Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: OT: Vitale says move the 3 point line back

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    sierra foothills
    Posts
    14,426

    Default OT: Vitale says move the 3 point line back

    http://larrybrownsports.com/college-...llanova/436152

    we were all discussing this a while back

  2. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bballbeachbum View Post
    http://larrybrownsports.com/college-...llanova/436152

    we were all discussing this a while back
    You'll give more value to the mid-range game, and big post players again.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Spokane
    Posts
    2,840

    Default

    It should be NBA 3-point line

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    19,077

    Default

    I like it right where it is, or the international line.

    Though I did always love Ralph Miller's quote about "if you're going to give 3 points for a basket it should be for when you get a lay-up off your half-court set" - always loved that.
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.
    Mark Twain.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,464

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DixieZag View Post
    I like it right where it is, or the international line.

    Though I did always love Ralph Miller's quote about "if you're going to give 3 points for a basket it should be for when you get a lay-up off your half-court set" - always loved that.
    I really enjoyed the NIT this year, particularly due to the 3pt line being moved back to FIBA distance. This should be implemented ASAP IMO. The game felt more open, more use of bigs, and mid-range as suggested above.

    I also loved the sideline 3pt lines as straight. Cool effect.

    The current distances/arc radius:

    NBA: 23 feet 9 inches
    FIBA: 22 ft 2 in
    NCAA: 20 feet 9 inches
    High School: 19 feet 9 inches

    I'm most suprised the NCAA line is only 12 inches further back than HS. Seems ridiculous, especially since many GU players launch well beyond the line as is...

    Moving to FIBA would be another 15 inches in distance. FWIW, the WNBA used the FIBA distance. WNBA further back than NCAA? Or just decide the NCAA line being unique, say 23 feet even???

    Long overdue.

    Villanova is smart, they shoot at the shortest distance possible -- the corners and right on the line. Anyone notice that? Nova shooters spot up right on line. So well coached.

  6. #6

    Default

    If this were to happen, the move to adding the dribble-drive motion offense will look genius on the part of Coach Few. One unintended consequence of a distance adjustment like this will be giving teams that can master that distance an absolute advantage, until the whole of the player base catches up.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Considering our history of mediocre 3 point D, I'm all for this move.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GorgeZag View Post
    Considering our history of mediocre 3 point D, I'm all for this move.
    How so? If you spread the game out far enough, you have to be that much more effective at closing out. It becomes a far-far greater emphasis on effective man-to-man D. Will also hurt low-major and mid-major teams.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,464

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coach Crazy View Post
    If you spread the game out far enough, you have to be that much more effective at closing out. It becomes a far-far greater emphasis on effective man-to-man D. Will also hurt low-major and mid-major teams.
    Chicken before the egg? Very much a presumptive statement.

    2 sides of the coin here. One could argue the extension could help mid-major teams with all 5 players able to hit long-range 3's, over a team that simply overpowers them anyway. Also, further back lowered chance of going in, vs missing a close out, etc.

    FIBA does well with it, and not many one and one, dribble drive focused teams.

    We are talking another foot or so, just an added element, not a game changer.

    The NCAA D1 college line only 12 inches further than 14-17 yr old kids shooting the same shot vs 18-22 yr olds. Silly when you think of it.

    Not to mention the NBA being a full 3 FEET further than NCAA. Extreme, isn't it?

    Need to be some middle-ground here -- I vote for 22 feet 6 inches, which is about an 18" move backward, yet still a foot closer than NBA

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hilton Head (Bluffton), SC
    Posts
    5,334

    Default

    There are limits to all things...the basketball court's size is limited...it is only so long and so wide. Many have suggested that the goal be moved up to 10.5 to 11 feet, since players are so much bigger and can jump higher...doing so would challenge the players a tad more and make the game more interesting and make the "DUNK" more meaningful. Moving back the 3pt line and enlarging the lane and reducing the shot clock to make the game more "exciting" to fans.

    FIBA, NCAA and NBA keep tinkering with the game trying to make in more entertaining...well, it has been noted that the basketball skills that we were taught 30-50 years ago are not being emphasized nearly as much today. It is evident just by watching how many illegal picks are being whistled or seeing "palming" become the norm and individual play being more dominant each year.

    Let the NBA do its own thing as the league is not about playing basketball but rather being an entertainment venue. FIBA has its rules, wider lane, deeper 3pt line, goal tending/basket interference, allowing more physicality and a few others...

    The NCAA is now toying with four quarters, 5+ fouls for the bonus, wider lanes, moving back the 3pt line and considering shortening the shot clock to increase more offensive possessions and more scoring.

    Moving the 3pt line back to 22'2" would be fine as kids would just adjust and the percentages would eventually creep back up to where they are today BUT I am against widening the lane to make inside play more meaningful. If widening the lane is the answer to making the game "more" exciting then maybe we should enlarge the court by six feet all the way around and raise the basket by another foot. It just seems that those who want change are the same ones that lowered the mound in baseball and decreased the strike zone so that pitchers wouldn't be so dominant, which would be more offence. The NFL keeps limiting what and how defensive players can play to protect offensive players and their ability to score. NBA game officials have one of the most difficult jobs on the planet, as they have to guess when to call fouls or violations and even which violations to call so that their whistles don't slow down the game.

    College hoops are fine. Go ahead change the game from two halves to four quarters and move back the 3pt line to 22'2" and then leave it alone...don't move it in the future.

    Vitale complains about 3pt shooting taking over the game, well then schools should concentrate on signing better 3pt shooters as well as those that can defend the 3pt line...

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    935

    Default

    Why would a league that is supposed to prepare players for the professional league have different rules than the pro league unless it was for player safety? Its not like the players cannot get the ball to the basket and thus need it closer... Bizarre even trying to make an argument that it should be different than the nba.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    1,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bballbeachbum View Post
    http://larrybrownsports.com/college-...llanova/436152

    we were all discussing this a while back
    Yes we were. I remember making the case to push it back. Just too easy now. Headed toward micro b ball instead of macro,
    Multifaceted game. Sooner or later will make for a boring sport.

    This is no doubt crazy, but I think about widening the court some too in order to accommodate a deeper 3 point line in the corners. Could be really tight in the corner if 3 pt line moved out on current court width.

    Effect of doing this on overall game?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    13,366

    Default

    "The Boston Celtics’ president, Red Auerbach, told The Times earlier that year: “We don’t need it. I say leave our game alone.” He theorized that the reason behind creating the shot was that “TV panicked over the bad ratings" < from the NYT's

    Does the 3 pt line improve the game? Maybe it was more exciting in the beginning but now, upwards of 40%-50% are 3 pt shots...stop and pop type things are a big component. It's turned from an occasional sensational shot to a deluge of 3's.
    Maybe we should abolish it. Makes for better basketball is the argument. Just a thought.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Somewhere between pain and pleasure
    Posts
    3,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by btzag View Post
    Why would a league that is supposed to prepare players for the professional league have different rules than the pro league unless it was for player safety? Its not like the players cannot get the ball to the basket and thus need it closer... Bizarre even trying to make an argument that it should be different than the nba.
    Where is it stated that college basketball is a league ? Where is it stated that college basketball is meant as the minor leagues for the NBA? It is not. Now some players, coaches, programs use it that way but that is not why GU fields a basketball team. They want to be the best collegiate basketball team as they can be, not the best pre-NBA team associated with a college.
    There are 10 kinds of people in this world.
    Those who understand binary and those who do not.
    "Only a madman or an economist thinks exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world."

    Func FOO

    E .· ` ' / ·. F
    The FOO fuels me.


  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    935

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by a13coach View Post
    Where is it stated that college basketball is a league ? Where is it stated that college basketball is meant as the minor leagues for the NBA? It is not. Now some players, coaches, programs use it that way but that is not why GU fields a basketball team. They want to be the best collegiate basketball team as they can be, not the best pre-NBA team associated with a college.
    Haha that’s cute. Let me guess, high level D1 kids are there to get their educations in the classroom, not on the court right? That’s a silly argument when you consider that 95+% of nba players played their pre-nba ball in the college ranks.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Somewhere between pain and pleasure
    Posts
    3,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by btzag View Post
    Haha that’s cute. Let me guess, high level D1 kids are there to get their educations in the classroom, not on the court right? That’s a silly argument when you consider that 95+% of nba players played their pre-nba ball in the college ranks.
    Yes because so many college players go on to play in the NBA right? There are approximately 5250 DI players and according to NCAA statistics only about 63 will get drafted or selected by an NBA team (haven't yet researched how many actually stick). So if colleges and coaches are gearing their basketball teams and decisions for the 1.2% (from the article) then they are sorely letting down their student athletes. Remember I did say some programs and coaches treat their programs as the NBA minor league (I'm looking at you Cali).

    I will also argue that the NCAA's purpose and mission is not to be a development program for the NBA.
    https://www.insidehighered.com/news/...professionally

    Men's hoops players are the most unrealistic. More than three-quarters of men’s basketball players in Division I say they believe it is at least “somewhat likely” they will play professionally. More than half of Division II players say the same, as do 21 percent of Division III players. Only 1.2 percent of college basketball players will be drafted by a National Basketball Association team.
    There are 10 kinds of people in this world.
    Those who understand binary and those who do not.
    "Only a madman or an economist thinks exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world."

    Func FOO

    E .· ` ' / ·. F
    The FOO fuels me.


  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    935

    Default

    A13 I completely understand the % of kids who go on to play NBA but it’s the same thing with football. There is essentially zero minor league system in either sport so they are fed by the college ranks yearly. Plus my understanding was that colleges are to teach young student athletes at their craft so that they are prepared to step out and make a career out of their degree or athletic skill? IF that is the stated goal why would you coach them at the skill with different rules than what they would use in the pros, euro or nba? And please spare me the d3 stuff, if the high level kids did not exist and play in the tourney we are all enjoying right now, the revenue would not exist to support these d3 programs.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by btzag View Post
    Why would a league that is supposed to prepare players for the professional league have different rules
    Preparing players for the professional league is NOT what college basketball is about, especially when you consider how few players actually make ....I believe there are about 350 Division I schools with about 12 players per team? that gives you about 4200 players...how many go pro? I am for moving the 3-point line back to international distances because I think it will make the "college" game better....
    It's What You learn AFTER You Know It All That Counts

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by btzag View Post
    ... if the high level kids did not exist and play in the tourney we are all enjoying right now, the revenue would not exist to support these d3 programs.
    You could remove ALL of the high level kids, especially the ones that have NO BUSINESS being in college, and the college game would be just fine and the revenue would still be there.
    It's What You learn AFTER You Know It All That Counts

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Oklafriggenhoma
    Posts
    7,687

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgiaZagFan View Post
    You could remove ALL of the high level kids, especially the ones that have NO BUSINESS being in college, and the college game would be just fine and the revenue would still be there.
    Not one consensus "one and done" made the Final Four.
    Birddog

    Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
    Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
    All mimsy were the borogoves,
    And the mome raths outgrabe.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Twin Cities
    Posts
    3,491

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Birddog View Post
    Not one consensus "one and done" made the Final Four.
    excellent point, and same thing last year, save Collins (6th man off the bench too).

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    13,522

    Default

    It's a really tough issue, because when they moved the 3 point line back several years ago, I thought it would cut down on the amount of threes that were taken. That the only players who would take them are guys like Josh Perkins, but it has really done nothing to curtail 33% shooters from shooting the shot. When you get hot, you get hot, and nothing will stop the kids from shooting the three when that happens:

    http://www.espn.com/mens-college-bas...meId=400988553

    I remember watching this game and thinking, there is no way Villanova is going to win. The Butler guys were so hot from 3 it was insane. Butler was a very mediocre three point shooting team this season. So Nova made the adjustment, and all Butler did was start canning them from 30 feet. At a certain point no defense can stop that.

    A long poster on this board (not me) hates the 3 point line and wishes that it would be eliminated from all levels of the game. He likes it at times, but feels teams can use it to win games they don't deserve to win. When a team gets hot enough, there is literally no defense that can stop it. Part of me is bothered by that, because the amount of points that can be accumulated through a team getting hot from 3 can bail them out of not playing well on either end. In other words, it can be sort of a gimmick.

    I'm not saying this happens all the time, but when it does, it just bothers me. You should have to work harder than that to win. It's tough to explain.

    Villanova won on Saturday because they are not only are a superb 3 pt. shooting team, but just a great team on both ends.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    6,002

    Default

    There are a couple of +-13 year olds, junior AAU types, that come in with their dads from time to time to play pickup at my gym. They both shoot the 19'9 3 pter with ease.

    Moving the line back to 22' might drop overall %'s by a point or 2. Pretty minimal effect. I think it's a good idea; creates more space.

    There are a lot of guys playing pickup ball that regularly shoot from 3-5 feet behind the line. Point is that the shot, which was originally a gimmick created by the ABA to get attention for their league (along with the red, white and blue ball), is too easy for D1 players for its value. All the analytics say you should either shoot a 3 or get a dunk/layup, so it has devalued the whole midrange.

    And it has sort of ruined the fast break. In the old days, you went to the basket and made the defender commit. It valued open court decision making. Kicking it to a wing or trailer for an open 3 makes for much less exciting play imo, and reduces the value of open court playmaking.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    sierra foothills
    Posts
    14,426

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MontanaCoyote View Post
    Yes we were. I remember making the case to push it back. Just too easy now. Headed toward micro b ball instead of macro,
    Multifaceted game. Sooner or later will make for a boring sport.

    This is no doubt crazy, but I think about widening the court some too in order to accommodate a deeper 3 point line in the corners. Could be really tight in the corner if 3 pt line moved out on current court width.

    Effect of doing this on overall game?
    Nice discussion here on this. I remember discussing it with you before

    not sure about widening the court but I'm with those who say push the 3 point line back. The shot's become disproportionately impactful because of its ease to make imo. I like the FIBA line

    that's not taking anything away from Nova, a great 3 point shooting team

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    13,366

    Default

    Lessens the value the mid range game. Nearly causes it to be abandoned. The game is very different nowadays due to 3 pt game. Has it improved the game??

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •