Why the NBA is becoming more boring
It’s difficult to keep a sport exciting. Over time, defenses learn to take away some of the most exciting plays. Rules need to be adjusted to spice up the game. I was reminded of this when I saw Rodney Hood’s recent line in a game against the Lakers:
11 for 13 shooting, 8 for 9 from three, and zero free throws.
I didn’t see the game, but I’ve seen some increasingly boring NBA action this year. Four guys standing at the three point line, while one guy penetrates and kicks out. Over and over and over again. The three point shot is making NBA basketball much less “diverse.” Shooting ability is being overemphasized.
[BTW, this is not a knock against Steph Curry, who actually does have a very diverse set of skills and is fun to watch.]
Rodney Hood played with Jabari Parker at Duke, and went #23 in an NBA draft where Parker went #2. By any reasonable standard, Parker is the far better basketball player. He’s also far more fun to watch than Hood. But in today’s NBA I wonder if he’ll be any more effective than Hood. Parker’s skills are perfect for the NBA of my youth, less so today. While it’s too early to say how he’ll end up (Parker had a severe injury last year), I doubt that even a healthy Parker will ever have a line as effective as Hood’s recent performance. Thirty points in 13 shots has to be close to a record.
My proposal: Move the three point line back one foot, and make it a smooth circle (thus eliminating the corner three). Yes, I know that change actually helps Steph Curry, but he won’t be around forever. The current three is easier than rule makers intended when they first set it up, so my proposed change is in the spirit of the original rule (which was to prevent defenses from clogging up the paint area.)
Update: I wrote this post a few days ago, and then Parker went 12/14 last night. But he only scored 26 on those 14 shots (even with 2 free throws) vs. 30 on 13 shots for Hood. The three is a huge advantage.
Tags:
2. April 2016 at 10:43
I think enough people agree with your take that the line will be moved back, though they’d have to widen the court to do it in the corner. Jared Dudley is a far better player than Derrick Rose. That is a little weird. But I also think there may be a lot you don’t appreciate about today’s game if you don’t watch a ton. Three point shooting is itself not the most exciting or diverse skill, but you are wrong about the complexities of creating those shots. The three point shot is not a novelty killer like the men’s tennis serve. You just have to train yourself to see the attempt as the climax.
Offenses are much more creative and interesting than they’ve ever been if you know what to look for. Smart coaches and players use set ups that turn off ball screeners and cutters into confusing decoys, designed to camouflage the screener, generate unintentional switching and throw off the natural defensive rotations. The act of generating space and opening up the three is much more of a chess game than any Adrian dantley post move or Karl Malone pick n pop. All five players are involved with moves and countermoves that reflect much more diversity than just spread, drive kick. Not always, but commonly on the well coached teams: Celtics, Spurs, Pacers, Hawks, Mavericks, sometimes the Rockets. And the Warriors are probably the most interesting man offense in history.
I think there are gives and takes to the new game, which is mostly about the money ball realization of the efficiency of the 3, the actual improvement in shooting and the elimination of the hand check.
2. April 2016 at 12:11
dlr, Good comment.
Popovich also opposes the three, and I’m pretty sure he understands the nuances of the game better than most. I agree that the Spurs and Warriors are a thing of beauty. But when more and more do the same thing, with less skill than those two, it starts to get boring. The Spurs would be great, and fun to watch, even w/o the three.
Agree that Dudley is now more effective than Rose–which of course supports my point. I don’t want the NBA to turn into nothing but layups and threes. Dudley can’t jump over a phone book. (And I like him as a player–he’s like those boring baseball players who are effective because they draw a lot of walks).
Notice I did not say eliminate the three, just make it a bit harder. I hope if they move the three back then they do it without widening the court, so that the corner three is gone. But I’m OK with a slightly bigger court. I really hate the corner three.
If I want to watch chess, I’ll watch chess (or soccer). If I want to watch basketball it’s because I want to watch people like Jordan and Doctor J.
2. April 2016 at 12:43
LOOORD,I could not disagree more.
What is it about you old people that make you think basketball was better in the 70s and 80s with 25 percent 3 pt shooters and isolation basketball.
the simple ball movement that results from spacing the floor with shooters is exactly what makes basketball pleasing to the eye.
”The Spurs would be great, and fun to watch, even w/o the three”?
No they would not.We saw it in 2005 and 2007.two of the worst finals ever.(i need to fact check) but i think the 2007 one did not have very good ratings.And is it a coincidence that the spurs became interesting when they dominated the league with the 3pt shot in 2013.
the league average for 3 is around 35 percent as it was for a decade now with a dozen outliers like steph curry over 40 percent.
how hard do you guys want it to be?is that not an overreaction to steph curry and the warriors?
the spurs and thunder are not good 3pt teams this year and still peform very well.
As a basketball fanatic I watched a lot of the big 80s and 90s games(although I was only born in 1990) and I still think the NBA has never been better.
2. April 2016 at 12:48
the timing of the post is terrible as well.
We just had one of the greatest games of the season last night with the celtics upset over the warriors
2. April 2016 at 13:34
If you want more excitement, it’s easy. Watch Aussie Rules football.
My take on why soccer produces spectator violence is because scoring is so infrequent, fans don’t get enough catharsis, and take out their rage on each other.
Lots of scores, lot of catharsis, happy football crowds.
Hence American football and (especially) Aussie Rules crowds are much better behaved than soccer crowds.
2. April 2016 at 14:36
@paul henri kadjo
So you don’t think something great’s been lost in that the athletic, spontaneous midrange game is so rare now? Many of us were attracted to basketball for that.
I don’t miss center’s dominating. But I do find coaches setting up target practice over and over pretty boring. I watch football for coaching. I used to watch basketball for heroic displays of athleticism.
2. April 2016 at 15:35
If I want to watch basketball it’s because I want to watch people like Jordan and Doctor J.
I do think they should and probably will extend the line, but this isn’t the reason. There are only a couple of Dr. J or Jordan players no matter the rules and they haven’t gone anywhere. The 3 point mania isn’t preventing you from seeing Dr. J and Jordan. Their names are Russell Westbrook, Kobe, Lebron, Giannis, John Wall and Anthony Davis, none of whom are good at shooting threes and all of whom have been awesome in the modern game. On an individual level, it is actually the least interesting players who are marginalized. Enes Kanter, Rudy Gay, Zach Randolph and Monta Ellis are the first off the boat, not Clyde Drexler or Sir Charles.
Anyway, if you watch basketball for Jordan and Dr. J you should probably switch to beach volleyball 😉 Every great battle sport is sprinkled sneakily with chess, and the real eye candy are guys like Magic, Bird, Nash, Lebron, Curry and Manu.
2. April 2016 at 15:54
@Michael Terry
for the mid range,I don’t know,I watch players like nowitzki,chris paul,derozan and think players still have a midrange.the 3pt shot makes less useful(unless you have dirk),but that certainly is not a great loss for basketball.
Now don’t tell me that your argument is that 80s players were more athletic or had better physical attributes than 2016 players.that is an insane(please I don’t mean as an insult,just not believable) argument.
the only reason the game looked as you describe it is that players were not good enough to diversify their game.Every possesion was an attempt to get to the basket or just post up basketball.
I’m sure you noticed the 80s point guards used to get literally 2 feet inside the 3 point line before setting a play which really was a pass to the center or an attempt at a layup.
the game today is complex(I mean tactics),players are more capable physically(i don’t know how to justify that,it seems obvious to me),they obviously have more skills(long range shooting).
Notice I’m not saying anybody today is better than Jordan or magic but the game overall is much better.(not even close)
2. April 2016 at 17:10
Paul, You said:
“is that not an overreaction to steph curry and the warriors?”
You didn’t read my post very carefully, I said Steph Curry is not the problem.
And I agree that the NBA has never been better in terms of talent and coaching. You are missing the point. But I still see some worrisome signs of a more one dimensional game.
Lorenzo, I once attended an Aussie rules football game, in Melbourne. You are right, it’s a fun game.
dlr, You said:
“the real eye candy are guys like Magic, Bird, Nash, Lebron, Curry and Manu.”
I like them as well. Don’t get me wrong, the NBA is the best team sport in the world, in my humble opinion, even with the recent problems.
But again, there’s a problem when mid-range jumpers become bad shots. It makes the game less diverse. It needs more balance.
I’m a bit puzzled that you are so outraged by my claim that they should move the three point line back by a foot, and then you say they should move the line back. If you agree with me, are you just outraged because you assume my opinion is not as well informed as yours? I’ve been watching the NBA since the 1960s, and have seen 1000s of games. Why do you assume I don’t understand the game?
2. April 2016 at 17:58
I’m with Kadjo. The three spaces the floor and allows for the phenomenal ball movement of teams like the Warriors.
I think the mid range game will make a comeback as well. Look how effectively Turner and Sullinger used it yesterday against the Warriors. And how the Warriors send Livingston, he of the awesome turnaround 12 footer, into the paint to wreak havoc on teams who go small to counter the Warriors long range shooters.
2. April 2016 at 18:24
If you agree with me, are you just outraged because you assume my opinion is not as well informed as yours? I’ve been watching the NBA since the 1960s, and have seen 1000s of games. Why do you assume I don’t understand the game? I’ve been watching the NBA since the 1960s, and have seen 1000s of games. Why do you assume I don’t understand the game?
Outrage? I think it’s a close call and it might be a slight improvement. But what I disagree with is that the possibility for slight improvement means that basketball has gotten boring, repetitive and homogenous, and I much prefer seeing the Hawks running a calculated Rube Goldberg misdirection just to get their PF/C an open three pointer than watching Alex English or Mark Aguirre raise up from 17 feet. I didn’t mean to denigrate your basketball chops by suggesting you don’t appreciate the nuance, that is admittedly just one (common) possibility for someone who sees today’s game and nothing but spread, drive and kick — not the only possibility. I’ve learned from central bankers that it’s possible to be a serious expert in a subject and still have a terrible opinion. That was humor, for the record, not outrage.
BTW in case you haven’t followed closely, the move-back-the-3pt-line is a very popular NBA debate. Mark Cuban has been a huge proponent and Adam Silver has been asked about it at least a dozen times in the last year. Kirk Goldsberry, who was just hired by the Spurs, wrote this about it a couple years ago:
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/is-it-time-to-move-the-nba-3-point-line-back/
PS: Bernard Beaudreau?
2. April 2016 at 19:02
I think the NBA is fine as it is. Stephen Curry is its new star. It would be kind of unfair to move the three point line just because he perfected a new style to which others did not find an answer yet. It’s only the second year and one title so far. There’s really no need to hurry. When Jordan was big it was exactly the other way round. The NBA invented new rules to protect him not to harm him.
I disliked the NBA much more when centers were dominating. Yao Ming and Shaquille O’Neal for example. That was extremely boring. It’s fine with me when finally people have a chance that aren’t giants. I disliked Kobe and LeBron James also. Teamsport?! How was this a teamsport when they were dominating? It was more like a solo sport with 9 supernumeraries.
Or do you remember the times when every game was a free throw festival? Hack-a-Shaq and so on? Now that was boring.
NBA is boring quite often because I think it lacks from more general imbalances. Namely offense and defense seem to be very imbalanced in this sport. That’s another reason why it’s obviously not the best team sport in the world. The best team sports in the world are soccer, football and maybe even ice hockey. And why are they the best? Because offense and defense in those sports are actually balanced.
2. April 2016 at 19:29
Edit:
NBA is boring quite often because I think it *suffers* from more general imbalances.
2. April 2016 at 19:34
So, shooting should not be rewarded in basketball? That is like saying passing should not be rewarded in football. Probably running backs all think that way.
It is a massive skill to play like the Warriors play, and it is pretty funny watching other teams play like them against them or even play traditional basketball against them.
There are no real centers anymore. Shaq would still be scoring and so would Wilt. But three point basketball is exiting for people who appreciate skill.
Surely you don’t want to return to Detroit Piston basketball with a bunch of thugs pushing everyone around do you?
2. April 2016 at 23:50
I like the spirit of your propsal, but it has a couple problems. It would certainly require widening the court at least 3 feet. Otherwise, the 3pt line would only be 3″ from the sideline at its closet point (4′ 9″ away from the baseline – it would also curve back in just a bit for the part closer to the baseline, which i kinda like). The wider court would also provide more space, which i think would be a plus on net. The biggest problem would be that the wider court may cost some (all?) arenas their front row floor seats. I have a hard time believing that owners would abide that revenue hit, Cuban not withstanding. (I get that you would really be eliminating the last row – not the first – but i think that several areanas may only have 1 row of floor seats, and that has a certain cachet to it. Spike Lee in the first row of seats just isnt the same as him being on the floor jawing with Reggie.)
My radical (more like a complete fantasy) proposal would be to change the relitive values of various baskets to downgrrade the 3 a bit, while leaving the relaionship between a “standard” field goal and a free throw unchanged, i.e. 2 to 1. Something like a “3” becomes worth 5, a standard field goal worth 4 and a free throw 2. I also like how this really punishes people who foul a “3” point shooter, since the resulting 3 free throws would be worth more than if the guy just made the shot (6 pts vs 5 pts).
3. April 2016 at 03:26
Today, the expected value of a 3 point shot is 1.08 points and the expected value of a 2 point shot is .96 points. I have no idea on 2nd iteration (2nd shot attempts ft vs 3pt so can’t add that in). Assume on defense that shooting the 3 catches you fewer times in mismatches on defense, and the game clearly should shift to a 3pt offense, as it has.
Taste is individual, but I really preferred the inside the paint body banging game more, with the occasional 3pt shot.
3. April 2016 at 08:53
Derivs, if the three point shots miss, the rebound usually goes out toward the offensive players and over the heads of people who are positioned correctly for the rebounds. That gives the offensive team a better chance of getting rebounds.
3. April 2016 at 12:06
“Derivs, if the three point shots miss, the rebound usually goes out toward the offensive players and over the heads of people who are positioned correctly for the rebounds. That gives the offensive team a better chance of getting rebounds.”
Yeah.. it was early… I Agree should also lead to more rebounds simply because there are more missed shots (adds to the 3). I should add in chance of being fouled (higher on 2 pt shots), and then which leads to more fast breaks against.. (I have no idea).
Probably if you add in everything, and run it 2-3 iterations, it’s probably close. But personally I prefer body slamming in the paint and watching guys take it to the net.
And, I hated Detroit but they were fun to watch. Hoyas with Ewing were even thuggier and more fun to watch.
3. April 2016 at 16:25
dlr, Well I still watch the game, so I didn’t mean to suggest it was boring in an absolute sense. It’s still the best spectator sport, even with the current 3.
Christian, No, moving the line back a foot would help Curry. Moving it back 2 feet would help him even more. I assume you are not an NBA fan.
Joe, No, it does not require widening the court.
4. April 2016 at 07:19
“Yes, I know that change actually helps Steph Curry, but he won’t be around forever.”
What? No.
Curry takes 55% of his shots from 3, of the top 10 scores (total points so far this season to be lazy) in the league that is by far the highest, #2 of that group is at 41% of his shots from 3. No other primary scoring option in the league is as reliant on the 3 pt shot than Curry is, any increased difficulty will harm Curry far more than the other comparable players.
4. April 2016 at 14:33
Bacon, Curry is a somewhat better 3% shooter than most, but he’s a way, way, way better deep three shooter than most. Move the line back and his relative advantage increases.
4. April 2016 at 14:55
@ paul henri kadjo
“Now don’t tell me that your argument is that 80s players were more athletic or had better physical attributes than 2016 players.that is an insane(please I don’t mean as an insult,just not believable) argument.”
It is a complete myth that today’s players are overall more athletic than those in the 70s,80s,90s – for example, Clyde Drexler was more athletic than anyone in the league today including Lebron. People either havent seen or dont remember how athletic some of the players were back then. Of course there are as athletic players today then in the 80s but on average it is probably about the same. Also, shooting percentages were roughly the same then as today. The game is just wholly different now than it was because the 3 is emphasized so much, mostly because analytics have said to. Jordan hit 6 threes in game one of the 1992 finals against the Blazers – if the three was emphasized like it is today, there were many who had the ability to shoot the 3 just as well as those today.
5. April 2016 at 02:39
Maybe the problems is all the bad teams. There are 30% more teams now than in the 80’s.
For me games are only boring when one team is visibly not trying hard enough or there is too much of a talent disparity.
5. April 2016 at 07:51
@ Ognian Davchev
I agree completely – the league should probably contract at least 2 or 3 teams.
5. April 2016 at 09:17
Joe C:
Setting aside evolution of coaching and training techniques, the NBA is pulling from a worldwide pool of talent today (or at least Latin America, Canada, Europe, parts of Africa and China) and not just from the US. You have to assume that a) American basketball athletes are getting worse or b) the rest of the world’s basketball athletes all are below NBA quality to believe that the increased supply of players wouldn’t increase the quality of NBA play.
5. April 2016 at 10:32
@Carl
Point A): yes, in some ways players are getting worse, or more lazy for example James Hardin – the guy is one of the leagues best offensive players but he simply doesn’t try hard on defense.
Point B): The increases supply of international players, overall, has not increased the quality of NBA play. Dirk Nowitzki is awesome but its wrong to assume with a greater supply overall quality increases.
5. April 2016 at 11:06
Joe C:
No argument on Hardin. He needs tights and a red cape on defense. But careful research of the Shaqtin archives reveals that Hardin is considered an outlier for his poor defense.
Nowitzki is great, but there are a lot of other very good foreign players: Diaw, Parker, Duncan, Ginobili, Barbosa, Ezeli, Ibaka, Porzingis, Irving, the Gasols, Horford, Deng, Batum and on and on. I think the burden of proof falls on the skeptics to prove that quality decreases when demand is kept virtually constant and supply increases significantly.
5. April 2016 at 12:17
Carl
Why does the burden of proof fall on me to prove that is doesn’t improve quality? But, here I go anyway:
Avg FG%: 80s = 48.5% 10s = 45.3%
Avg 3pt%: 80s = 28.3% 10s = 35.5% – but the peak 3pt% was 36.7% in 1995/96 and the overall pct has been essentially constant since then
blks: 80s = 5.4/gm 10s = 4.9/gm – Of course with more two pointers blocks is bound to be higher but the ability to shoot a higher pct in the face of more likelihood of a block is impressive.
Avg FT%: 80s = 75.8% 10s = 75.5% – not a big difference but still indicative of better free throw shooting
pts/gm: 80s = 109.1 10s = 99.6 (102.6 last season)
shots/gm: 80s = 88.5 10s = 82.6 – so players in the 80s shot a better pctg while taking more shots. Apparently all this so called ball movement (ur dribbling around forever) is not creating overall better shots – even for two pointers.
Now this doesn’t prove my point but they are telling nonetheless.
Well, I need to get back to work even though I love looking at sports stats! These stats come from http://www.basketball-reference.com
Have a great day
5. April 2016 at 12:20
becoming?
5. April 2016 at 18:33
Dump the 3 point shot all together. It was made for the casual fan. How do serious soccers fans keep the game pure, holding on to the offside rule against the casual fans who want more scoring.
6. April 2016 at 06:49
I’m not a basketball fan, but paul henri kadjo and dlr, as well as Christian List, win this thread; Sumner loses. Indeed, as Floccina implies (sarcastically I take it), don’t just eliminate 3’s, why not eliminate the shot clock and raise the basket higher by a foot or two? Then Sumner will get the raw athleticism he craves. Give the players pole vaulting sticks too, maybe they can beat themselves over the head while playing, to add to the excitement.
BTW when I want to watch a chess match, I go to chessbomb.com and watch a real chess match. Throwing a ball that’s the size of a grapefruit down a hole that’s about as high as a average door (proportionately, for an NBA player vs an ordinary person) is not my idea of sport, sorry.
7. April 2016 at 08:33
Carl, I agree that the talent level is clearly higher today.
7. April 2016 at 10:07
“Bacon, Curry is a somewhat better 3% shooter than most, but he’s a way, way, way better deep three shooter than most. Move the line back and his relative advantage increases.”
Almost all of Curry’s value is derived from behind the line, the fact that he can shoot deeper threes is partially a result of his ability to shoot the closer three. Move back the line and those open deep threes become contested deep threes.
On the other side almost all of Harden’s scoring value comes at the hoop. He shoots 36% from 3 which is a well below average shot for him in terms of pps. Take away his 3s and he still has 80% of his offensive value.
8. April 2016 at 16:48
Bacon, That’s no longer true, Curry is an outstanding driver and finisher at the rim, elite level. And moving the line back one foot won’t affect Curry very much, he’ll still have space. Unlike others, he doesn’t rely on the corner three to have a good percentage.
BTW, If GS beats Memphis, it sets up the most important regular season game in NBA history. The home winning streak vs. the best season record.
16. April 2017 at 15:38
@ssumner The NBA is not even close to the best team sport. That honour goes to the NFL. The only less team sport is golf or tennis. One man can’t dominate an NFL game, but one man can dominate an NBA game.