NBA: Intentional Foul

**Spurs9** · 07-14-2015

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

**JamStone** · 07-14-2015

Originally Posted by Trainwreck2100

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

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

**Thread** · 07-14-2015

Originally Posted by spurraider21

why? because you say so?

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

**baseline bum** · 07-14-2015

Originally Posted by JamStone

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

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

**JamStone** · 07-14-2015

Originally Posted by baseline bum

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

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

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

**baseline bum** · 07-14-2015

Originally Posted by JamStone

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

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

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

**DMC** · 07-14-2015

Originally Posted by Thread

Only pussies & assholes employ "hack."

Only chicken s about legal tactics.

**ducks** · 07-14-2015

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

**K...** · 07-14-2015

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

Boom, deandre harden.

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

**Mitch** · 07-14-2015

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

**DMC** · 07-15-2015

Originally Posted by Mitch

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

Let them what, exactly?

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

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

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

**Mitch** · 07-15-2015

Originally Posted by DMC

Let them what, exactly?

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

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

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

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

**Raven** · 07-15-2015

Originally Posted by JamStone

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

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

that's laughable

**Raven** · 07-15-2015

Originally Posted by JamStone

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

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

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

**Raven** · 07-15-2015

Originally Posted by Mitch

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

i find it very entertaining when someone airballs a ft

**DMC** · 07-15-2015

Originally Posted by Mitch

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

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

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