The 3-Point Defense

A few weeks ago there was an article written by Bob Ryan of the Boston Globe decrying the 3-point line as too easy a shot and that the line should be moved back.

All of this after one of the greatest weekends of basketball in the NCAA tournament with 3 of the regional finals going into overtime.

Ryan argues that the distance is too short and that the reward is not commensurate with the achievement. Well if that’s the case the whole freakin floor should be covered with spots and lines like the basketball floor in an MTV Rock and Jock basketball game. 7 point spot just past half court, a 1 point shot for a layup, a 4 point shot from the deep corner just behind the basket. How does that sound?

The fact is is that the 3-point line is not an easy shot. It actually requires skill to shoot.

Ryan suggests that any goof with a basketball can hit the rim at 19 feet 9 inches (where the line currently exists), and I argue that any goof can stand at the NBA line (23 feet 9 inches) and can hit the rim from there too, but it’s not about hitting the rim, it’s about making the shot.

There is a big difference between the NBA line and the 3 point line (4 feet). But there is an even bigger difference between the 3 point college line and a layup (about 18 feet). So if you want to start tinkering and changing the game then I feel that there should be an arc at 2 feet 9 inches that is a 1 point shot and anything inside that is worth 1.

Sound absurd?

Yep, it’s just like saying that the 3-point line is too close.

Ryan uses Sean May’s 29 points in the regional final (without shootng a 3) against Wisconsin as an example of how the game should be played and how it was artistry to watch him maneuver in the low post.

Oh please.

Did May have an awesome game? Hell yes. Is he unstoppable in the post? Hell yes, but what Ryan fails to mention is that North Carolina had balance, and that they were able to spread the floor with . . . ya ta da da . . . the 3 point line. Yes, if it hadn’t been for the 3 point line, Wisconsin could have collapsed in on May with 4 people and he may have scored 10 instead of 29. The 3 point line causes the defense to loosen up. Weak side defenders can’t float into the middle of the lane for help side defense, cause if they do May would have done what he did to Illinois and kick it cross court to McCants for a 3 pointer.

Also take WVU as a perfect example. Look at their offense. They shoot a ton of 3’s, but they also get a ton of layups. “How do they do that?” You may ask. It’s because with the 3 point line they are able to expand the defense, create driving lanes and unclog the middle of the floor for beautiful back doors and curl cuts to the basket.

Move the line back? If you do it would the same thing as having no line. If teams are shooting around 38% (and that’s pretty good) at the current line then I would bet that the percentage would drop to 25% or lower at the NBA line. Do you think I am coming out to guard a shot out there? No way, I will pack it in and get the rebound. Say good bye to the quality of the low post play.

Ryan says the midrange jump shot has disappeared, post play is nearly extinct, and that the 3-point line is a glorified free throw.

Oh no, is the sky falling too?

The reality is is that college basketball is as popular as ever (the same can’t be said for the NBA) and the game has changed with the 3 pointer, no doubt about that, but the change has been for the better. Plus, I find it difficult to argue with a part of the game that rewards a player for shooting the ball well.

The game is fine the way it is. The line is perfect where it is. Don’t change it.

Plus my last and best argument: Who would ever want to do something like the NBA anyway?