Take the 3 point line out tomorrow, how low do teams ppg plummet?

[Showtime80']

Since modern teams have no other way to manufacture scoring options aside from 3's and lay ups and PG's have no desire to run the ball consistently, what would the league scoring average drop to if you removed the 3 point line?

I say around the low 80's!

[r15mohd]

Since modern teams have no other way to manufacture scoring options aside from 3's and lay ups and PG's have no desire to run the ball consistently, what would the league scoring average drop to if you removed the 3 point line?

I say around the low 80's!

likely..and you'll see teams like SAS and Memphis become even more powerful with their post game presence

[Straight_Ballin]

likely..and you'll see teams like SAS and Memphis become even more powerful with their post game presence

This. It's really pathetic how the game has evolved into a shell of its former self. How will John Stockton's record ever be broken? Removal of the 3 point line and the resulting factors are evidence of this.

[Thesmallmamba]

Lol pace would go up


Playing for the 3 point shot requires more time off the shot clock as teams need to create space for open 3's and continue passing to shooters


No 3 pointers would make pace go up, it's easier to create 2 points than spot up 3 point jumpers


So scoring goes up

[Showtime80']

Thank you!!!! Thank you!!!! Thank you!!!!

Finally someone else mentions it. The TIME CONSUMPTION in playing for the 3 pointer versus 2's is SIGNIFICANT!!! That's something that the analytic geeks fail to mention when defending their "3 is better than 2" warped paradigm! Offensive schemes stagnate when your constantly setting up for 3's!

The problem is, where are the fast break pass first PG's to speed up tempo in the modern game?!? What you have now are basically the bastard offspring of the Steve Francis, Stephon Marbury, Allen Iverson and Baron Davis factory of shoot first take the air out of the ball PG's!''

[GIF REACTION]

If you play like an 80's team you'll have way way too many turnovers

[Kvnzhangyay]

Thank you!!!! Thank you!!!! Thank you!!!!

Finally someone else mentions it. The TIME CONSUMPTION in playing for the 3 pointer versus 2's is SIGNIFICANT!!! That's something that the analytic geeks fail to mention when defending their "3 is better than 2" warped paradigm! Offensive schemes stagnate when your constantly setting up for 3's!

The problem is, where are the fast break pass first PG's to speed up tempo in the modern game?!? What you have now are basically the bastard offspring of the Steve Francis, Stephon Marbury, Allen Iverson and Baron Davis factory of shoot first take the air out of the ball PG's!''

Why is a fast pace beneficial? In a fiat world, it would be beneficial to viewers, yes, but that would be catering to the entertainment side, and not the competitive side that 3-pointers now focus on

[Showtime80']

Modern teams DON'T have the personnel to play like 80's teams! They don't have the point guards, centers or even true power forwards to play that effectively.

Teams have less turnovers now because they waist 20+ seconds setting up for a 3 pointer and most of them have no consistent RUNNING games making up for the boring 3 point or lay up offensive monotone you see today.

I say, put the 3 point line in effect ONLY in the last 2 minutes of the quarter. Let teams spend the rest of the 40 minutes in trying to run VERSATILE OFFENSES!

The result may be ugly at first since most the present players have no clue how to establish consistent post, mid range or fast break games

[Showtime80']

Fast pace catering to the entertainment side!?! LOL! Now I've heard everything.

The fast break is one of the most FUNDAMENTAL aspects of basketball along with the inside post game dating back to the Celtics of the 60's which were the team that perfected the art. There are no two other more efficient ways to put pressure and TIRE OUT a defense than post play and fast break game!!!

All you do with the 3 point shot is BAIL OUT the defense instead putting it in foul trouble by pounding the ball inside or ramming it down their throats on the break!

Modern teams don't have any other choice since the skills and lack of fundamentals of today's players don't allow them to play for anything aside from 3's and layups! Not to mention the rule changes catering to soft perimeter players encouraging even MORE players to stagnate offenses consuming 20+ seconds off the shot clock dribbling around like a chicken with its head cut off 22 away from the basket!

[Kvnzhangyay]

Fast pace catering to the entertainment side!?! LOL! Now I've heard everything.

The fast break is one of the most FUNDAMENTAL aspects of basketball along with the inside post game dating back to the Celtics of the 60's which were the team that perfected the art. There are no two other more efficient ways to put pressure and TIRE OUT a defense than post play and fast break game!!!

All you do with the 3 point shot is BAIL OUT the defense instead putting it in foul trouble by pounding the ball inside or ramming it down their throats on the break!

Modern teams don't have any other choice since the skills and lack of fundamentals of today's players don't allow them to play for anything aside from 3's and layups! Not to mention the rule changes catering to soft perimeter players encouraging even MORE players to stagnate offenses consuming 20+ seconds off the shot clock dribbling around like a chicken with its head cut off 22 away from the basket!

What if I attack the core of your argument and say that a fast break is NOT a fundamental part of basketball? For that matter, what IS the DEFINITION of fundamental? How can you prove that your definition is right?

[sdot_thadon]

Thank you!!!! Thank you!!!! Thank you!!!!

Finally someone else mentions it. The TIME CONSUMPTION in playing for the 3 pointer versus 2's is SIGNIFICANT!!! That's something that the analytic geeks fail to mention when defending their "3 is better than 2" warped paradigm! Offensive schemes stagnate when your constantly setting up for 3's!

The problem is, where are the fast break pass first PG's to speed up tempo in the modern game?!? What you have now are basically the bastard offspring of the Steve Francis, Stephon Marbury, Allen Iverson and Baron Davis factory of shoot first take the air out of the ball PG's!''

So every team just settles for 3s now, Is that what we've been reduced to? Or do offenses run sets with the 3 in mind? There is a difference. I suppose that means all the movement and spacing and passing that leads to these 3s are a stagnant offense? Wow.

On subject the scoring would fall off a cliff due to there being full fledge zone and not have an Avenue to bust it.

[ralph_i_el]

Thank you!!!! Thank you!!!! Thank you!!!!

Finally someone else mentions it. The TIME CONSUMPTION in playing for the 3 pointer versus 2's is SIGNIFICANT!!! That's something that the analytic geeks fail to mention when defending their "3 is better than 2" warped paradigm! Offensive schemes stagnate when your constantly setting up for 3's!

The problem is, where are the fast break pass first PG's to speed up tempo in the modern game?!? What you have now are basically the bastard offspring of the Steve Francis, Stephon Marbury, Allen Iverson and Baron Davis factory of shoot first take the air out of the ball PG's!''

Offensive schemes stagnate when you're constantly letting one player ISO one-on-one. The teams that are setting up the most 3's are teams that break down defenses with passing and penetration, and space teams with shooting. I find it very entertaining. We saw a ton of great basketball last season.



Teams play a slower pace when they try to set up a lot of 3's, because we realize now that if you push the pace and try to score a lot, you're giving your opponent more possessions too. Now teams go for offensive efficiency per possession, even if it means slowing down the pace.

[Showtime80']

The ESSENCE of the game of basketball since its inception is to get the BEST and closest shot to the basket as possible!

A textbook fast break has rebounding, passing and an open efficient shot ideally taken under 15 feet or at the paint, all done before the defense has a chance to get set and only taking about 8 to 10 seconds off the shot clock. What part of that is not FUNDAMENTAL and OPTIMAL!

Blame the current crop of PG's who would rather shoot 25+ times a game than honing their craft in the fast break game. That's why modern offenses need so much time to materialize.

Jason Kidd and Steve Nash basically led a collection of role players to Finals fast and top of their conferences with the fast break style. The problem is their half court offenses were lackluster.

[ClipperRevival]

So every team just settles for 3s now, Is that what we've been reduced to? Or do offenses run sets with the 3 in mind? There is a difference. I suppose that means all the movement and spacing and passing that leads to these 3s are a stagnant offense? Wow.

On subject the scoring would fall off a cliff due to there [COLOR="Red"]being full fledge zone [/COLOR]and not have an Avenue to bust it.

There is no such thing. Illegal D rule dictates that you can't stay more than 3 seconds in the painted area if you aren't at least an arm's length of your man. That means zone is only allowed outside the paint. The thing is, the paint is a pretty big area. So zone is only allowed outside the paint and since this is the era of spacing and 3 point shooting, it's not a good idea to run zone because guys at this level are too good to just guard an area. You have to stay attached to your man to defend the 3 and cover such a spaced court.

[GIF REACTION]

A wide open 3 pointer, which is what a lot of these 3 point shooting teams, is a VERY efficient shot. There was some data on how distance from a shooter affected 3pt percentage... Went exactly how you'd think. The further the defender, the higher the percentage