Women's 3-point line has been moved

[meyers7]

The NCAA fixing what isn't broken.

Oh it's broke. Glad they are finally fixing it.

 

[HuskyNan]

Uh, Nan? You realize that the men’s and women’s teams have separate practice floors inside Werth, right?

The courts look the same Fast forward to about 5:30 if you don’t want the whole tour

 

[CTrefugee]

If it is an advantage for us, why didn't we do it before (to spread the floor) ?

 

[Dokey]

very happy to see this, now if pro male Nba players could stop saying that the WNBA needs to lower the rim for "dunks" would be even better. Nba players can have their opinion of what would make the Wnba "more exciting" but to minimize the females of the Wnba by trying to turn the league into a gimmick is not cool imo

Given the the basket height was designed for scrawny middle schoolers I would like to see basket raised a foot for men to cut down on dunks—one of the reasons I don’t watch men’s game—and put more emphasis on finesse and less on height and brute strength. Just think of the fun watching NBA giants sputter and bitch about the change.

 

[Charliebball]

Ducharme shoots them from just inside of half court............I bet she wants the line brought out to 30 ft......

 

[oldude]

If it is an advantage for us, why didn't we do it before (to spread the floor) ?

UConn does spread the floor. AgStatesman correctly suggests that with the new 3-pt line, UConn will spread the floor “more.”

 

[Waquoit]

Wonder what effect if any this will have on percentages and attempts?

It will have a negative effect on percentages. Attempts will not be affected because it's still a 50% bonus.

 

[CTrefugee]

UConn does spread the floor. AgStatesman correctly suggests that with the new 3-pt line, UConn will spread the floor “more.”

If it's an advantage, why didn't Geno have them move out before? There is no limit on how much you can move out. I guess you see something Geno does not.

 

[UConnCat]

Cat:
Thanks for posting.
I came across the press release on this and cut and pasted the top two 'graphs:
"The NCAA Women’s Basketball Rules Committee on Friday proposed moving the 3-point line to the international distance of 22 feet, 1¾ inches, beginning with the 2021-22 season.

"All rule recommendations must be approved by the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel, which is scheduled to discuss women’s basketball proposals June 3."

My question: will this recommendation be subject to much discussion/debate to the Rules Oversight Panel or is it pretty much a done deal?

Based on the WBCA's statement I'm guessing it's a done deal. There seems to be support and momentum behind this move.

 

[MilfordHusky]

We know it’s no problem for Saylor or Caroline, as they typically shoot from 23-25’. As for Azzi, pick a distance—any distance—and she’ll be the best. This is a good move for the game.

 

[KY Card Fan]

We know it’s no problem for Saylor or Caroline, as they typically shoot from 23-25’. As for Azzi, pick a distance—any distance—and she’ll be the best. This is a good move for the game.

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.

 

[ju6381]

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.

I think it will lead to more open looks because help defenders will be required to cover more ground. We have players that can beat the primary defender and help defenders will have a more difficult time making up the ground. I think this will help Paige more then anyone, her natural development coupled with a change that aides her game, can't wait!

 

[oldude]

If it's an advantage, why didn't Geno have them move out before? There is no limit on how much you can move out. I guess you see something Geno does not.

Let me clarify. When the new 3-pt line is in effect, it will be an “advantage” for UConn because they are loaded with “long range” shooters vs most of their opponents, so they will be able to spread the floor more than they currently do and still be effective shooting the 3. As for the old 3-pt line, there was no reason to shoot 3’s from an extra 16” unless you had to.

 

[LoboDays]

This will have zero impact on anything. The players who attempt 3 pointers will continue to attempt them. The players who shoot lay ups will continue to make some of them. No defenses will change. No plays will change. The only possible change will be for teams whose only chance to stay in a game is to make a high percentage of 3 pointers.

 

[topogigio]

Great news, the old arc rewarded a mid range jumper too much. You should have to work for 3!

 

[JordyG]

But they use the men's size ball in WNBA and Internationally, I believe.

No. The WNBA ball is still about an inch smaller.

 

[JordyG]

Concerned that for some of UConn's players that are trying to develop an outside game (ex. Griffin, McLean), this is another thing to get in their heads.

Outside game? These two need to concentrate on a game inside the arc and finishing at the basket. Anything else would be gravy.

 

[CL82]

I agree with our shooters, it will not be an issue and I agree with mediocre shooters
(32% or so) the shooting will be worse and I am not sure how that makes the watchability of the game better as more teams will pack the paint

Not against us, because that’s within our players comfortable range. For Connecticut it probably means somewhat easier driving to the hoop.

 

[huskeynut]

It's about time.

It will affect some teams, but not many. As for UConn, Paige and company already shoot from a good distance behind the "old" arc.

As for Aubrey and Mir, they shoiuld be working on their mid-range game - 6' to 15' range. Neither need to be 3 point shooters.

 

[Dokey]

How often was our Crystal even within spitting distance of line when she drained a three?

 

[Dokey]

While she was named MVP, KLS had a lot more problems hitting threes from international distance. She followed a 4 for 4 with a 1 for 8. 5 for 12 isn’t bad but...

She was 39.2% for league season.

 

[MD#12Fan]

I am forever stuck with the concept of "risk reward" pertaining to the 3-point line. The further back the line goes, IMO the better the risk is equivalent to the reward. Golfers know what I mean. In golf, trying to drive the par 4 or going for the green in 2 on a par 5 can result in a reward of possibly an eagle, minus 2. That won't happen 99.9% of the time unless you "go for it". Birdie still possible of course, not eagle. If the hole properly "penalizes" you for an errant attempt, then IMO it's a good, fair test. Could be water, deep sand traps, pot bunkers in the UK, tight out-of-bounds lines, deep rough, etc. That's the risk in the equation. An attempt at eagle can result in bogey or worse.
You've got to consider if this is true for the college 3-point lines since its inception. IMO there has never been appropriate risk for taking a 3-point shot. In fact, long rebounds are generally another advantage for the offense. I believe Coach K realized it first: why not take 3's instead of 2's, they're worth more. Not rocket science. Disclaimer- no line when I played and I thought basketball was a great game then. Outside shooting has always been a big part of the game. Much purer game then.
Frankly Scarlet, you get defenders out of the paint by making outside shots period. 25, 24, 23, 22.5, 18 feet, it doesn't matter. It also doesn't matter how many points they are worth.

 

[CL82]

The courts look the same Fast forward to about 5:30 if you don’t want the whole tour

I’m pretty sure they would paint the arc the appropriate distance for each of the teams, but you may be right. In the end, for our players I don’t think the three point distance will matter materially.

 

[Carnac]

One less line to differentiate on multi-court arrangements! ?

Two of ND's top three-point shooters -- Mabrey and Brunelle -- regularly shoot three's from beyond this line anyway. Particularly Mabrey. (Any Mabrey)

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.

 

[MD#12Fan]

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.

Devil's Advocate: Remember the old adage (maybe not so old, but since the 3-point shot was instituted): the worst shot you can take is a 2-pointer with your foot on the 3-point line.
I played before the line and I was an outside shooter and when the line was instituted, strangely enough it was like 6" outside my range. I know this because we used to play in alumni games with the line and also when I started coaching. Craziest thing. I was always so excited to play with the line and it was just slightly too far. In school I practiced shooting 4 hours a day. I can't think of an analogy.
Long story short, the change will affect the shooters IMO. Obviously, there will be adjustment and some will adjust better than others.