The NBA has become a 3-point shooting league to the point where it is hurting the product. Here is the data.
The trend (Source: Basketball Reference, NBA.com):
- In the 2003-04 season, teams averaged approximately 16 three-point attempts per game.
- In the 2023-24 season, teams averaged approximately 35 three-point attempts per game.
- That is a 120% increase in 20 years.
- The midrange game has been mathematically eliminated. Expected value analysis shows that a 40% 3-pointer (1.2 points per shot) is worth more than a 50% midrange (1.0 points per shot).
Why this is a problem:
- Homogeneity. Every team plays the same way: drive and kick for 3s, or shoot 3s off the dribble. The stylistic diversity that made the NBA interesting (Shaq's post game, Nash's 7-seconds-or-less, the Pistons' grind) has been replaced by one optimal strategy.
- Shot diet monotony. Fans watch the same types of shots over and over. The mid-range artistry of Kobe, MJ, and Dirk is being coached out of the game.
- Variance. 3-point shooting is inherently streaky. Games are decided by which team happens to get hot from three, not by sustained execution. This increases randomness in outcomes.
The counterargument:
- NBA scoring is at an all-time high. Fans say they want scoring.
- Players like Steph Curry have made 3-point shooting an art form. The logo 3 is an iconic shot.
- Analytics say the 3 is the optimal shot. You cannot argue with math.
Proposed changes:
- Move the 3-point line back 2 feet (to approximately 25'9")
- Widen the paint to discourage drive-and-kick
- Increase the value of the midrange by making the 3 harder
Sources:
- Basketball Reference — league-wide shooting data
- NBA.com — shot tracking data
- Cleaning the Glass — shot distribution analysis
The midrange is an art form that is dying. Watching DeMar DeRozan work the midrange is beautiful basketball. The fact that analytics says it is suboptimal makes me sad for the sport.