Things you would change about the NBA

Capt. Factorial said:
And by the law of unintended consequences, three point shooters would be fouled on ~87% of their 3PT attempts the next season.
Click to expand...
Oh that's an intended consequence; the goal is to lower the expected value of taking a three point shot, so that it's used to punish lazy defenses instead of being lazy offense.
 
I still don’t I understand why you lose your challenge even if it’s correct. The ref screwed up, you prove it, and can’t challenge again if the ref screws up later in the game?
 
Telemachus said:
They need to stop the move where a player does a pump fake and then leans or steps under the defensive player who is already in the air. A defender has to allow the offensive player space to come down after a shot, so why is an offensive player allowed to move under a defensive player who is in the air?
Click to expand...
I think that’s covered under what Woj mentions in his tweet since that’s Harden’s go to
 
Insomniacal Fan said:
Oh that's an intended consequence; the goal is to lower the expected value of taking a three point shot, so that it's used to punish lazy defenses instead of being lazy offense.
Click to expand...

Well, that's an interesting take. But it seems the easy way to lower the value of taking a three-point shot is to eliminate the three point shot (or, as the NBA would almost certainly prefer, only allow shots outside the arc to count as three points in the final 2 or 3 minutes or whatever - the NBA wants teams to be in reach at the end of games). Your suggestion would encourage deliberate fouling, probably result in increased flagrants and altercations as players get too enthusiastic fouling, result in more game stoppage time...there are some interesting strategic points but I don't think it sounds like the best idea in toto.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
Well, that's an interesting take. But it seems the easy way to lower the value of taking a three-point shot is to eliminate the three point shot (or, as the NBA would almost certainly prefer, only allow shots outside the arc to count as three points in the final 2 or 3 minutes or whatever - the NBA wants teams to be in reach at the end of games). Your suggestion would encourage deliberate fouling, probably result in increased flagrants and altercations as players get too enthusiastic fouling, result in more game stoppage time...there are some interesting strategic points but I don't think it sounds like the best idea in toto.
Click to expand...
I have a better idea. Why don't we actually allow teams to play defense the way they used to? The keep changing the rules to favor the offense. Better defense will keep the games closer and more enjoyable IMO.
 
steelevt said:
I still don’t I understand why you lose your challenge even if it’s correct. The ref screwed up, you prove it, and can’t challenge again if the ref screws up later in the game?
Click to expand...

Because people like Luke Walton would gauge their success based on how many challenges they win per game. If he has a lucky 10 in a row streak that game just went 5 hours or more, ha ha ha.
 
Telemachus said:
I have a better idea. Why don't we actually allow teams to play defense the way they used to? The keep changing the rules to favor the offense. Better defense will keep the games closer and more enjoyable IMO.
Click to expand...

This is the problem when sports betting takes place on statistical output. They need their precious data.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
Well, that's an interesting take. But it seems the easy way to lower the value of taking a three-point shot is to eliminate the three point shot (or, as the NBA would almost certainly prefer, only allow shots outside the arc to count as three points in the final 2 or 3 minutes or whatever - the NBA wants teams to be in reach at the end of games). Your suggestion would encourage deliberate fouling, probably result in increased flagrants and altercations as players get too enthusiastic fouling, result in more game stoppage time...there are some interesting strategic points but I don't think it sounds like the best idea in toto.
Click to expand...

I have a hard time believing the NBA would eliminate the 3 point shot entirely; it would alienate more money than it would excite. And I don't think things are yet that dire for the NBA that they'd consider something so drastic. (I think that the rise in 3pa is actually correlated with a rise in revenue, so any changes to the rules on this would probably require the NBA to crash, or would require subtlety )

One FTA per 3PA probably wouldn't upset many people by itself. And as a relatively subtle rule change, it's hard to predict exactly how teams would figure out how to play it. But I think some things will prevent it from being cheesy;
  1. Players can still foul out, so it's not like it's a substitute for defense.
  2. If there's a lower expected value for 3PAs, then teams are going to shoot fewer 3PAs, so the chances to deliberately foul will decrease as the tactic becomes more effective
It's a convention that defenders should foul instead of allowing a layup, and players seem (mostly) accepting of hard fouls in that circumstance. There would be an adjustment period, but eventually players would get used to it.

I think the stoppage time will be a wash; maybe there'd be more fouls, but with only one (terminal) FT per foul, the game might move even quicker.

Also, my hope is that by decreasing the value of a 3PA, it might enrich the basketball ecosystem with players that excel in the midrange, as there'd now be a competitive reason to take those shots.
 
Last edited:
Telemachus said:
They need to stop the move where a player does a pump fake and then leans or steps under the defensive player who is already in the air. A defender has to allow the offensive player space to come down after a shot, so why is an offensive player allowed to move under a defensive player who is in the air?
Click to expand...

I don't think they should allow the full-on lean in, but I think there has to be a benefit to getting defenders biting on pump fakes that isn't just being able to escape dribble for a possibly open shot (which you wouldn't have if you're already pump faking off the dribble).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
The NBA buisiness model. Is it working?
Replies
15
Views
676
kingsboi
kingsboi
twslam07
Potential Free Agent/Trade/Sign Tracker, '25-'26 Season
19 20 21
Replies
612
Views
16K
iowamcnabb
iowamcnabb
Spike
What Do The Kings Mean to You?
Replies
9
Views
716
Jdbraver137
J
sactowndog
An at-length discussion about... um, length (split from the [Game] thread)
2
Replies
46
Views
2K
dude12
D
King Baller
This is why we love the Kings
Replies
9
Views
1K
MizzouKing
MizzouKing
Back
Top