It is weird actually if Wilt Chamberlain can score 100 without 3 point rule but with 3 point rule Kobe can only score 81.
Try to think of it a lot of bad shot happens cause of 3 point line cause players want to get more points. But what make 3 point line interesting is how hard and impossible that shot is in the clutch shot situations. Remember how Reggie Miller jump to the back just so he can get behind 3 point line to defeat the Knicks in the playoff and succeeded. But if it is abolish, the kind of heart pumping situation won't occur again as the is nothing to gain by shooting further outside.
Kind of makes you ponder. What do you think?
2007-01-23 21:21:11 · 9 answers · asked by Booooo 2 in Sports ➔ Basketball
On one hand, if you abolish the three point line, it means players won't take as many crappy shots from outside.
2007-01-25 06:53:16 · answer #1 · answered by RichMac82 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Very good point in deed, but the NBA wouldn't be what it is today without the 3 pointer. With the three point shot it makes for a higher scoring game, and all sports fanatics enjoy points by the hundreds. And Wilt didn't score a hundred points because there wasn't a 3 point line, he scored that many because he was a foot taller than anyone else, the team he was playing wouldn't beat the best highschool team right now, and once he got to about 75 points, everyone on the team passed him the ball, even while being tripple teamed. Case in point, I believe the NBA is better off with the three point-line.
2007-01-23 21:29:08 · answer #2 · answered by chsbaseball0313 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not fair to compare Wilt Chamberlain's 100 points with what we have today.
Let's just say, there aren't a lot of 7 footer in Chamberlain's era and the players don't play as agressive as they do today. That gives Chamberlain a lot of rooms for scoring.
NBA is an Entertainment, more than it is a Sport. If you take out the heart pumping clutch situation behind the 3-point line, there wouldn't be much entertainment left to entertain.
Reggie Miller's "8 points in 31 seconds" says it all.
2007-01-23 21:35:35 · answer #3 · answered by E Lim 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
NO!! Cuz if they take away the 3 point line, the game would be boring. Everyone loves when a 3 is swished, and the player loves when the fans cheer for them. So, if the fans aren't cheering because no big shots are made, the players tension rises and he/she might lose their focus. Which could end up in losing the game. So keep the 3 line. I love shooting 3's!
2016-05-24 03:40:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I know you're talking about the NBA, where I don't think it should be abolished. But in the NCAA, I think they should get rid of it or move it out to NBA range. Since they'll never get rid of it, I'd say move it.
2007-01-24 00:21:36 · answer #5 · answered by cmw 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not really. It is good for team strategy and spreading the court. Take it away and games would be as dull as they were back in the day.
No thought required about that.
2007-01-23 21:25:48 · answer #6 · answered by speedloc 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Heck, I think that Don Nelson's suggestion of adding a four point line should be considered.
2007-01-23 23:52:27 · answer #7 · answered by lustatfirstbite 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No keep it
2007-01-23 21:37:12 · answer #8 · answered by gman 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no
2007-01-24 02:13:34 · answer #9 · answered by no longer waiting 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋