ESPN talks about the shit we have been saying for over 10 years

[warriorfan]

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...ecome-too-good

Skimmed it. Didn’t really have anything new to say that hasn’t been covered here a million times

[highwhey]

nearly a decade late

[elementally morale]

Come on, guys.

All these things are well known by everyone n the NBA and sports media and have been for as long as it has been known here. They are making decisions and writing articles about it when the trends show that the majority of the broader fanbase (casuals included) if of the same opinion or on the brink of it. It's not something that just occurred to them yesterday and decided to do something about it today. The time is coming closer when there will be some change. Minor one at first to test the reaction and they will go from there. The NBA is about money. NBA people knew about offenses and defenses all the time but as long as it generated more money they had no real problems with the direction. It's more of the same now. A slightly different direction but the same incentive.

[Im Still Ballin]

1) Bring back hand-checking.
2) Remove three seconds in the key.

If those don't work? Push the above-the-break three-point line back one to three feet.

[Duffy Pratt]

1) Bring back hand-checking.
2) Remove three seconds in the key.

If those don't work? Push the above-the-break three-point line back one to three feet.

Get rid of the zero step and call carries. Get rid of the protective circle for offensive fouls. Make it a no call if the offensive player initiates contact and the defender has not jumped, or has jumped vertically.

After that, no three point shots available until there is less than 10 seconds left on the shot clock. (No fast break threes.). And no offensive player can keep control of the ball for more than 5 seconds in half court. (Cut down on ISOs).

[Full Court]

Get rid of the zero step and call carries. Get rid of the protective circle for offensive fouls. Make it a no call if the offensive player initiates contact and the defender has not jumped, or has jumped vertically.

After that, no three point shots available until there is less than 10 seconds left on the shot clock. (No fast break threes.). And no offensive player can keep control of the ball for more than 5 seconds in half court. (Cut down on ISOs).

These are all good ideas. It would make the game better.

[elementally morale]

Get rid of the zero step and call carries. Get rid of the protective circle for offensive fouls. Make it a no call if the offensive player initiates contact and the defender has not jumped, or has jumped vertically.

After that, no three point shots available until there is less than 10 seconds left on the shot clock. (No fast break threes.). And no offensive player can keep control of the ball for more than 5 seconds in half court. (Cut down on ISOs).

I would limit 3 point shot attempts to 24 a game until the last two minutes. You can decide when you take those 24 but that's the limit for the first 46 minutes.

Offensive goaltending is idiotic and every ball should be live after touching the rim. The defensive 3 second rule should also go.

[Full Court]

I would limit 3 point shot attempts to 24 a game until the last two minutes. You can decide when you take those 24 but that's the limit for the first 46 minutes.

Offensive goaltending is idiotic and every ball should be live after touching the rim. The defensive 3 second rule should also go.

I don't like the idea of limiting the number of 3 point shots. I'm not a fan of 3-point spam fests, but to me that's not as bad as the idea of the NBA regulating how teams run their offense.

[elementally morale]

I don't like the idea of limiting the number of 3 point shots. I'm not a fan of 3-point spam fests, but to me that's not as bad as the idea of the NBA regulating how teams run their offense.

There are limits to many things. How many seconds. How many fouls. Timeouts. Etc. At some point there was no 3 point line. It made sense for many years to have a 3 because teams were not generally good at shooting them. These days almost everyone shoots well enough to make 2 point baskets not that relevant. If it were just 2.5 points things would change. You can move back the line and have some effect. I think I'd limit the shots. Why? Because it's not really basketball any more. It's a different sport.

[Xiao Yao You]

There are limits to many things. How many seconds. How many fouls. Timeouts. Etc. At some point there was no 3 point line. It made sense for many years to have a 3 because teams were not generally good at shooting them. These days almost everyone shoots well enough to make 2 point baskets not that relevant. If it were just 2.5 points things would change. You can move back the line and have some effect. I think I'd limit the shots. Why? Because it's not really basketball any more. It's a different sport.

You can't move back the corner 3. Eliminate it maybe

[elementally morale]

You can't move back the corner 3. Eliminate it maybe

Draw a bigger circle and the line ends where it does. But limiting attempts would add a chess element to the game.

[90sgoat]

1) Bring back hand-checking.
2) Remove three seconds in the key.

If those don't work? Push the above-the-break three-point line back one to three feet.

This is it.

2) is all that's needed.

They just don't want to do it.

NBA players flame out in FIBA because they're not getting wide open 3s.

[ArbitraryWater]

I don't like the idea of limiting the number of 3 point shots. I'm not a fan of 3-point spam fests, but to me that's not as bad as the idea of the NBA regulating how teams run their offense.

3s only in the last 10 secs is just as regulated and would be a cluster**** to check.


Both those are a hard no

[FultzNationRISE]

The league has no incentive to stop it. There's no evidence I'm aware of that says this offensive explosion is leading to less fan engagement. If anything it's probably the opposite.

Of course they'll say theyre gonna look at it because people are talking about it and asking them about it. But I doubt they do anything meaningful to change it, because I'm sure they see no reason to.

[Xiao Yao You]

The NBA's competition committee has officially begun reviewing whether the game has become too advantageous for offense and whether some changes need to be implemented to achieve better balance.


"It is a topic that we're monitoring," Joe Dumars told ESPN earlier this month. "We're diving in right now to make sure that we're on the right side of this."


When Adam Silver took over as commissioner, the league-wide offensive rating was below 105 points per 100 possessions and has since risen steadily to 115 points per 100 possessions this season.


Players are more talented and teams prioritize higher percentage shots than they did in the past.


"More high-percentage shots, which are shots at the rim and 3-point shots, are going to lead to more points," 76ers coach Nick Nurse said before a game in Philadelphia last month. "Most everybody's kind of got that as their theme of how they're playing."


The NBA isn't close to taking any action yet.


"It's not to that point yet," said Dumars, who regularly fields calls from teams. "We're diving [into the data] right now and just a ton of film and putting together a ton of reels to be able to look at this and go, 'OK, yeah, we do have a problem.' But you don't make changes like that just on an anecdotal call."