Where's the league outrage?

[PlayoffEx-static]

Boston intentionally fouled Ben Wallace in the 4th Q!!!!!!!!! Call David Stern and get that damn rule changed!!!

Actually, if anything, this will forestall changing the rule if it's an advantage to the Golden Celtics.

FU, Stern and Jackson.:ihit

[RonMexico]

It's an advantage to any team that wants to use it. In fact, it's a great strategy to use against any team that has Mike D'Antoni as it's coach because he won't make any adjustments.

The only problem I have with the rule is that it allows people to foul off-the-ball. I have no problem with Hack-a-Shaq/Chandler/Ben if they receive the ball. Maybe even if they adjust it to where you can't foul the guy until he crosses halfcourt. As constructed, however, it provides a large advantage to the defensive team.

[theMUHMEshow]

Boston intentionally fouled Ben Wallace in the 4th Q!!!!!!!!! Call David Stern and get that damn rule changed!!!

Actually, if anything, this will forestall changing the rule if it's an advantage to the Golden Celtics.

FU, Stern and Jackson.:ihit

I work in the Detroit media and was in the Piston locker room after the whole KG shoving the ref shit went down... I wish to god I could have recorded what Lindsey and Sheed were saying about the "golden boy" and the leagues "perfect team" Boston... Its fucking laughable how they get treated...

[sickdsm]

LOL, nice to know the media is neutral up in Detoit judging by some of your other posts.

[Matchman]

I work in the Detroit media and was in the Piston locker room after the whole KG shoving the ref shit went down... I wish to god I could have recorded what Lindsey and Sheed were saying about the "golden boy" and the leagues "perfect team" Boston... Its fucking laughable how they get treated...

care to write down what they said so we can get a good laugh?

[Cry Havoc]

It's an advantage to any team that wants to use it. In fact, it's a great strategy to use against any team that has Mike D'Antoni as it's coach because he won't make any adjustments.

The only problem I have with the rule is that it allows people to foul off-the-ball. I have no problem with Hack-a-Shaq/Chandler/Ben if they receive the ball. Maybe even if they adjust it to where you can't foul the guy until he crosses halfcourt. As constructed, however, it provides a large advantage to the defensive team.

Which is why every team in the league uses it, right?

Oh wait. So far only one team has used it effectively, against Shaq. There are maybe 3 players in the league that you could use the strategy on, and they all shoot free throws worse than high schoolers (Bierdins being the 3rd.)

Also, are you sure you want intentional fouls during a shot? Those tend to be more unpredictable. Off the ball fouls aren't going to result in injury, but if Wallace goes up to shoot and someone tries to "ensure" a foul is called while he's in the air, it could cause injury.

[theMUHMEshow]

LOL, nice to know the media is neutral up in Detoit judging by some of your other posts.

Radio brotha... I am not paid to be unbiased. :toast

[RonMexico]

Which is why every team in the league uses it, right?

Oh wait. So far only one team has used it effectively, against Shaq. There are maybe 3 players in the league that you could use the strategy on, and they all shoot free throws worse than high schoolers (Bierdins being the 3rd.)

Also, are you sure you want intentional fouls during a shot? Those tend to be more unpredictable. Off the ball fouls aren't going to result in injury, but if Wallace goes up to shoot and someone tries to "ensure" a foul is called while he's in the air, it could cause injury.

I'm not saying it has to be on a shot. In fact, that's obviously more dangerous to the shooter, so that would spark more flagrants. But the fact that it would cause more potential flagrants is another deterrent to the usage of the intentional fouls, which is what Stern seems to sponsor.

Still, you can wrap up the player as soon as he has the ball and not increase the chance for injury. It levels the playing field for the offense and defense: if the player receives the ball, then the defense can employ the hacking strategy, but on the other side, the offense has the option to avoid giving that player the ball.

That's still a slight advantage to the defense because they might basically be playing 5 on 4, because a guy like Shaq might not receive the ball down low in the 4th quarter. I mean, how many times has Shaq gotten an offensive board, brought the ball down and been wrapped up by multiple guys to send him to the line instead of allowing a dunk? This would be no different.

And no, there is not only 1 team that has employed it against Shaq - there were more than a few that did it during the regular season, but there was only one team that used it in the playoffs this year because Mike D'Antoni only got them as far as the first round.

[Cry Havoc]

I'm not saying it has to be on a shot. In fact, that's obviously more dangerous to the shooter, so that would spark more flagrants. But the fact that it would cause more potential flagrants is another deterrent to the usage of the intentional fouls, which is what Stern seems to sponsor.

Still, you can wrap up the player as soon as he has the ball and not increase the chance for injury. It levels the playing field for the offense and defense: if the player receives the ball, then the defense can employ the hacking strategy, but on the other side, the offense has the option to avoid giving that player the ball.

That's still a slight advantage to the defense because they might basically be playing 5 on 4, because a guy like Shaq might not receive the ball down low in the 4th quarter. I mean, how many times has Shaq gotten an offensive board, brought the ball down and been wrapped up by multiple guys to send him to the line instead of allowing a dunk? This would be no different.

And no, there is not only 1 team that has employed it against Shaq - there were more than a few that did it during the regular season, but there was only one team that used it in the playoffs this year because Mike D'Antoni only got them as far as the first round.

Again. When Shaq and Big Ben retire, who is this strategy going to be used against? What's the point of changing a rule if the target of the rule change will not be playing in 2-3 years?

[Amuseddaysleeper]

There will always be bad free throw shooters.


I agree the rules may need to be tweaked, but to get rid of the Hack a shaq entirely is silly.

[RonMexico]

Again. When Shaq and Big Ben retire, who is this strategy going to be used against? What's the point of changing a rule if the target of the rule change will not be playing in 2-3 years?

Tyson Chandler is already a terrible FT shooter. Brian Skinner isn't the best.

Some guys can improve FT shooting (like Amare), while others can wallow in mediocrity.

[endrity]

Dwight Howard anyone?