On a winter afternoon in 1891, Dr. James Naismith nailed peach baskets onto 10-foot poles and had his physical education students at Springfield College shoot soccer balls into the hoop for physical exercise. He eventually developed rules for this activity and on January 20, 1862, the inaugural game of basketball was played. It ended at 1-0 when a player sunk a game-winner from 25 feet away.
Today, 25 feet is one foot and three inches beyond the three-point arc in the National Basketball Association (NBA). It is now a routine and profitable shot. Current NBA great Ray Allen has made 2,857 and counting from that range—a specialty that has earned him $70 million over his 17-year career.
Many basketball fans have suggested lengthening the distance of the arc from the basket. Making 3-pointers would become more difficult, forcing players to improve their shooting ability. In addition to showcasing excellent shooters, the extended arc would create more room in the two-point field goal area. Perimeter players would benefit from more room to dribble past their defenders, while inside players would have greater room to operate.
Historically, the NBA has not been opposed to changing the 3-point arc. The league adopted its current length in 1980, shortened it by a foot in 1994 and then stretched it back in 1996. The minute modifications have not really mattered. The average NBA fan is indifferent to a 25-foot or 23-foot nine-inch arc. Its mere existence excites.
It’s widely known that fans love scoring, and the NBA rarely changes their game to capitalize on this idea. Apart from the addition of the 24-second shot clock in 1954 and the abolition of hand-checking in 2004, these slight changes to the 3-point line are the most innovative method the NBA has devised to inflate scores.
Fans also love exceptional athleticism. Basketball players are bigger and more athletic than ever before as a result of evolution in human development and fitness knowledge. In 1953, the average professional basketball player was six-foot-five-inches and weighed 205 pounds. Today, 60 years later, he is six-foot-seven and 220 pounds. Today’s players are quicker, faster and they jump higher. Forty-inch verticals are more prevalent today than 30 years ago.
Why constrict this new breed to old rules? The NBA could garner greater popularity and profitability by giving its athletes more room to score. Instead of adding an extra foot and three inches to an extended 3-point line, why not implement a major increase?
Current NBA Commissioner Adam Silver took the reins this year. Perhaps he can steer the game towards a new direction. One simple rule change can will drastically improve the game and even make the NBA a more profitable entity—a wider court.
The standard NBA court is a 94-foot-by-50-foot rectangle. Although the arc is 23-feet-nine-inches at the top, with 20 feet for players to move behind it, the arc is only 22-feet on the sides, with three feet behind it. At the top, players can use many dribbles to evade defenders and pull-up for three. In the sides, players can only shoot a 3-pointer off movement by losing their defenders laterally and then hopping backwards. The challenge to do so is an essential part of the game. Ironically, the worst place to pass the ball from the perimeter to the post is the place with the most space to do so—the top. Surely, a coach would argue that this is part of the strategy.
With a wider court, coaches would develop new insights into understanding the offensive and defensive intricacies. More importantly, a more square formation would afford perimeter players more opportunity to demonstrate their ball-handling skills and long-range shooting ability.
The NBA could easily test a wider court in the preseason. Just as it did with the 3-point line, the NBA could change its mind, but until then it might as well try something new.