The three point barrage is ruining the nba quite frankly it’s getting boring . The best thing the nba can do is bring back hand checking and physical defense... there’s a reason Reggie Miller didn’t become a super star like curry, teams didn’t allow him to fire at will.... something has to be done the three point shot is ruining the nba
fitzfarm wrote:The three point barrage is ruining the nba quite frankly it’s getting boring . The best thing the nba can do is bring back hand checking and physical defense... there’s a reason Reggie Miller didn’t become a super star like curry, teams didn’t allow him to fire at will.... something has to be done the three point shot is ruining the nba
same things were said about hand checking, so what's the middle ground?
I kinda like the wide open offensive play. My gripe is inconsistent calls (like when we get manhandled and none of our players get calls) and to an extent, the ticky tack foul.
I don't want a return to the holding and arm checking that went on.
I used to want them to add a four point shot - and maybe the thing to do is (wishful thinking) is turn the three pointer into a four, then anything outside the lane is a 3 pointer, and anything in the paint is a 2 pointer.
Honestly, the game is doing well. We just need to get some shooters so we can compete.
franco12 wrote:I kinda like the wide open offensive play. My gripe is inconsistent calls (like when we get manhandled and none of our players get calls) and to an extent, the ticky tack foul. I don't want a return to the holding and arm checking that went on.
I used to want them to add a four point shot - and maybe the thing to do is (wishful thinking) is turn the three pointer into a four, then anything outside the lane is a 3 pointer, and anything in the paint is a 2 pointer.
Honestly, the game is doing well. We just need to get some shooters so we can compete.
The ratings are way down. I used to watch whatever game was on when the Knicks weren’t playing. Now I might watch the end of the fourth quarter if it is close. Lots of entertainment options is definitely a factor but the style of play is as well.
Tonight is the perfect example of three point bs if we could hand check this game wouldn’t be so out of control
NBA is entertainment business.
Fans like scoring, highlights, crazy shots.
NBA is giving this all to fans.
It is also good for players.
Playing defense is hard and will not show up in the stat-sheet and highlights except of blocks.
As a result only a couple of teams who really play defense can compete for the ultimate prize.
But all are getting paid. The worst of the worst Knicks is the most expensive franchise...
Lately I watch more and more NHL where every game can be won by any team and 90% of teams are into the playoffs hunt until the very end.
In hockey no defense, no effort, no grit equal losing 100% of the time.
In today NBA not so much.
fitzfarm wrote:The three point barrage is ruining the nba quite frankly it’s getting boring . The best thing the nba can do is bring back hand checking and physical defense... there’s a reason Reggie Miller didn’t become a super star like curry, teams didn’t allow him to fire at will.... something has to be done the three point shot is ruining the nba
I agree, I struggle to watch full games now, it is just boring. And all this BS about " player x is averaging the most points since y"- that's because no ones allowed to play defence, the pace is quicker and they shoot more 3 pointers.
CrushAlot wrote:franco12 wrote:I kinda like the wide open offensive play. My gripe is inconsistent calls (like when we get manhandled and none of our players get calls) and to an extent, the ticky tack foul. I don't want a return to the holding and arm checking that went on.
I used to want them to add a four point shot - and maybe the thing to do is (wishful thinking) is turn the three pointer into a four, then anything outside the lane is a 3 pointer, and anything in the paint is a 2 pointer.
Honestly, the game is doing well. We just need to get some shooters so we can compete.
The ratings are way down. I used to watch whatever game was on when the Knicks weren’t playing. Now I might watch the end of the fourth quarter if it is close. Lots of entertainment options is definitely a factor but the style of play is as well.
Me too, though as you said it is also partially due to other entertainment options. Think bball's future ratings wise will be broadcasting edited down games on streaming platforms (say 45mins to an 1hr) rather than 2-3hr live at daft times.
I'm a dinosaur, I get that. But Charles Oakley would have no career now, just sayin'.
They are also desperate to avoid Malice in the Palace part deux. That was all started by physical on court play.
KnickDanger wrote:I'm a dinosaur, I get that. But Charles Oakley would have no career now, just sayin'.
Ewing would have been toast by age 32. The great low post players are all gone.
We all pine "For the good old days"...........
I think we forget it was teh intense rivalry and our success that drew us in. Thats a good thing.
The lumbering low scores was a not good for the game. While the last two minutes are still important with low scoring games it was even more so. The game had a bad reputation. I like that the game is more athletic. No more Oliver Miller, Tractor Traylor, Duckwork, or Sweetney. Big Baby and others were great basketball talents but heavy!! The game is more fluid and freakish shooters are evolving. We thought the game would be 8 foot giants around the rim? No, the game is wide open now and it values shooters. This is how its evolving and it takes time. Steph Curry and Harden are a new breed. WE had that back in the day. Jerry West and others in the 60's and 70's were that kid of talent. The three point shot really opened it up. The Darry Dawkins and Shaq monsters are few and far between. Shaq was amazing!!!!! Last of the big. I love his comments that "I ate them all up and none exist.
Allanfan20 wrote:They are also desperate to avoid Malice in the Palace part deux. That was all started by physical on court play.
Oak had a good jump shot and I'm pretty sure would have been a good NBA 3p shooter if that was a skill he was pushed to to develop. He set bruising screens and was a fantastic m2m and help defender. Ewing was another guy with great range and I think those two would have been fine in today's NBA.
fishmike wrote:Allanfan20 wrote:They are also desperate to avoid Malice in the Palace part deux. That was all started by physical on court play.
Oak had a good jump shot and I'm pretty sure would have been a good NBA 3p shooter if that was a skill he was pushed to to develop. He set bruising screens and was a fantastic m2m and help defender. Ewing was another guy with great range and I think those two would have been fine in today's NBA.
Today Ewing would be a one and done player and its hard to say he'd be the same. At 22 he came out with a polished Offensive game we did not preview when he was at Georgetown. with that in mind he was more "Mitchell Robinson" at 19? Fun to speculate.
As for Oak? He played at Virgina Union, a division II school and somehow got drafted 9th!!!! Want to have fun, look at that draft. Look where Karl Malone, Joe Dumars and Terry POrter get drafted vs. Jon Koncak and Joe Kleine!!!!!! Tisdale and Benoit Benjiman were good pro's but they go ahead of Mullin!! Im not sold that Oak has nearly as good NBA career given his limitations vs. what is demanded in this modern game.
I think cutting out the up and under move by the offensive player should be eliminated, especially if the defensive player is just standing still in a stance. Why is it if the offensive player initiates contact with HIS arms (ala Harden) is it a defensive foul? In fact, if the offensive player tries to initiate contact at all, that should not be a foul.
And if there is incidental contact where there is no advantage, play on
someone suggested somewhere that 3 point fouls should only result in 2 free throws.
djsunyc wrote:someone suggested somewhere that 3 point fouls should only result in 2 free throws.
interesting. I always thought if a player is fouled and misses shot and it would have been an assist on a made basket, passing player should get half assist on made FT
djsunyc wrote:someone suggested somewhere that 3 point fouls should only result in 2 free throws.
In Canada it also comes with an apology!
martin wrote:I think cutting out the up and under move by the offensive player should be eliminated, especially if the defensive player is just standing still in a stance. Why is it if the offensive player initiates contact with HIS arms (ala Harden) is it a defensive foul? In fact, if the offensive player tries to initiate contact at all, that should not be a foul.And if there is incidental contact where there is no advantage, play on
I agree. I think it should be a play on.
Nalod wrote:djsunyc wrote:someone suggested somewhere that 3 point fouls should only result in 2 free throws.
In Canada it also comes with an apology!
They should bring back make first 2 to try for 3
fishmike wrote:Allanfan20 wrote:They are also desperate to avoid Malice in the Palace part deux. That was all started by physical on court play.
Oak had a good jump shot and I'm pretty sure would have been a good NBA 3p shooter if that was a skill he was pushed to to develop. He set bruising screens and was a fantastic m2m and help defender. Ewing was another guy with great range and I think those two would have been fine in today's NBA.
Maybe I meant Anthony Mason wouldn't have a career. You are correct, Oak had some other skills including his shot.
And yes the game has changed -- all of them do and always will. Doesn't mean I have to like it.
fitzfarm wrote:The three point barrage is ruining the nba quite frankly it’s getting boring . The best thing the nba can do is bring back hand checking and physical defense... there’s a reason Reggie Miller didn’t become a super star like curry, teams didn’t allow him to fire at will.... something has to be done the three point shot is ruining the nba
I would give slightly better odds to Trump marrying AOC. But I agree with you.
