Raising the official NBA rim height to 11 feet?

[BigKaboom2]

It's clear by your desire to engage in a nature vs. nuture argument, that you are not a real fan. If you just watched the games, you'd realize. Plus, like Bill Walton, Tim Legler, and Steve "Snapper" Jones would totally agree with me, and they're NBA experts, while you've never even played in the NBA.

You know what? You're right. I don't know who I'm kidding...at some point I've got to grow up and ditch this façade. No reason for me to continue posting about the NBA when I don't have the mad skillz to back it up. And really, I just denounce the theories of Walton, Legler, and Jones because I'm a jerk who gets off on rejecting conventional wisdom, regardless of validity!

I'm so ashamed.

Back on topic - while I haven't seen many games this season, when I do I see lots of ill-conceived plays that don't really get anywhere, and then the last few seconds of the shot clock turns into one-on-one time...all it would take for me to enjoy it is if more players were able to consistently make a jump shot and would actually take the shots when they're wide open.

Instead there are teams who wait until they get their third or fourth good look of the possession to actually shoot, which is definitely the opposite of the 80's mentality.

[shadowgrin]

Some would argue that Popavich doesn't really call them from the bench though, the Spurs are disciplined and know what to run on their own.

It's noticeable sometimes. Popavich would just shout at his players if they made a bad play or when the Spurs are a bit tentative maybe because the players don't know or aren't sure what to do next. Most of the times he just stands watching.
It's clearly noticeable during Parker's early years with the Spurs, he just watches what Parker will orchestrate with the ball and most of the time Parker will make boneheaded decisions which by then Popavich goes ballistic.

[Skinnyman23]

I don't know why this coach persists on raising the rims up to 11 feet because I don't see any point in changing the 10 foot high rule-and-tried formula if it has been working so well for all these years. Sure, players have been getting taller and stronger over the years and they make dunking on a ten footer look like child's play, so raising the rims would make it more difficult for these super atheletes to dunk and hence shorter non-dunkers may have more of an impact in scoring. But doesn't that put everybody at a disadvantage including the non-dunkers? Maybe the person suggesting this idea should have tried a 10 1/2 rim instead (btw, I played on a 10 1/2 rim before and the game felt pretty awkward).

[Sauru]

like i said, raise it to 12, or hell 13 feet. then stern can just go ahead and move the nba to another country since the old people being drafted would be foreign players who can shoot.

[Andrew]

i gotta agree with grusom, you want better team play then enforce rules that will push teams into doing that. for instance, stop blowing the whistle and sending guys to the free throw line when they run blindly into the paint and throw up some insanely stupid shot just to get to the line. if these kind of plays stop being rewarded with 2 free shots you wont see it happen nearly as much.

Do you really need to enforce a certain style of play though? A questionable approach will only take a team so far. The Warriors have won 46 games to date and remain in playoff contention but they're not likely to accomplish much more than a first round upset and I wouldn't count on that this year. The teams with the better gameplan will be the ones that ultimately prevail when it counts.

That's not to say that teamwork and styles of play that promote unselfishness shouldn't be taught or encouraged, but if a coach is going to adopt a foolhardy approach then let it be upon their head. If failure won't teach them a lesson, nothing will.

As usual though I must agree on pocketing the whistle or at the very least refining what constitutes the act of shooting and what merits a continuation. I don't think you're going to eliminate the individual from the sport of basketball though. More than most other team sports, basketball facilitates the individual. The most effective way of trying to curb that would be to remove dribbling from the game (a la netball) since it would require more of a team effort to get into position to score and ball hogs wouldn't profit from their selfishness. That would be a drastic step backwards though, essentially compromising one of the aspects that makes basketball unique.

I think the bottom line here is that no matter what improvements could be made to the game, raising the rim doesn't seem to be the answer, no more so than rule amendments or a change in coaching philosophy.

[Sauru]

i am fine with one on one, or one on two, or whatever kind of play. i just mainly want to see less calls bailing out players who blindly drive the lane where thier only intention is to get to the free throw line

[Andrew]

If the NBA tightened up continuation calls and clearly defined what constitutes the act of shooting and stuck with it, there'd be less of those calls. My feeling is that if the ball is being dribbled or is at waist height when the whistle is blown, there can't be a continuation and a player can't be in the act of shooting.

[-Young Buck-]

If you want the rim raised just watch WNBA. That game is filled with layups and bad shots. IMO this would only make the NBA game less exciting. No dunks, shots need higher arches for smaller players, it would just be terrible. In a league where there arent many pure shooters, this would fail. We would see lower scoring, worse shooting percentages, and overall worse gameplay. Its fine how it is, leave it.

Now the WNBA should think about lowering the rim. They really dont have to prove they can play equal to men anymore. They use a smaller ball, they should use a shorter rim, because the average height of a wnba player is most likely shorter than the average height of the average NBA player.

[puttincomputers]

but wait a second a few of those gals can dunk! so to even the playing field why not raise the rim?

[Patr1ck]

but wait a second a few of those gals can dunk! so to even the playing field why not raise the rim?

...or lower the WNBA rims to 9 feet?

[Andrew]

but wait a second a few of those gals can dunk! so to even the playing field why not raise the rim?

But wouldn't it give taller players more of an advantage since they'd have an easier time dunking (and thus taking advantage of the highest percentage shot in the game) while shorter players who cannot dunk as easily as it is might see the dunk taken from their arsenal?

[puttincomputers]

but can those same players who can dunk shoot the ball as well aas those short guys with a long range shot?

[Sauru]

eliminating the dunk created one of the most dominate big men the game has ever seen. if they did away with it again you would see the hook alot more often. it does not really hurt the big guys at all, who it hurts is the guards and forwards who cant do shit but dunk the ball

[Skinnyman23]

eliminating the dunk created one of the most dominate big men the game has ever seen. if they did away with it again you would see the hook alot more often. it does not really hurt the big guys at all, who it hurts is the guards and forwards who cant do shit but dunk the ball

The only consequence I see in raising the rim up by a foot (or even six inches) would be less dunking, but big men like Kobe, Shaq, and Yao would probably be dunking just as often even if the rim was raised up by a foot. BTW, I wonder what a pro game would be like on twelve foot high rims (which has been done before but I don't remember exactly where and when)?

[GoHornets]

Kobe is not a big man. He's 6'6
I think the game is as good as it is. Changing it would make it worse

[.jrmagic]

I agree.

[Jackal]

I just took a look at your posts and this is the first time you've ventured out to the "General Forums" section.

What would it take for you to go back?

[.jrmagic]

What the heck are you talking about? I'm new, I want to be nice, but here you are telling me I should go somewhere else.

[Lamrock]

Take +deidei+ with you plz.

I kid... sort of

[.jrmagic]

what the heck does that mean?

[jenz]

i means we're going off-topic..

[.jrmagic]

sorry, Jackal, started it. Never mind. I was thinking, (If we did change the hoop tp 11 feet) How that would affect all the tall guys like YAO MING, or SHAQUILLE O'NEAL. Would they still be able to dunk?

[Andrew]

eliminating the dunk created one of the most dominate big men the game has ever seen. if they did away with it again you would see the hook alot more often. it does not really hurt the big guys at all, who it hurts is the guards and forwards who cant do shit but dunk the ball

But those players are destined to crash and burn or at least fade away into relative obscurity sooner rather than later. The players who can do little more than jump and throw down some emphatic and/or creative dunks are still a minority in the grand scheme of things. Fundamentals may be underrated and there are always going to be players who would be benefit from having more polished, all-around skills but it's not as though the league is full of Harold Miners.

That's not to say banning the dunk couldn't help in the development of big men who are well-rounded at the offensive end but I don't think you should take away a high percentage shot from everyone because a select few refuse to play defense or put in the work on their jumpshot. If the dunk was to be banned, it should only be at the lower levels or maybe as a rule imposed by coaches at lower levels to encourage their players to develop other weapons.

BTW, I wonder what a pro game would be like on twelve foot high rims (which has been done before but I don't remember exactly where and when)?

They experimented with a 12 foot rim for a game back in George Mikan's era.