If it's half-court (is it?) it's actually significantly less injury risk than a standard game... Anyway, I was trying to think of what 3 guys I'd pick from the Rockets. Harden-Gordon-Williams are too small. We don't have anyone between the SF-C positions that I would put on the team; symptomatic of one of the Rockets' big roster problems that has to be addressed this offseason ---- add a playmaking front-court player.
I see nba players playing in this but it won't be superstars. it will be borderline star/role players.
We probably don't even need superstars to beat "the world." Isaiah Thomas / Devin Booker / Kevin Love would probably, at the very least, get silver.
me and a friend had a fun game of trying to make the best nba 3 on 3 team comprised of players that didn't make the playoffs this year. i got kemba walker, devin booker, and anthony davis. good 1 on 1 scorers who can shoot, pass, and hold their own on defense.
pick and roll and pick and roll defense is deadly in 3v3 I played three on three the other day and one guy was so mad bcuz we killed his team with screens and said we needed them to score. i was like lol, guard up.
Texas should send out a quitter (Scottie Pippen), a loser (T Mac) and a choker (Jim Harden) to represent them
seems like with a 2:1 disparity vs a 3:2 disparity, shots behind the arc would be even more common than in the NBA
Yep, the long ball would carry even more value. NBA stars would be completely unstoppable in a truly competitive 3 on 3 setting. With 5 men you can shade and rotate to at least make it hard. If you can beat a man off the dribble in 3 on 3, it's like fish in a barrel. Quality PnR's are also nigh impossible to stop.
The "3" is worth TWICE as much? Like pickup? I guess you'd go with 3pt shooters. But I wonder how Shaq would fair. Who could stop him? You cant really double the post or front it.
True, didn't think about it in an Olympic context lol. But those are the 3 rockets I'd pick if available
Basketball analytics will not be the same with 3v3 I'm sure they settled on 3s counting twice as much, because the efficiency of twos skyrockets with 3 on 3, while the efficiency of shooting 24 feet out doesn't increase much at all, if any at all. I'm sure there are many teams shooting 70-80%. Do the math and that equals 35-40% from three, when valued at 2:1 It's not the same game. I'm sure threes have to be worth twice as much or they aren't analytically wise.
