I love basketball. I hate three-pointers. I used to love three-pointers when I was younger. The three-point line was a relatively new invention when I was a kid, so there was a novelty aspect to shooting a three-pointer. There was a never-say-die element to a three pointer, too. We're down three with two seconds left? Prior to the the three-point line, it would have been time to pack up and head home. Ah, but with the three-pointer there's still hope...the ever-lasting fuel for sports fandemonium.
The other thing I liked about three-pointers was I could shoot them. I was the youngest and smallest of all my cousins and basketball-playing kids in my neighborhood. Driving to the basket was not a real option for me. I could always dribble the ball a bit on the outside while the bigger kids took a breather and, never wanting to be outside of rebound range, the older kids often left three-point land unguarded. That left me a golden, swat-proof opportunity to get a shot off.
Now, as someone who periodically coaches and writes about basketball, I hate three-pointers. Three-pointers have become a way of life. But that's not the substance of what basketball is. I bet you can think of dozens of NBA players who have scored 40 or more points recently. How many of those were post players? There's too much effort required for a center to score 40 points. Taking free throws out of the equation, a post player has to hit 20 shots to produce what a shooter can with just 13 shots. Many college teams now have the three-pointer as the foundation of their offense. There are dozens of teams nightly across this country that shoot more three-pointers than two-pointers. Really? That's what basketball is? Hit 15 threes, 10 regular shots and 21 free throws–guess what? You just scored 86 points and probably won. That's basketball? Hitting 25 baskets and winning? Without the three-pointers and the same 21 free throws, you need to hit 33 shots. What happened in the game, a late-arriving fans asks. One team hit 32 shots and the other hit 25. Which team won, he asks. The 25 shot team.
In what other sport would this seem normal? Hooray! A grand slam! Four runs for us! Yeah, but he hit it into the upper deck–it's six runs for us! I knocked down all ten pins! That's a strike! I knocked down three pins...but I did it from way over there. That's also a strike! He shoots, he scores! Yes, but he shot the puck from outside the blue line...he shoots and scores two goals! Tiger...lining up the par put from 54 feet away–that puts him in three-point range, so if he hits this, it's and eagle! It's stupid in every other sport. Why does it make sense in basketball?
Because it makes the game more exciting! It gives underdogs a chance! Yeah–except, no... it makes the game worse. The complaints from analysts and coaches alike are the same–the players can't shoot mid-range jump shots, they can't make free throws, they don't know how to set proper screens. These are all critical fundamentals to what basketball is really about and they are eroding. And why? There's no value in it. There's no benefit to setting screens and working the ball into the paint. Why drive to the basket and get fouled to get three points? First, you have to make a basket, then you have to get hacked, then you have to hit another shot. It's easier to stand really far away and throw a shot in from the third row of the bleachers. You can't screen, you can't pass, you can't rebound, you can't dribble, you can't drive, you can't make free throws, you can't defend. You can consistently hit three-pointers. We gotta get you some time on the court! That's the game of basketball?
Just wait. Soon you'll get four points from hitting behind the half-court line. One day, there will be a circle on the the far end of the court. Hit a shot from there and your team instantly wins the game! Hey, it makes teams defend the whole court, keeps the underdog in it and makes the game more exciting.
No comments:
Post a Comment