Article on three-Point Line

[theexorcist]

sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/luke_winn/06/19/three.point/index.html

Discuss.

[chep3]

Those stats trouble me. We're so good at the 2's, yet we relied so much on the 3's. Hopefully we'll be able to get to the line (and make them) more next year.

[nathanhm]

I think a better statistic would be what percentage of 3% they hit versus what % of 3's their opponents hit.

In our case:

38.4% of our 3's fell this season (38th nationally) and teams only hit 29.9% of their 3's against us good enough for 4th best in the nation.

However 40.2% of our FGA were 3's versus 35.3% of our opponents.


So I think our 3pt shooting will only decrease a little bit but our opponents will decrease there's drastically. So in the long run I think it helps us because a team can't hit 3 quick 3's and get back in the game as quickly.

[SirSaxa]

To be honest, I can't see a change of one foot in the distance for threes having much of an impact. Does anyone really see it differently?

[aggypryd]

It should bring defenders out a little more so we can run a few more back-door stuff. Also, the fact that the perimeter defenders are out a little further should help our post-play. This will definitely come into play when we play Duke because they love to collapse the perimeter defender to the post.

[prhoya]

I agree. Shooters will adjust. The difference will be the spacing, which should help our style.

[grokamok]

SOME shooters will adjust. I give the edge to natural long-range shooters and younger players who haven't yet developed on the outside. The first group can hit from anywhere and the second haven't spent their lives getting used to a specific spot on the floor. That said, I would think we are in better shape than most teams.

I see Austin and Dajuan, maybe, having more trouble adjusting than Jessie or Chris, given the typical locations of their respective shots, but I could very well be wrong. From what I can tell from discussions so far, Greg and Jason should be fine. I have no idea about Nikita or Omar, but we know Bryon will be fine as long as he can find glass , and I would guess that we wouldn't expect to see Henry take too many (though I would LOVE it if we had our big men take a few more when left alone at the top of the key to keep the D honest -- I'd been wanting Roy to do this, a la Laimbeer, since his freshman year).

I'm actually glad this happened for this coming year. With the additional spacing and our exterior D, Roy would have had to step out from the middle more often (as our guards got beat off the dribble) and better teams would get some easy baskets on the baseline because Roy would not be able to recover quickly from the extra half-step away. I don't see that being as much of a factor with our coming lineup since they are a more athletic bunch, on average, and will be both less likely to be beat on the outside and more likely to be able to recover on the inside.

As far as our offense goes, I agree that it will tend to open up the cutting lanes for layups, assuming there is not a big drop-off in our ability to hit 3s. The additional spacing should also help Austin and Dajuan get some open looks from about 10-12 feet, from where, I believe, they are pretty good. I do worry a bit about the drive-and-dish-outside from Jessie/Austin/Dajuan - the spots to hit will be a bit different than they are used to. I think Chris will have less trouble with this, having a bit more intuitive feel for assists (though that can work against him sometimes). In total, a net positive for us as long as JT III drills them - and is there anyone here who honestly thinks he won't?

[SFHoya99]

I think Chris and Austin will be fine. I think where we will struggle a bit is with the bigs -- Summers, Jeff and Ewing over the last couple of years, Monroe and Vaughn in the future. But III will find ways to compensate.

[moe09]

Agree with SF. It will probably be great for Austin considering he's got a great midrange game. However, overall, I have to think that changes will be minimal.

[algtiger]

The important thing that will help us is how our opponents will adjust. If we can continue to have multiple threats from the outside, opponents who are used to packing into a zone against us (like 'Cuse for instance), will either have to extend out even further, thus opening up more cutting lanes, or will have to stay in tight and allow us to shoot over them all day.

[Just Cos]

Wouldn't moving the 3 point line back help 'Cuse? If moving the line back hurts 3PT% (assumption), then a zone defense would become stronger.

[TrueHoyaBlue]

All depends on how you defend it. Basically, the one-foot difference probably won't have a huge impact either way, but arguably, if most 2-3 zones only defend the wing out to the perimeter (or a foot back from the perimeter) then this will add two feet of space (one foot on each sideline) to the frontcourt area that has to be covered.

This potential advantage, though, will be able to be exploited by teams that can do one or more of the following:

1. Crisp skip passes around the perimeter
2. Driving into the seams of the zone.
3. Exploiting the elbow and/or high-low game (given a bit more space that the forwards will have to cover to collapse in help defense).
4. Hit 20' threes.

Essentially, defensive teams will be helped to the extent that a deeper 3-point line reduces shooting percentage, but offensive teams will be helped (if their shooters still need to be respected) to the extent that the ball moves faster than players do.

[HoyaSinceBirth]

I think what it essentially does is it helps good teams and hurts marginal and bad teams. Teams with good shooters are still going to shoot well from 3 and good team defenses will still cover the floor, but weaker defenses and shooters who are only halfway decent will be exposed.

[Locker]

Some players can be excellent shooters from a certain perimeter distance, but simply don't have it from a foot or two further out. I remember guys like Mookie Blaylock, Kevin Johnson, and Juwan Howard used to wear out the old shorter NBA three point line during the 90s, but then once the longer line was reestablished, they couldn't make the shot consistently. It just depends on the range of the particular shooter.