Intentional Foul

[disciple]

The NBA is going to consider changes to intentional fouls or what is referred to as 'Hack-a-Shaq'.

My suggestion is to leave it alone so we don't award a player for not being able to play a complete game.

If some change has to be made 'for the good of the game' than how about adding a new foul called an 'out of play' foul. Not to be confused with the 'off the ball' foul. Players sometimes are fouled trying to make cuts to get open but that is part of the game play. An intentional foul should not be included in any rule for that. The intentional 'out of play' foul could be awarded just one free throw and the ball out of bounds. However, if the free throw is missed than play continues and the team does not retain the ball. That way they are kind of doing both. They are changing the rule to discourage the practice but not to the extent of completely awarding the poor shooter. If he misses the team fouling is awarded if the he makes it they are penalized for the attempt. This would serve to change the strategy of when to use it too because there is greater risk.

What is your suggestion ?

[SquawkinHawkBigCock]

Why should the NBA change a rule to cover up a player's deficiency? Most of these guys are getting paid millions of dollars to play basketball, they're suppose to make an uncontested 15 foot shot with ease. And to those clamoring that Pop is making a mockery of the game for using this strategy, no. He's making a mockery out of guys like Josh Smith for disrespecting the game and not learning how to shoot proper free throws. :lol

[disciple]

I agreed with your position and said so. Hence, my comment "for the good of the game" of those that take that position.

[TDMVPDPOY]

isnt the league made up of 400 of best players in the world?

lol cant hit a ft...then u cant use best to describe what the league is...

[disciple]

Right there with you.

But, if the NBA had to make some adjustment what would you suggest ?

[disciple]

I like my suggestion because it increases the chance taken. It makes the difference between the good and the bad of doing it greater. Currently, either they give up none to two points in exchange for taking the ball out of the playmakers hands. If this rule were implemented the same reward would be available but the exchange would be to give up a point and possession.

[hater]

Imo they should allow a team to opt for an electronicalized free throw. A computer program that will mulates the free throw based on real %s.

For example. If they foul demonkey, doc can just say emulate and the program will emulate a shot with 30% probability or whatever the monkeys % is.

This would save lots of time and pain to all while still keeping them monkeys real.

[hater]

Or even better. They can call a clipper fan to shoot for the monkey :lol

[Splits]

They already announced there will be no changes to it this season.

[DMC]

Right there with you.

But, if the NBA had to make some adjustment what would you suggest ?

This reminds me of people who say chess is too boring. They play with a clock for speed chess. All that does it get them to the end game faster, but it doesn't make the game of chess any better. If your desire is to get to the end of the game faster, why not just skip the game and vote on the winners, American Idol style?

I think golf needs to be sped up. Who wants to watch people walk between holes? I say let them drive golf carts. Shouldn't we really only be watching a montage of the best moments of any sporting event anyhow? Why watch all the boring stuff?

There's nothing wrong with how the game is now. You win or you lose based on who you bring and how they play. Having a guy that can't hit the FT is worse than having a guy who can't hit a 3pt shot, because everyone on the floor is subject to getting to the FT line. Teams either need to make FT shooting a bigger part of player selection or live with the results of not doing so. Change nothing.

[JamStone]

Keep it the way it is, except that the intentional off the ball foul is worth 3 personal fouls on an individual player (but still only 1 foul as far as team fouls and bonus are concerned). That way, you limit the ability of teams to do it too excessively even when they put in bench scrubs to commit the fouls. It forces the coach fouling to hesitate to use the hack-a-Shaq strategy too much particularly early in games, like the first half without at least considering what it does for availability of some of the bench players. And if one of your key rotation players does it, that's 3 big personal fouls on him just on one play.

It forces fouling teams to at least foul the poor free throw shooter when he's involved in the play (setting a pick or on a offensive rebound attempt), instead of allowing fouling teams to just run up on the guy and hug him in the backcourt or at halfcourt. If the fouled team keeps the poor free throw shooter out of the play, away from the ball, away from any action, that intentional foul costs the fouling player 3 personal fouls. Do it too much early, and you may not be able to afford to do it late in the 4th quarter without losing players to fouling out. Then it would be unlikely to see a guy like DeAndre shoot 20+ free throws in a half. He can still get hacked, but as opposed to 20+ free throws, maybe it's 6-8 free throws. Helps a little with the pace of game without taking out the strategy completely.

[baseline bum]

Keep it the way it is, except that the intentional off the ball foul is worth 3 personal fouls on an individual player (but still only 1 foul as far as team fouls and bonus are concerned). That way, you limit the ability of teams to do it too excessively even when they put in bench scrubs to commit the fouls. It forces the coach fouling to hesitate to use the hack-a-Shaq strategy too much particularly early in games, like the first half without at least considering what it does for availability of some of the bench players. And if one of your key rotation players does it, that's 3 big personal fouls on him just on one play.

It forces fouling teams to at least foul the poor free throw shooter when he's involved in the play (setting a pick or on a offensive rebound attempt), instead of allowing fouling teams to just run up on the guy and hug him in the backcourt or at halfcourt. If the fouled team keeps the poor free throw shooter out of the play, away from the ball, away from any action, that intentional foul costs the fouling player 3 personal fouls. Do it too much early, and you may not be able to afford to do it late in the 4th quarter without losing players to fouling out. Then it would be unlikely to see a guy like DeAndre shoot 20+ free throws in a half. He can still get hacked, but as opposed to 20+ free throws, maybe it's 6-8 free throws. Helps a little with the pace of game without taking out the strategy completely.

That's the worst solution I have ever heard. How about Jordan just learn to hit his fucking free throws like Splitter did after he got hacked in the 2012 WCF?

[Thread]

Only pussies & assholes employ "hack."

[JamStone]

That's the worst solution I have ever heard. How about Jordan just learn to hit his fucking free throws like Splitter did after he got hacked in the 2012 WCF?

Free throws weren't part of the original rules of basketball. They were implemented to help players who couldn't defend well enough. How about players learn to play defense without fouling? If they can't, just let them get overpowered and scored on. If the point is to make the game better, just as the rule to shoot free throws was to make the game better, then limiting the ability to use hack-a-Shaq also makes sense.

[baseline bum]

Free throws weren't part of the original rules of basketball. They were implemented to help players who couldn't defend well enough. How about players learn to play defense without fouling? If they can't, just let them get overpowered and scored on. If the point is to make the game better, just as the rule to shoot free throws was to make the game better, then limiting the ability to use hack-a-Shaq also makes sense.

Let's add four pointers too. Also halfcourt shot is worth 7 now, should lead to many more exciting finishes.

[hater]

Free throws were implemented to protect players and the game. Lol

Flagrants were also not part of original basketball. Lets abolish them so we can have niggas on wheelchairs :lol

[baseline bum]

Offensive foul should be worth zero fouls, you don't want to limit niggas' aggresiveness attacking the rim. It makes the game better.

[JamStone]

Free throws were implemented to protect players and the game. Lol

Flagrants were also not part of original basketball. Lets abolish them so we can have niggas on wheelchairs :lol


Offensive foul should be worth zero fouls, you don't want to limit niggas' aggresiveness attacking the rim. It makes the game better.


I didn't call for abolishing anything from the game, just tweeking the rules. The evolution of the game has seen rules changes from being able to dribble to the 24 second clock to different rules on zone defense to not being able to dunk and then again being able to dunk. A rule tweek to the hack-a-Shaq strategy makes sense because the hack-a-Shaq strategy sucks to watch. If you're a Spurs fan, you have no problem with it because over the years it has been advantageous to your team. I understand that. But it sucks to watch. It makes the game worse. The point of basketball wasn't to be a shooting contest. If it was, then make the game a free throw contest. Take away all play and just have teams shoot free throws and the team that makes the most free throws win.

My suggestion did not "abolish" the strategy. It merely discourages the excessive use of it.

[ambchang]

Hack a Shaq is part of a defensive strategy that is high risk. I personally don't really see the point of employing it as even a very bad FT shooter gets about 50% at the FT line, and it teams, overall, don't average 50% from the field. There is also the disruption in offensive rhythm, but overall, the success rate of employing hack a shaq is really half and half.

Ultimately, the job of a coach is to exploit the weakness of the other team, if the opposition FT shooting is so bad that it is worse than its FG shooting, you foul them to give yourself a better chance at winning.

I just don't see why the league would want to take away a defensive strategy that is based on a fundamental part of the game.

[Splits]

My suggestion did not "abolish" the strategy. It merely discourages the excessive use of it.

The excessive use is the whole point of the strategy, to get the opposing coach to pull the shitty free throw shooter.

[Trainwreck2100]

Keep it the way it is, except that the intentional off the ball foul is worth 3 personal fouls on an individual player (but still only 1 foul as far as team fouls and bonus are concerned). That way, you limit the ability of teams to do it too excessively even when they put in bench scrubs to commit the fouls. It forces the coach fouling to hesitate to use the hack-a-Shaq strategy too much particularly early in games, like the first half without at least considering what it does for availability of some of the bench players. And if one of your key rotation players does it, that's 3 big personal fouls on him just on one play.

It forces fouling teams to at least foul the poor free throw shooter when he's involved in the play (setting a pick or on a offensive rebound attempt), instead of allowing fouling teams to just run up on the guy and hug him in the backcourt or at halfcourt. If the fouled team keeps the poor free throw shooter out of the play, away from the ball, away from any action, that intentional foul costs the fouling player 3 personal fouls. Do it too much early, and you may not be able to afford to do it late in the 4th quarter without losing players to fouling out. Then it would be unlikely to see a guy like DeAndre shoot 20+ free throws in a half. He can still get hacked, but as opposed to 20+ free throws, maybe it's 6-8 free throws. Helps a little with the pace of game without taking out the strategy completely.

you'd have teams bullying the player as he's coming down the court with off the ball fouls. If your situation leads to off the ball fould being worth 3 fouls that would be disastrous

[JamStone]

The excessive use is the whole point of the strategy, to get the opposing coach to pull the shitty free throw shooter.

The excessive use is also what makes the game hard to watch. Limiting it allows for the strategy to be used more prudently without completely making a game unwatchable. Imagine basketball without a 24 second shot clock and watching bad teams that can't score hold the ball on offense for 5 minutes at a time. Making tweeks to hack-and-Shaq is an attempt to make the game more watchable, just like the 24 second shot clock.

[JamStone]

you'd have teams bullying the player as he's coming down the court with off the ball fouls. If your situation leads to off the ball fould being worth 3 fouls that would be disastrous

I don't get what you're saying.

[Trainwreck2100]

I don't get what you're saying.

teams would intentionally foul the bad shooter anyway, only it wouldn't be a love tap, they'd just foul the guy off the ball even as he's running down the court like they do now. Then it would be up to the ref to determine whether it's worth three fouls or one.

[spurraider21]

Only pussies & assholes employ "hack."
why? because you say so?

[Spurs9]

During a summer league broadcast I thought they mentioned they had already reviewed the rule this summer and would not change it.

[JamStone]

teams would intentionally foul the bad shooter anyway, only it wouldn't be a love tap, they'd just foul the guy off the ball even as he's running down the court like they do now. Then it would be up to the ref to determine whether it's worth three fouls or one.

I don't see that as a foreseeable consequence at all. If teams/players still want to employ the strategy, it's fine. If it's not a love tap, it's fine. It's not like NBA players are fragile glass dolls. So what if the intentional off the ball foul is harder? If it's excessive and unnecessary, then they still risk a flagrant foul, ejection, and a league fine. If you're suggesting that teams will now just try to foul poor free throw shooters without making it obvious or intentional and without telling the referees they are trying to intentionally foul him, then that's good. NBA play can be physical at times and sometimes refs let some physicality go. If teams do that, then they risk a foul not being called at all. If they go overboard with the fouling, again they also risk a flagrant foul. I don't see that as being a bad thing, certainly not disastrous.

[Thread]

why? because you say so?

Because it's chickenshit. It's pussy. You should know that without being told.

[baseline bum]

The excessive use is also what makes the game hard to watch. Limiting it allows for the strategy to be used more prudently without completely making a game unwatchable. Imagine basketball without a 24 second shot clock and watching bad teams that can't score hold the ball on offense for 5 minutes at a time. Making tweeks to hack-and-Shaq is an attempt to make the game more watchable, just like the 24 second shot clock.

Your idea of a more watchable game is one designed to play to the strengths of athletes with minimal basketball skill? Go watch Kadour Ziani youtubes if you want to see people just dunking basketballs.

[JamStone]

Your idea of a more watchable game is one designed to play to the strengths of athletes with minimal basketball skill? Go watch Kadour Ziani youtubes if you want to see people just dunking basketballs.

No it's not. Intentionally fouling takes no basketball skill either. Free throw shooting is just one part of the game. Basketball skill encompasses more than just shooting free throws. There's passing, cutting, setting sound picks, rebounding, shooting (non free throw) jumpers, all of which take at least some skill to do correctly.

The strategy of hack-a-Shaq is actually designed to take away all of those "skill" things from the opposing team because it erases the ability of the opposing team to run its offense. Hack-a-Shaq takes away the skill out of the game even more than limiting the use of the hack-a-Shaq strategy. It turns the game into a free throw contest. It's not just about allowing athletic players who can't shoot to dunk. That's not only an extremely narrow view of what the purpose of limiting hack-a-Shaq would be trying to do. It's also completely inaccurate.

[baseline bum]

No it's not. Intentionally fouling takes no basketball skill either. Free throw shooting is just one part of the game. Basketball skill encompasses more than just shooting free throws. There's passing, cutting, setting sound picks, rebounding, shooting (non free throw) jumpers, all of which take at least some skill to do correctly.

The strategy of hack-a-Shaq is actually designed to take away all of those "skill" things from the opposing team because it erases the ability of the opposing team to run its offense. Hack-a-Shaq takes away the skill out of the game even more than limiting the use of the hack-a-Shaq strategy. It turns the game into a free throw contest. It's not just about allowing athletic players who can't shoot to dunk. That's not only an extremely narrow view of what the purpose of limiting hack-a-Shaq would be trying to do. It's also completely inaccurate.

Intentionally fouling exploits lack of basketball talent in a player. It means you have to put a basketball player and not a high jumper on the court, or suffer the consequences. It's funny you keep calling this Hack-a-Shaq as if this was ever a viable strategy against him until he was old and washed up. Shaq could actually hit them at a high enough clip that it never made any sense except for one lone series when he was 36. And it doesn't work for almost every other NBA bigman in the game because most of them have more offensive talent than dunking. I don't understand why you think the NBA needs to be tailoring the game towards and not away from guys like Jordan if you care about the quality of basketball being played. Do you want more DeAndre Jordans in the league? Is that improving the NBA game to dilute the talent pool of the league with people who can't shoot at any level whatsoever? I don't see changing the rule just to help DeAndre Jordan look like a better player than he is.

[DMC]

Only pussies & assholes employ "hack."
Only chickenshits bitch about legal tactics.

[ducks]

SO would you get 3 fouls if you foul someone so they do not make a layup or dunk?

[K...]

Count fouls normally but keep track of player misses. If a player misses free throws 7 times they are ejected. To mitigate the defensive advantage allow the opposing team to decline free throws, have the player shoot one without penalty, or proceed normally.

Boom, fuck deandre fuck harden.


Also, random free throw tests every couple games. Don't hit 50% in an empty gym you are given a one week suspension. This is professional basketball. Basic skill test shouldn't be unconscionable.

[Mitch]

Just let the team who shoots the freethrows during intentional fouls. Hacking is a bad tactic for the NBA as a product.

[DMC]

Just let the team who shoots the freethrows during intentional fouls. Hacking is a bad tactic for the NBA as a product.

Let them what, exactly?

Hacking is a good tactic. It's done at the end of games when the score is close, to gain extra possessions, and no one seems to care.

Fouling away from the ball is still a foul. The other team should be glad they get to go to the FT line instead of just taking the ball out of bounds. That's what the "penalty" means.

The bad product is the oaf who cannot hit a FT. Either remove FTs from the game or remove the oafs.

[Mitch]

Let them what, exactly?

Hacking is a good tactic. It's done at the end of games when the score is close, to gain extra possessions, and no one seems to care.

Fouling away from the ball is still a foul. The other team should be glad they get to go to the FT line instead of just taking the ball out of bounds. That's what the "penalty" means.

The bad product is the oaf who cannot hit a FT. Either remove FTs from the game or remove the oafs.

Good basketball tactic, bad for business. Fans don't want to see a quarter of free throws.

[Raven]

Keep it the way it is, except that the intentional off the ball foul is worth 3 personal fouls on an individual player (but still only 1 foul as far as team fouls and bonus are concerned). That way, you limit the ability of teams to do it too excessively even when they put in bench scrubs to commit the fouls. It forces the coach fouling to hesitate to use the hack-a-Shaq strategy too much particularly early in games, like the first half without at least considering what it does for availability of some of the bench players. And if one of your key rotation players does it, that's 3 big personal fouls on him just on one play.

It forces fouling teams to at least foul the poor free throw shooter when he's involved in the play (setting a pick or on a offensive rebound attempt), instead of allowing fouling teams to just run up on the guy and hug him in the backcourt or at halfcourt. If the fouled team keeps the poor free throw shooter out of the play, away from the ball, away from any action, that intentional foul costs the fouling player 3 personal fouls. Do it too much early, and you may not be able to afford to do it late in the 4th quarter without losing players to fouling out. Then it would be unlikely to see a guy like DeAndre shoot 20+ free throws in a half. He can still get hacked, but as opposed to 20+ free throws, maybe it's 6-8 free throws. Helps a little with the pace of game without taking out the strategy completely.

that's laughable

[Raven]

No it's not. Intentionally fouling takes no basketball skill either. Free throw shooting is just one part of the game. Basketball skill encompasses more than just shooting free throws. There's passing, cutting, setting sound picks, rebounding, shooting (non free throw) jumpers, all of which take at least some skill to do correctly.

The strategy of hack-a-Shaq is actually designed to take away all of those "skill" things from the opposing team because it erases the ability of the opposing team to run its offense. Hack-a-Shaq takes away the skill out of the game even more than limiting the use of the hack-a-Shaq strategy. It turns the game into a free throw contest. It's not just about allowing athletic players who can't shoot to dunk. That's not only an extremely narrow view of what the purpose of limiting hack-a-Shaq would be trying to do. It's also completely inaccurate.

is that so? because i don't remember any passing or cutting in the 90s

[Raven]

Good basketball tactic, bad for business. Fans don't want to see a quarter of free throws.

i find it very entertaining when someone airballs a ft

[DMC]

Good basketball tactic, bad for business. Fans don't want to see a quarter of free throws.

Fans don't want to see their team lose either. As a fan, I'd take the free throws over having some cross eyed genetic freak monkey baller dominate my team when all I need to do is force him to hit some free throws.

Those who complain most about this are those with big who cannot hit free throws. Since when has any NBA fan given two shits about what's better for the game? Since when has winning not been entertaining?

[Thread]

Since when has winning not been entertaining?

You were pretty glum & tight lipped after that 1st 5th.

tee, hee.

[DMC]

You were pretty glum & tight lipped after that 1st 5th.

tee, hee.
I called it, Gabby.

[Thread]

I called it, Gabby.

The 1st or 2nd 5th?

tee, hee.

[DMC]

The 1st or 2nd 5th?

tee, hee.

Your capitulation is duly noted

[Thread]

Your capitulation is duly noted

lmemulatedao!!!

[Mitch]

i find it very entertaining when someone airballs a ft

You like it when Kawhi miss those two in '13?

[DMC]

You like it when Kawhi miss those two in '13?

So the foul away from the ball argument is self serving.

[Raven]

You like it when Kawhi miss those two in '13?

that's a weird question

[Mitch]

that's a weird question

Why? You said you like bad free throw shooting displays.

[Raven]

Why? You said you like bad free throw shooting displays.

I meant when i'm an outside viewer, i find it entertaining. It's funny.

[LnGrrrR]

There's got to be a better way to decide games than the "extend the last two mins into 20" parade from stripe to stripe.

[Mitch]

I meant when i'm an outside viewer, i find it entertaining. It's funny.

So long as it don't hurt Spurs, eh?

[Mnky]

No it's not. Intentionally fouling takes no basketball skill either. Free throw shooting is just one part of the game. Basketball skill encompasses more than just shooting free throws. There's passing, cutting, setting sound picks, rebounding, shooting (non free throw) jumpers, all of which take at least some skill to do correctly.

The strategy of hack-a-Shaq is actually designed to take away all of those "skill" things from the opposing team because it erases the ability of the opposing team to run its offense. Hack-a-Shaq takes away the skill out of the game even more than limiting the use of the hack-a-Shaq strategy. It turns the game into a free throw contest. It's not just about allowing athletic players who can't shoot to dunk. That's not only an extremely narrow view of what the purpose of limiting hack-a-Shaq would be trying to do. It's also completely inaccurate.

Being defunct one skill is enough to warrant justification.
I direct you to any 20% jump shooter. They're not around too often even though they can dribble, pass, dunk. When you have guys who can't shoot, you let them shoot. When you have guys who can't dribble, you man up and force the drive. You force your opponent into a weakness. It's called strategy.

Comparing strategy to a free throw contest is completely inaccurate.

[da_suns_fan]

For off-the-ball fouls when a team is over the limit, the team fouled has option to take the free throws or the ball out of bounds.

If a player HAS the ball and is fouled, he still has shoot free throws.

Problem solved.

Players still have to be able to make free throws or their teammates can never pass them the ball but it removes the ridiculous hacking that defensive Spurs fans defend simply because their coach chooses to do it.

[SupremeGuy]

They already announced there will be no changes to it this season.Really? Link? It's going to be pretty funny watching DJ shoot an inordinate amount of FTs his first game at Dallas.

[DMC]

For off-the-ball fouls when a team is over the limit, the team fouled has option to take the free throws or the ball out of bounds.

If a player HAS the ball and is fouled, he still has shoot free throws.

Problem solved.

Players still have to be able to make free throws or their teammates can never pass them the ball but it removes the ridiculous hacking that defensive Spurs fans defend simply because their coach chooses to do it.
They all do it.

You cannot have the choice, else a foul away from the ball on Curry means two FTs, but on Jordan means ball out of bounds. Can't be that way.

You're getting the clock stopped with a chance to score points and you bitch about it? How far down the ladder do you think your shitty teams are that you have to lobby for rule changes under the guise of "keeping it interesting"? Who wants to see two small market teams in the Finals? Why not make it so that small market teams have to win 5 of 7 while the popular teams only have to win 3 of 7? That would keep the majority of NBA fans more entertained.

[disciple]

They all do it.

You cannot have the choice, else a foul away from the ball on Curry means two FTs, but on Jordan means ball out of bounds. Can't be that way.

You're getting the clock stopped with a chance to score points and you bitch about it? How far down the ladder do you think your shitty teams are that you have to lobby for rule changes under the guise of "keeping it interesting"? Who wants to see two small market teams in the Finals? Why not make it so that small market teams have to win 5 of 7 while the popular teams only have to win 3 of 7? That would keep the majority of NBA fans more entertained.

LOL:blah:blah:blah

[da_suns_fan]

They all do it.

You cannot have the choice, else a foul away from the ball on Curry means two FTs, but on Jordan means ball out of bounds. Can't be that way.

You're getting the clock stopped with a chance to score points and you bitch about it? How far down the ladder do you think your shitty teams are that you have to lobby for rule changes under the guise of "keeping it interesting"? Who wants to see two small market teams in the Finals? Why not make it so that small market teams have to win 5 of 7 while the popular teams only have to win 3 of 7? That would keep the majority of NBA fans more entertained.

Yes it can. If a team fouls off the ball and is over the limit, the team fouled can take the free throws (as the rule is now) or simply take it out of bounds.

The NFL gives teams the exact same "option" to accept a penalty for the exact same reason. There are loopholes in the rule book that can be exploited just like "hack-a-shaq" so they give teams the option to simply not accept the penalty.

The rest of your post is just the nonsense of a defensive spurs fan. Teams fouling each other as soon as the ball is inbounded to try and exploit a loophole is bad for the game no matter who your coach is. Grow up.

[Dex]

There's got to be a better way to decide games than the "extend the last two mins into 20" parade from stripe to stripe.

Bingo. Obviously "Hack-a" has come more into light because Pop made it vogue and more teams are utilizing the strategy now. But I don't see how it's any different from end-of-game situations where intentional fouls are the accepted norm.

The system is fine as it is. Either be a detriment to your team, or learn how to shoot a goddamn free throw. The league shouldn't be hiding player deficiencies for the sake of entertainment. This is basketball, not WWE.

[da_suns_fan]

Bingo. Obviously "Hack-a" has come more into light because Pop made it vogue and more teams are utilizing the strategy now. But I don't see how it's any different from end-of-game situations where intentional fouls are the accepted norm.

The system is fine as it is. Either be a detriment to your team, or learn how to shoot a goddamn free throw. The league shouldn't be hiding player deficiencies for the sake of entertainment. This is basketball, not WWE.

As if theres ever going to be a day in which we dont have players that are, despite thousands of hours of practice, bad free throw shooters. We should just say "learn to shoot free throws" as if teams havent spent millions upon millions of dollars on shooting coaches and countless hours practicing.

We should be idealistic and accept the shit being passed on as "basketball" because thats what the Spurs like to do.

No thanks.

[da_suns_fan]

It must suck to be a Spurs fan and have to pretend that we dont all watch sports for "entertainment".

[baseline bum]

You like it when Kawhi miss those two in '13?

It was one son, come on, I know you have watched the end of that game more than any Spurs fan here.

[baseline bum]

Yes it can. If a team fouls off the ball and is over the limit, the team fouled can take the free throws (as the rule is now) or simply take it out of bounds.

The NFL gives teams the exact same "option" to accept a penalty for the exact same reason. There are loopholes in the rule book that can be exploited just like "hack-a-shaq" so they give teams the option to simply not accept the penalty.

The rest of your post is just the nonsense of a defensive spurs fan. Teams fouling each other as soon as the ball is inbounded to try and exploit a loophole is bad for the game no matter who your coach is. Grow up.

LOL faggot still butthurt over the mid 2000s telling people to grow up.

[Dex]

It must suck to be a Spurs fan and have to pretend that we dont all watch sports for "entertainment".

Yes, we all watch basketball for entertainment. That's because we enjoy the competition for what it is, and that is dictated by rules that have mostly been in place for over 100 years.

Basketball has been an institution for far longer than these sensationalized TV markets. Hell, when it was invented in 1891, the first television was still three decades off. The game been played on every level, from prep school to college to international to NBA, and aside from some variations, the main rules have stayed the same. None of those other leagues would ever consider watering down the game for the sake of ratings, especially rating that are only lining the pockets of people who are already millionaires. If you want basketball to be pure entertainment, go watch a Globetrotters game.

:cry But I don't want to watch free throws. :cry

It must suck to be a Suns fan and...well...have to be a Suns fan.

[Mitch]

It was one son, come on, I know you have watched the end of that game more than any Spurs fan here.

Not really, Bum. I saw the highlight reel and the 20something seconds of the Spur breakdown.

[ducks]

SO would you get 3 fouls if you foul someone so they do not make a layup or dunk?

[da_suns_fan]

Yes, we all watch basketball for entertainment. That's because we enjoy the competition for what it is, and that is dictated by rules that have mostly been in place for over 100 years.

Basketball has been an institution for far longer than these sensationalized TV markets. Hell, when it was invented in 1891, the first television was still three decades off. The game been played on every level, from prep school to college to international to NBA, and aside from some variations, the main rules have stayed the same. None of those other leagues would ever consider watering down the game for the sake of ratings, especially rating that are only lining the pockets of people who are already millionaires. If you want basketball to be pure entertainment, go watch a Globetrotters game.

:cry But I don't want to watch free throws. :cry

It must suck to be a Suns fan and...well...have to be a Suns fan.

The rule is that if your team commits a foul more than five times in a quarter, the other team is rewarded with free throws. The rule wasnt invented 100 years ago. I dont know when it was invented. The rule exists to discourage teams from fouling and slowing the game down. The Spurs try to exploit this rule rather than follow the spirit of it.

The SAME THING happens in the NFL. This is WHY they give teams the option to decline penalties. Otherwise, teams would hit the quarterback after he made a long pass since roughing the passer might result in a better defensive field position than if the catch was made etc.

Poor, poor defensive spurs fans.

[da_suns_fan]

The NFL solved this problem a long time ago:


The referee then confers with the offended team's on-field captain to find out whether the offended team would rather decline the penalty and take the result of the play. In certain situations, the result of the play may be more advantageous to the offended team, especially, for example, if time is running out in the half and a 7-yard gain is a better option than a 5-yard penalty. However, there are certain scenarios where the referee may not have to confer with the team captain because the enforcement is entirely obvious (such as a false start foul or other penalties called prior to the snap) or when the choice is fairly obvious (such as when the defense commits a foul during a play in which the offense scores a touchdown).

Spurs fan, please explain why NFL allows teams to decline penalties but the NBA should make the players "play by the rules" regardless of loopholes.

If a guy has the ball, by all means, foul him and make him shoot free throws. But off-the-ball fouls in the penalty should simply result in an option to shoot free throws.

Problem solved.

[HarlemHeat37]

I understand the entertainment argument, but it's pretty strange to change a rule to cover the deficiencies of a small portion of the league's players, tbh:lol..are we going to change the rule on defending players that can't shoot 3s, too?

[da_suns_fan]

I understand the entertainment argument, but it's pretty strange to change a rule to cover the deficiencies of a small portion of the league's players, tbh:lol..are we going to change the rule on defending players that can't shoot 3s, too?

There is no way to make players HAVE to shoot three pointers so your argument is moot.

And its not covering the deficiencies of a player when they have to shoot free throws if theyre fouled with the ball.

[DMC]

Yes it can. If a team fouls off the ball and is over the limit, the team fouled can take the free throws (as the rule is now) or simply take it out of bounds.

No. Argument by repetition doesn't make your point more valid. As it is now, the team fouled doesn't have the choice, so it's not "can take the free throws". It's "must take the free throws". There's a huge difference.


The NFL gives teams the exact same "option" to accept a penalty for the exact same reason. There are loopholes in the rule book that can be exploited just like "hack-a-shaq" so they give teams the option to simply not accept the penalty.

Apples vs oranges (no surprise here, you're one of the stupidest motherfuckers ever to post here). One is to prevent the fouled team from being penalized, the other would be to keep bad free throw shooters protected against being forced to the line.



The rest of your post is just the nonsense of a defensive spurs fan. Teams fouling each other as soon as the ball is inbounded to try and exploit a loophole is bad for the game no matter who your coach is. Grow up.
You're a faggot. Everything you say is questionable at best. You're also the most transparent shit troll here, faggot semi-auto revolver boy.

[CitizenDwayne]

Changing this rule would be a massive mistake. Sends an absolutely terrible message to players and fans alike. I don't understand why so many people seem to support this rule change.

[CitizenDwayne]

:lol @ comparing this to football penalties, wtf man

[DMC]

Changing this rule would be a massive mistake. Sends an absolutely terrible message to players and fans alike. I don't understand why so many people seem to support this rule change.

A. They have a superficial understanding of the game
B. They prefer monkey ball over basketball
C. Everything is boring except highlight dunks and blocks that don't lead to turnovers because the ball ends up in the upper level.

[~O~]

Well I consider the free throws entertaining. I find the lack of skill at free throw shooting laughable even when you're making the minimum level of money on contract. To my contentment, I'm elated that the talent that won the title the past two years were competent enough to take simple aspects such as free throws and simple team oriented basketball into effect. Most of all, the the quality in individual talent, e.g., Iguodala, Green, Leonard, Diaw, Mills, etc.

These players are rich...not wealthy but RICH. They don't need any saving; they've already won in life so there is no excuse. This is professional basketball and each player should meet a professional quality. NBA executives should not be responsible for saving slackers if they truly want a quality brand. However, the brand that is the NBA still has other issues to deal with other than masking an acrobat's deficiencies. General managers are overpaying these guys. Most of all, the sun has set on the tradition big man game!

Get rid of the three second violation!

[da_suns_fan]

No. Argument by repetition doesn't make your point more valid. As it is now, the team fouled doesn't have the choice, so it's not "can take the free throws". It's "must take the free throws". There's a huge difference.

Apples vs oranges (no surprise here, you're one of the stupidest motherfuckers ever to post here). One is to prevent the fouled team from being penalized, the other would be to keep bad free throw shooters protected against being forced to the line.


You're a faggot. Everything you say is questionable at best. You're also the most transparent shit troll here, faggot semi-auto revolver boy.

Self-ownage.

Game. Set. Match.

[spankadelphia]

Memphis lost a men's basketball national championship partially because of intentional fouling. Nobody cried about it then. They just made fun of Rose and CDR and Calipari for being such a poor teacher of fundamentals. Now that a big market NBA team is being embarrassed it's a problem all of the sudden?

[da_suns_fan]

:lol @ comparing this to football penalties, wtf man

:lol @ defensive spurs fans defending their shit product.

[DMC]

Self-ownage.

Game. Set. Match.
^obligatory faggot response

[da_suns_fan]

^obligatory faggot response

I feel for you, I really do.

I mean, you guys HAVE to defend the Spurs. You live in San Antonio, Texas. The Spurs is all you have. If you admit that your product is complete shit (as watching two teams hack-a-shaq is), then what does it say about YOU?

Discuss.

[DMC]

I feel for you, I really do.

I mean, you guys HAVE to defend the Spurs. You live in San Antonio, Texas. The Spurs is all you have. If you admit that your product is complete shit (as watching two teams hack-a-shaq is), then what does it say about YOU?

Discuss.

5 time champ.

You?

[da_suns_fan]

5 time champ.

You?

:lol

You play for the SPURS?!! Holy shit! I thought you were just a fat mexican who defended them because youre a giant douche-bag! :lol

[da_suns_fan]

DMC says hes a FIVE time champ...that must mean he's Tim Duncan!

Hey Tim, why did you post that pic of the fat mexican hand? That was REALLY weird bro!

btw- a lot of peeps here want to know why you have that tramp stamp. Are you gay? I mean, theres nothing wrong with that but we all just want to know, you know?

[CitizenDwayne]

I don't see why this has to be a Spur issue. No one's stopping anyone from using this against Spur players that are poor at the FT line.

[DMC]

:lol

You play for the SPURS?!! Holy shit! I thought you were just a fat mexican who defended them because youre a giant douche-bag! :lol


DMC says hes a FIVE time champ...that must mean he's Tim Duncan!

Hey Tim, why did you post that pic of the fat mexican hand? That was REALLY weird bro!

btw- a lot of peeps here want to know why you have that tramp stamp. Are you gay? I mean, theres nothing wrong with that but we all just want to know, you know?

Melting down, just like the Suns.

[baseline bum]

LOL this Suns fan faggot acting like this is a Spurs strategy when it has been used against them in the 2003 WCF (Bowen) and the 2012 WCF (Splitter). They went and worked on their FT shooting so teams couldn't profitably do it anymore. That's the solution, not whining about shit being unfair.

[da_suns_fan]

LOL this Suns fan faggot acting like this is a Spurs strategy when it has been used against them in the 2003 WCF (Bowen) and the 2012 WCF (Splitter). They went and worked on their FT shooting so teams couldn't profitably do it anymore. That's the solution, not whining about shit being unfair.

No..its just defensive spurs fans defending the back and forth "hack-a-shaq" as basketball and claiming we shouldnt be watching sports for "entertainment".

I guess the Spurs have been boring for so long their fans have will now accept ANYTHING.

[da_suns_fan]

Melting down, just like the Suns.

No, I thought it was hilarious you referred to yourself as a "five time champ"!

[DMC]

No, I thought it was hilarious you referred to yourself as a "five time champ"!
This is some cosmored/mouse level trolling.

[da_suns_fan]

This is some cosmored/mouse level trolling.

Whatever you say champ!

[baseline bum]

I guess the Spurs have been boring for so long their fans have will now accept ANYTHING.

I don't know son, I thought this was pretty good entertainment

SCANvGC2RAA

[Thread]

I don't know son, I thought this was pretty good entertainment

SCANvGC2RAA

That's when you guys were buttering my bread, scratching my back, feathering my cap.

[baseline bum]

That's when you guys were buttering my bread, scratching my back, feathering my cap.

And yet you have turned on us when San Antonio is the city most responsible for O&47. I spit on you.

[Clipper Nation]

:lol @ defensive spurs fans defending their shit product.
You still semen-shield for Jared Dudley to this day, yet you laugh at Spurs fans for "defending their shit product" that has won championships (unlike the Suns) and dominated the Suns' asshole in the playoffs :lmao

Fat Fuckley playing basketball, now that's a shit product :lol

[DMC]

You still semen-shield for Jared Dudley to this day, yet you laugh at Spurs fans for "defending their shit product" that has won championships (unlike the Suns) and dominated the Suns' asshole in the playoffs :lmao

Fat Fuckley playing basketball, now that's a shit product :lol
What about their PG, Sieve Trash?