Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

As his first order of business, should Adam Silver eliminate the Hack-A-(Insert Poor FT Shooter's Name)?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • As his first order of business, should Adam Silver eliminate the Hack-A-(Insert Poor FT Shooter's Name)?

    Yes. Please god, yes.
    32
    Keep it! Learn to shoot free throws!
    87.50%
    28
    Lose it! For the love of god lose it!
    12.50%
    4
    "Stop eating your sushi."
    "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
    "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
    - Jack Armstrong

  • #2
    no. and even if they wanted to, how would it even be addressed?

    Comment


    • #3
      How about if your paying a guy millions of dollars he should be able to make a god damn free throw
      "Both teams played hard my man" - Sheed

      Comment


      • #4
        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.
        "Stop eating your sushi."
        "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
        "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
        - Jack Armstrong

        Comment


        • #5
          iblastoff wrote: View Post
          no. and even if they wanted to, how would it even be addressed?
          Here's a simple one: the shooting team can choose any of their players to shoot free-throws
          "Stop eating your sushi."
          "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
          "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
          - Jack Armstrong

          Comment


          • #6
            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
            @Boymusic66

            Comment


            • #7
              TSF wrote: View Post
              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
              Sorry, thought this would be clear: it would apply to any Hack-A-Shaq style intentional off-the-ball fouls.
              "Stop eating your sushi."
              "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
              "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
              - Jack Armstrong

              Comment


              • #8
                JimiCliff wrote: View Post
                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.
                But as people say.....

                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 8, 2014, 02:08 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  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.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    iblastoff wrote: View Post
                    no. and even if they wanted to, how would it even be addressed?
                    That's what I wanna know. Would every foul on Player X be called as a double foul? How would the refs even make that judgement, considering how terrible they are at making other calls? Would it be a technical against the player who commits the foul?

                    mike, prague wrote: View Post
                    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.
                    They (players/coaches) already get fined for commenting/criticizing the officiating. That's pretty Stalin-ish.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                      A guy shooting free throws is supposed to benefit from those shots.
                      As we've seen since Hack-A-Shaq started, coaches employ this strategy because certain players do not benefit from it.

                      white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                      He wastes a valuable foul to send the guy to the line.
                      They aren't valuable. It's very easy to ensure that these fouls don't compromise any of the hacking teams useful players.

                      white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                      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.
                      To call them free throws is pure semantics; they could have been called anything. They aren't free. If they were actual free points, then there wouldn't be any shooting involved.

                      white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                      What if DeAndre Jordan is run into off the ball, but intentionally during normal contact with screens?
                      In terms of the rules, another option would be, on off-the-ball fouls, to allow the team being fouled to choose to inbound the ball rather than shoot free throws.

                      There are multiple simple solutions to this problem.

                      white men can't jump wrote: View Post

                      What I'd like to see before any rule change is the guys who suck at it make a real effort to be better.
                      The idea that these players don't work on their FTs is just plain wrong. They do. It's just a difficult shot for some people; there's no way around it. And I don't see why they should be forced to shoot Granny style because, as I wrote, the root of this whole issue is that it's against the spirit of the rules for a team to employ fouling intentionally as a strategy from which they can benefit. The onus should not be on the team being fouled to adapt to this unsportsmanlike play.
                      "Stop eating your sushi."
                      "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
                      "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
                      - Jack Armstrong

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        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.

                        Lame.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          JimiCliff wrote: View Post
                          As we've seen since Hack-A-Shaq started, coaches employ this strategy because certain players do not benefit from it.



                          They aren't valuable. It's very easy to ensure that these fouls don't compromise any of the hacking teams useful players.



                          To call them free throws is pure semantics; they could have been called anything. They aren't free. If they were actual free points, then there wouldn't be any shooting involved.



                          In terms of the rules, another option would be, on off-the-ball fouls, to allow the team being fouled to choose to inbound the ball rather than shoot free throws.

                          There are multiple simple solutions to this problem.



                          The idea that these players don't work on their FTs is just plain wrong. They do. It's just a difficult shot for some people; there's no way around it. And I don't see why they should be forced to shoot Granny style because, as I wrote, the root of this whole issue is that it's against the spirit of the rules for a team to employ fouling intentionally as a strategy from which they can benefit. The onus should not be on the team being fouled to adapt to this unsportsmanlike play.
                          Yes, they don't benefit....but they are supposed to, as free throw shooting is supposed to be a basic fundamental skill.

                          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.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                            And finally, you totally cut out my last part.
                            Because I think real issue at hand precedes it (as I've written): a team should not be able to foul strategically.
                            "Stop eating your sushi."
                            "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
                            "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
                            - Jack Armstrong

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              JimiCliff wrote: View Post
                              Just because I think real issue at hand precedes it (as I've written): a team should not be able to foul strategically.
                              But I think that's on the player's inability to shoot free throws. Which in turn precedes that. No coach would employ that strategy if guys shot even a modest 65% or so from the line.

                              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 8, 2014, 03:19 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X