NBA 2015-2016

jmoney74 said:
They will be in the finals next year.  OKC with no Durant.. Spurs team with a retiring Duncan.. only a gimpy LAC is in their way.
Click to expand...

Um, did you watch the Spurs in the post-season? TD played and contributed very little. He's a below-replacement player at this stage. I think the Ws should be heavily favored to make it to the Finals. I also think teams like the Spurs with Gasol can pound The Donut on the boards.
 
Should the NBA consider changing the rules? When Shaq was killin' the league, they changed the rules. The NBA created a 5-second count so you don't have to watch Shaq back-down a guy for the entire shot clock. They also allowed zones, keeping the 3-second count, to allow teams to load-up on dominant bigs.

There's no fundamental reason why a shot behind the 3-point line is worth 50% more than any other shot on the court. In fact, I'd argue a Wiggins cross-over going past three defenders and dunking is "worth more" than a shot behind the 3-point line.

Maybe the best thing for basketball is to change the value? If the 3-point shot were worth 2.5 points, maybe teams built like the Ws wouldn't be nearly as dangerous. It also might help the Ws. Watching them choke games 5-7 in the Finals was pretty brutal, jackin' 3s from everywhere; especially with one minute left in Game 7, watching Curry dance around the line with Love defending, trying to find enough space to jack a 3. Brutal.
 
16zduy.jpg
 
Perspective said:
Should the NBA consider changing the rules? When Shaq was killin' the league, they changed the rules. The NBA created a 5-second count so you don't have to watch Shaq back-down a guy for the entire shot clock. They also allowed zones, keeping the 3-second count, to allow teams to load-up on dominant bigs.

There's no fundamental reason why a shot behind the 3-point line is worth 50% more than any other shot on the court. In fact, I'd argue a Wiggins cross-over going past three defenders and dunking is "worth more" than a shot behind the 3-point line.

Maybe the best thing for basketball is to change the value? If the 3-point shot were worth 2.5 points, maybe teams built like the Ws wouldn't be nearly as dangerous. It also might help the Ws. Watching them choke games 5-7 in the Finals was pretty brutal, jackin' 3s from everywhere; especially with one minute left in Game 7, watching Curry dance around the line with Love defending, trying to find enough space to jack a 3. Brutal.
Click to expand...

This is funny 2.5 points for a long range 3 pointer.
 
The 3pter value won't be changed, that's too drastic.

As you can see, it's not guaranteed a 100% win as long as teams know how to defend it. NBA defense will adjust, just like it did with dominant bigs using double and triple teams.

Shooters like Curry are rare, as are dominant bigs like Shaq... let's see how the game evolves.
 
irvinehomeowner said:
The 3pter value won't be changed, that's too drastic.

As you can see, it's not guaranteed a 100% win as long as teams know how to defend it. NBA defense will adjust, just like it did with dominant bigs using double and triple teams.

Shooters like Curry are rare, as are dominant bigs like Shaq... let's see how the game evolves.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Still, there's no defensible reason why a shot behind that line is worth 50% more than a shot on that line, or anywhere else on the court. The NBA needs it to pay a premium for spacing, but 50% is far too steep. The league is devolving into tall/long 3-and-D players who have little basketball skill outside of shooting 3s.
 
Perspective said:
irvinehomeowner said:
The 3pter value won't be changed, that's too drastic.

As you can see, it's not guaranteed a 100% win as long as teams know how to defend it. NBA defense will adjust, just like it did with dominant bigs using double and triple teams.

Shooters like Curry are rare, as are dominant bigs like Shaq... let's see how the game evolves.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Still, there's no defensible reason why a shot behind that line is worth 50% more than a shot on that line, or anywhere else on the court. The NBA needs it to pay a premium for spacing, but 50% is far too steep. The league is devolving into tall/long 3-and-D players who have little basketball skill outside of shooting 3s.
Click to expand...

The league changed for more scoring. Before the league was more physical.
 
It makes come backs more interesting to watch although I agree 50% premium is unfair... I get that it's more difficult as your % to make will go down, but it's not like if you make a half court shot, it's worth 4
Without the 3, it's going to be that much more boring to watch if a team is down by a couple buckets, like college games since their shot clock is 10s longer
 
Perspective said:
irvinehomeowner said:
The 3pter value won't be changed, that's too drastic.

As you can see, it's not guaranteed a 100% win as long as teams know how to defend it. NBA defense will adjust, just like it did with dominant bigs using double and triple teams.

Shooters like Curry are rare, as are dominant bigs like Shaq... let's see how the game evolves.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Still, there's no defensible reason why a shot behind that line is worth 50% more than a shot on that line, or anywhere else on the court. The NBA needs it to pay a premium for spacing, but 50% is far too steep. The league is devolving into tall/long 3-and-D players who have little basketball skill outside of shooting 3s.
Click to expand...
Well, it hasn't really been an issue until recently as players are becoming more accurate shooters.

Flipping that around, one can contest that unguarded dunks should only be worth 1 point.

It's part of the game and it is still a lower % shot when defended vs closer ones. 50% lower, maybe not, but I don't think it will make every team just a 3pt shooting one.

At least this gives smaller players value and makes defenders play harder.

This is akin to how people are complaining that the NFL is moving towards a spread offense with running QBs, but as teams adjust, you can still see championship teams with pocket passers.

What I don't like is that this has basically come down to GSW vs. Cavs and the 82-game season is now just exhibition.

People are comparing the KDecision to Lebron's saying that at least KD didn't make a spectacle of it (Hamptons?) and was forthcoming to the Thunder about what he was doing. To me, I actually respected LBJ's move more because they had no guarantees that Miami would be good enough... but we all know how good GS is. I would have rather seen KD go to a team where he would still have to work to get to the Finals. The Warriors can win without him... so it's not like he's really "earning" his ring.
 
AW said:
Without the 3, it's going to be that much more boring to watch if a team is down by a couple buckets, like college games since their shot clock is 10s longer
Click to expand...
This is a good point.

Even with an 8-point lead, no team is out of it in the final minutes because of the 3... it does lead to more exciting finishes.
 
eyephone said:
Perspective said:
irvinehomeowner said:
The 3pter value won't be changed, that's too drastic.

As you can see, it's not guaranteed a 100% win as long as teams know how to defend it. NBA defense will adjust, just like it did with dominant bigs using double and triple teams.

Shooters like Curry are rare, as are dominant bigs like Shaq... let's see how the game evolves.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Still, there's no defensible reason why a shot behind that line is worth 50% more than a shot on that line, or anywhere else on the court. The NBA needs it to pay a premium for spacing, but 50% is far too steep. The league is devolving into tall/long 3-and-D players who have little basketball skill outside of shooting 3s.
Click to expand...

The league changed for more scoring. Before the league was more physical.
Click to expand...

They do want more freedom of movement and scoring - less grabbing, clutching, bumping, etc. However, the league still allows all of this physicality once games matter in the postseason. Boston did it to the Lakers a few years back, twice in Finals, and Cleveland just did it to the Ws.
 
So with Wade going to Chicago... should Whiteside pull a DeAndre and back out of his verbal agreement with Miami?

It would be so funny if he did because that would jeopardize everyone's signings/trades, including Durant's.
 
just ironic that the dude looks like a raptor and played for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top