to win the game by launching a very long shot.

I know, it's far-fetched and nobody but me likes it. I'm ok with that.


Here's one thought, though: the corner 3 has to be eliminated, or the court made much wider (which would be a more expensive proposition, to be sure). The corner 3 is too close and too easy to be worth three points.

[rsvman]

By the way, I read the linked article after I posted. It was an interesting article. None of his ideas was anywhere near as "out there" as mine. I definitely like the idea of getting rid of the corner 3, which he also mentioned. The idea of moving the line further out and changing it every year to reflect 33.3% make rate is also intriguing. I hate the idea of allowing goaltending. It would be difficult, at times, for the big guys to see whether the shooter had both feet behind the line.

[House P]

Here's one thought, though: the corner 3 has to be eliminated, or the court made much wider (which would be a more expensive proposition, to be sure). The corner 3 is too close and too easy to be worth three points.

Not only is the corner 3 too easy, Goldsberry makes a compelling argument that it leads to a less interesting style of offense. Instead of having 5 guys moving around at all times, teams almost always have one or two stationary shooting specialists camped out in the corners "picking dandelions like little league right fielders".

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Nuggets traded two for three way too many times

[camion]

Not only is the corner 3 too easy, Goldsberry makes a compelling argument that it leads to a less interesting style of offense. Instead of having 5 guys moving around at all times, teams almost always have one or two stationary shooting specialists camped out in the corners "picking dandelions like little league right fielders".

How about making the shape of the goal similar to the shape of the three point line, narrower from the side?

[subzero02]

Tatum and Jaylen Brown are a dynamic duo and as good as Marcus Smart is for the Celts, I think he missed his calling as a UFC fighter.

Side note: Nolan Smith was mentioned on inside the NBA after the mavs/clips game because Charles Barkley described his dad, Derek Smith, as one of his all time favorite and lovable teammates.

[rsvman]

How about making the shape of the goal similar to the shape of the three point line, narrower from the side?

Now that is really thinking outside the box. I dont like it, but at least it is original.

[camion]

Now that is really thinking outside the box. I dont like it, but at least it is original.

It's really more of an ellipse than a box though.

[dukebluesincebirth]

Lots of people on here calling the corner 3 “too easy.” When’s the last time you guys knocked down 10 in a row from the corner? Just sayin...😁
My solution to this so-called three point shot issue: play better defense on the shooters!

[Steven43]

Lots of people on here calling the corner 3 “too easy.” When’s the last time you guys knocked down 10 in a row from the corner? Just sayin...😁
My solution to this so-called three point shot issue: play better defense on the shooters!

“10 in a row”?? How about 5 out of 10? Because a 50% success rate on corner 3’s would still be an indication that’s it’s too easy.

[Duke79UNLV77]

Lots of people on here calling the corner 3 “too easy.” When’s the last time you guys knocked down 10 in a row from the corner? Just sayin...😁
My solution to this so-called three point shot issue: play better defense on the shooters!

When was the last time anyone offered to pay me to play in the NBA? The straight-on NBA 3 is a bit of a heave for me and a lot harder than the top of the key 3 drawn on most courts. But, so many NBA players shoot it so well now that much of the game between the 3-point line and layups has disappeared. Even with good defense, some guys will get standstill 3's because the offense causes the defense to collapse, and some guys can shoot ridiculous 3s off the dribble, like Steph, or squaring up in the air after sprinting away from the ball, like Redick. The last couple times I've gone to an NBA game, most everyone, even the big guys, spent most of their time in warmups just shooting 3-pointers.

[jimsumner]

Lots of people on here calling the corner 3 “too easy.” When’s the last time you guys knocked down 10 in a row from the corner? Just sayin...��
My solution to this so-called three point shot issue: play better defense on the shooters!

Most of us can't do much with a 90 mile-per-hour fastball thrown over the middle of the plate with no movement. Try that with a major league hitter and you're going to be looking for a new line of work. Likewise, most of us cannot consistently reach a 540-yard par-5 in two, make 50 PATS in a row, run 5-minute miles for two hours or return a 100-mile-per-hour serve.

But elite athletes in those respective sports can and NBA players are pretty much a textbook definition of elite athletes.

[subzero02]

“10 in a row”?? How about 5 out of 10? Because a 50% success rate on corner 3’s would still be an indication that’s it’s too easy.

I'm pretty sure he meant unguarded. If someone is feeding a good shooter in a shoot around setting, hitting 10 3s in a row from the same spot isn't that big of a deal at all.

[subzero02]

Austin Rivers is having a good first half... a few 3 pointers and a nice dunk. With Westbrook sidelined, the PT is their for those willing to seize it.