Kanoa Leahey does TV play-by-play for University of Hawaii men’s and women’s basketball. He also works other Division I games for ESPN throughout the Western region of the U.S. He agreed to a quick Q&A about the sudden impact of the 3-point shot on college and pro basketball.

DR: Although the 3-point line has been in play more than 30 years (even longer if you count the old ABA), strategies and tactics relevant to the line seem to continue to evolve. Stats show a higher percentage of 3-pointers being taken in recent years. Why is this? Is it because so many players are tremendous 3-point shooters now, even the big guys? Has coaching philosophy changed?

KL: I think analytics have played a role in this evolution. Basketball strategists, like Mike D’Antoni and Steve Kerr, have recognized that the 3-point shot is simply a greater value shot. So basic arithmetic would have you believe that shooting 10 3s at a 35 percent clip would result in more points than shooting 10 2s at 45 percent. It’s also likely a function of the European influence in the game. For years, big men from Europe were trained to play both in the post and out on the perimeter. That has bled into the game domestically, and has taken place concurrently with this movement toward a greater emphasis on the more valuable shot.

The culture of the game tends to shift with its superstars. Talented and athletic post players like Wilt and Kareem made the game so much about inside domination. Then, Michel Jordan led a revolution for perimeter slashers and “iso” ball. There’s actually statistics to support this. The number of dunks increased exponentially as a result of the impact MJ had on basketball philosophy and training.

And now we have an individual like Steph Curry impacting the game as profoundly. He’s altered the idea of what is considered a “quality” shot. His freedom of shot selection and effectiveness has made it so a guy like Damian Lillard can pull up on a fast break from 25 feet, and it is, analytically, considered a high value or quality shot. And, in turn, that changes how younger players work on their game and the kinds of skills they emphasize. Now we seem to be in the midst of a generation of basketball players that can widely shoot the ball from all over the floor.

DR: You regularly work games of teams other than Hawaii and follow the national college scene closely. How much are teams other than the Rainbow Warriors becoming 3-centric, so to speak? The inside-out philosophy seems pretty logical, but not everyone seems to stress it as much as UH and Eran Ganot does. I’m guessing you’ve seen other teams that prescribe to it as much as Ganot … or maybe not?

KL: It is definitely a greater emphasis for many programs across the country. I don’t think college teams will generally subscribe to the 3-point shot with the same fervor as those we see in the pros, but there’s certainly been a shift in how most coaches feel about shots behind the arc. It is more widely recognized as a high quality shot, depending on who’s shooting it, which in this day and age, can be anyone from the point guard to the center.

The 3-point shot has always been the great equalizer for teams that are physically outmatched, and I think that philosophy has only been solidified among college coaches. Heck, Duke attempted almost 40 3-point shots in its loss to North Carolina after Zion Williamson went down, proving that even Coach K doesn’t seem to mind utilizing the arc to compensate for deficiencies in other areas.

DR: What recollections do you have of a world without the 3-point line, if any? I know that you are a very good outside shooter, or at least you were the last time I played with you. Was this always a big part of your game from small-kid time, and did the line have a lot to do with it?

KL: My only memories of playing without a 3-point line was in the Catholic School League in grade school. I was no great athlete, but one of the things I could do in my younger days was shoot from the perimeter. As I played into high school that became very much associated with the 3-point line. There was no analytical thought behind it, but I do remember an And-1 brand t-shirt that read, “Why shoot the 2, when you can drain the 3?” That seemed to make sense to me, and provided me with an excuse not to go through the effort of driving to the basket (laughs).

DR: Who are the best 3-point shooters you’ve ever seen at the various levels (NBA, NCAA, Hawaii high school)?

KL: Best shooter I saw personally in my high school era was Kai Machida. He played at ‘Iolani and Roosevelt, and had one of the quickest and purest releases I’ve ever seen. I was always a huge fan of guys like Trevor Ruffin and Tes Whitlock at UH. Ruffin could literally pull up from anywhere. I remember in the NCAA Tournament loss to Syracuse when Lawrence Moten was bowing down to him, “I’m not worthy”-style, with all the shots he was hitting. And Tes had one of the most textbook flicks. It was feathery. I loved watching him shoot. To me there is nothing cooler or sexier than a shot from deep that splashes through the net. … It’s a thing of beauty.

DR: Is it fair to say basketball would be less exciting without it, considering it is an equalizer for teams that lack height and allows for the possibility of more upsets?

KL: Yeah, it’s become such a major part of the game. And not only is it a great equalizer, but it also makes games that would otherwise be considered out of hand in the last few minutes still interesting. I can’t imagine the game without it.