[stevenash]

The three point shot made the art of the midrange jumper pretty much obsolete.

“Why take a mid range jump shot when you can take pretty much the same shot six feet deeper and if you make it it’s worth an extra point” is the thought process some GM’s and other types have.

But it’s more involved than that.

The fans love the three point shot because no 20 point lead is safe anymore.
In the 1960’s if your team was down by 20 late in the third quarter you were done.
Game over.

In 2020 if your team is down 20 points with 10 minutes left in the game and you have a Joe Harris or a Ray Allen or a Kay Thompson long range sharp shooter or two on the floor and they heat up, well that 20 point lead can evaporate in six minutes.

That’s one of the arguments the ones that are in favor of the three point shots use.
And I see that point.....

More tomorrow.

[TommieGunshot]

Seems you missed the point?
I'm looking at what you copied and see nothing about threes in that statement? Try dunks and you got it.

The title that you started with, along with your original premise was entirely about threes. The part quoted was reduced for brevity.

As for dunks: they are similar to three-pointers, in that when they are used and how they are used, it is usually the correct strategy.

The field goal percentage on dunk attempts is around 90%. Two-point jump shots are around 42%. Was there ever a time in the NBA the gap wasn't that wide?

A team should try to only dunk. If the defense is able to stop them, take layups. If the defense stops them from taking a layup, then a three-point shot is the next best. This is just basic strategy for any team that wants to maximize its chances of winning. It has always been the correct strategy, ever since the three-point shot came into existence in the 1960s

All of this is coming nbasavant.com and basketball-reference.com. I would be interested in any different analysis if anyone has any.

[coolguy73739]

I believe all these CRAZY 3-POINTERS are factored into Line by Bookmakers.. Nothing surprises Bookies.. All pre-calculated imo..

[PAULYPOKER]

I believe all these CRAZY 3-POINTERS are factored into Line by Bookmakers.. Nothing surprises Bookies.. All pre-calculated imo..

Oddsmakers.....

[ABEHONEST]

For whatever my opinion is worth? You know how much weight that will carry.
Anyway, until some basketball player, either, breaks his neck while getting undercut on his attempt at a 4 1/2 ft. sky-leap off the floor, causing his whole body to flip at a 180 degrees and breaking his neck, #1., or the other, #2., breaking all bones above his sternum [the protective bone covering the upper chest, shaped like a carrot] including both arms, neck and skull included, rendering this now still warm corpse, a trip to the morgue, I suppose all forms of skyhigh dunking will go for a few more years?

Actually, I really enjoy those "assisted" grabbing high flying dunks. Well, until #1 or #2 happens.
And isn't darn obvious by now, man, mostly the physically gifted [Jordan types] are reaching heights off the basketball floor we didn't see a generation ago. Like evolution, all matters evolve with repeated patterns and inherited genetics. Right?

The point: Where do you reach the limit on these fantastic looking dunks? It will come when #1 or #2 finally happens.
Of course, they could also limit those acrobatic non-assisted dunks, too. What, number per game? 2. 4?

[PaperTrail07]

I say the same but with the NBA-who wants to watch 50 FT a game....best players in the world and they go touch foul...cant watch it.....3 ball or foul down low...

[carolinakid]

it amazing how bad the nba is today, im not sure how anyone can watch it without a bet on it and it even hard to watch it with a bet going............

[stevenash]

it amazing how bad the nba is today, im not sure how anyone can watch it without a bet on it and it even hard to watch it with a bet going............

The NBA is a brutal watch.

When I was eight years ago, and that was four decades ago, my daddy told me back then, he said "son, all you have to do is watch the last five minutes of the game, usually the first 42 or so minutes is meaningless" and to this day he's correct.

Basketball is not my thing anyway, I neither like nor dislike the game itself, it just doesn't hold my attention for 2 hours and 20 minutes.
I can watch an entire crucial game six or game seven of a NBA playoff game from start to finish, but that's it.

That doesn't mean I don't respect the person who loves the game and sport, I do, I have this passion for baseball, I can watch a 3 hour regular season game in May between two teams I have no rooting or betting interest in, many can't.
So I get it.

SPORTS ANALYTICS
In layman's terms is the collection of data (statistics) used to form an opinion (conclusion) on how a certain team or individual will perform in a certain situation.

As mentioned in a previous post I was curious as to whether or not the three point shot is more (or less) beneficial that the standard two point shot so just for shits and giggles I spent a little more time that I really wanted to applying my analytics to this question, because, well, like I said before that's just the type of geek I am.

This was my approach.

I am using statistics from this season to date, I can't use the data from the 2020 season, that was the 'bubble season' and it was an anomaly. Since this season mirrors pretty much the last full season in the NBA (2019) I'll go with the current up to date data.

For this argument I am eliminating the free throws, this is a field goal debate.
To date the average NBA attempts 88.5 field goals per game and make 40.8 of them, or .460 (46%) of them.
Of those 88.5 shots 53.4 of them are your garden variety two point tries, and 35.1 of the field goal attempts are from behind the three point line which is 61 percent of all field goal attempts are two point tries, and 39 percent of field goal tries are three point shots.

The average team scores 111.1 points per game, shoots 22.1 free throws and makes 16.8 of those (76 percent)
I'm not using free throws in this analysis but it's good to know these numbers.

OK, the average team will score 111.1 points per game, subtract the 16.8 points scored via free throws, rounding up the average team scores 94 points from field goals.

Rounding up, the average team attempts 53 two point shots, making 28 of them (52 percent) and attempts 35 three point shots making 13 of them (36.5 percent)

Let's take out the three point equation for a moment and make those 35 shots from three point land closer two point shots.
Those 13 for 35 shots (35 percent) from three point range have to be pro rated because we are making 53 percent on the average two point shots not 35 percent three point shots. Pro rated you're not going to be 41 for 89 from the field, but closer to 48 for 89 (once again providing there is no three point line)

Remember what I said earlier, on the average teams score 111.1 points of a game of which 98 of them come via the field goal (albeit the 3 or 2 pointer)

48 for 89 two point shots is 96 points.
My calculations using fractions is 1.2points not 2.
Using my analytical approach, your team would average 1.2 points LESS if you eliminate the three point line.
Or pretty much a wash, or as we say in my business a statistical dead heat.

Now I've read other studies on this subject and there is one aspect nobody wrote about that I've seen and I think it's rather important.
And that pertains to the missed three point attempts, what happens to the 22 missed shots (35-13-22)
There's a reason why they call them 50/50 balls, because they are reboundable (if there is such a word and I think there is)balls.
The data shows 14 of those shots goes to the opposition via long defensive rebounds or the shot ricocheting out of bounds, possession to the defense. Of those defensive rebounds off of missed three point attempts roughly four point are gained from the fast break.

Now deduct those 4.0 or so points you just gave up via fast breaks off of missed three points from the 1.2 or so points you gained from my previous statement, you lose about 2.8, 2.4 point overall.

Once again pretty much a wash. (or the aforementioned 'statistical dead heat'

There's other factors involved too, but I'm going to stop right here because the more I slice and dice all the other available data the more my conclusion remains the same, there's not much of a difference if you keep the three point shot or not.

I'm going to include a chart below of the data I used.
I included the rebound numbers because I wanted to prove to myself that teams that shoot the most three point shots are going to be among the leaders in offensive rebounds, for obvious reasons.

My suspicions were correct, teams that shoot the most (and miss the most) 3's are likely to come up with more offensive rebounds.
Unless you are Cleveland, those numbers just baffle me. God they are a bad, bad shooting team.

Team	G		FG	FGA	FG%		3P	3PA	3P%		2P	2PA	2P%		PTS		ORB	DRB	TRB
Toronto Raptors	13		39.5	88.9	0.444		16.1	43.1	0.373		23.4	45.8	0.51		111.8		9.6	33.8	43.4
Portland Trail Blazers	14		40.4	92.1	0.438		15.9	42.4	0.374		24.5	49.7	0.493		114.9		9.5	34.4	43.9
Utah Jazz	13		40.6	88	0.462		16.2	40.7	0.397		24.5	47.3	0.517		110.5		11.2	38.2	49.3
Milwaukee Bucks	14		44.6	92	0.485		15.9	39.5	0.403		28.7	52.5	0.547		120.4		11	36.6	47.6
Oklahoma City Thunder	12		39	87	0.448		12.8	38.8	0.33		26.2	48.2	0.543		106		7.2	37.8	45
Detroit Pistons	13		39	91.7	0.425		13.3	38.5	0.345		25.7	53.2	0.483		108.9		11.1	31.6	42.7
Dallas Mavericks	13		38.6	86.5	0.446		12.9	38.4	0.337		25.7	48.2	0.534		107.5		8.8	35.6	44.5
Golden State Warriors	13		39.6	89.2	0.444		13.2	37.8	0.35		26.4	51.5	0.513		111.6		7.9	35.2	43.2
Houston Rockets	12		39.9	86.2	0.463		13.3	37.8	0.352		26.6	48.3	0.55		110.2		8.1	35	43.1
Phoenix Suns	12		40.3	86.1	0.468		14	37.8	0.371		26.3	48.3	0.543		109.9		8.1	34.4	42.5
Atlanta Hawks	13		38.9	89	0.437		12.5	36.6	0.34		26.5	52.4	0.505		111.2		11.2	37.5	48.8
Chicago Bulls	14		42.1	88.2	0.478		13.9	36.1	0.385		28.2	52.1	0.542		117.4		8.3	36.5	44.8
Brooklyn Nets	15		43	87	0.494		14.5	35.9	0.403		28.5	51.1	0.559		119.3		8.5	37.7	46.2
Charlotte Hornets	14		39	87.7	0.445		13.1	35.8	0.367		25.9	51.9	0.498		107.6		11	33.8	44.8
Miami Heat	12		39.7	81.6	0.486		13	35.7	0.364		26.7	45.9	0.581		110.3		6.8	35.3	42.1
Los Angeles Clippers	14		41.2	84.7	0.487		15.4	35.1	0.44		25.8	49.6	0.519		114.9		9.1	32.8	41.9
Minnesota Timberwolves	12		40.2	91.3	0.44		11.5	34.6	0.333		28.7	56.8	0.505		107.7		11.4	33.3	44.7
Denver Nuggets	13		42.8	88.7	0.483		12.9	34.3	0.377		29.9	54.4	0.55		115.4		11	32.2	43.2
Philadelphia 76ers	14		41.9	88.1	0.475		12.1	33.6	0.362		29.7	54.6	0.545		113.6		9.8	37.4	47.2
Indiana Pacers	13		43.1	90	0.479		11.8	33.5	0.351		31.3	56.5	0.554		112.9		8.4	33.9	42.3
Washington Wizards	11		43.9	91.9	0.478		13	33.5	0.389		30.9	58.5	0.529		120.5		9.1	33.7	42.8
Boston Celtics	12		41.3	88.3	0.468		12.2	33.3	0.366		29.2	55.1	0.53		110.8		11.3	33.7	45
Los Angeles Lakers	15		42.9	88.1	0.488		12.5	31.9	0.391		30.5	56.2	0.542		115.3		10.5	38.1	48.6
Sacramento Kings	14		41.7	87.9	0.474		11.6	31.6	0.369		30.1	56.4	0.534		114.3		10	32.4	42.4
Orlando Magic	14		39.2	91.4	0.429		9.9	31.3	0.317		29.3	60.1	0.487		104.5		11.7	34.7	46.4
San Antonio Spurs	14		42.2	94.4	0.447		11.4	30.9	0.37		30.8	63.5	0.485		111.1		9.9	36.3	46.2
New Orleans Pelicans	12		39.9	85.8	0.466		10.2	30.4	0.334		29.8	55.3	0.538		107.8		11.5	36.8	48.3
Memphis Grizzlies	13		41.6	92.1	0.452		10.1	30.2	0.333		31.5	61.8	0.51		106.6		10.5	34.8	45.3
Cleveland Cavaliers	13		38.3	86.5	0.443		9.5	27.8	0.343		28.8	58.8	0.49		99.5		11.3	32.5	43.8
New York Knicks	15		37.7	84.9	0.445		9.4	27.4	0.343		28.3	57.5	0.493		100.6		10.6	35.9	46.5
	13		40.8	89	0.46		12.8	35.1	0.365		27.9	53.4	0.523		111.1		9.8	35.1	44.9
			47	89
League Average	13		40.8	88.5	0.46		12.8	35.1	0.365		27.9	53.4	0.523		111.1		9.8	35.1	44.9

[PharaohUB]

If you will sit through the commercials in a college basketball game, you will watch anything.

NFL is worse. On youtubetv I can switch between games and resume from last action when I switch back and fast forward through the parts with no action. I can keep up with like four nfl games at one time and no more than 2 college basketball games.

[Zlaniner]

3 pointers are worth too many points? How many points should they be worth?

Hahahahaha, good one !

[stevenash]

After spending a couple of hours with the numbers I’m OK with the three point shot, and I’m OK also if it never existed.

I like the fact that a team can rally from 20 points down easier, but I like to see less long range shots and more post up plays, you know a little more play in the paint.

Like I said, I’m officially up the middle pro or con.

[ABEHONEST]

Steverino, that was worth my 5 points I sent you, knowing the thinking and calculating involved.
Me? I like things simple but solid. One of my favorite expressions.
So, I don't have enough memory processing actually to read, process your math and have anya logical answer.

Hey, if it pleases you, you say it does, have fun.

Are you buying my theory about genetics and man evolving physically? Taller, jumping higher; Blacks with that edge they have because of this evolving from thousands of years ago. They somehow are given a longer, leaner calf muscle. This seems to make a profound difference?
My guess: And I am an evolution guy, Black people as far back as you can go and still be 95% human, they likely had to
exist differently than Whites at around the same period of time?

My cheap little guess would be; they ran long distance for some reason and I am sure if they did, that created some definite differences in our Black/White, men's legs. And another guess; to survive, they ran considerably.

I believe I read about the calf muscle difference a few years ago.
Going by memory here.

[coolguy73739]

Steverino, that was worth my 5 points I sent you, knowing the thinking and calculating involved.
Me? I like things simple but solid. One of my favorite expressions.
So, I don't have enough memory processing actually to read, process your math and have anya logical answer.

Hey, if it pleases you, you say it does, have fun.

Are you buying my theory about genetics and man evolving physically? Taller, jumping higher; Blacks with that edge they have because of this evolving from thousands of years ago. They somehow are given a longer, leaner calf muscle. This seems to make a profound difference?
My guess: And I am an evolution guy, Black people as far back as you can go and still be 95% human, they likely had to
exist differently than Whites at around the same period of time?

My cheap little guess would be; they ran long distance for some reason and I am sure if they did, that created some definite differences in our Black/White, men's legs. And another guess; to survive, they ran considerably.

I believe I read about the calf muscle difference a few years ago.
Going by memory here.

This is most bizarre hateful RACIST comment I have ever read on this Forum.. BLACKS ARE 95% HUMAN ??
Why the hell this Moron haven't been banned from this forum yet?