Basketball has evolved into a game of calculated decision-making

Yes, 33% for 3pts equals a 50% 2pt shot, so beat that, and you've got yourself a pretty good scorer. But hitting 33% is not trivial unless you make a lot of other adjustments: multiple blocks for the shooters and not just a simple pick-and-roll or pick-and-pop, staggered blocks for a shooter switching from one sideline to the next. This has actually led to less specialization, as every player on the court needs to shoot 3s and defend faster or bigger players as switches became unavoidable.

And with all that, it only led to a "dynasty" when one player who could create his own shot and shoot from nearly anywhere at 35+% (Curry), paired with another ~40% career 3pt shooter and defensive specialist (Thompson) and completed with a power forward who could defend anyone and coordinate the attack too (Green). Even so, they did need another future hall-of-famer in Durant to win two of their last 3 rings.

That same team still has 2 of those core people in them, but they are unable to replicate anywhere near the success.

So if anyone can do this, why doesn't everyone do it?

> Players are no longer do-it-alls; they are now given specialized roles.

> they not only scored but guarded defense, caught rebounds and played the role of playmakers.

Anyone who even watches games would instinctively use different language. Nobody in basketball speaks this way.

As far as the veracity, I'd really need to see some data.

First, nothing in cutting edge, 3-and-D basketball says to stop playing defense. Defense is the D in 3-and-D.

As just one counter-example to the author's claims, big players - centers and power forwards - have become more generalized. Instead of just playing near the basket on offense and defense, many now handle the ball, pass, and also shoot from outside - the old-style guys who lack those skills have taken big pay cuts. The primary ball-handler for the author's local Golden State Warriors is Draymond Green, their center. The best player in the world is a center renowned especially for their passing, Nikola Jokic.

Wing players (small forwards and shooting guards) do it all. The local Golden State Warriors also have Steph Curry, the best shooter ever and an excellent ball-handler and passer. And they recently acquired Jimmy Butler, an all-star all-around player; here is the coach:

"Jimmy, he's a real deal," Kerr said. "I mean, just a complete basketball player, methodical, under control all the time, plays at his own pace, never turns it over, sees the game and then can get to the line frequently. Great closer, not in the traditional sense where he's going to be Kevin Durant and make four straight midrange jumpers, but it's more of a complete game. Get to the line, make the right pass, get somebody else an open look, get a defensive stop, get a rebound. He's a fantastic player."

https://abc7news.com/post/warriors-draymond-green-calls-new-...

What's changed in the NBA is that 3-point shooting has become more valued, partly supported by analytics, partly because Steph Curry redefined what is possible for 3-point shooting for both playing and for being a star: Before Curry, every kid wanted to be Michael Jordan or others who made miraculous drives to the basket through crowds; after Curry, kids were heaving up shots from ridiculous distances, just like their hero.

You won't be surprised to learn that many people say, 'it's not like the old days', and are debating changing the rules to make everyone play like they did 20 years ago.

Supporting my theory of the author, here is their bio (https://nabraj.com/)

> Hi, I'm NT (Nabaraj T), a full-stack engineer in Northern California. ... ten years of professional experience

> Besides software development, my interests are in embedded circuits and astronomy. I have started my startup to research space technologies. When not tangled with 1s and 0s, I usually watch football, cheering on Chelsea.

There’s still a free-throw left to earn the old fashioned way.

Mostly the thinking is this encourages post-play since bigs are usually worse free-throw shooters. Also, it should shorten game length which is another recent audience concern.

For example, maybe these probabilities might not always be the same as this in all circumstances. Also, how much risk you might take also might depend on the current score and remaining time (e.g. maybe you are likely to win even with only one more point than your current score, or maybe it depends how much time it takes to make a specific shot (I don't actually know enough about basketball to know if this is relevant)), and on how your opponent can defend against it at a specific situation (and if their defense would allow them to score instead; I don't actually know how much that is relevant either), maybe. There are probably other considerations as well.

(I do not actually know all of the rules or strategy of basketball, so if I am wrong, you can mention what mistake I made.)