Lets say that a basketball player makes a steal and he is all alone in the front court on his way to the basket. The players always dribble the ball down the court a lay it up into the basket for two points.
What if instead he dribbled as fast as he could up to the three-point line, picked up the ball and jumped, and layed it up for THREE points?
It would still count for three points if his foot was behind the line when he jumped, right??
And if the players can dunk after jumping from the free throw line they could do this, right???
This is a joke, right? Very, very few players can dunk from the free throw line. Very, very, very, very few players have dunked from the free throw line during the game. No player could take off from the three point line and make a “layup.”
By “layup” I didn’t mean like, 6 inches away from the rim. Laying it up from 4 or 5 feet in front of the rim doesn’t seem like a difficult shot- for the pros.
because it is better to go for a sure 2 pts. than a chance at 3. At least it would seem that way to me, but what do I know basketball is my least favorit sport.
Jumping from the 3 point line and releasing the ball when you are closer to the basket is not a practical basketball shot.
It is difficult to shoot the ball because you’re are moving in air yet are still a fair distance from the basket.
You just don’t give yourself a good shot because of the challenges of shooting in flight from a pretty fair distance.
Crunch time? Your best percentage shot is getting planted behind the 3point line as best you can and take it from there. A running (very fast) leaping (very far) jump shot from behind the 3point line is a daunting challenge.
I think the OP is operating under the notion that merely reducing the distance between one’s self and the basket will automatically increase the likelihood a basket will be made.
While getting closer helps in some scenarios, it doesn’t help to be flying in mid air to do so. I this case, a little extra distance is better overcome by being set to take a shot. A good three point attempt by a player who has decent percentages from that distance is a better option than an awkward hi flying jump shot.
Distance is not the only factor when taking a shot.
There’s a simple reason no one does this. There are very few basketball players that are also trained as long jumpers. Let’s take the 3 point line closest to the basket - 19 feet, 9 inches in college.
Reasons why this won’t be happening - it is the rare case where someone is able to break so far away from the rest of the pack that they get a completely open lay up. It would be even rarer for them to do so from far enough behind the 3 point line that they could have enough time and distance to build up the speed necessary to jump far enough. Obviously, speed while dribbling is markedly less than speed while not dribbling.
Not all bball players are good jumpers. Guards are the most likely people to somehow find themselves ridiculously open to try this. Guards are, as a percentage, the least likely able to either dunk or jump high/far enough to even think about this. Those players that are most likely (say the 6’6 to 6’8 small/power fowards) are forwards for a reason. They are weaker ballhandlers. That would slow down the necessary build up speed.
Finally, it’s a ridiculously harder shot to try and make it when jumping a great distance and not dunking. There is a reason players try to go straight up on a jump shot, so they have a better base to shoot from and better control on the release. One could jump from 15 feet away and dunk under control, because the release point is obvious - when you hit the rim. Jumping from 20 feet away and then trying to either finger roll (which is harder to do well than it looks) or use normal shooting form would probably be a lower percentage shot than just pulling up for a 3 pointer.
Also, a layup is such a given (unless you are Jason Williams of Duke) that a coach wouldn’t exactly be pleased at the stupidity of a player doing something really hard and getting no points instead of a simple 2. Same basic theory applies to yokels trying to do a fancy dunk and clanging it to half court instead of making sure the basket is scored.
If something has been around for 35 years (introduced in the ABA in 1967), and it hasn’t been tried and adopted in that time period, then it probably isn’t a good idea.
Mullinator- “If something has been around for 35 years (introduced in the ABA in 1967), and it hasn’t been tried and adopted in that time period, then it probably isn’t a good idea.”
Maybe.
Or Maybe no one ever THOUGHT of it because they are not as BRILLIANT as I am!
Since the answer is clearly that a “runner”, or a shot made while in the air and moving in some direction on the same plane as the rim while more than a few feet from the hoop (that’s my definition, not the OED’s) is harder than a jumper or a layup, I have another question.
What happened to the set shot? Back in the day, the set shot from the chest or over the head was quite popular. One explanation has to do with shooting over a defender, but even open guys jump now.
Did it go away because jumping gets you closer to the plane of the rim before release? Because the extra force of the jump makes it easier to get the ball to the rim? Because of the improved tempo? Or because the set shot looks less cool? I mean, I understand why the two-handed set shot died–clearly an asymetric thrust issue. But why not a one-handed setter?
It just seems that any moderate range, the extra stability of staying planted would outweigh the benefits of jumping, yet we all wear Air Jordans, not Floor Jordans. And since players are taller today, the benefit of jumping up to the plane of the rim would have been even more helpful in the days of Chuck Taylors (and, for that matter, Chuck Taylor). And if jumping is so helpful, why doesn’t anyone shoot their free throws with a jump?
I mean, nobody jumps while throwing a baseball unless they have to. I don’t jump into my golf swing. Then again, I don’t get off the floor even when I jump, so this is probably a semantic argument for me anyway.
Any thoughts? (Suggestion for related topic–why doesn’t Shaq shoot free throws underhanded, “Granny” style?)
I believe that the opportunities for set shots are far fewer now. Defenders are better and are much more likely to get in your face in an attempt to block the shot.
The jump shot is the best way to get the ball over a defender. And it is practiced the most often of all shots, except for free throws.
But if you watch the 3-point shooting contest during the All-Star weekend, the best shooters in that contest are shooting set shots. Larry Bird wouldn’t be shooting jumpers. He would just take the ball, square his feet, and SWISH.
As for free throws, I’ve seen some girls high school players shoot jump shots. They need to do it to give the ball enough lift to get on the right trajectory to the basket. Such shots are usually not successful.
The average male can make a 15-foot shot without jumping.
And why doesn’t Shaq shoot underhand? Because it’s too embarrassing to do so for starters. And even when underhand free throw shooting was the norm (1930-1940s), I don’t think the percentages were as high as they are today.
The set shot used to be standard. Coincidentally, I’m reading one of Bill Russel’s books. He talks about the first season they started doing jump shots. The conventional wisdom was that they were much worse, for the reasons Rubicon stated. So they played a game where the other team’s coach gave orders that no one on that team was to even challenge a jump shot. Bill’s team won 144-41 or something absurd, and the other coach still though set shots were superior.
Certainly a lot of the reason is that unlike a foul shot, in a normal basketball play, there is defense. Getting a clean unchallenged look at the basket without a real loss of percentage is a great deal.
My mind isn’t functioning to its fullest capacity at the moment, but I’m not really sure what this NBA rule is saying.
Does this imply, first of all, that when the shooter releases the ball for his shot, his body cannot have crossed inside the 3-point line?
Second, I thought the gist of the rule was that neither of your feet could be inside the 3-point line, when you release the shot or launch yourself up for it. Why does the above quote say “at least one foot”? It sounds like you could have one foot out and one foot in, and the shot would still count as a 3-pointer.