Yes. Please god, yes.
Keep it! Learn to shoot free throws!
Lose it! For the love of god lose it!
Yes. Please god, yes.
no. and even if they wanted to, how would it even be addressed?
How about if your paying a guy millions of dollars he should be able to make a god damn free throw
This is part of a much broader problem, but my main issue with it is this: a foul, at it's core, is supposed to be a penalty against the player who committed the foul. By it's very definition, you shouldn't be able to benefit by committing a foul, and if you are, the rules are being incorrectly applied.
When does that apply though? How many times does a player need to be fouled before it applies? At what point in the quarter/half? Because otherwise, steve nash is shooting 35 FT's a game
A guy shooting free throws is supposed to benefit from those shots. The player committing the foul is penalized. He wastes a valuable foul to send the guy to the line. But his team is trying to benefit, since the guy being sent to the line can't shoot something very correctly called a FREE throw. As in, free points.
In general, I despise the hack-a-whoever strategy. But guys leave it open as a possibility by being atrocious free throw shooters and never improving. I don't think any rule change should be made. You also get sketchy instances if you change the rules. What if DeAndre Jordan is run into off the ball, but unintentionally during normal contact with screens? His coach will be screaming for a "hack-a-Jordan" foul, and some refs (most?) in this league are bad enough that they'll probably give it to them far too often. Then you have a 80-90% FT shooter getting extra shots he doesn't deserve. You'll have those guys like Jordan being told to embellish all off-ball contact to try and draw such fouls. I just don't like it.
What I'd like to see before any rule change is the guys who suck at it make a real effort to be better. Maybe they should try the granny shot (underhanded) strategy. It worked for Rick Barry and he's been itching to teach shitty shooters how to do it. These guys have too much pride to shoot underhanded, when swallowing it could help them correct a massive flaw in their game that affects their team's play.
Last edited by white men can't jump; Sat Feb 8th, 2014 at 12:08 PM.
Hell no! Making rules is making rules ... but telling coaches how not to coach is just wrong. It would be very Stalin-ish of him.
There are multiple simple solutions to this problem.
First order of business - no.
FIX THE REFEREE SITUATION THEY SUCK THEY ARE HORRIBLE FIX THAT NOW.
But should it be addressed? Hell yeah.
Only basketball purists would disagree - it's boring.
The NBA is a business and you better believe the folks in charge want the game to be as entertaining as possible.
And as an objective mind, basketball can fucking draaaaag sometimes.
It's not a finished product, NBA basketball, and I think the foul system should (and will) be revised.
I've always thought it was really unfortunate that basketball slows down at the end of those games where the lead is a little big, but not insurmountable. It is the opposite of exciting.
In hockey, the goalie gets pulled and anything can happen.
In basketball, you watch a guy stand on a line.
And the fouls are valuable, as a coach cannot constantly sacrifice the quality of his lineup to make sure the 12th man is out there to give up fouls. Thus it means there is a real risk that it wastes some fouls for his more valuable players. A coach may be able to give up useless fouls for some stretches in the game, but it is not easy to keep up for long stretches. Basketball is also a game of rhythm, and if you have to pull out a better player to put in a worse one so he can foul, then you risk disrupting your player's, and possibly team's, rhythm. Not to mention the slim chance that you need even your end of benchers for legit foul trouble or injuries. It may be an easy strategy on paper, and probably the part of the anti-hack argument that has the most merit, but it's still not so simple to execute. There are still consequences.
They weren't called anything. They were very obviously given the name of free throws because the team/player getting to shoot them is meant to be getting a very high percentage chance to score. It was not arbitrary. It's not a guaranteed 2 points, but it should pretty much always be a pretty sure 1 point and a high chance at 2, and thus should more likely ensure a team is adding points compared to a FG, which may bring a higher chance at 2+ pts, but a lower chance at ensuring at least 1.
They are not simple solutions. The problem is that you're adding grey area to the game when reffing is already atrocious. What do you do about penalty situations then? The team being fouled may think it's more beneficial to inbound the ball rather than send their shitty player to the line. But if it's a penalty situation, and an unintentional foul, there's no good reason that guy shouldn't be forced to shoot, and try to make his free throws. Solutions are anything but simple.
And finally, you totally cut out my last part. Often these guys "work" on free throw shooting, but the work is not evident. They do not make adjustments in their form, which is usually the biggest culprit for many of them. Hence my suggestion that some of these guys really should give the underhanded shot a try. It is influenced less by having big hands (a part of the problem contributing to bad mechanics for some of these guys) and is totally different from their already existing bad mechanics. If you shoot 1000 FTs a day with the same shitty form, you will never significantly improve your shot. You need to make alterations. Shaq and Dwight have gone on record as not being willing to put the work in to change that.
We're talking about making a rule to prevent coaches from exploiting a weakness present in a small minority of players, instead of such players finding a way to improve that area of skill. The rule can have more widespread effect than desired, whereas the current state of things is still limited to a very small amount of players. You don't make rules to compensate for a lack of skill in an area. It's up to the players who suck, and coaches who are stuck with them, to find a way from limiting that weakness. The same way a team with poor 3 pt shooting has to find more ways to score inside, for example. You don't bring the 3 pt line in back to college distance because some guys suck at it. But it would improve scoring and possibly excitement in the game.
*Teams should be able to exploit any strategy that is caused by a lack of skill in an area, be it FT shooting, 3pt shooting, a lack of interior scoring, a lack of quality ballhandlers....You just don't make rules to offset such things.
Last edited by white men can't jump; Sat Feb 8th, 2014 at 01:19 PM.
I would take it one step further too, to the issue of fouls in general.
I frankly think basketball is developing a dangerous trend with guys like Harden, who have figured out the art of drawing fouls, and the increasing prevalance of flopping. When the best player in the game is actively manipulating the rules to his advantage, it's time to change the rules.
It's embarassing, against the spirit of competition, and it just adds such a huge element of ambiguity to the game.
Did he, or didn't he?
Call less fouls, and it doesn't matter.
The fact is, it's only a very very very small minority or PROFESSIONAL Basketball Players that can't his FT's at a reasonable rate (emphasis on professional because FT's aren't that fucking hard. I suck at basketball and can hit 70% without any trouble). I don't think we should protect these shitty FT shooters with a special rule just for them. If they just got up to 60% it wouldn't be worth it to foul them anymore. The onus is on them to get better, like the other 98% of the league.
The more rules you add when officiating is poor, the more likely you are to get poor outcomes because of the enforcement of those rules.
You don't change fouling rules because of poor FT shooters.
I mean, would you go back to illegal D type rules? Would you call a violation of some kind because someone is sagging off a very poor shooter long-range shooter?
Would you make doubling in the post illegal because there aren't as many dominant post-up bigs as there once was?
Again, you just don't make adjustments based on the skills of players, especially a minority of players.
Even Pop, a long-time user of the hacking strategy, has gone on record that he hates it. But it is what it is. I don't think you could make more than marginal changes, and still am not convinced those would be great....like:
-Teams cannot intentionally foul players (all players) off the ball pre-bonus situation (except in last 2 minutes). The result would be a tech type call, where fouled team gets 1 shot and the ball.
->teams can intentionally foul players off the ball in the last 2 minutes of a quarter. Kind of sketchy, but it means if a team is down 20 in the middle of the 3rd, they wouldn't be able to use the "hack" strategy until the last 2 minutes, and for 4 minutes total in the half (counting the 4th quarter). But coaches still should be able to foul however they need to in such situations, if for no other reason that it's been a long-used tool to stop the clock.
These wouldn't completely eliminate "hacking" though, as teams would still use it in close games. But it would really help eliminate them from games like last night to a certain degree. But again, because a guy sucks at shooting FTs, doesn't mean the rules should fully help compensate for his lack of skill. They will still get "hacked" in on-the-ball situations when the off-the-ball ones result in tech style fouls. There is no way to completely eliminate it that wouldn't be totally ludicrous and pampering players because they suck at something.
*And FWIW, I think even the rules I propose are not to protect shitty FT shooters. I don't know about anymore, but when I reffed, which was a mix of NCAA and FIBA rules for high schools, intentional off-the-ball fouls were treated as unsportsmanlike, and resulted in FTs and possession, but counted as a normal foul on the player's foul total. Essentially a mild version of the flagrant, because if you're not making a play on the ball, you deserve a harsher punishment.
Last edited by white men can't jump; Sat Feb 8th, 2014 at 01:40 PM.
Only way to stop the hack-a-whoever is for whoever to learn to shoot free throws. The rules are fine the way they are.
Adam Silver really needs to assess flopping as his first order of business. The stars of the league are giving basketball a wuss/flopping/soccer stigma and it needs to be straightened out.
Jesus...it's free throws. No one is contesting you , no one is hitting you. You go to the line and sink them.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)