Three-Pointers Optimize Basketball Forever
False Assumption: Heavy reliance on three-point shots and layups represents the unbeatable optimal strategy for basketball derived from analytics.
Written by FARAgent on February 11, 2026
In the 2000s, MIT analysts examined millions of shots and concluded three-point baskets were worth 50 percent more than two-pointers. The NBA had added the three-point line decades earlier, but players initially underused it. Analytics spread, leading teams to prioritize threes over mid-range jumpers. Steph Curry's success validated the shift, boosting scoring and excitement initially.
By the 2020s, all teams adopted the strategy of shooting only layups or threes, avoiding mid-range shots. All-Star games reached absurd scores like 211-186. Players and fans grew bored with the predictable play, resembling tic-tac-toe where optimal moves eliminate uncertainty. Milwaukee's Damian Lillard noted the loss of originality, as copycat behavior forced conformity to win.
Critics now question the strategy's dominance. Players complain publicly. Suggestions include gradually extending the three-point arc to restore balance and subtlety, like college basketball's adjustments. The league still profits, but entertainment value faces mounting questions.
People Involved
- Steph Curry emerged as the star of this analytics era. He excelled at three-point shooting. His skills helped him win four NBA titles. Teams built around exploiting this strategy profited from his example. [1]
- Damian Lillard, guard for the Milwaukee Bucks, took a different stance. He warned that the obsession with analytics was stripping originality from the game. He pointed out how it banned mid-range jumpers, acting as a voice of dissent. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (2)
“the best three-point shooter, Steph Curry, won four NBA titles.”— The Tic-Tac-Toeization of the NBA
“'I think as a league now, we look so deep into analytics, and you hear people saying out loud, we want a 3 or a layup. Don't be shooting too many midrange jumpers,' Milwaukee guard Damian Lillard said Saturday.”— The Tic-Tac-Toeization of the NBA
Organizations Involved
The NBA became the main institution pushing this analytics-driven approach. It fostered a copycat culture among teams. To stay competitive, franchises had to conform to a focus on threes and layups. [1] This enforcement came through league-wide trends. Institutions sustained the idea because deviation meant risking losses in a high-stakes environment. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (1)
“"It's a copycat league that we play in, and you can't have everybody playing one way, a successful way and you playing a different way. You've got to get in line with what's working to win, and right now that's what it is."”— The Tic-Tac-Toeization of the NBA
The Foundation
In the early days of basketball analytics, MIT analysts examined millions of data points. They concluded that a three-point basket was worth 50 percent more than a two-point one. This math seemed straightforward. It led to the idea that teams should eliminate mid-range shots altogether. [1] The assumption grew that basketball strategy would forever converge on short twos or long threes. Data supported this view at first. Yet it overlooked factors like entertainment value and the variability in how plays execute on the court. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (2)
“a team of MIT data nerds crunched millions of numbers and came up with a revolutionary conclusion: a basket made from three-point range (23’9” diminishing to 22’0” inches in the corners) was worth 50% more than a basket from two-point range!”— The Tic-Tac-Toeization of the NBA
“this strategy of only shooting short 2s or long 3s looks less like a fun fad doomed to be replaced by some other innovation, and instead more like the ultimate forever solution to the game of basketball.”— The Tic-Tac-Toeization of the NBA
How It Spread
The idea took hold through data-driven coaching in the 2010s. Media outlets like ESPN amplified it. They pressured teams to adopt a threes-or-layups-only style. [1] Copycat dynamics in the league enforced uniformity. Any team that strayed from the analytics model faced the threat of falling behind. Social and competitive pressures made the strategy seem inevitable. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (2)
“From ESPN: "I think as a league now, we look so deep into analytics..."”— The Tic-Tac-Toeization of the NBA
“"you can't have everybody playing one way, a successful way and you playing a different way. You've got to get in line with what's working to win"”— The Tic-Tac-Toeization of the NBA
Harm Caused
Critics argue this strategy has homogenized basketball. Games now feel repetitive to fans and players. All-Star contests produce absurd scores, like 211-186. The subtlety of mid-range play has vanished. [1] Mounting evidence suggests it diminishes certain skills. Coaches like John Wooden once gave UCLA an edge with mid-range precision. Such tactics now hold little relevance, reducing the impact of varied coaching. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (2)
“the Eastern Conference defeated the Western Conference 211-186. ... many fans and some players are increasingly finding the modern computer-analyzed game of basketball boring.”— The Tic-Tac-Toeization of the NBA
“That kind of subtlety isn’t as important anymore when the strategy is to drive the basket but if stymied then kick it out to somebody open 24 feet from the basket.”— The Tic-Tac-Toeization of the NBA
Downfall
Growing questions surround the assumption's permanence. Players like Damian Lillard have criticized the loss of three-level scoring publicly. This has sparked debates about restoring variety. Some propose extending the three-point line gradually. Critics argue this could counter the strategy's flaws. The issue remains debated among experts. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (1)
“"It's meant to be played at three levels. It's meant to be played a certain way. ... I would say. It's meant to be played at three levels."”— The Tic-Tac-Toeization of the NBA
Sources
- [1]