game thread 3/15 Spurs/pelicans (3/16 2:30 Riga)

[Chinook]

Isoing doesn't work when you take fadeaway jumpers instead of attempting to drive the paint tbh.

That's a different argument though. The Spurs were getting the ball to LMA, and he wasn't being aggressive.

[TE]

lol of course

[Ron Swanson]

Of fucking course.

[Bill_Brasky]

Shatty again

[NASpurs]

:lol the Tank Commander purposely missing that

[cd98]

Mills doing his part to help tank.

[bklynspursfan]

Takes more than one quarter to convince me especially a 40 year old who's been struggling really bad and this is from a big Manu fan. Doesn't take much for you though, which is fine. Don't need to convince me.

I get that. I'm just saying, if a guy has some big time momentum swinging play in a game, why not keep him out there. If he looked like he did in the first half, I'd say keep him out. Feel like we just gotta roll with the game changers on a game by game basis

[Pelicans78]

LOL Fatty

[TE]

Every year there is just one player that stinks it up.

We all know who it is this year.

[Darius Bieber]

You already know the Pelicans gonna swish the three.

[Bill_Brasky]

Fuck it lets let a couple of seconds go off the clock and foul em

[TimDunkem]

God fucking damn it.

[sasaint]

Just do this one thing patty

Earning that 50Mills.

[timtonymanu]

Mills the 50 million tank commander

[Trainwreck2100]

He wanted absolutely none of those Fts

[Amuseddaysleeper]

WOW, Aldridge went from 9-14 shooting to 11-27

Yikes

[bdictjames]

Patty needs a hair change lol. I swear, it's the hair hahah.

[Chinook]

Danny and Kyle both had the ball after the inbounds and the Pelicans fouled Ginobili. :lol

They didn't foul Green because they were trying to trap him. It was a smart move on their part to make Danny pass the ball under pressure and hope for a steal. Plus, it ain't like Manu hasn't missed big-time FTs before.

[ducks]

Mills fucking sucks
Start booing him

[tholdren]

Why is mills in the league? Dude fell hard. And yes, i am better than him

[boutons_deux]

:lol Patty

[bklynspursfan]

Danny and Kyle both had the ball after the inbounds and the Pelicans fouled Ginobili. :lol

Anderson got rid of that in a hurry lol Smart decision.. DG is usually pretty solid from the line

[cd98]

9 seconds...plenty of time. Good job mate.

[007nites]

WOW, Aldridge went from 9-14 shooting to 11-27

Yikes

Them post fades

[Pelicans78]

Fuck these chokers. Hate this team

[bbarry]

Gotta hit at least one.. .come on.

[bklynspursfan]

You already know the Pelicans gonna swish the three.

:tu

[cd98]

Horrible shot. Now Patty has to tank again.

[sasaint]

That's a different argument though. The Spurs were getting the ball to LMA, and he wasn't being aggressive.

LMA just playing his game...

[bbarry]

game :toast

[sasaint]

:tu

Mirotic with a Spursian force.

[Bill_Brasky]

Nice.

[TimDunkem]

They didn't foul Green because they were trying to trap him. It was a smart move on their part to make Danny pass the ball under pressure and hope for a steal. Plus, it ain't like Manu hasn't missed big-time FTs before.

I know what they were doing. I disagree with it though. Make the bow-legged "shooter" hit the FTs. At the very least, foul Kyle. Ginobili is the last one out of the three I want taking those FTs.

[bklynspursfan]

LDN going for his 7th block :lol

[Seventyniner]

game :toast

A win is a win. I'll take it.

[NASpurs]

I get that. I'm just saying, if a guy has some big time momentum swinging play in a game, why not keep him out there. If he looked like he did in the first half, I'd say keep him out. Feel like we just gotta roll with the game changers on a game by game basis

Of course, nothing wrong with that. Everyone goes with what's working for them. I was just obviously skeptical.

[bdictjames]

Spurs win! Closer than what it should've been, but we'll take it!

[Budkin]

Pels out choked us

[DieHardSpursFan1537]

What a game. LaMarcus and DeJounte killed it along with 6 blocks from Green. Onto the T-wolves

[spursistan]

7th seed bitches !!

[SASdynasty!]

I dedicate this win to the 34 minutes, 2 field goals, and 1 assist of Patty Mills.

[Raven]

huge win

[weeks]

nice win. hope murry didn't hurt himself

[007nites]

We shot so bad and still won lol

[SPURt]

Spurs win 2 in a row! It’s a miracle!

[NASpurs]

7th seed bitches !!

:cry spreading ass cheeks for GSW :cry

[BillMc]

Victory!!!:flag:

[weeks]

I dedicate this win to the 34 minutes, 2 field goals, and 1 assist of Patty Mills.

oi u cheeky bugga theres no pressure on me to perform this year

http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=/i/headshots/nba/players/full/4004.png&w=350&h=254

[TimDunkem]

I dedicate this win to the 34 minutes, 2 field goals, and 1 assist of Patty Mills.

:vomit:

[ElNono]

7th seed bitches !!

8th actually

[Hoops Czar]

WOW, Aldridge went from 9-14 shooting to 11-27

Yikes

And Paddy Mills went from 1-1 shooting to 2-12. :wow

[spurs10]

Sure, but this time only you don't like it. How are you going to change the rules to Say that a guy walking all over another one isn't a foul? :lol Well it clearly is a foul and Manu is smart enough to know he’s too close and drew the foul. It’s a charge basically. You let people run over you they will be glad to. Manu was badass tonight. We lose without his play.

[DAF86]

Bro, read the thread. I bet if that wasn't Manu, you wouldn't say shit about my complaint.

Nah, I think I have proven I'm not a poster that let's likes/dislikes influence his takes. I just don't see how you can change the rules to Say that's not a foul.

[TheGreatYacht]

And Paddy Mills went from 1-1 shooting to 2-12. :wow
:lmao funniest guy on here

[ElNono]

Manu was a badass... especially on that 3rd quarter...

Bad game from Tony, yet, much better than Fatty...

[TimDunkem]

Manu was a badass... especially on that 3rd quarter...

Bad game from Tony, yet, much better than Fatty...

Just about every player in this league is better than Fatty, tbh.

[alfahdlan]

What did Gay do to Pop tbh?
He missed badly a defensive switch sometime in the first half.

[sasaint]

A win is a win. I'll take it.

We had better have a playoff spot nailed down before that last game. If we are still neck-and-neck with the Pels, they will curb-stomp us.

[TE]

Just about every player in this league is better than Fatty, tbh.
Seriously. I don't even think that random ass leprechaun poster from the 2012-14 years who posted as a die hard Patty fan would show his face now.

[Seventyniner]

We had better have a playoff spot nailed down before that last game. If we are still neck-and-neck with the Pels, they will curb-stomp us.

Damn, I forgot we finish the season against those fuckers again. Just like 2015.

[spurs10]

Manu was a badass... especially on that 3rd quarter.... Couldn’t agree more...vintage badassness!

[SASdynasty!]

Clutchest player in franchise history. MVParker and his daggers :cry
Differnce-maker tonight tbh

[sasaint]

Damn, I forgot we finish the season against those fuckers again. Just like 2015.

Hopefully NOT just like 2015.

[spurs10]

Damn, I forgot we finish the season against those fuckers again. Just like 2015.
Yeah hopefully with not that much on the line....did we drop from 3 to 6 or something?

[Chinook]

Nah, I think I have proven I'm not a poster that let's likes/dislikes influence his takes. I just don't see how you can change the rules to Say that's not a foul.

Now you're making a different argument. Anyway, it wouldn't be hard to implement a rule saying that's a foul. It would likely be subjective like charge/block calls, but even just the potential of that being called an offensive foul would deter players from doing it.

[spurs10]

Hopefully NOT just like 2015. :lol

[sasaint]

Now you're making a different argument. Anyway, it wouldn't be hard to implement a rule saying that's a foul. It would likely be subjective like charge/block calls, but even just the potential of that being called an offensive foul would deter players from doing it.

It would be very much like block/charge. Unfortunately those have become a mess.

[DAF86]

Now you're making a different argument.

Literally from the post you previously quoted:


Sure, but this time only you don't like it. How are you going to change the rules to Say that a guy walking all over another one isn't a foul? :lol


Anyway, it wouldn't be hard to implement a rule saying that's a foul. It would likely be subjective like charge/block calls, but even just the potential of that being called an offensive foul would deter players from doing it.

The rule for determing if a foul is a Charge or a block isn't subjective, wachu talkin bout Willis?

Either way, that Paul/Manu play can already be called a foul. If the guy gets into the path of the defender, that is getting back on D, without giving him enough time to react it's a foul on the offensive player. Just like it's a block foul on a guy that is trying to take a Charge, despite being perfectly still, if he doesn't give the offensive player enough time/space.

[Chinook]

It would be very much like block/charge. Unfortunately those have become a mess.

They could stand to be cleaned up, but they aren't any worse than any other call. Plus, these "reverse charges" wouldn't be nearly as frequent or ambiguous. It's natural for the offense and defense to clash facing each other. It's rare for them to do so moving in the same direction, especially in the back court.

[BillMc]

Hopefully NOT just like 2015.

Hopefully we party like its 1999.

[Chinook]

Literally from the post you previously quoted:

That's a different argument from the part you didn't bold, which was what you originally came out with.


The rule for determing if a foul is a Charge or a block isn't subjective, wachu talkin bout Willis?

Yes it is. There a rule on the books and some official markers for when a charge cannot be called, but whether a guy is in time, whether the offensive player initiated the contract, yadda yadda, is up to the interpretation of the official.


Either way, that Paul/Manu play can already be called a foul.

1) Never seen anything saying it can be called a foul

2) Manu totally and deliberately dribbled into Davis path, took the hit and fell over like a sedan hit him.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTgCzBUl_bE

Skip to the 40-second mark.

[sasaint]

Hopefully we party like its 1999.

We should collaborate on a Spotify playlist. Another good one! :toast

[BillMc]

We should collaborate on a Spotify playlist. Another good one! :toast

I'm so out of it I don't know a damn thing about Spotify but I'm sure that would be fun. :toast

[sasaint]

They could stand to be cleaned up, but they aren't any worse than any other call. Plus, these "reverse charges" wouldn't be nearly as frequent or ambiguous. It's natural for the offense and defense to clash facing each other. It's rare for them to do so moving in the same direction, especially in the back court.

Unfortunately true. Yeah, I don't see this kind of thing being any harder to call than a lot of calls that get botched on a routine basis. I would like like to see a return to the rules.

[DAF86]

That's a different argument from the part you didn't bold, which was what you originally came out with.



Yes it is. There a rule on the books and some official markers for when a charge cannot be called, but whether a guy is in time, whether the offensive player initiated the contract, yadda yadda, is up to the interpretation of the official.



1) Never seen anything saying it can be called a foul

2) Manu totally and deliberately dribbled into Davis path, took the hit and fell over like a sedan hit him.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTgCzBUl_bE

Skip to the 40-second mark.

Of course Manu deliberately dribbled into Davis' path, just like he deliberately put himself in Davis' way to take the Charge in the previous play. That isn't the matter though. The matter is giving the walking player enough time space to avoid the contact, if he doesn't avoid it, it's his fault and, therefore, his foul.

[peacemaker885]

Thats the voice of Joel Myers, used to be the Spurs voice back in the day. Super classy, one of my favorite commentators.

[Chinook]

Of course Manu deliberately dribbled into Davis' path, just like he deliberately put himself in Davis' way to take the Charge in the previous play. That isn't the matter though. The matter is giving the walking player enough time space to avoid the contact, if he doesn't avoid it, it's his fault and, therefore, his foul.

And you act like you're being objective...

[UZER]

That's a different argument from the part you didn't bold, which was what you originally came out with.



Yes it is. There a rule on the books and some official markers for when a charge cannot be called, but whether a guy is in time, whether the offensive player initiated the contract, yadda yadda, is up to the interpretation of the official.



1) Never seen anything saying it can be called a foul

2) Manu totally and deliberately dribbled into Davis path, took the hit and fell over like a sedan hit him.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTgCzBUl_bE

Skip to the 40-second mark.

Damn both those fouls calls are horrible. I’m a huge Manu fan but shit like that is shady. Don’t like “crafty” plays like that. Exaggerating fouls is one thing. That right there is just cheap and gimmicky. Just play the game.

[Slippy]

Davis is unlucky on that second one but heads up play from Manu . they were both the correct calls. the second one if Manu didn't fall from the weight of Davis behind him it would of been a no call. Seen heaps of them before, that's how they usually call them.

Good win . Almost choked it again but ill take it any way they come

[SAGirl]

SAGirl (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=49524) I'll see you at the Ashley Homestore tbh
Had to pick someone up at the airport true story. I missed the entire second half. Glad to find out they pulled this one out somehow. See Mills shooting % didn’t improve from where it was heading when I stopped watching..

[spurs10]

Davis is unlucky on that second one but heads up play from Manu . they were both the correct calls. the second one if Manu didn't fall from the weight of Davis behind him it would of been a no call. Seen heaps of them before, that's how they usually call them.

Good win . Almost choked it again but ill take it any way they come:toast

[spurs10]

Had to pick someone up at the airport true story. I missed the entire second half. Glad to find out they pulled this one out somehow. See Mills shooting % didn’t improve from where it was heading when I stopped watching..
I read this thinking you were saying Mills’ ‘0% didn’t improve.’ :lol
Now he did shoot < 20% so you were close. 2/12 2pt and 1/6 from 3pt. He made his last ft’s that sealed it though.

[DAF86]

And you act like you're being objective...

It's objective because it's the way it is. Is it cheap? Yeah, but that doesn't mean those aren't fouls. Is hack a Shak cheap? Yeah, but there isn't an easy solution to it, nor I think ir should be. Just make your damn free throws.

It's the same here. Deliberately or not, if a guy steps all over another guy there's no way to not call a foul.

[spurs10]

It's objective because it's the way it is. Is it cheap? Yeah, but that doesn't mean those aren't fouls. Is hack a Shak cheap? Yeah, but there isn't an easy solution to it, nor I think ir should be. Just make your damn free throws.

It's the same here. Deliberately or not, if a guy steps all over another guy there's no way to not call a foul. Yes and it’s highly unlikely the ref made the call because he was biased in Manu’s favor. Push fouls are like charges. It’s just drawing a foul. Pretty savvy to me.

Now I love all calls in our favor and if it was the other way around I’d bitch about it, but I’d know they are going to call that when the contact is as hard as that. :lol

It was a very physical game. I’m glad Manu was willing to play that tough.

[Chinook]

It's objective because it's the way it is. Is it cheap? Yeah, but that doesn't mean those aren't fouls. Is hack a Shak cheap? Yeah, but there isn't an easy solution to it, nor I think ir should be. Just make your damn free throws.

It's the same here. Deliberately or not, if a guy steps all over another guy there's no way to not call a foul.

Something "being a foul" is merely what is against the rules. The league could take out charges from the rule book and call any contact like that a defensive foul. Or they could tweak the various elements of the rule like expanding or removing the charge circle, removing the need for a defender to beat an offensive player to a spot or deciding that if the defender is moving at all that it's an automatic block. And fouls that resulted from that new rule would be just as much fouls as what is currently called. If they wanted to make a rule saying that an offensive player can't change direction, back up and run into a guy without getting a charge, they could. It would be just as easy as a charge/block call. Manu would have gotten an offensive foul. And no one would be batting an eye, because "them's the rules".

Manu makes a lot of plays like this that disgust me. That includes how he fouls to stop the break. I can believe those plays are bullshit and should be legislated out of the game without rejecting the idea that the rules were properly enforced when he gets those calls. And until/unless those get changed, I don't expect Manu, Paul or any other "savvy" player to stop using them. That won't stop me from thinking they're bullshit, though. And before you try to turn this into some attack on Manu, it's not. I don't hate Manu, just like I don't hate Murray or Leonard. I appreciate everything Manu has done for the organization and want him to play at a high level for as long as he has left. But I'm not going to only call out what I consider to be bullshit when it's a player I don't like or team I don't root for.

[BatManu20]

974493652432183296

[Russo21]

50 million dollar aboriginal piece of shit went 2 for 12. He is just pathetic.

[Chinook]

50 million dollar aboriginal piece of shit went 2 for 12. He is just pathetic.

Bad-shooting nights happen. Hell, it's just par for the course for the team this year. But 34 minutes? He was arguably the worst guard on the team last night but played the most minutes anyway. I just don't get it.

[r0drig0lac]

And Paddy Mills went from 1-1 shooting to 2-12. :wow

sad

[BillMc]

974493652432183296

Is it a sin to play the LMA "You know" drinking game at noon? Because that's what I'm doing with a nice Chianti. :bobo

[daledondale]

Bad-shooting nights happen. Hell, it's just par for the course for the team this year. But 34 minutes? He was arguably the worst guard on the team last night but played the most minutes anyway. I just don't get it.
"Culture" :pop:

[Seventyniner]

Manu makes a lot of plays like this that disgust me. That includes how he fouls to stop the break. I can believe those plays are bullshit and should be legislated out of the game without rejecting the idea that the rules were properly enforced when he gets those calls. And until/unless those get changed, I don't expect Manu, Paul or any other "savvy" player to stop using them. That won't stop me from thinking they're bullshit, though. And before you try to turn this into some attack on Manu, it's not. I don't hate Manu, just like I don't hate Murray or Leonard. I appreciate everything Manu has done for the organization and want him to play at a high level for as long as he has left. But I'm not going to only call out what I consider to be bullshit when it's a player I don't like or team I don't root for.

How can you legislate away fouls that stop a fast break? Give the refs a yellow flag and have them throw it, let the play continue, then give the fast-break team the option of taking the foul or the result of the play?

The same problem with the break-stopping fouls, like mauling the guy with the ball, is the same as with what Manu did to AD. With that much contact a foul has to be called, especially when it causes the ball handler to travel or double dribble.

[DAF86]

Something "being a foul" is merely what is against the rules. The league could take out charges from the rule book and call any contact like that a defensive foul. Or they could tweak the various elements of the rule like expanding or removing the charge circle, removing the need for a defender to beat an offensive player to a spot or deciding that if the defender is moving at all that it's an automatic block. And fouls that resulted from that new rule would be just as much fouls as what is currently called. If they wanted to make a rule saying that an offensive player can't change direction, back up and run into a guy without getting a charge, they could. It would be just as easy as a charge/block call. Manu would have gotten an offensive foul. And no one would be batting an eye, because "them's the rules".

Manu makes a lot of plays like this that disgust me. That includes how he fouls to stop the break. I can believe those plays are bullshit and should be legislated out of the game without rejecting the idea that the rules were properly enforced when he gets those calls. And until/unless those get changed, I don't expect Manu, Paul or any other "savvy" player to stop using them. That won't stop me from thinking they're bullshit, though. And before you try to turn this into some attack on Manu, it's not. I don't hate Manu, just like I don't hate Murray or Leonard. I appreciate everything Manu has done for the organization and want him to play at a high level for as long as he has left. But I'm not going to only call out what I consider to be bullshit when it's a player I don't like or team I don't root for.

Sure, making a rule that an offensive player can't do all that is easy to make and wouldn't open a can of worms that would inevitably fuck up the playability of the game. :lol

And no, I don't think this is an attack on Manu, just as I don't know why you think I feel the need to defend this just because Manu did it. If Parker would have been the one to do this, I would be arguing the same thing with you and I wouldn't be thinking it is an attack on Tony.

[Dex]

Is it a sin to play the LMA "You know" drinking game at noon? Because that's what I'm doing with a nice Chianti. :bobo

RIP your liver.

[Dex]

Bad-shooting nights happen. Hell, it's just par for the course for the team this year. But 34 minutes? He was arguably the worst guard on the team last night but played the most minutes anyway. I just don't get it.

Pop trying anything to get him out of his slump, hopefully so we can dump his contract this offseason. Who is going to bite on a trade for a overpaid, undersized shooting guard who can't shoot?

[Chinook]

How can you legislate away fouls that stop a fast break? Give the refs a yellow flag and have them throw it, let the play continue, then give the fast-break team the option of taking the foul or the result of the play?

The same problem with the break-stopping fouls, like mauling the guy with the ball, is the same as with what Manu did to AD. With that much contact a foul has to be called, especially when it causes the ball handler to travel or double dribble.

I really do love the idea of an advantage system to address the ambiguity in the continuation rule. In terms of the "take" fouls on the break, the refs just have to call them like they do clear-path fouls. Give the other team shots and the ball. I don't think the Manu play should have been a no-call. I think it should have been an offensive foul if not a technical foul. You could almost completely remove that play from the game if you just made it clear it is likely to be an offensive foul.

[Chinook]

Sure, making a rule that an offensive player can't do all that is easy to make and wouldn't open a can of worms that would inevitably fuck up the playability of the game. :lol

It wouldn't, not in the slightest. That's not a play that happens by accident in the natural flow of the game.


And no, I don't think this is an attack on Manu, just as I don't know why you think I feel the need to defend this just because Manu did it. If Parker would have been the one to do this, I would be arguing the same thing with you and I wouldn't be thinking it is an attack on Tony.

So says the guy who's accused me of having personal vendettas against multiple players on the team before...

I think had it not been Manu, you would have just let it go without comment. I've made similar comments about this before in relation to other players (like Paul) without a rebuttal from you.

[sasaint]

Is it a sin to play the LMA "You know" drinking game at noon? Because that's what I'm doing with a nice Chianti. :bobo

Beats salt and Tic-Tacs.

[BillMc]

RIP your liver.

Pop would be proud of me.


Beats salt and Tic-Tacs.

You know salted Tic-Tacs might be the next big thing.

[DAF86]

It wouldn't, not in the slightest. That's not a play that happens by accident in the natural flow of the game.



So says the guy who's accused me of having personal vendettas against multiple players on the team before...

I think had it not been Manu, you would have just let it go without comment. I've made similar comments about this before in relation to other players (like Paul) without a rebuttal from you.

Well, you are wrong.

And the only player I said you seemed to have a thing against is Kawhi. Because that's the only way I could rationalize underrating a top 3 player so much, tbh.

[Seventyniner]

I really do love the idea of an advantage system to address the ambiguity in the continuation rule. In terms of the "take" fouls on the break, the refs just have to call them like they do clear-path fouls. Give the other team shots and the ball. I don't think the Manu play should have been a no-call. I think it should have been an offensive foul if not a technical foul. You could almost completely remove that play from the game if you just made it clear it is likely to be an offensive foul.

The advantage thing does make sense, you just need to have a quick way to notify players that the advantage is on. On a fast break that is hard to do, a ref hand or arm signal doesn't work because the players are sprinting away from all of them. It would need to be some sort of light that turns on around the basket or support, which is ok for pro leagues and probably college but would be hard to use below that level.

A potential problem is what happens if the breaking team misses the shot. When do you stop play? Waiting until the next "natural" stoppage has a host of problems: what if the fouling player would have fouled out (if the breaking team chooses the foul) but then commits yet another foul that stops play later? Blowing the whistle right after the miss precludes the possibility of a putback, or an offensive rebound that resets the possession and might make the refs rewind the clock substantially if that team misses again. Stopping play once the fouling team regains possession breaks up the flow of the game as badly as if the refs just called the original foul in the first place.

For the take foul, what are your criteria for awarding shots and the ball? I think something as simple as "any defensive foul in the backcourt" would work, with occasional ref discretion needed to decide if the ball is loose or the breaking team actually has possession. This has the bonus of stopping hack-a-whoever before that player crosses halfcourt. On further thought, this even speeds up the end of games if the ball does not advance after a timeout: you can't foul a player in the backcourt so you have to let them burn at least 8 seconds.

[Snaq O'Meal]

Pop trying anything to get him out of his slump, hopefully so we can dump his contract this offseason. Who is going to bite on a trade for a overpaid, undersized shooting guard who can't shoot?

You need RC to be hired by another team first. He’s the only guy who will bite on such deals.

[ismael-robert]

That HEB commercial just revealed what happened to Kawhis quad Parker pushed him off a plane

[vander]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTgCzBUl_bE


Pathetic, How does he look his wife and children in the eye after that?

[spurraider21]

to be fair, Poop did bench Tony for his awful play, tbh
whataboutism

[Chinook]

The advantage thing does make sense, you just need to have a quick way to notify players that the advantage is on. On a fast break that is hard to do, a ref hand or arm signal doesn't work because the players are sprinting away from all of them. It would need to be some sort of light that turns on around the basket or support, which is ok for pro leagues and probably college but would be hard to use below that level.

I would say to just assume the player has an advantage unless the refs keep blowing the whistle. Almost every foul would trigger an advantage situation, whether it's a blocking foul, a shooting foul, a loose-ball foul. The only ones that may not are offensive fouls, but even then, if the charge resulted in a turnover leading to a fast break, it could be advantageous to play on anyway. I don't think you need a light. Hell, in Rugby, the ref just says "advantage" and then stops the play if the team doesn't make progress.


A potential problem is what happens if the breaking team misses the shot.

You mean like if a team is on the break, gets fouled, then misses? If that is a bang-bang as it should be, then it should be easy to call the foul after the missed shot. As you mention later, if you curtail take fouls away from the basket, then you're going to get a lot fewer cases where a play can be fouled before they get to scoring position. Independent of those of those situations, I'd say you stop it whenever the team stops their momentum toward the basket.


Blowing the whistle right after the miss precludes the possibility of a putback, or an offensive rebound that resets the possession and might make the refs rewind the clock substantially if that team misses again.

As I mentioned before, they can blow the whistle whenever they want. What would change is what the whistle means. I think you could stop the clock every time or keep it running every time, except inside a minute or two minutes or whatever it is now. The latter would continue to speed up the game.


Stopping play once the fouling team regains possession breaks up the flow of the game as badly as if the refs just called the original foul in the first place.

It likely would be true that an individual foul would still slow the game down as much as it does now. But there would be fewer of them, because a) the players would score more and b) players would foul less because there's less upside to doing so. There are a lot of fouls, particularly on the break, where there isn't much of a chance for them to get off a shot afterwards, often because the foul was part of a block attempt. The shots that go in would be and-1s just as they are now and the ones that miss would be FTs as they are now. I don't think waiting for tip-in for the shots that neither go in the basket or out of bounds would slow down the game at all. Oftentimes now a put-back happens before the refs react to the foul anyway.


For the take foul, what are your criteria for awarding shots and the ball? I think something as simple as "any defensive foul in the backcourt" would work, with occasional ref discretion needed to decide if the ball is loose or the breaking team actually has possession. This has the bonus of stopping hack-a-whoever before that player crosses halfcourt.

I like the idea of that rule, but not its execution. Call EVERY foul in the back court like a clear-path foul removes full-court pressure, or at least nerfs it by encouraging players to try to draw contact back there. It seems like removing that rule for inbound possessions would work better. You don't have the same type of take fouls on OOB possessions in the first place.


On further thought, this even speeds up the end of games if the ball does not advance after a timeout: you can't foul a player in the backcourt so you have to let them burn at least 8 seconds.

If there's any appeal to removing take-fouls, it's because you don't want to break up the flow of the game needlessly. I know that it's a good thing to stop the ends of close games from taking QUITE as long as they used to, but I doubt anyone wants to completely remove the drama from them.

[spurs10]

Is it a sin to play the LMA "You know" drinking game at noon? Because that's what I'm doing with a nice Chianti. :boboThen you must have passed out by 1:00 RT! :bobo

[BillMc]

Then you must have passed out by 1:00 RT! :bobo
:lol