Silver attempting to stop hack a player free throw strategy after this season

[Thebesteva]

http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2016/story/_/id/15913971/2016-nba-playoffs-adam-silver-seek-end-hack-shaq-cites-surge

Fina-fuckingly

[baseline bum]

http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2016/story/_/id/15913971/2016-nba-playoffs-adam-silver-seek-end-hack-shaq-cites-surge

Fina-fuckingly

So you want a league that rewards people like DeAndre Jordan and Dwight Howard who can't be bothered to learn basketball skills?

[midnightpulp]

So you want a league that rewards people like DeAndre Jordan and Dwight Howard who can't be bothered to learn basketball skills?

Of course he does. The Spurs employ hack-a, so Lakerfan doesn't like it.

Yeah, it slows the game down, but the bigger picture here is more important: players like Dwight and DeMonkey shouldn't be rewarded for completely refusing to learn an important basketball skill. I'll deal with it to keep the integrity of the game intact.

[Thebesteva]

Of course he does. The Spurs employ hack-a, so Lakerfan doesn't like it.

Yeah, it slows the game down, but the bigger picture here is more important: players like Dwight and DeMonkey shouldn't be rewarded for completely refusing to learn an important basketball skill. I'll deal with it to keep the integrity of the game intact.

why would I give a shit as a Laker fan? Because a past hall of a famer struggled with FT's? You guys cant be this fucking stupid

[midnightpulp]

why would I give a shit as a Laker fan? Because a past hall of a famer struggled with FT's? You guys cant be this fucking stupid

So what's your argument against hack-a other than, "It slows the game down :cry."

[Clipper Nation]

This is just pure faggotry by the league, especially since the hack-a strategy seems to backfire on the team using it way more often than it works anyway. How about instead of changing the rules, they start enforcing the rules they already have on their Golden Girls in Oakland? You know, like the rules against illegal screens, handchecking, hooking, pushing off, and throwing bows.

If they really feel the need to change the rules, how about they address the ridiculous focus on threes at the expense of all other aspects of the game? Maybe make the three-pointer count for as many points as any other shot (sans free throws)? Either bump all the other shots up to 3 points or bump the three-pointer down to 2. Now that the three-ball is an established part of the game instead of a new gimmick, we've long since passed the phase where players needed to be enticed into shooting them with the promise of an extra point. Take that advantage away and maybe we'd start seeing balanced offenses again instead of the league devolving into a three-point chucking contest.

[whitemamba]

This is fucking shameful, learn how to shoot a fucking free throw , I mean Christ , I can shoot over 50% left handed. Bitch move by the NBA.

[LakerHater]

This is fucking shameful, learn how to shoot a fucking free throw , I mean Christ , I can shoot over 50% left handed. Bitch move by the NBA.

[Thebesteva]

So what's your argument against hack-a other than, "It slows the game down :cry."

I feel like it takes a game out of rhythm...seriously I cant watch that shit

[Robz4000]

:lol today's NBA

[Silver&Black]

:lol Today's NBA

[TampaDude]

Of course he does. The Spurs employ hack-a, so Lakerfan doesn't like it.

Yeah, it slows the game down, but the bigger picture here is more important: players like Dwight and DeMonkey shouldn't be rewarded for completely refusing to learn an important basketball skill. I'll deal with it to keep the integrity of the game intact.

^ this, tbh

[Capt Bringdown]

Meyer Lanskey approves of this rule change
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/mafia/images/c/ce/Meyer-lansky.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20081005043604

[Obstructed_View]

Silver should be figuring out a way for his officials, both on and off the court, to quit fucking up games and overlooking critical infractions.

[140]

:lol today's NBA


:lol Today's NBA

:lol Today's NBA

[benefactor]

:lol today's NBA


:lol Today's NBA


:lol Today's NBA
tbh

[baseline bum]

I don't understand putting a rule just for Jordan, Drummond, and Howard. These are the guys the league wants to structure its rules around? These are the players who are supposed to represent the pinnacle of professional basketball?

[Capt Bringdown]

Ever try to improve your FT shooting? I have. It's not that big of a deal.

Practice everyday, even for a few minutes, and your percentage will improve.

These dudes are professionals, ffs. Getting paid millions of dollars to play a kid's game. And they can't improve their FT shooting to at least 65-70%?
Jackass rule change, IMO.

[K...]

One game suspension for any player who shoots under 50% ft for a game..

[jacobdrj]

This is stupid. Like making new laws for texting while driving... There are already rules on the books for this (reckless driving /distracted driving). Intentional fouls 2 shots and the ball. Flagrant... The play of jack a shaq isn't nt a basketball play or a play on the ball...

I don't think this is an issue of rewarding bad free throw shooting... It is a way to improve viewership for casual fans... Just like the stupid hand-checking rules that have allowed teams like the GSW to prosper, and increasing the width of the key and adding the protected cylinder and zone defense etc...

[JamStone]

Good. The NBA should have changed the rules years ago to prevent hacking away from the ball / away from the play. That's not basketball.

I don't think it's not a matter of rewarding bad free throw shooters. To me, it's a way to get teams and players back to actually playing basketball. Fouling a guy who is nowhere near the ball and nowhere near the action isn't basketball to me. Should still be able to foul bad free throw shooters when they go up for a shot, attempt to rebound the ball, even when they set screens. At least that's fouling in the course of playing the game. The away from the ball hack-a-whoever is not basketball.

There was a regular season game between the Pistons and the Rockets where at the start of the third quarter, Bickerstaff had one of his end of the bench players foul Andre Drummond 5 straight times in the first 20 seconds of the quarter just to get into the bonus so they could start putting him on the free throw line. That's not basketball.

It's no defense for guys like Drummond and Jordan. They need to take more pride in their profession and get at least adequate at the free throw line. But it's like with Dean Smith's four corner offense holding the ball for the entire half and how it gave birth to the shot clock. At some point it's not basketball anymore and you have to do something about it.

[Thread]

Only pussies & assholes hack.

[da_suns_fan]

If youre fouled off the ball (and over the limit), allow said team to take the free throws or the ball out of bounds (their choice).

Problem solved.

Teams cant hide bad free throw shooters (you can still hack someone with the ball and put them on the line) but we dont get this awful shit that defensive Spurs fan try to defend.

[K...]

It's fine that you say "it's not basketball" but do you also day that inability to shoot makes you not a basketball player.

They could change how you do the bonus.

I would say, a fair rule, if the ref thinks the foul was intentional then the foul should always be considered to be against the ball handler at the time. This makes sense: you foul a shooter to prevent their shot, intentional fouls have the same purpose but circumvent rule

[JamStone]

It's fine that you say "it's not basketball" but do you also day that inability to shoot makes you not a basketball player.


It's the only "weakness" that teams can forcibly make a player do without actually doing it in the course of play by running up to a guy way away from the action and forcing him to shoot free throws.

If a player is really weak at dribbling and shooting with his off hand, you can't go run up to him, foul him, and then he has to dribble and shoot with his off hand for that possession.

If a player is bad at boxing out, you can't tap him on the shoulder and then say he's the only one on his team who can rebound a missed shot, and if it's rebounded by his teammates, possession goes to the other team.

A poor shooter is the only guy whose weakness can be exposed forcibly outside the course and action of play. A bad three point shooter can't be forced to shoot three pointers. A guy who is not a good passer cannot be forced to facilitate the offense. A player who is not good at finishing at the rim cannot be forced to drive and attempt to score. Shooting free throws is the only exploitable weakness the opposing team can forcibly make a player do. And when it happens in the course of the action, no problem. He has the ball in his hands, foul him. He attempts a shot, foul him. He sets a screen, foul him. No problem with that at all. He's 25 feet away from the ball and nowhere near the action, the opposing team should not be able to foul him to force him to shoot free throws without a different penalty than just two free throws. My opinion.

[InRareForm]

Intentional Fouls count as 2 fouls.

[snickles]

I'll deal with it to keep the integrity of the game intact.


lol at thinking the integrity of the game matters to the NBA.


i do agree with your main point 100% though.

[Captivus]

I have another idea...If you are more than 7 feet tall, you cant guard a 6 feet player, so if he comes running to you, you have to move...
Thats a great idea, some cant shoot FTs, other are short...balance!!!

[K...]

Intentional Fouls count as 2 fouls.

The problem with big punishment, is having refs call it. you need to account for refs biases, the bigger the punishment the less likely refs will call it. You will also see teams getting more savvy about it and doing more flop type fouls.

[Gervin44Silas13]

fuck you Sliver and fuck yo broadcast money

If you can't hit a free throw you aint shit

[baseline bum]

Unbelievable that the NBA wants to reward three lazy ass players. I hope the owners shoot it down.

[offset formation]

This is fucking shameful, learn how to shoot a fucking free throw , I mean Christ , I can shoot over 50% left handed. Bitch move by the NBA.

Well what do you expect with the whiny little bitch JVG moaning incessantly about it each and every game he telecasts. Hell, I almost wanted them to change the rules just so he'd STFU.

[JamStone]

Unbelievable that the NBA wants to reward three lazy ass players. I hope the owners shoot it down.

It's not about rewarding lazy ass players. It's more about forcing teams to play basketball.

Going up to a player that's nowhere near the basketball, nowhere near the action to stop play and turning the game into a free throw shooting contest is not basketball.

Any rules changes should only specifically address the away from the ball fouls. It doesn't completely eliminate a hack-a-player strategy. If a team is in the bonus and they have a weak free throw shooter, foul him as many times as you want as long as he's in the play, with the ball, attempting to rebound, setting screens. Force him to shoot free throws as much as you want as long as it's in the flow of the game, part of the action. Just eliminate the away from the action fouls.

That's not rewarding lazy ass players. They will still have to shoot free throws. It's forcing teams to play basketball in order to use the strategy.

[Splits]

:lol today's NBA


:lol Today's NBA


:lol Today's NBA

tU88dxJKTHI

[UZER]

Dont put more guessing of intent on the officials. These fuckers can't even get blatant nut shots right.

[Thread]

Dont put more guessing of intent on the officials. These fuckers can't even get blatant nut shots right.

Don't start that officiating shit. It's Friday, I'm in a good mood. Don't spoil it, Ooze.

[baseline bum]

Don't start that officiating shit. It's Friday, I'm in a good mood. Don't spoil it, Ooze.

You were celebrating their shit

[LkrFan]

So you want a league that rewards people like DeAndre Jordan and Dwight Howard who can't be bothered to learn basketball skills?

Yes. That means if you can't stop someone like Drummond from dunking on your grill, tough tittie. Be lucky Silver wasn't in office from 1996-2004 ;)

[LkrFan]

Of course he does. The Spurs employ hack-a, so Lakerfan doesn't like it.

Yeah, it slows the game down, but the bigger picture here is more important: players like Dwight and DeMonkey shouldn't be rewarded for completely refusing to learn an important basketball skill. I'll deal with it to keep the integrity of the game intact.

Hack-a-Shaq was chickenshit, just like DNP-CDs Pop also employs. Those DNPs cost you the OKC series I said :lol

[K...]

What if we just changed the rule to make all fouls go against the current ball handler?

Hack....the foul is meant to stop current offense...so current ball handler is the best choice to shoot

Screen.....the ball handler is initiating the action, fouling the screen man is pretty much the same as fouling the shooter, you are trying to disrupt a play not a player

Rebounds....foul is on the ball handler at that moment, so the bigs would shoot here. Fighting for position is a basketball play so we shouldn't change these fouls. Maybe just remove rebounding fouls from ever being shooting fouls (possession only) is the answer.






I like this rule because refs don't have to judge intent. They have to judge whether the foul taker was the ball handler or initiating a play like a screen our drive.

The only real grey area there is if you foul fighting for rebound space while the offense is making a move

[K...]

Hack-a-Shaq was chickenshit, just like DNP-CDs Pop also employs. Those DNPs cost you the OKC series I said :lol

Still nothing compared to multi year tank, sorry

[LkrFan]

Still nothing compared to multi year tank, sorry

Tanking led to 4.61 Spur titles. ;)

[Dex]

Of course he does. The Spurs employ hack-a, so Lakerfan doesn't like it.

Yeah, it slows the game down, but the bigger picture here is more important: players like Dwight and DeMonkey shouldn't be rewarded for completely refusing to learn an important basketball skill. I'll deal with it to keep the integrity of the game intact.

Have you seen the playoffs this year?

Multiple bad calls in the clutch of the Spurs/Thunder series. Players allowed to push opponents from out of bounds.

Draymond allowed to push, kick, and trip anybody he wants with no repercussion, while lesser players (Jones) catch suspensions for less.

The integrity of the game is already fucked.

[da_suns_fan]

There are two problems with it:

1) Its completely subjective as to whether or not its intentional

2) Its using a loophole in the rule book to penalize the other team rather than play the sport

The NFL has plenty rules like this so they allow teams to DECLINE the penalty. This is all the league has to do. If you get fouled off the ball and they over the limit, accept or decline the penalty.

[JamStone]

I don't mind the suggestion that a team decline the free throws and be able to just take it out of bounds.

But I'd just prefer that when an away from the ball / action foul be made, anyone on the team can shoot the free throws. No other changes, no harsher penalties. Just anyone on the court for the team in the bonus can shoot the free throws. That's the only change.

It doesn't prevent the hack-a-player strategy. But it also forces a team trying to implement the strategy to do it within the parameters and confines of actual basketball play. That's the only thing I would prefer to see if teams want to use the strategy. Do it while playing basketball.

[RsxPiimp]

why not just make revisions? teams have options to put their preferred player on the line when intentional fouls are committed on those players who doesn't have possession of the ball?

[DMC]

It doesn't matter how it ends up, teams will use officiating against the other team at every opportunity and the game will stop because of it.

[baseline bum]

It's not about rewarding lazy ass players. It's more about forcing teams to play basketball.


Of course it rewards lazy players. Jordan's currently an enormous offensive liability to his team because he doesn't care enough to learn to shoot free throws at a 50% clip. Artificially get rid of that liability through the rules change and he's a top 10 player.

[DMC]

I don't mind the suggestion that a team decline the free throws and be able to just take it out of bounds.

But I'd just prefer that when an away from the ball / action foul be made, anyone on the team can shoot the free throws. No other changes, no harsher penalties. Just anyone on the court for the team in the bonus can shoot the free throws. That's the only change.

It doesn't prevent the hack-a-player strategy. But it also forces a team trying to implement the strategy to do it within the parameters and confines of actual basketball play. That's the only thing I would prefer to see if teams want to use the strategy. Do it while playing basketball.

Player with the ball takes the freethrows. That way if Jordan has the ball you can foul someone else and force him to the line, but you cannot force him to the line if he doesn't have the ball.

[baseline bum]

Any rules changes should only specifically address the away from the ball fouls. It doesn't completely eliminate a hack-a-player strategy. If a team is in the bonus and they have a weak free throw shooter, foul him as many times as you want as long as he's in the play, with the ball, attempting to rebound, setting screens. Force him to shoot free throws as much as you want as long as it's in the flow of the game, part of the action. Just eliminate the away from the action fouls.


So hammer Jordan on screens so the ref can see it and get called for a flagrant? Trip him every time down the floor? Seems like a great way to have a ton of fights started, and then the refs will have to protect him every single game.

[Fabbs]

Gaymond Green is allowed to nutt kick another player. Not only does the phaggot not get a call -or review-, farking Adams gets rung up for a double foul on the play.
Emboldened, now Delanova incorporates the nutt slap.

NBA should just appoint Caitlyn Jenner as the new commissioner and be done with it.

[K...]

Player with the ball takes the freethrows. That way if Jordan has the ball you can foul someone else and force him to the line, but you cannot force him to the line if he doesn't have the ball.

Jordan (deandre) only scores off put backs and such, so the result would be "and one" depending on when the foul is called. Teams would have to be very careful to intentionally foul a big on a to the basket play.

[JamStone]

Of course it rewards lazy players. Jordan's currently an enormous offensive liability to his team because he doesn't care enough to learn to shoot free throws at a 50% clip. Artificially get rid of that liability through the rules change and he's a top 10 player.

I'm not advocating Jordan never going to the free throw line. Exploit it all you want WITHIN the parameters of playing basketball. That's all I'm saying. Pop subbing in Matt Bonner to run up to Jordan when the ball isn't even past halfcourt and he's nowhere near the ball or the action takes what kind of skill? I'm suggesting we eliminate teams using loopholes to exploit the weakness. Exploit it by fouling him when the two teams are actually playing the game and Jordan is part of the action.

That's not rewarding guys like Jordan. It's forcing teams to play basketball in order to exploit the weakness.

[JamStone]

So hammer Jordan on screens so the ref can see it and get called for a flagrant? Trip him every time down the floor? Seems like a great way to have a ton of fights started, and then the refs will have to protect him every single game.

You don't have to be flagrant to foul someone who has the ball or is attempting to rebound the ball. If that's your idea of the only way it could work, I'm at a loss. You can foul in those situations without being flagrant and malicious.

[baseline bum]

You don't have to be flagrant to foul someone who has the ball or is attempting to rebound the ball. If that's your idea of the only way it could work, I'm at a loss. You can foul in those situations without being flagrant and malicious.

When he has the ball? The Clippers don't give Jordan the ball on offense, they're not running post ups for him.

[JamStone]

Player with the ball takes the freethrows. That way if Jordan has the ball you can foul someone else and force him to the line, but you cannot force him to the line if he doesn't have the ball.

Your suggestion is still attempting to manipulate the rules to exploit the weakness. I'm just suggesting to exploit the weakness within the normal flow of the game.

Jordan catches the ball in the high post and in the weakside corner, the defender hugs Jordan's teammate 20 feet away from the ball just to force Jordan to shoot free throws? That's pretty similar to how it is now in that the foul is occurring away from the action. What's worse is that unintentionally fouling a guy away from the ball while in the bonus will end up leading to guys like Curry and Durant and Dirk and Harden shooting free throws when they weren't even being fouled. That's a worse outcome imo. I don't like that suggestion at all from either team's perspective.

If Jordan has the ball, just foul HIM.

[JamStone]

When he has the ball? The Clippers don't give Jordan the ball on offense, they're not running post ups for him.

When he rebounds the ball, he has the ball. When he sets screens, he's part of the action. When he's just going up to get a rebound, he's part of the action. All situations where if you foul him, you can send him to the line.

You're trying to find ways to still make Jordan shoot free throws without getting hurt in the process and without it having to be part of the basketball action. That's what I'm suggesting be removed from the game.

[baseline bum]

When he rebounds the ball, he has the ball. When he sets screens, he's part of the action. When he's just going up to get a rebound, he's part of the action. All situations where if you foul him, you can send him to the line.

You're trying to find ways to still make Jordan shoot free throws without getting hurt in the process and without it having to be part of the basketball action. That's what I'm suggesting be removed from the game.

So if you want to make basketball plays, hit him with an elbow to the face when he sets the screen or run him down? Knock him down in the air when he goes for a rebound or a lob?

[JamStone]

So if you want to make basketball plays, hit him with an elbow to the face when he sets the screen or run him down? Knock him down in the air when he goes for a rebound or a lob?

No.

[baseline bum]

No.

When you hack you need to make things obvious.

[nevitt_&_smrek]

Make it so that when "away from the ball" or "non-shooting" fouls are committed, while in the bonus, the team can select anyone on the court to shoot those FT's. Loose ball fouls on rebounds can be tricker. But refs should be able to tell if guys are legitimately going after the ball on those.

[UZER]

Make it so that when "away from the ball" or "non-shooting" fouls are committed, while in the bonus, the team can select anyone on the court to shoot those FT's. Loose ball fouls on rebounds can be tricker. But refs should be able to tell if guys are legitimately going after the ball on those.

This has such horrible repercussions for bad calls. Someone's legit trying to play D, the ref blows and now steph curry is at the line?

You think the game slows down now. What's gonna happen when the refs have to go to the monitor over and over and over to "judge intent" of an away from the ball foul?

Just practice your damn free throws like a person getting paid millions of dollars should do.

[lefty]

:lol today's NBA


:lol Today's NBA


:lol Today's NBA

[DMC]

Jordan (deandre) only scores off put backs and such, so the result would be "and one" depending on when the foul is called. Teams would have to be very careful to intentionally foul a big on a to the basket play.

Any change is going to have consequences. If you reward the other team two shots and the ball, it could be a 6 point possession (assuming there's a foul on a made 3 on the ensuring inbounds play after 2 made FTs). If you only award them the ball out of bounds, that means teams can foul relentlessly since no FTs will be awarded after being in the penalty. If you reward 2 shots to whomever the team picks, that's going to create flopping away from the ball to draw that foul.

Just leave it alone.

[DMC]

This has such horrible repercussions for bad calls. Someone's legit trying to play D, the ref blows and now steph curry is at the line?

You think the game slows down now. What's gonna happen when the refs have to go to the monitor over and over and over to "judge intent" of an away from the ball foul?

Just practice your damn free throws like a person getting paid millions of dollars should do.

Yeah it stood still for 5 minutes to call a common foul on Delly. What do you think the game would look like if every off the ball foul was reviewed?

[DMC]

Make it so that when "away from the ball" or "non-shooting" fouls are committed, while in the bonus, the team can select anyone on the court to shoot those FT's. Loose ball fouls on rebounds can be tricker. But refs should be able to tell if guys are legitimately going after the ball on those.
No. This gives officials too much control over the spread. They can force guys to the line to alter spread on bogus calls. Right now they can only do that with the ball handler.

[midnightpulp]

There are two problems with it:

1) Its completely subjective as to whether or not its intentional

2) Its using a loophole in the rule book to penalize the other team rather than play the sport

The NFL has plenty rules like this so they allow teams to DECLINE the penalty. This is all the league has to do. If you get fouled off the ball and they over the limit, accept or decline the penalty.

Instead of re-writing the rule book, why don't these players just learn to shoot freethrows?

[da_suns_fan]

Instead of re-writing the rule book, why don't these players just learn to shoot freethrows?

Dont have to re-write rule-book. Just have to give teams the same options they give NFL teams get. Then we can stop the abomination of the sport that defensive Spurs fans feel the need to defend.

[therealtruth]

To bad they haven't done it sooner. It could have saved Pop from being outcoached by Doc Rivers in the Clipper series.

[Splits]

:lol changing the rules because three apes can't hit half their free throws

:lol Today's NBA

[K...]

Just ban all fucking shooting fouls, bonus or not, that occur in the backcourt.

[lefty]

:lol changing the rules because three apes can't hit half their free throws

:lol Today's NBA

HarlemHeat37

[da_suns_fan]

I honestly think my solution is pretty fucking genius:

If a team is fouled off the ball, you can take the free throws or just take the ball out of bounds.

A) Teams cant exploit a rule to try and penalize the other team

B) Teams cant hide bad free throw shooters (if a player has the ball and is fouled then they still have to shoot free throws).

C) Referees dont have to determine players intentions. They dont have to try and guess what a player was thinking.

The NFL solved this problem years ago. You take away loopholes in the rulebook by letting teams decline penalties.

[midnightpulp]

Dont have to re-write rule-book. Just have to give teams the same options they give NFL teams get. Then we can stop the abomination of the sport that defensive Spurs fans feel the need to defend.

Or that dipshit fans of teams who once had shitty FT shooters as star players need to deride.

And Spursfans don't even like hack-a. It's always blown up in Pop's face, since it gets our offense out of rhythm. I'm just against protecting lazy players who don't want to put in the work at the line in practice and would rather scam on teenage girls who look like Colin Kaepernick.

[baseline bum]

And Spursfans don't even like hack-a. It's always blown up in Pop's face, since it gets our offense out of rhythm.

It actually worked against his team in 08, the only time it ever did :lol

[midnightpulp]

It actually worked against his team in 08, the only time it ever did :lol

:lol Naturally.

[apalisoc_9]

The 90s had more shitty free throw shooter.

Basketball needs to progress. It needs to constantly progress. I dont mind the move at all.

90s basketball fans not seeing the logic. :lmao

[Spurtacular]

http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2016/story/_/id/15913971/2016-nba-playoffs-adam-silver-seek-end-hack-shaq-cites-surge

Fina-fuckingly

:lmao Lakers fan wanting special rules. No surprise.

[DMC]

I honestly think my solution is pretty fucking genius:

If a team is fouled off the ball, you can take the free throws or just take the ball out of bounds.

A) Teams cant exploit a rule to try and penalize the other team

B) Teams cant hide bad free throw shooters (if a player has the ball and is fouled then they still have to shoot free throws).

C) Referees dont have to determine players intentions. They dont have to try and guess what a player was thinking.

The NFL solved this problem years ago. You take away loopholes in the rulebook by letting teams decline penalties.
No it's stupid. You don't get the choice if you foul on the ball, why would you get it for fouling off the ball? In the NFL teams get penalized. In the NBA a player gets penalized. You can't just issue the foul and say "no we don't want the FTs, we want the ball out of bounds". It would be almost worse, because now you're forced to inbounds the ball instead of just shooting FTs.

Intentional fouls should be treated as flagrant. They aren't plays on the ball. They don't have to be aggressive, just intentional fouls. Grabbing someone while they are running or dribbling needs to be banned. If a guy gets out on a break you better catch him, you cannot just grab him and stop the break by taking a foul. I know it's strategic but so is flopping and that's been banned (sort of).

So no intentional fouls, because the concept of a foul is that you interfered with the shooter or you took a charge or you run someone over, set an illegal screen and such. Grabbing should be 2 shots and the ball. You want to stop the break, ok, you put the guy on the line. No clear path needed.

If you do that you can ignore the shitty FT shooting aspect. All intentional fouls are 2 shots and the ball.

[midnightpulp]

The 90s had more shitty free throw shooter.

Basketball needs to progress. It needs to constantly progress. I dont mind the move at all.

90s basketball fans not seeing the logic. :lmao

No, this is a regressive move. It has more to do with entertaining fans than actually improving the game. It will also hurt player development in that area.

Take Tiago. A shitty free-throw shooter when he first joined the Spurs. He was often a hack-a target for opposing teams. What did he do? Did he play around on twitter with teenage girls? Did he renege on verbal commitments and cause an off-season circus? No. He went to work and became a good FT shooter.

And improving that area improved his overall game since he was no longer a liability at the line, meaning the Spurs could feature him in the offense more.

Yeah, I don't like the way it slows the game, but I'm more against babying the Dwights and DeMonkeys of the league.

[JamStone]

Changing the rule on away from the ball / away from the action fouls is not rewarding or protecting lazy players. I don't know why that keeps popping up as an argument. Teams can still send shitty free throw shooters to the free throw line. A rule change is forcing teams to play basketball in order to use the strategy. Otherwise, no rule change is actually rewarding lazy teams that don't want to actually play basketball in order to implement a strategy to exploit a weakness of the other team. It's a way for a team to get a cheap way to get an advantage without much risk or downside. A rule change would force teams to foul within the context of playing the game, with the regular rotation players.

What kind of skill or talent or genius strategy does it take for a coach to send the 13th or 14th player on his bench into the game, while the ball is being inbounded in the backcourt, to go run over to a bad free throw shooter standing still 50, 60 feet away from the ball and hug him and lightly smack him on the chest to indicate foul? What skill is involved in that? A rule change prevents that. A rule change makes you actually have to foul a player while you're playing basketball in order to send him to the line.

It's not about protecting or rewarding lazy players who can't shoot. It's about having to actually play the game in order to use the strategy.

Play basketball.

[midnightpulp]

Changing the rule on away from the ball / away from the action fouls is not rewarding or protecting lazy players. I don't know why that keeps popping up as an argument. Teams can still send shitty free throw shooters to the free throw line. A rule change is forcing teams to play basketball in order to use the strategy. Otherwise, no rule change is actually rewarding lazy teams that don't want to actually play basketball in order to implement a strategy to exploit a weakness of the other team. It's a way for a team to get a cheap way to get an advantage without much risk or downside. A rule change would force teams to foul within the context of playing the game, with the regular rotation players.

What kind of skill or talent or genius strategy does it take for a coach to send the 13th or 14th player on his bench into the game, while the ball is being inbounded in the backcourt, to go run over to a bad free throw shooter standing still 50, 60 feet away from the ball and hug him and lightly smack him on the chest to indicate foul? What skill is involved in that? A rule change prevents that. A rule change makes you actually have to foul a player while you're playing basketball in order to send him to the line.

It's not about protecting or rewarding lazy players who can't shoot. It's about having to actually play the game in order to use the strategy.

Play basketball.

By this logic, then intentional fouling toward the end of the game when facing a deficit should also see a rule change.

You're not "playing basketball," using that strategy, since you're not defending the player or his team within the context of the game. You're simply lightly touching him when he receives the ball and hoping he misses at the line. Where's the skill in that? No defense is being played. It's just one team hoping to get lucky.

But I know you wouldn't be in favor of such a rule change because that aspect of the game is "entertaining," (i.e. late game chokes at the line that lead to improbable comebacks).

That's where the outcry against hack-a comes from. Not from some defense of game integrity, but because it isn't entertaining to watch.

Want hack-a to stop? Tell these players to learn FTs. That said, if you do support a rule change in both instances, then I know you're about game integrity rather than just selectively picking problems with the game you don't like.

[K...]

By this logic, then intentional fouling toward the end of the game when facing a deficit should also see a rule change.

You're not "playing basketball," using that strategy, since you're not defending the player or his team within the context of the game. You're simply lightly touching him when he receives the ball and hoping he misses at the line. Where's the skill in that? No defense is being played. It's just one team hoping to get lucky.

But I know you wouldn't be in favor of such a rule change because that aspect of the game is "entertaining," (i.e. late game chokes at the line that lead to improbable comebacks).

That's where the outcry against hack-a comes from. Not from some defense of game integrity, but because it isn't entertaining to watch.

Want hack-a to stop? Tell these players to learn FTs. That said, if you do support a rule change in both instances, then I know you're about game integrity rather than just selectively picking problems with the game you don't like.

you are fouling one of four inboundees It's a fiction, but all four guys are all equal involved. So you can say it is a basketball move when you foul on an inbound since technically the inbounding team can attempt a pass to any person without notice. Now in reality it's pretty easy to spot screeners and such, but screens are basketball moves.


inbounding and rebounding are both chaotic situations. It's easy to just tell the refs everyone is the dominant ball handler. The rule change only needs to apply to the back court and perimeter.


Teams can still foul bigs in the paint intentionally, but the offense will sniff this out and chuck up shots. The rules would then reward an aggressive offense over a hack defense by giving the FT appoints tot the shooter.

Part of the issue is that maybe we should just move to a game in which bigs are forbidden from shooting. The league would probably survive and we'd get better bigs since the need less skills and certainly wouldn't need skills meant for a guard.


Make it more like WWE were the biggest guys get paid for acting like they are playing hard defense, but without the hard defense. professional heels, they could wear masks even

[da_suns_fan]

Changing the rule on away from the ball / away from the action fouls is not rewarding or protecting lazy players. I don't know why that keeps popping up as an argument. Teams can still send shitty free throw shooters to the free throw line. A rule change is forcing teams to play basketball in order to use the strategy. Otherwise, no rule change is actually rewarding lazy teams that don't want to actually play basketball in order to implement a strategy to exploit a weakness of the other team. It's a way for a team to get a cheap way to get an advantage without much risk or downside. A rule change would force teams to foul within the context of playing the game, with the regular rotation players.

What kind of skill or talent or genius strategy does it take for a coach to send the 13th or 14th player on his bench into the game, while the ball is being inbounded in the backcourt, to go run over to a bad free throw shooter standing still 50, 60 feet away from the ball and hug him and lightly smack him on the chest to indicate foul? What skill is involved in that? A rule change prevents that. A rule change makes you actually have to foul a player while you're playing basketball in order to send him to the line.

It's not about protecting or rewarding lazy players who can't shoot. It's about having to actually play the game in order to use the strategy.

Play basketball.

Well said. :toast

[Raven]

i don't see anybody making up rules to give the rebound to the 6ft guard when going against a center, so why this..

[DMC]

Changing the rule on away from the ball / away from the action fouls is not rewarding or protecting lazy players. I don't know why that keeps popping up as an argument. Teams can still send shitty free throw shooters to the free throw line. A rule change is forcing teams to play basketball in order to use the strategy. Otherwise, no rule change is actually rewarding lazy teams that don't want to actually play basketball in order to implement a strategy to exploit a weakness of the other team. It's a way for a team to get a cheap way to get an advantage without much risk or downside. A rule change would force teams to foul within the context of playing the game, with the regular rotation players.

What kind of skill or talent or genius strategy does it take for a coach to send the 13th or 14th player on his bench into the game, while the ball is being inbounded in the backcourt, to go run over to a bad free throw shooter standing still 50, 60 feet away from the ball and hug him and lightly smack him on the chest to indicate foul? What skill is involved in that? A rule change prevents that. A rule change makes you actually have to foul a player while you're playing basketball in order to send him to the line.

It's not about protecting or rewarding lazy players who can't shoot. It's about having to actually play the game in order to use the strategy.

Play basketball.
You keep falsely equivocating "play the game" with "entertain me". They are playing the game now. If they weren't, there would be a timeout and an commercial would air. You just mean constant up and down the floor action. The game isn't just transition basketball, it's also the in between aspect, the "skills" part that teams can exploit for +/- swings.

"Just play the game" is a whining attempt to avoid having to watch strategic game play.

[JamStone]

You keep falsely equivocating "play the game" with "entertain me". They are playing the game now. If they weren't, there would be a timeout and an commercial would air. You just mean constant up and down the floor action. The game isn't just transition basketball, it's also the in between aspect, the "skills" part that teams can exploit for +/- swings.

"Just play the game" is a whining attempt to avoid having to watch strategic game play.

Of course there's an entertainment factor to a potential rules change. Absolutely. But it's not the only reason. The hack-a-player strategy away from the ball is NOT playing the game. It's not. Most of the time, it's done right when the ball is inbounded, most of the players are standing still except for inbounder, the ball handler, and the guy hacking. It's occurring when there is no genuine competition of play. Offensive players aren't trying to score or create a scoring opportunity. Defensive players are not trying to prevent the other team from scoring. It's not playing basketball. And I'm not asking for constant up and down floor action. Slow down the pace, have timeouts. But the away from the ball hack strategy is NOT playing the game.

The shot clock was a rules change for the same purpose and effect. Otherwise, once a team got up a few points, they could go to the four corner stall for the remainder of quarters. Would you like to go back to that "strategic" style of play? Have 48 minutes ending with a 10-7 score? Oh, but they're "playing the game" now and you're just whining about having to watch "strategic game play."

Bullshit. Four corner stall was within the rules and it wasn't playing basketball. Away from the action hack-a-player strategy is within the rules right now and it is NOT playing basketball.

Sure there's an entertainment aspect. I won't deny it. But to think that's all it is is naive and foolish.

[JamStone]

By this logic, then intentional fouling toward the end of the game when facing a deficit should also see a rule change.

You're not "playing basketball," using that strategy, since you're not defending the player or his team within the context of the game. You're simply lightly touching him when he receives the ball and hoping he misses at the line. Where's the skill in that? No defense is being played. It's just one team hoping to get lucky.

But I know you wouldn't be in favor of such a rule change because that aspect of the game is "entertaining," (i.e. late game chokes at the line that lead to improbable comebacks).

That's where the outcry against hack-a comes from. Not from some defense of game integrity, but because it isn't entertaining to watch.

Want hack-a to stop? Tell these players to learn FTs. That said, if you do support a rule change in both instances, then I know you're about game integrity rather than just selectively picking problems with the game you don't like.

Poor counter example.

End of the game when a team is facing a deficit, they still have to foul the player with the ball, or a player attempting to get the ball. That's part of the action. That's part of playing the game. They have to actually run around chasing guys who are trying to get open and foul the first guy that gets the ball. That's part of basketball. If they foul away from the ball at the end of the game, isn't it a free throw and possession?

You're trying to find a comparable example. But there is none. The hacking strategy away from the action does not have a parallel. And not just in basketball, in any of the other four major sports. It's a way to manipulate the rules to exploit the weakness of an opposing player with very little risk.

As I just said above, of course entertainment is part of it. It makes for a bad product. It's not some clever strategy. It's a manipulation of the rules.

And yes, these players should learn to shoot free throws. What you're are missing is the fact that even with a rules change, teams can force bad free throw shooters to shoot free throws. That's being lost. Hack bad free throw players. Absolutely. Send them to the free throw line 20 times a game need be. Continue the hack-a-player strategy.

Just do it within the context of playing basketball.

That's it.

That's all.

[Raven]

Of course there's an entertainment factor to a potential rules change. Absolutely. But it's not the only reason. The hack-a-player strategy away from the ball is NOT playing the game. It's not. Most of the time, it's done right when the ball is inbounded, most of the players are standing still except for inbounder, the ball handler, and the guy hacking. It's occurring when there is no genuine competition of play. Offensive players aren't trying to score or create a scoring opportunity. Defensive players are not trying to prevent the other team from scoring. It's not playing basketball. And I'm not asking for constant up and down floor action. Slow down the pace, have timeouts. But the away from the ball hack strategy is NOT playing the game.

The shot clock was a rules change for the same purpose and effect. Otherwise, once a team got up a few points, they could go to the four corner stall for the remainder of quarters. Would you like to go back to that "strategic" style of play? Have 48 minutes ending with a 10-7 score? Oh, but they're "playing the game" now and you're just whining about having to watch "strategic game play."

Bullshit. Four corner stall was within the rules and it wasn't playing basketball. Away from the action hack-a-player strategy is within the rules right now and it is NOT playing basketball.

Sure there's an entertainment aspect. I won't deny it. But to think that's all it is is naive and foolish.
the hacking strategy is an attempt to exploit a players's weakness, therefore it is playing the game just like it is calling for a post up on a smaller player

[DMC]

Of course there's an entertainment factor to a potential rules change. Absolutely. But it's not the only reason. The hack-a-player strategy away from the ball is NOT playing the game. It's not. Most of the time, it's done right when the ball is inbounded, most of the players are standing still except for inbounder, the ball handler, and the guy hacking. It's occurring when there is no genuine competition of play. Offensive players aren't trying to score or create a scoring opportunity. Defensive players are not trying to prevent the other team from scoring. It's not playing basketball. And I'm not asking for constant up and down floor action. Slow down the pace, have timeouts. But the away from the ball hack strategy is NOT playing the game.

The shot clock was a rules change for the same purpose and effect. Otherwise, once a team got up a few points, they could go to the four corner stall for the remainder of quarters. Would you like to go back to that "strategic" style of play? Have 48 minutes ending with a 10-7 score? Oh, but they're "playing the game" now and you're just whining about having to watch "strategic game play."

Bullshit. Four corner stall was within the rules and it wasn't playing basketball. Away from the action hack-a-player strategy is within the rules right now and it is NOT playing basketball.

Sure there's an entertainment aspect. I won't deny it. But to think that's all it is is naive and foolish.

All of it is playing basketball. It's just not as entertaining as you'd like. Prior to the 24 second shot clock, they were playing ball. Prior to the 3pt line, they were playing ball. Rule changes often are for entertainment sake, not to keep the "playing ball" bullshit mantra alive. It's all playing ball. You're using the "no true Scotsman" fallacy btw.