Henry Abbott- "Deep Thoughts About Hack-a-Shaq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Extra Stout

Really? When was that? What happened?

---

it was 6 or 7 years ago. used as an experimental rule in some of the 'exempt' games.

the team with the lead would continually take the ball out of bounds, which led to them just getting fouled and fouled and fouled...

the final minute of the game took about 20 minutes to complete.

even the people who had been in favor of the rule change said that it worked better in theory than it did in practice and scrapped it.

There's a mention of it in this article:

Quote:

---

COLLEGE BASKETBALL
All Fouled Up

In early-season basketball tournaments the NCAA has experimented with a rule that gives a team the option of shooting foul shots or taking the ball out of bounds after its opponent's 10th foul of a half. The rule, which was designed to keep basketball's endgame from turning into a tedious march to the free throw line, instead produced some bizarre—and tedious—finishes.

In Xavier's 81-79 win over Louisville last Thursday at the Great Alaska Shootout, the Cardinals were behind 80-79 with 26 seconds left when they started fouling. They fouled 10 times in the next 23 seconds before Musketeers coach Skip Prosser finally allowed star guard Darnell Williams to go to the foul line with :03 on the clock. Williams made the first free throw but missed the second, and a desperation 20-footer by Louisville's Reece Gaines clanked off the rim. "Well, that was an interesting finish," said Cardinals coach Denny Crum. "In all honesty, I'm probably not a big fan of it," Xavier's Prosser said of the rule.

---

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.c...7853/index.htm

Cheaters

I also believe the league should change every single rule that give teams advantages. Especially those used by the Spurs.

They should remove the 3 pt line, why reward teams for shooting a shot that has a lower chance of connecting rather than a shot that has a higher chance of connecting, such as a layup? Afterall, the point of the game is to outscore the other team in an efficient manner, we don't want to see shots that connect only 33% of the time, vs. ones that connect 60% of the time. If anything, a layup should count as 3 pts, and a 3pter should now count only as two points.

Whenver there is a jump ball, teams should be able to choose players to jump, instead of seeing these 7' guy jumping against some 6'2" guy who has no chance of getting the ball. The spirit of the jump ball is to give an equal chance to either team in getting possession of the ball, no?

Hell with it, if the purpose of the FT is to discourage fouls, teams can have a designated foul shooter like they did in the 50s, Brent Barry would average 28 ppg just on FTs alone.

All revenues should be shared amongst the 30 franchises too! It's unfair that a crappy team like the Knicks and Clippers can never loose $ because of the market, while teams in smaller markets must put up a quality product to survive. Afterall, the spirit of the salary cap and luxury tax is to give all teams a fair chance, no?

On the other hand, how about teams actually practicing shooting FTs so people won't use Haq-a-Shaq?

Since when is gamesmanship and strategy bad? That is part of what alludes me.

I mean, leaving aside all of the other variety of issues here (long term rules in place, adjustments because one player refuses to learn a fundamental skill, etc) - part of the game is strategy. And if you disagree, then you must not think coaches are important to the game.

Running certain plays, running certain line-ups, setting up specific defenses and stratagems - that's always been a part of the game. Using the rules to your advantage - always been part of the game. That's why guys will bounce balls off their opponents when they are falling out of bounds. That's what clock management is all about. That's what foul count and timeouts are all about. Working the rules to find an advantage.

It's part of the high-level of play. It's part of what separates the NBA from street-ball. Intentional fouling is just another piece of that. This hack-a-player fouling is perfectly legal and has been forever; it's an issue now because sports writers who jocked the Suns are disgruntled about their losses and because Pop rarely resorts to this tactic. People are bitching because they hate seeing the Spurs win, and this is easy to latch onto. No one complained about hack-a-Bowen when it happened back in the day; then it was a legit strategy.

People are acting like the game is some pure spirited thing that has been distorted by (the Spurs and) lame rules. But working the rules has always been a part of the game, and is a piece of every other strategy one devises in order to give one's team the advantage. Bottom line - gamesmanship is not a bad thing or an evil thing. It's part of the competition.

Abbott's takes on this series have been horrible. While this wasn't as bad as his last piece, it's stupid in its own right. Why the hell do people care about Hack-a-Shaq all of a sudden? It's been around for a decade. Why change it now when it has been used hundreds of times in NBA history?

It's like the national media's first response to the Spurs winning is to change rules. Tim and David pack the paint? Change the illegal defense rules. David draws charges under the basket? Add the charge circle. Pop instructs his players to hand check on the perimeter? Eliminate handchecking.

Part of the reason the Spurs haven't been able to win back-to-back is because the rules have changed so much year to year recently. It used to preferred to have physical defenders like Mario Elie and Jaren Jackson. Then after handchecking was eliminated, those types of players became worthless defensively.

Last year after Stoudemire and Diaw clearly violated the "don't leave the bench" rules, everyone wanted to change the rules. Even this year, when the Spurs were manipulating the D-League call up rules, the NBA changed the rules in the middle of the season.

I just don't understand why the first reaction to Spurs success is rule changes. Don Nelson has been using Hack-a-Shaq tactics for like twenty years now. The Spurs have mixed results and now hacks like Abbott are coming up with ways to eliminate it? WTF?

When you can't beat em, just pussy out and beg to change the rules.

If you can't make a 15 foot uncontested shot from straight-on with consistency, then your game is bad, not the rules. If I got into the NBA and shot 15% on free throws, should we change the entire rulebook because my team is being hurt instead of rewarded? Of course not, the team should either bench me or make me work with a shooting trainer.

Shaq is fat and lazy and won't stick to shooting free throws. Look at that one year he actually did well, then he gave up and went back to whatever he is doing now.

If you suck so much at something that a rule that is meant to help you hurts you, then you better have a good reason for sucking.

And about the game coming down to a free throw shooting contest. Same principle. If you choke under pressure and miss your free throws, then it's your fault your team lost, not the rules. A championship caliber team will do what it takes to win. If they miss the free throws, then they aren't skilled enough. Get out of the kitchen if you can't handle the fire.

The Spurs are the team equivalent to what Wilt Chamberlin was to individual accomplishment. They're such bad asses that you feel the need to change the rules after they make you their personal bitch.

timvp is right on the $

All these national media guys keep whining about things that all come down to on basic argument... That life isn't fair.

Amare and Diaw getting suspended for breaking the rules isn't fair.
Intentionally putting shaq on the line because he's a bad free throw shooter isn't fair.

These so called "adults" have the minds of children. Life isn't and is never going to be fair, and it is a GREAT thing.

Because life isn't fair we have the opportunity to better and differentiate ourselves by putting in effort into something that most people arent willing to do. The Spurs are willing to work to master both sides of basketball, offense and defense, and they have won multiple championships. The Suns play one dimensional team ball and come up short. Put the work in to get better defensively as a team, don't go rent a fat Shaq, expect your problems to be fixed, then cry about a lack of fairness when you still come up short.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

I'd generally agree, but Abbott's editorial choices in the last week are suggesting (to me, at least) an agenda that is more anti-Spurs than anything else. Abbott has made it clear that he's rooting for the Suns -- he was rooting for the Suns against the Spurs last year, too. I don't have a problem with that. I do have a problem with his willingness to publish views that largely diminish the Spurs' accomplishments by suggesting that they are the product of gamesmanship, conspiracies, and other forms of favoritism.

I realize that the sniping criticism (and cynicism) about the Spurs always been there, at least to some extent, until there is some begrudging acknowledgment during the Finals of the athletic prowess, teamwork, and ethic that wins titles. But I guess that what I percieve as intimations that the Spurs' successes are anything other than hard-earned have really gotten to me and are really frustrating this year.

---

Just last week? No, he's been a Spurs hater since True Hoop appeared on ESPN and probably before then too. But screw him...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurminator

This guy makes an interesting point...

---

Precisely. Henry Abbott is a complete Phoenix tool when he's not a Portland tool. Suddenly this rule needs revising because the Spurs are using it.

http://www.ncaa.org/releases/rules/1...99050701ru.htm

yikes.

- Mars

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duncan228

A letter to the Sports Editor in my local paper this morning:

"The NBA needs to step in and take action when a team like the Spurs commits the "Hack A Shaq" all night long and makes a mockery of the game."

I'm in Lakerland, I have to assume the writer is a Laker fan.

---

I bet it is. I bet it is. :depressed

Stuff like this can get intersting though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duncan228

A letter to the Sports Editor in my local paper this morning:

"The NBA needs to step in and take action when a team like the Spurs commits the "Hack A Shaq" all night long and makes a mockery of the game."

I'm in Lakerland, I have to assume the writer is a Laker fan.

---

We hacked him once in game 1 and 3 times in game 2. That's "all night long"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RuffnReadyOzStyle

Wake the fuck up, please. In principle, Abbott is spot on here.

---

No... you wake the fuck up, please. The game is won by the team that puts the little ball through the ring the most times. Period.

So you would think that the rules of the game would reward players who can put the little ball through the ring. Not protect the ones who can't.

There is already a rule in place to protect players like Shaq, who can't put the little ball through the ring... it's the one that puts a player out of the game after he commits his 6th foul. No team could play the Hack-A-Shaq all night, because they would run out of players.

And remember, Shaq gets rewarded every time a team attempts this strategy. He gets to stand directly in front of the basket and shoot two uncontested shots. What more could any player ask for?

The only way it could be considered a penalty is when a player lacks the fundamental basketball skill of being able to put the little fucking ball through the ring. The rules don't penalize Shaq. His lack of ability does.

I'm sorry... but when you play a sport where the whole idea is to put a ball through a ring, and you get paid millions of dollars every year to do so... you ought to be able to put the silly ball through the fucking ring.

And you're complaining as a fan of the game? A fan of a game where the objective is to put the ball through the ring? And you think it ruins the game when a player gets an unobstructed opportunity to do that, and he can't? And somehow that is the fault of the game, or the rules?

Honestly, watching Shaq shoot free throws is at least as entertaining as watching Jerry Springer, or any of the "reality" TV shows where people humiliate themselves. I think a lot of people would pay money to watch a guy who gets paid $20 mil a year throw up brick after brick, while they laughed at him and threw tomatoes.

I actually think the rules as they stand make the end of tight games a LOT more interesting. normally, when a team is up 5 with a minute to go, you know the other team still has a chance. Eliminate the FT's, and such a game is essentially OVER - turn off the TV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

The only way it could be considered a penalty is when a player lacks the fundamental basketball skill of being able to put the little fucking ball through the ring. The rules don't penalize Shaq. His lack of ability does.

---

Bingo.

The only response i have to this article and all hidden hate towards the Spurs is...

FUCK i love being a Spurs fan.