As basketball players got bigger and stronger it was often proposed to raise the goal to 11'. Now that golfers are bigger and stronger it is being proposed to roll back the ball. I think both are terrible ideas.
Whatever your thoughts, there is no link between the two. Not all change is bad and not everything that stays the same is bad. Each change or proposed change needs to assessed on it's merits.
The ring staying at 10 feet and the 3 point line have been great for basketball. As the general population of basketballers has gotten taller, the need for extremely tall man mountains has decreased. This has resulted in basketball teams with a more even spread of talent across the floor with more emphasis of skill at the power forward and centre position and less emphasis on height. Almost all players now are expected to shoot from all over the court, dribble the basketball, set screens, pass the basketball and defend all positions. This has led to greater teamwork and less predictability on the court. For example, 20 years ago, the screen and roll was the domain of the point guard and the centre/power forward. Now you might see the same play with the point guard screening for the power forward. or the centre screening for the power forward, or the shooting guard screening for the point guard...
As for golf, you have to look at the extra distance the ball travels and judge how that has affected the game. This has no relvevance to changes in basketball. If basketball has improved as a game and a spectacle because there are more players on the court with well rounded games, the most pertinent question would be as to whether shorter effective courses encourage golfers to have more skillfull well rounded games?