drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by drquigley on Dec 26, 2018 10:44:28 GMT -5
Anyone else get a chance to see the MASN Classics games broadcast the last few days? Watched Hoya-Kentucky NCAA 1984 semi final and the NCAA Hoya-St. John's semi final. Wow. Such a different game. Before the 3 point shot hardly anyone took shots from beyond 15 feet. Totally committed to scoring in the paint. Defenses stayed way off ball handlers beyond what would today be the 3 point arc. A lot easier to play man to man. And of course no shot clock so game was much slower with a lot of coaching involved in clock management. And oh yeah, Gene Smith was a monster in man defense. No one on our team over the last 30 years could compare.
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,650
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Dec 26, 2018 11:30:59 GMT -5
Three point shot killed Big Man U. ☹️
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Dec 26, 2018 12:02:15 GMT -5
I have started to believe the three has been bad for basketball. Every year players have been able to hit that shot further and further out. Within a few years, the Steph Curry's of the world will be able to hit the shot consistently from mid court. It is exciting to watch but coaches now rely on it solely.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,140
|
Post by SSHoya on Dec 26, 2018 12:05:41 GMT -5
I have started to believe the three has been bad for basketball. Every year players have been able to hit that shot further and further out. Within a few years, the Steph Curry's of the world will be able to hit the shot consistently from mid court. It is exciting to watch but coaches now rely on it solely. I seem to recall that JT Jr. was opposed to the 3 point shot when it was first instituted. I think he said something somewhat facetiously that you should get 3 points for a layup because it was either the result of a fastbreak or a good pass. Might have made those remarks at a Hoya Hoop Club basketball awards banquet which I attended every year through the Esherick era. Yes, a good pass could lead to a 3 as well but I sort of see JT Jr's point. |
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,650
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Dec 26, 2018 12:50:34 GMT -5
Adapt or perish. We perished. This is the same reason Pat never got a head coaching gig in the NBA. It’s no longer a bigman’s game. That said, he now has a ton of experience to impart to our players.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2018 12:55:59 GMT -5
The 3pt shot is a terrible bastardization of a sport. In all goal/net sports, skill and athleticism/size get you closer to the goal, which allows you a better chance to score. All scores are then are valued equally. Soccer/hockey goals, touchdowns, basketball FGs, etc.
The 3-pointer is an admission that "I don't have the skill or size to compete with you, let's change the rules so that I can". (There's also a 'give the losing team a better chance to catch up' angle, a la NBA half-court inbounds, but that's VERY secondary.)
The rationalization for more points is "well, it's a much harder shot" - but for any half-decent player, it's just not. Certainly not worth 50% more than a regular FG.
I get that sports are always tweaking rules to promote offense/defense/pace of play/etc, but giving 3pts vs 2pts back in the day was a bad decision that there's no easy retreat from.
It's just surprising that it took so long for players & teams to change the style to match the math.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Dec 26, 2018 13:08:06 GMT -5
I have started to believe the three has been bad for basketball. Every year players have been able to hit that shot further and further out. Within a few years, the Steph Curry's of the world will be able to hit the shot consistently from mid court. It is exciting to watch but coaches now rely on it solely. I seem to recall that JT Jr. was opposed to the 3 point shot when it was first instituted. I think he said something somewhat facetiously that you should get 3 points for a layup because it was either the result of a fastbreak or a good pass. Might have made those remarks at a Hoya Hoop Club basketball awards banquet which I attended every year through the Esherick era. Yes, a good pass could lead to a 3 as well but I sort of see JT Jr's point. I don't get the pushback against the three. Creating the the three point line rewards highly skilled players over sheer size and force, which I think is good for any game. Who wants a game where there is only one way to win? Where only the genetically advantaged have any value? In addition to this basic benefit, creating the three point line also stretched the defense out. No more collapsing down low. It opens up space in the defense, allowing for more drives and more open play. It actually makes post play easier. Removing the three point line would bring the game back to a plodding, collapsing, defensive mush. No one should want that. What should be done is to move the college line back a bit. It'd open up more space but also reward the actual good shooters and stretch some differences between players. I'm not sure how far is right, but the line right now is too easy, I think. That said, it will leave openings for things like the pack line to become more dominant against teams that are affected by the deeper line. And the pack line makes basketball boring. The pro distance is not bad, but one thing I would do -- but will never happen -- is widen the court to allow for a true arc. The corner three is far too easy for pros. At least make all three 23'9". If people are missing big man play, the real culprits are easy: one, AAU ball that is so up and down that big men aren't given enough touches or taught properly; the way officials let fouls go very easy against big men. Start putting big men on the line regularly like they do James Harden and watch as it becomes a more efficient option. |
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,140
|
Post by SSHoya on Dec 26, 2018 14:05:31 GMT -5
I seem to recall that JT Jr. was opposed to the 3 point shot when it was first instituted. I think he said something somewhat facetiously that you should get 3 points for a layup because it was either the result of a fastbreak or a good pass. Might have made those remarks at a Hoya Hoop Club basketball awards banquet which I attended every year through the Esherick era. Yes, a good pass could lead to a 3 as well but I sort of see JT Jr's point. I don't get the pushback against the three. Creating the the three point line rewards highly skilled players over sheer size and force, which I think is good for any game. Who wants a game where there is only one way to win? Where only the genetically advantaged have any value? In addition to this basic benefit, creating the three point line also stretched the defense out. No more collapsing down low. It opens up space in the defense, allowing for more drives and more open play. It actually makes post play easier. Removing the three point line would bring the game back to a plodding, collapsing, defensive mush. No one should want that. What should be done is to move the college line back a bit. It'd open up more space but also reward the actual good shooters and stretch some differences between players. I'm not sure how far is right, but the line right now is too easy, I think. That said, it will leave openings for things like the pack line to become more dominant against teams that are affected by the deeper line. And the pack line makes basketball boring. The pro distance is not bad, but one thing I would do -- but will never happen -- is widen the court to allow for a true arc. The corner three is far too easy for pros. At least make all three 23'9". If people are missing big man play, the real culprits are easy: one, AAU ball that is so up and down that big men aren't given enough touches or taught properly; the way officials let fouls go very easy against big men. Start putting big men on the line regularly like they do James Harden and watch as it becomes a more efficient option. My pushback is partly based upon the fact I'm just a grumpy old man and harken back to the Big East days of yore.  One suggestion: Widening the lane as in international basketball would also result in unclogging the middle to prevent the big man easily posting that closely to the basket and open up passing lanes. Also institute a defensive 3 second violation as in the NBA. |
|
SirSaxa
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by SirSaxa on Dec 26, 2018 17:14:25 GMT -5
My pushback is partly based upon the fact I'm just a grumpy old man and harken back to the Big East days of yore. One suggestion: Widening the lane as in international basketball would also result in unclogging the middle to prevent the big man easily posting that closely to the basket and open up passing lanes. Also institute a defensive 3 second violation as in the NBA. SS! I am surprised to read those comments from one of our more astute posters.  Three pointers have been part of the NCAA -- and Big East -- since 1986, very early on in the history of the conference. Rick Pitino got it right away and used it to maximum impact at Providence. The second thing is we know it's not going away. Too popular. Too established. Pat did say he wants to have a team of 5 guys who can all shoot the three. SS -- I enjoyed those big bruisers and power basketball and GU's very aggressive D. But we have the early makings of another exciting team. Let's hope Mac, James, Jesse, Jamorko, Blair and Malinowski have a lot of success shooting Hoya threes in the BE this season! And SS - keep on posting. You are one of those I make a point of reading. Thanks. Happy New Year!  |
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,140
|
Post by SSHoya on Dec 26, 2018 17:22:14 GMT -5
My pushback is partly based upon the fact I'm just a grumpy old man and harken back to the Big East days of yore. One suggestion: Widening the lane as in international basketball would also result in unclogging the middle to prevent the big man easily posting that closely to the basket and open up passing lanes. Also institute a defensive 3 second violation as in the NBA. SS! I am surprised to read those comments from one of our more astute posters. Three pointers have been part of the NCAA -- and Big East -- since 1986, very early on in the history of the conference. Rick Pitino got it right away and used it to maximum impact at Providence. The second thing is we know it's not going away. Too popular. Too established. Pat did say he wants to have a team of 5 guys who can all shoot the three. SS -- I enjoyed those big bruisers and power basketball and GU's very aggressive D. But we have the early makings of another exciting team. Let's hope Mac, James, Jesse, Jamorko, Blair and Malinowski have a lot of success shooting Hoya threes in the BE this season! And SS - keep on posting. You are one of those I make a point of reading. Thanks. Happy New Year! Just a function of how old I am! I predate the Big East and remember the ECAC -South. I do harken back to the founding of the Big East in 1979 and the glory years of the Ewing I era and the implementation of the 3 point shot. I always wondered what Sleepy Floyd would have averaged if he had the benefit of the 3 pointer in his stats. Hopefully, Ewing II era can bring us back to prominence. Happy New Year! |
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,229
|
Post by EtomicB on Dec 26, 2018 17:34:18 GMT -5
My pushback is partly based upon the fact I'm just a grumpy old man and harken back to the Big East days of yore. One suggestion: Widening the lane as in international basketball would also result in unclogging the middle to prevent the big man easily posting that closely to the basket and open up passing lanes. Also institute a defensive 3 second violation as in the NBA. SS! I am surprised to read those comments from one of our more astute posters. Three pointers have been part of the NCAA -- and Big East -- since 1986, very early on in the history of the conference. Rick Pitino got it right away and used it to maximum impact at Providence.
The second thing is we know it's not going away. Too popular. Too established. Pat did say he wants to have a team of 5 guys who can all shoot the three.SS -- I enjoyed those big bruisers and power basketball and GU's very aggressive D. But we have the early makings of another exciting team. Let's hope Mac, James, Jesse, Jamorko, Blair and Malinowski have a lot of success shooting Hoya threes in the BE this season! And SS - keep on posting. You are one of those I make a point of reading. Thanks. Happy New Year! I watched episode 7 of Basketball: A Love Story on ESPN Monday night, highly recommend the series, it's very well done... One of the segments was on Rick Pitino & Billy Donovan's player/coach relationship @ PC, in addition to how the '87 Friars were the 1st team to embrace the 3pt shot and how it propelled them to the FF4... The crazy part is Pitino changed the strategy in the Gtown game because JT2 was doing everything he could to deny Donovan & Brooks from taking 3's.. PC went from taking 20+ in the previous tourney games to taking only 9 in the win against Gtown... If this is true, he's not recruiting like it... |
|
SaxaCD
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,402
|
Post by SaxaCD on Dec 26, 2018 23:28:22 GMT -5
The 3pt shot is a terrible bastardization of a sport. In all goal/net sports, skill and athleticism/size get you closer to the goal, which allows you a better chance to score. All scores are then are valued equally. Soccer/hockey goals, touchdowns, basketball FGs, etc. The 3-pointer is an admission that "I don't have the skill or size to compete with you, let's change the rules so that I can". (There's also a 'give the losing team a better chance to catch up' angle, a la NBA half-court inbounds, but that's VERY secondary.) The rationalization for more points is "well, it's a much harder shot" - but for any half-decent player, it's just not. Certainly not worth 50% more than a regular FG. I get that sports are always tweaking rules to promote offense/defense/pace of play/etc, but giving 3pts vs 2pts back in the day was a bad decision that there's no easy retreat from. It's just surprising that it took so long for players & teams to change the style to match the math. I remember when the 3 point shot was just an ABA gimmick. I guess I sort of like it, but definitely believe the game has gotten WAYYY too imbalanced because of it. And I do understand Coach Thompson's point. Just being big doesn't mean 2 point baskets are too easy. Lots of big guys can't score even in close, and I think the emphasis on bombing away has hurt the standards of entry passes, post footwork and other things. Yes, long-range shooting is a skill, but lots of those gunners are just as one-dimensional as the bigs they have replaced. Not sure what the balance might be, although I suppose the wider lane might have been a decent option. |
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Dec 27, 2018 16:43:56 GMT -5
A dunk should be worth 4 points. That would change the Game.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Dec 27, 2018 16:52:36 GMT -5
No one should want that. What should be done is to move the college line back a bit. It'd open up more space but also reward the actual good shooters and stretch some differences between players. I'm not sure how far is right, but the line right now is too easy, I think. I agree with moving the line back. That is a long-time coming. This is necessary, in part, because teams have placed such an emphasis on threes that it essentially has taken away other parts of the game. As you said, nobody wants to watch a game where there's only one way to win, and it's increasingly becoming the case that the only shots you see are threes, and layups/dunks. I don't blame people for playing that way, as it is the best way to play in the current environment and if you have shooters. I also don't like the variance caused by rampant three point shooting, and a hot streak that can cause big upsets. I am not sure moving the line out would solve that problem, though. |
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,650
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Dec 27, 2018 16:59:23 GMT -5
If a dunk were 4 points, Mac would be a 5-star. Our starting front line would be weak.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,557
|
Post by tashoya on Dec 27, 2018 17:00:09 GMT -5
No one should want that. What should be done is to move the college line back a bit. It'd open up more space but also reward the actual good shooters and stretch some differences between players. I'm not sure how far is right, but the line right now is too easy, I think. I agree with moving the line back. That is a long-time coming. This is necessary, in part, because teams have placed such an emphasis on threes that it essentially has taken away other parts of the game. As you said, nobody wants to watch a game where there's only one way to win, and it's increasingly becoming the case that the only shots you see are threes, and layups/dunks. I don't blame people for playing that way, as it is the best way to play in the current environment and if you have shooters. I also don't like the variance caused by rampant three point shooting, and a hot streak that can cause big upsets. I am not sure moving the line out would solve that problem, though. I like the idea of a combo of the ideas here but definitely start with the moving of the line. When they do that, it should also eliminate the corner 3. |
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Dec 27, 2018 20:27:02 GMT -5
I seem to recall that JT Jr. was opposed to the 3 point shot when it was first instituted. I think he said something somewhat facetiously that you should get 3 points for a layup because it was either the result of a fastbreak or a good pass. Might have made those remarks at a Hoya Hoop Club basketball awards banquet which I attended every year through the Esherick era. Yes, a good pass could lead to a 3 as well but I sort of see JT Jr's point. I don't get the pushback against the three. Creating the the three point line rewards highly skilled players over sheer size and force, which I think is good for any game. Who wants a game where there is only one way to win? Where only the genetically advantaged have any value? In addition to this basic benefit, creating the three point line also stretched the defense out. No more collapsing down low. It opens up space in the defense, allowing for more drives and more open play. It actually makes post play easier. Removing the three point line would bring the game back to a plodding, collapsing, defensive mush. No one should want that. What should be done is to move the college line back a bit. It'd open up more space but also reward the actual good shooters and stretch some differences between players. I'm not sure how far is right, but the line right now is too easy, I think. That said, it will leave openings for things like the pack line to become more dominant against teams that are affected by the deeper line. And the pack line makes basketball boring. The pro distance is not bad, but one thing I would do -- but will never happen -- is widen the court to allow for a true arc. The corner three is far too easy for pros. At least make all three 23'9". If people are missing big man play, the real culprits are easy: one, AAU ball that is so up and down that big men aren't given enough touches or taught properly; the way officials let fouls go very easy against big men. Start putting big men on the line regularly like they do James Harden and watch as it becomes a more efficient option. That is so key. Officiating has caused the imbalance. You can hit a big man with a chair but you can't swear at a live ball handler. Posting up is a skill and properly doing so should be rewarded. |
|
|
|
Post by bicentennial on Dec 27, 2018 22:34:26 GMT -5
I don't get the pushback against the three. Creating the the three point line rewards highly skilled players over sheer size and force, which I think is good for any game. Who wants a game where there is only one way to win? Where only the genetically advantaged have any value? In addition to this basic benefit, creating the three point line also stretched the defense out. No more collapsing down low. It opens up space in the defense, allowing for more drives and more open play. It actually makes post play easier. Removing the three point line would bring the game back to a plodding, collapsing, defensive mush. No one should want that. What should be done is to move the college line back a bit. It'd open up more space but also reward the actual good shooters and stretch some differences between players. I'm not sure how far is right, but the line right now is too easy, I think. That said, it will leave openings for things like the pack line to become more dominant against teams that are affected by the deeper line. And the pack line makes basketball boring. The pro distance is not bad, but one thing I would do -- but will never happen -- is widen the court to allow for a true arc. The corner three is far too easy for pros. At least make all three 23'9". If people are missing big man play, the real culprits are easy: one, AAU ball that is so up and down that big men aren't given enough touches or taught properly; the way officials let fouls go very easy against big men. Start putting big men on the line regularly like they do James Harden and watch as it becomes a more efficient option. That is so key. Officiating has caused the imbalance. You can hit a big man with a chair but you can't swear at a live ball handler. Posting up is a skill and properly doing so should be rewarded. I so agree with this. If a big touches a guard it is a foul, if a guard mugs a big there is no foul call. A "skilled" guard clearly still sliding into the place a big man is about to arrive is called a charge while a big man who moves his body an inch left or right while his feet have not moved for 10 seconds is called for a block. Other than the fact the refs are all less than 6 feet tall, I am not sure why they are so biased against Big men today! |
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,650
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Dec 28, 2018 8:44:39 GMT -5
I will say that Jessie is prone to fouling guards on the perimeter. No need for that.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,140
|
Post by SSHoya on Dec 28, 2018 9:13:07 GMT -5
I will say that Jessie is prone to fouling guards on the perimeter. No need for that. His lateral foot speed isn't optimal and tends to reach with hands or bump with his body. Sigh. |
|
One suggestion: Widening the lane as in international basketball would also result in unclogging the middle to prevent the big man easily posting that closely to the basket and open up passing lanes. Also institute a defensive 3 second violation as in the NBA. 
