“You don’t need a three.” That’s the most incorrect phrase used by college basketball announcers. If you hear this on a broadcast and you know nothing about the situation, figure that the team in question does in fact need a three-pointer late in the game. People who look at time and score and still think teams don’t need threes usually make two incorrect assumptions: 1) that the opponent will miss both free throws after being fouled and/or 2) it’s quick and easy to get a two-point basket. Since the Hoyas won’t be facing Ben Wallace this season, and since they play in the Big East, both assumptions would be way off base.

Let’s take an example. If your team has the ball and is losing by 4 with 12 seconds left (two possessions), a made three-pointer gives you a chance to force overtime, no matter how many free throws the opponent makes. In that case, the three-pointer cuts the lead to one. If the opponent makes both free throws, you need a three to force overtime. If they miss one or two free throws, then you don’t need a three, since you’ll only be down one or two. It’s not that complicated – it’s the difference between hoping your opponents will miss and choosing to take a big shot.

The three-point line has been moved back 12 inches. This small change will make a big difference. The three-point shot has been too close for a few years. The players have adjusted so well, that across the country threes have been just a little too easy. The change won’t affect good shooters when they have open looks with their feet set. But in crunch time, with the game on the line, or when struggling to claw back from 5, 6, or 7 points behind, the comeback enabler will not be as helpful as in the past. You’ll still need a three, but it will be a much tougher shot.