The rim is inside the 3 point line.

I think a regular dunk would be 2 points. I think the dunk in the video would be 3 if it happened the way the video took place.

I think it matters if you consider touching the rim matters changes the status of the location on the court. I would also think if this was possible, the rules would change to make the rules very clear that a dunk would not be a 3. But it is not possible at this point without some technology that we have not seen yet.

Peace

It's not touching the floor in the 2 point area. You are where you are until you get where you're going. It would be a 3 point dunk if this was at all possible.

If touching the rim meant you were at the location of the rim, then in every NBA stadium you would be out of bounds. The rim is attached to the stanchion which is only touching out of bounds.

OK, I'm going to have to unpack my rule book after moving, but I'm pretty sure the location of an airborne player is defined strictly by where he last touched the floor. I'll be shocked if there's any reference to the rim there.

There isn't, because it never mattered...............until now. :D

And since it's not there, it's (touching the rim) not relevant to the rule. If they change the rule, then it could be a two point shot, but until then, it's 3.

Actually, 4-35-4 says "....the floor, or an extension of the floor, such as a bleacher."

I would say that is the applicable rule.

And the rim is not an extension of the floor. Hell, half the time the rim isn't even attached to the floor.

Extensions of the floor would be bleachers, table, benches.

The backboard has inbounds status, therefore, so does the rim. If it has status with regard to inbounds/out of bounds, it must also have status with regard to inside/outside the line.

4-4-5: A ball which touches the front faces or edges of the backboard is treated the same as touching the floor inbounds.

Well it would matter if this was possible. But we are talking about a hypothetical that is likely to never happen.

Peace

Is it?

Not necessarily.

The rim could be neutral....in fact I think it has to be.

Why?

If the rim were treated the same as the floor inside the 3 point arc, all tries would end when the ball hit the rim and any 3 that wasn't net-only would become a 2 when the ball hit the rim. Of course, that isn't the case. So, I suggest that the rim (and backboard too), while inbounds, is neither in the 2 point area nor the 3 point area.

They have a rule in place for when a jump ball ends by definition that involves hitting the backboard and the rim. That was a not a change in the rule from when they did jump balls at FT lane area. I would think that if this was possible, the rule would be clarified with previous rules or new interpretations, followed by new rules. I have no idea if what I am saying would be right as it is not ever happened to my knowledge and no such issue has been raised realistically. We are speculating on what really would be the interpretation and yes that would matter like other things do somethings in the rules. But I would not think in the effort of fairness that the rules committees would keep awarding a 3 point shot for a dunk attempt without some clarification. Nothing to be upset about, we are strictly talking about a very big leap in how the game is actually played now.

Peace

This would be an excellent point if we were talking about ball location, but we're not. We're talking about player location.