Should The 3-Point Line Be Moved Back?

Last Friday, Dallas Mavericks owner gave reporters his thoughts on moving the 3-point line back. Cuban told reporters:

"It's getting too close, guys are shooting a foot behind it anyways. ... That's something we should look at. It's worth looking at."

Of course for Cuban, this is bad timing on this statement noting that Stephen Curry has become probably the most popular player in the league and 3-point shooting has become something that fans want to see. However, Cuban explained that this wouldn't be to hurt 3-point shooters it would be to help other players who aren't 3-point shooters. He told the media:

"I don't think the number of shots would decline, but I think it would reward skill and open up the court some more. So guys would still take [3-point] shots if it's seven inches back or whatever, but at the same time, it opens up the court for more drives, more midrange game. I think it'd open it up more so guys with different skill sets could play. It would open up play for more drives. Guys with midrange games would be rewarded and that would stay in the game. There would be more diversity of offensive action in the game."

While Cuban has a point, he doesn't seem to understand that the mid-range game is just fine. Since, the 2011-12 season, mid-range shot attempts have been fairly similar. Not to mention the mid-range game is still used by many of the league's stars including, Carmelo Anthony, John Wall, Chris Paul, Blake Griffin, and Dirk Nowitzki. And besides that, it doesn't matter where you put the 3-point line, the teams are already spacing the floor more because of guys like Stephen Curry and it is opening things up. Teams can create that without moving the line back and the Warriors have proven that. Also, moving back the line would create problems such as the corner shot. How would you move that back? Would you move it back? Not to mention, an NBA 3-pointer is hard enough to hit. It is 23ft. 9in. It would take away from the stretch 4 position such as Kevin Love, DeMarcus Cousins, and Ryan Anderson's game.

Teams such as the Spurs and the Grizzlies have proven you can win without the 3-point shot. The Timberwolves have big men Gorgui Dieng and Karl-Anthony Towns that constantly use the mid-range shot to force defenders out on them. Marc Gasol uses Mid-range all of the time. And lightning quick John Wall uses mid-range to not allow players to sag off of him and protect the basket. However, Mark Cuban is missing the fact that players are having to be guarded different. By having defenses more perimeter orientated, they are having to pressure at the 3-point line more, making the inside of the paint so much more open. Big men are having to come out from underneath the basket to get out on shooters making it acutally easier for players to get to the rim. I acutally think that moving the line back could actually counter what Cuban says it will cause.

Of course, this wouldn't affect Stephen Curry, it would acutally cause the players such as DeMarcus Cousins not have as much skill. Stephen Curry already broke his own record of 3-pointers made in a season (again) and if you move the line back, it will actually cause Curry to have an even bigger advantage against a lot of players such as John Wall and Chris Paul.

So as you can see, Mark Cuban's logic doesn't make much sense to me. While I see what he is trying to get at by moving the line back, it seems like so much a hassle for something that really wouldn't change much and would probably be changed back in later years. If you want to see the whole article with all of Mark Cuban's quotes, you can check it out here. As always, hope you all loved the breakdown and I'll be hoping to give you guys more here at NBA Inside The Play Nation!