Is It Time To Make the Dunk Count for Four Points Instead of Two?

In basketball, the dunk has been around for a long time. It is a foregone conclusion that teams gain important momentum after the execution of a successful dunk shot. 

I am hoping that the rules committees in the NBA and NCAA will read this and consider tweaking the current scoring system just a little by making a dunk worth four points instead of two.  This would take basketball to another level. 

Please hear me out.  

I know that this might sound far-fetched at first, but allow yourself to fathom for one minute what this might do for the game of basketball.  I believe that this is exactly what the game of basketball needs for the proverbial shot-in-the-arm that would make it even more exciting than it already is. 

Currently, the successful execution of a dunk puts two points on the scoreboard, but these two points pale in comparison to the overall impact of what that dunk actually does to a team and a crowd during a game.

Basketball has long been called the ultimate spectator sport, and one of the biggest highlights of any game is witnessing an impromptu dunk by the home team player.  The intense, powerful impact of the dunk instantly hypes up any crowd. 

Darryl Dawkins became a household name in the '70s and '80s for tearing down backboards when the NBA did not have the collapsible rims like they have now.  The sheer force of a powerful dunk is never forgotten, and any player caught on a poster getting dunked on is always a topic of discussion.

The dunk's importance to the game of basketball is evidenced every year during the NBA All-Star Game.  This is when the league inevitably showcases its best dunkers on a stage for the entire world to see.  The dunking contest itself has started to lose a little luster because people are tired of seeing the same dunks over and over again.  

But I think the most obvious reason that dunking in a venue like the NBA Slam Dunk Contest doesn't create the vibe and impact that it once did is because those dunks are not being performed in a game-time situation. 

Any real fan of the dunk will tell you that dunking on or over someone during a game is a far greater achievement than dunking in a dunk contest.  Case in point: Click here to witness Vince Carter dunking over a seven-footer in the Olympics. 

But the NBA Slam Dunk Contest has also drawn criticism for what a lot people deem as "a lack of creativity" from a contest-planning perspective.  The fact of the matter is that most of the best dunks have already been done. It is extremely difficult for players to keep coming up with new dunks every year and for league organizers to create a contest format that is progressively better than the previous year. 

I was fortunate enough to witness in person the exploits of dunking sensation Vince Carter at the 2000 NBA All-Star Game's Slam Dunk Contest in Oakland, California.  This is when Carter performed the dunk where he ended with his arm in the net. 

At that time, nothing like that had been seen or attempted before, and it will go down as one of the most creative dunks of all time. Creativity is the key factor in a dunk contest, whereas momentum is the key factor during an actual basketball game.   

But the really great dunkers continue to come up with newer and more exciting ways to dunk, and when they dunk over somebody or dunk during a game, this keeps the dunk at the highest apex of fan appeal, making it one of the most prolific individual accomplishments in all of sports.  

When Dwight Howard put on the Superman garb and caught his own alley-oop, coming down with an amazing throw-down slam, you were witnessing one of the best dunks ever. 

Contrary to popular belief, dunking is not easy.  NBA players like Blake Griffin, LeBron James, Kobe Bryant and Dwight Howard all make it look easy because they are so good at it.  But most basketball players lose the ability to dunk before they lose the ability to make a three-point shot from 23 feet out.

This makes the dunk far more difficult than the three-point shot.  So why not one-up the current three-point shot scoring system and award the most prolific dunkers for their exploits in a way that would have far more impact on the game from a fan's perspective, than what scoring it as two points currently does?

Here are a couple of scenarios that could make a dunk shot count as four points:

 Scenario No. 1

If the dunk is attempted and completed beyond a certain distance from the basket (A Four-Point Dunking Zone), make it count as four points.  I say, pick a distance between the mark that currently allows a defensive player to draw a charging foul, and go up toward the free-throw line or just create an area that is very challenging but gives great rewards when a dunk is launched from this point. If the dunker launches his dunk from any point within this area and successfully makes the dunk, score it as four points.   

Scenario No. 2

If and when the dunk is attempted and completed within the "Dunking Zone" and/or it is completed over two or more opposing players in that specific area of the court, score it as four points.

Now most people will say that this is impossible and it wouldn't be good for the game because it would totally destroy all of the old scoring records and change an adequate scoring system that has already been established.  Others will argue that a dunk is not as difficult as a 3-point shot attempt.   Owners and GMs would probably argue that the amount of players injuries would increase. 

But some of these same types of arguments were brought out when the 3-point shot was implemented.  And just like when it was first introduced, teams, coaches, statisticians, historians and everyone "keeping score" would be able to make the adjustment after after seeing how much more exciting the game will be.      

So is basketball ready for this? I believe it is. What do you think? Hit me up and let me know. Let's get some dialog going on this subject for the basketball rules committee people to hear and consider.