Outspoken Mavericks team owner Mark Cuban has never been shy about voicing his opinions about the state of the NBA and his latest idea involves moving back the 3-point line, as he told ESPN during Friday night’s win over the Nuggets (h/t Tim McMahon of ESPN.com). Cuban, prompted by watching the two teams launch a combined 58 3-point attempts that night, had this to say: “It’s getting too close. Guys are shooting a foot behind it anyways. That’s something we should look at. It’s worth looking at. I don’t think the number of shots would decline, but I think it would reward skill and open up the court some more. So guys would still take [3-point] shots if it’s seven inches back or whatever, but at the same time, it opens up the court for more drives, more midrange game.”
While many will automatically assume this stance is motivated by the unreal shooting range of Golden State’s Stephen Curry, the Mavs owner insisted this change would benefit players by opening up other scoring opportunities. “I think it’d open it up more so guys with different skill sets could play,” Cuban said. “It would open up play for more drives. Guys with midrange games would be rewarded and that would stay in the game. There would be more diversity of offensive action in the game. You’d see a little bit of decline in the 3. I’m not saying it’s a bad thing that we shoot so many 3s, but it’s worth it in the D-League to see what happens [with a deeper 3-point line].”
This brings me to the topic for today: Should the NBA adjust the distance of the 3-point line?
Is this simply an overreaction to Curry’s play, or is there an issue with the game that needs to be addressed? As a basketball purist at heart, I often lament the decline of the midrange jumper and miss the days when skilled big men would dominate the paint area. While I certainly appreciate the athleticism displayed by the NBA’s top stretch-fours and perimeter-oriented big men, a major part of me still longs for the days of Hakeem Olajuwan, David Robinson and Patrick Ewing battling it out in the post. The 3-point shot has never been used more freely than it has been this season, with players currently on pace to nail 58,477 in total, which would easily shatter the league record of 55,137, as McMahon notes.
But what say you? Should the 3-point line be adjusted, or is the game fine with the current layout? Are there any other changes that you suggest be made to help make a more exciting and diverse on-court product? Take to the comments section to share your thoughts and opinions. We look forward to what you have to say.
Considering that Curry can hit half court shots on the norm…this is definetly not an overreaction unless the line gets moved back to half court. Cuban’s points are correct and moving the line back wouldn’t be a bad idea although I wonder if the court is expanded to push back the corner three as well.
The NBA already experimented with a shorter 3-point line, which was a mistake. Leave it where it is.
As my old man used to say, “the dunk is not basketball, shooting the ball is basketball”. I tend to agree. 3s make games more competitive than dominant interior games, with a good shooter you are never out of most games until very late. Moving the line just increases the number of shots missed, not the number taken, imho. How about changing defensive rules back instead?