Fixing the NBA's biggest problem in three easy steps

To start the 2024-25 season, there has been a flurry of criticism aimed at teams taking more and more threes. In fact, the defending champion Boston Celtics jacked up 61 threes on opening night.

Last season, the Celtics attempted 42 threes per game while 15 teams averaged at least 35 attepmts per game. That has dramatically altered how the NBA is played, with teams playing outside-inside instead of inside-out. On one hand, scoring has increased in recent years with teams becoming far more efficient and the pace of play has also improved with fewer free throws bogging the game down.

Shorter games are also great for the game because there are no frequent stoppages due to fouls. Nevertheless, something needs to change to keep the NBA from experiencing a decline in interest; as a result, let's take a look at potential fixes.

Fixing the NBA's 3-point shooting problem may not be that hard.

The biggest problem the NBA has with 3-point shooting is that players have adapted to the distance. The league average has steadily increased and has made it an easy decision for teams to launch from outside.

Taking 40 threes and shooting around 37% from deep is a recipe for a great offense and teams often have at least nine shooters in their rotation to ensure a spaced floor. It follows that pushing out the 3-point line would change the math and make it a lower percentage shot.

NBA writer Kirk Goldsberry has previously suggested pushing the line out from 23 feet 9 inches to 25 feet 9 inches. That would dramatically drop the average 3-point percentage from 35.5% to closer to around 33.3%. That doesn't seem like a big dip but the appeal of shooting more threes is because the extra point ensures that teams score at least a point per possession.

Moving the 3-point line back and eliminating corner threes would change the NBA overnight.

Good offenses score at least 1.1 points per possession, but increasing the distance would take away the allure of launching threes since it wouldn't be nearly as efficient. That would increase the value of sharpshooters while forcing more mediocre shooters to take more shots inside the arc.

That would potentially increase the number of mid-range jumpers, with 18-20 footers becoming more valuable since it would still add spacing while being a higher percentage shot than a three for most players. Of course, the biggest change is increased spacing with more room for postplay and drives to the rim.

Teams would probably still play with four players outside of the paint but another way to curb that would be to focus on corner threes. Phasing out the corner three by having no 3-point line in the corners would keep players from hanging out there. Instead of the 3-point line going from near half court to the baselines, it could stop several feet short of the corners or even taper off and end on the sidelines on each side.

With a deeper 3-point line and no corner threes, it wouldn't make sense for fringe shooters to launch from outside. It would force them to rely on other skills such as driving, hitting pullups, postups, or scoring off of cuts and in transition.

With NBA teams increasingly relying on 3-pointers, changing the rules would force teams to adjust and lead to a dramatic change to offense and defenses as a result. Another potential ideal to help curb teams from launching from outside would be to bring back hand checking.

That would allow for defensive players to use their hands more to slow down offensive players, further limiting teams from bombing from outside. That would make for a more exciting product that would be better for the league long-term.