Women's 3-point line has been moved | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Women's 3-point line has been moved

KY Card Fan said:
Based on what I saw this past season this will have minimal effect. Percentages may go down a point or two. Dana Evans probably took half of her attempts from a foot or more behind the line, as did many other good three-point shooters that I saw.
Expand ...
I agree. I think it will just separate the girls from the women.
 
JordyG said:
Outside game? These two need to concentrate on a game inside the arc and finishing at the basket. Anything else would be gravy.
Expand ...
Yeah they need to work on a midrange game. Mir could really use a nice floater when she is amongst the trees.
 
Carnac said:
Me too (played before the line), and just two referees.
Expand ...
Did you have 3-point range from the jump?
We played a lot of 1 on 1, so my range was top of the key range.
 
It will definitely open up the floor. I believe it favours more athletic players rather than heavy footed bigs.
 
.-.
Should help UConn immensely. They have the best 3pt shooters in the country, so it will give them an advantage. It also opens up spacing as well, which will help offset UConn's post/size disadvantage against big physical teams like South Carolina & Stanford.
 
MD#12Fan said:
Did you have 3-point range from the jump?
We played a lot of 1 on 1, so my range was top of the key range.
Expand ...
I was a post. Never shot beyond 5’ of the basket. I came right behind Abdul-Jabbar. The hook shot was very popular then. I became decent within that range. Also a hard shot to block.
 
DEpup said:
Yeah they need to work on a midrange game. Mir could really use a nice floater when she is amongst the trees.
Expand ...
Floater? How about a jump shot from anywhere inside the arc? The last time she shot a 3 it got stuck between the rim and the backboard. The same goes for AG.
 
Cuango said:
For those who are saying”this won’t change anything as our shooters all shoot from a foot or so behind the line” I must disagree. They shoot from back there to avoid inadvertently stepping on the line and making it a two point attempt. It stands to reason that they will continue that. Therefore, the distance will actually be longer than what they are currently used to and may result in lower percentages even for them. However, all things being equal, I believe we are in possibly the best position to benefit from this as our coaches have signed at least three, possibly more, players who are among the best long range shooters in the country. You have to wonder if Geno & Chris saw this coming and recruited accordingly!
Expand ...
I usually agree with you Carnac. But are you saying women shooters shoot from beyond the men's 3pt line (sometimes well beyond) to avoid stepping on the women's 3 pt line?
 
Last edited:
.-.
HuskyNan said:
From the ESPN article I linked earlier, this one sentence:

South Carolina coach Dawn Staley, who also played many years professionally, said she is fine with keeping the women's college line where it is.
Expand ...
Dawn might prefer that games are all played in a phone booth.
 
Carnac said:
To a legitimate 3 point shooter, they couldn’t care less. You could move the line back another 6” and it would not change their mindset or shot. Most long range shooters take pride in hitting shots taken well behind the arc.
Expand ...
But they probably shoot less effectively the farther they go back.
 
Gamecockfan77 said:
But they probably shoot less effectively the farther they go back.
Expand ...
True, some players do, some don't. Check out Steph Curry and Damian Lillard. Two of the NBA's most deadly long range shooters. The NBA could move the line back 12", it wouldn't bother them. Last night (Sat May8), the Warriors set a franchise record by making 27 three-pointers, with nine of their 10 healthy players connecting from deep (only Kevon Looney failed to get in on the action). Curry scored 49 points, and didn't play the 4th quarter. Anything inside the half-court line is within their range.

There are some women players that have this same moxie and mindset. Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis thought the ball was going in EVERYTIME she launched it regardless of where she shot it from. Would moving the line back 2" have caused her to take less 3's? I think not.

Of course any time you shoot farther from the basket your percentage may go down, just as it will go up the closer you get. I don't expect to see less 3 pt. shots taken in WCBB next season because the line was moved back.

My point is......................the small change in the new distance IS NOT significant enough to make a difference. Shooters gonna shoot. Their confidence in their ability to knock down 3's will not be deterred.

A rule change I'd really like to see is adding a 6th foul in ALL levels of men's and women's basketball from AAU, high school and college. That would allow the best players on every team to stay on the floor a little longer, especially late in close and overtime games. The WNBA has a 6 foul rule. It works well for all the players and coaches. This rule would have kept ONO and Edwards in the game longer in the first half of games they picked up two fouls.
 
Last edited:
BobbyJ said:
The contest was held in a HS gym and the 3 point line is the same for both boys and girls at 19.75 feet. Basketball Court Dimensions and Hoop Height: A Quick Guide Of course that means the women will be adjusting to 22.15 feet in college now.
Expand ...

This isn't aimed at your post, just a general remark. I wish they'd give the dimensions in metric (at least in addition to the English dimensions). The new 3-pt distance wasn't arrived at from wanting to pick some weird distance like 22' 1-3/4 -- it's 6.75 m/675 cm. The high-school distance of 19' 9" is English as is the American free-throw line at 15'. The international FT line is at 4.6 m; about an inch long of the American distance. We need to start using metric somewhere besides engine displacements -- might's well be where there's some passion, like sports.

[/rant mode]
 
Last edited:
Carnac said:
A rule change I'd really like to see is adding a 6th foul in ALL levels of men's and women's basketball from AAU, high school and college. That would allow the best players in every team to stay on the floor a little longer, especially late in close and overtime games.
Expand ...
It was tried and they couldn't change it back to 5 fast enough. Games became unwatchable hack fests. Players can stay on the floor late by not fouling early.
 
.-.
Waquoit said:
It was tried and they couldn't change it back to 5 fast enough. Games became unwatchable hack fests. Players can stay on the floor late by not fouling early.
Expand ...
:( Who is “they”? No argument, just curious. What level was this tried at and for how long?
 
Gamecockfan77 said:
But they probably shoot less effectively the farther they go back.
Expand ...
Except for Zia Cooke, they really don't have a lot of 3 pt range in their line up. May change this year with Raven coming in.
 
Waquoit said:
It was tried and they couldn't change it back to 5 fast enough. Games became unwatchable hack fests. Players can stay on the floor late by not fouling early.
Expand ...
Fouls are part of the game, and in the minds of some coaches, strategy.
 
.-.
JordyG said:
I usually agree with you Carnac. But are you saying women shooters shoot from beyond the men's 3pt line (sometimes well beyond) to avoid stepping on the women's 3 pt line?
Expand ...
I’m saying that proficient 3 pt. shooters are at their best and most confident when they are “in rhythm.” When they are, they will put it up from behind the line no matter how close or far back they are. If they have an open look, they will set their feet and launch it because they feel it’s going in no matter what.

Again I’m suggesting that moving the line back won’t have any affect on 3 point shooters. You know they all practice shooting well behind the arc anyway. Not one player is going to stop shooting 3’s because they’re moving the line back 2”. 2 feet maybe, not 2 inches. I made note of some of the shots Aari McDonald took our last game. Some where well behind the line. Same with Dangerfield during her days at UConn. Some of her made 3’s would have been good in the NBA.
 
Last edited:
Bigboote said:
This isn't aimed at your post, just a general remark. I wish they'd give the dimensions in metric (at least in addition to the English dimensions). The new 3-pt distance wasn't arrived at from wanting to pick some weird distance like 22' 1-3/4 -- it's 6.75 m/675 cm. The high-school distance of 19' 9" is English as is the American free-throw line at 15'. The international FT line is at 4.6 m; about an inch long of the American distance. We need to start using metric somewhere besides engine displacements -- might's well be where there's some passion, like sports.

[/rant mode]
Expand ...
Why, with no effect on the game lets just change to metric. Going to metric was tried in this country at one time it failed miserably so lets than push it for no good reason. So far for the common person the only popular areas metric are used, tools and tracks. most aren't even aware it's the case. So lets just screw with us, go metric, everyone speak Spanish add any number of things the so called experts tell us are better for us, not buying it. I'm happy the way things are, if any want a BB court dimensions in metric they can convert in their heads. Please leave my head alone.
 
Carnac said:
I’m saying that proficient 3 pt. shooters are at their best and most confident when they are “in rhythm.” When they are, they will put it up from behind the line no matter how close or far back they are. If they have an open look, they will set their feet and launch it because they feel it’s going in no matter what.

Again I’m suggesting that moving the line back won’t have any affect on 3 point shooters. You know they all practice shooting well behind the arc anyway. Not one player is going to stop shooting 3’s because they’re moving the line back 2”. 2 feet maybe, not 2 inches. I made note of some of the shots Aari McDonald took our last game. Some where well behind the line. Same with Dangerfield during her days at UConn. Some of her made 3’s would have been good in the NBA.
Expand ...
I believe they’re moving the line back 16.75 inches not 2. Going from 20 feet 9 inches to 22 feet 1 3/4 inches.
 
MooseJaw said:
Why, with no effect on the game lets just change to metric. Going to metric was tried in this country at one time it failed miserably so lets than push it for no good reason. So far for the common person the only popular areas metric are used, tools and tracks. most aren't even aware it's the case. So lets just screw with us, go metric, everyone speak Spanish add any number of things the so called experts tell us are better for us, not buying it. I'm happy the way things are, if any want a BB court dimensions in metric they can convert in their heads. Please leave my head alone.
Expand ...
The effort in the 1970's was a combination of poor planning, implementation, and lack of education of Americans.
You do realize that we are one of three (3) countries in the world that doesn't use the metric system of weights/measures :) Just the economic impact (converting/confusion/time/paperwork/etc) of just our international trade is wasting billions of dollars per. So, if you think of nothing beyond $ the change would still be worthwhile.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,512
Messages
4,579,720
Members
10,488
Latest member
Azerion


Top Bottom