No, it's really not. Uh... because he's a pro player. Paid millions to be able to perform fundamental basketball tasks on at least a mediocre level. Apple, meet orange again. Why, oh why, do you guys keep comparing a fundamental basketball skill to those that are specialized? Being able to hit 1/2 free throws is akin to being able to pass to a wide open man on an in-bounds play. Dribble the ball to half-court and back without double-dribbling or traveling. Hit a layup in a layup drill. I love this. You guys keep arguing around the issue, but not the actual issue, which is that players and coaches alike agree that shooting free throws successfully is fundamental to your game. THE game. We get what you are saying. It's an aberration of the rules. It's not the "intent" of the flow of the game as originally planned. Well, where do you draw the line? Why allow intentional fouls at all? As we agreed above, teams that are down by less than 2 possessions will always intentionally foul on the in-bounds play if there's only seconds remaining in the game. This has nothing to do with a "basketball move." It is fouling for the sake of fouling, the only intent to stop the clock. "Oh, well that guy has the ball." So what? The foul itself is still intentional and has nothing to do with the ebb and flow of a basketball possession, because the damned possession hasn't even started yet (the guy is being fouled 80 feet from the basket). I understand you think it makes for lame entertainment. So sorry. And you know what? I don't like to see it either. Again, get mad at these nincompoops that won't spend the time or energy or money getting better at this basic, core part of the game. Your answer is to change the rules for less than a dozen atrocious FT shooters. My answer is to shame them, force them to go to the gym in the offseason and free throw their arms off. Here, maybe I can get y'all to directly argue the point I'm trying to make with re-quotes from NBA players. "You're doing a disservice to yourself, a disservice to your team, if you aren't making these shots. I can't understand how anyone can live with themselves if they can't shoot 80 percent from the free throw line." - Rick Barry "These guys work tirelessly at their jump shots. So if you’re tall... [] I always hear 'Oh, you have big hands,' but…no, it’s hard work, and it’s not just about bragging, it’s about taking someone with you ALL SUMMER… you don’t get better during the season, you get better in the offseason… and if you don’t want to get hacked, take yourself to the gym, lock yourself in there, and SHOOT. FREE THROWS. It’s that simple. It really is that simple.” - Chris Webber (jumped from ~50% to ~70-75% after 1 single off-season)
I just add my quote there too for references' sake. I guess my point is best illustrated with examples. When Dwight Howard (and TJones) was out, our interior defense was terrible. The rest of the team has to be way more involved in pick-and-roll/penetration situations. Another example - Jason Terry is at best a mediocre defender. If Ariza doesn't have his assignment, they will probably try doubling him sometime in the series. In these situations, certain player(s) have deficiencies which are covered by other players on the floor. With fouling on-the-ball, the offense can at least set up where the person getting fouled receives the ball (possibly get a shot and FT's). Now... when you intentionally foul someone off-the-ball, they can't run from you. They can't have someone else shoot their FT's. And I'm not saying I'm against the fundamentals of good FT shooting, just the context. Every time hack-a-someone happens, it's like... HEY, instead of trusting our 5 guys on defense to neutralize whatever offense your 5 guys are running, let's having this entire play consist of ONE GUY in the backcourt who is NOT INVOLVED in the play whatsoever shoot 2 FT's. This skill floor talk, whether the FT shooter actually makes the FT's or not and all that is peripheral to my point. I just think the aforementioned situation, at its very core, isn't real basketball. Even Wilt Chamberlain, one of the greatest centers of all time, was a modest 54% career FT shooter. Bill Russell was 56%.
Why limit this to foul shots? Do you think choosing an oppoing player to shoot a jumper any time you want regardless of the play is a good rule? Do you deny that shooting a jump shot is a FUNDAMENTAL skill of basketball and teams should be punished by having a poor shooter on the team?
Completely different context. Jumpers can and will be contested or wide open depending on circumstance. Being able to shoot a shot? Yeah, that's a fundamental part of basketball. If you can't properly shoot a basketball (switching from 2-handed pushing to proper form) by middle/high school... you're (probably) not going to be playing JV or varsity ball. Teams are absolutely punished if they start a guard or 2 with very low 5-20 FG% - the defense can sag off and help/double a lot easier. You also realize that a player could jump if they wanted to on a FT. So, yeah, we do give the defense the option of "choosing" who gets to shoot a free, wide-open jump-shot. Only, oh yeah, it's 10 feet from the basket, and is better served shooting without jumping. You must not have read what we've been talking about - shooting jumpers and 3s is a specialized role, much like shot-blocking. Nowhere ever has anyone had the skills floor expectation of a center to be able to fire 3s at a 40% clip. If you want to compare apples to apples, here is a list of fundamentals including your "jump shot:" - dribbling a basketball from the baseline to half court and back without double dribbling or traveling - hitting 8-9/10+ layups with your strong hand on a layup drill - successfully hitting a wide-open teammate on an inbounds pass 5 feet from you - being able to hoist a shot at the basket from within the 3-point line with proper form - hitting 1/2+ free throws from the free throw line Why is there a % attached to free throws? Because it's ****ing easy to hit free throws. Dwight Howard, Deandre and J-Smoove are the exception for a reason. This reason is that 1/2 free throws on a consistent basis is an insanely low bar for professionals. Need to get that % up? Try shooting underhanded. Hire a (better?) free throw coach and take him/her with you everywhere you go until you're hitting an acceptable % in-game. As Chris Webber suggested, lock yourself in the damn gym all summer until your arms fall off.
Have you played basketball in real life? Because if you have you should understand the difference between being able to dunk the ball and hit 50% of your FTS. Free throws are fundamental of every player, like dribbling a ball or make an open layup. The argument you are trying to make is you make it seem like every big man hits at 25% free throw and so they should be excused. However that is not the case, I'm sure most big men hit FTS above 50%. Dwight has 57%, Josh Smith has 67%, even Shaq who was the original target has a career 52%!!! So the question if Shaq can hit FTS above 50% why can't guys like Rondo and De Andre Jordan? Why should they get a pass on something Shaq was able to do?
Hack an X doesn't apply to everyone, that's its never been an issue till now, when people lacking basic ball skills start popping up. My belief is these are pro players, if they can't do the basic things you are supposed to do in a basketball game they should be punished for it, because at the end of the day they are making millions of dollars playing a game so they should be pretty good at that game. Hack an X only applies if the player hits FTS above 50%, if the guy hits exactly 50% then the advantage is actually on the team being hacked because having 1 pt per possession is effieicnt compared to going against set defenses. If 50% was a godly stat and every big man has an issue with it then yes I agree it should be removed. But Yao Ming, Shaq, Howard, Greg Smith, Duncan, Omer Asik and josh Smith hit above 50%. Who is taller than Yao? More muscular than Shqw? Has bigger hands then Greg Smith? Doesn't Omer Asik have stone hands and barely catch passes on offense? What kind of excuse can Jordan, Rondo and all the other guys who can hit 50% or above give other than lack of effort/practice? Hell even Bismarck Biyombo hits above 50%! So you're telling Rondo has a more difficult time than Shaq, Duncan, Howard, Biyombo and we should pity him because he's done everything he can but he can't hit his FTS? Gimme a break man Since you like throwing hypothetical, let me ask you something. Do you think players should be called for traveling? If yes, why should they be called that when traveling disrupts the flow of the game? How about turnovers? Yep those disrupt the flow too. FTS on contact? All these things don't add to enjoyment, but we do it anyway because these are part of the core rules of the game. So if we can disrupt the flow and take away enjoyment for these, why can't we do the same for FTS which are also part of the core game rules?
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Whats the difference between FTs in a Hack-a-whoever, and someone who gets to the line all the time. Is it more fun to watch a FT go in ?</p>— Mark Cuban (@mcuban) <a href="https://twitter.com/mcuban/status/595442399553323008">May 5, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Or we can just say if you are shooting under 50% FT , you aren't allowed to play in the 4th quarter. That solves the problem too. Doesnt it?</p>— Mark Cuban (@mcuban) <a href="https://twitter.com/mcuban/status/595442782661029888">May 5, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The drama of watching a guy hacked on purpose shoot the FT is 100x watching a 90pct free throw shooter.</p>— Mark Cuban (@mcuban) <a href="https://twitter.com/mcuban/status/595457043655303168">May 5, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">IMHO its the equivalent of the old adage, "Give me the ball, Im open. No... You are open for a reason" We dare players to shoot all the time</p>— Mark Cuban (@mcuban) <a href="https://twitter.com/mcuban/status/595457411193835520">May 5, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/B_harlington5">@B_harlington5</a> ive always been opposed. You cant reward a guy for not being able to shoot any shot, FT or otherwise</p>— Mark Cuban (@mcuban) <a href="https://twitter.com/mcuban/status/595458210842025984">May 5, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/JimmieOakman">@JimmieOakman</a> Teach the guy to make FTs. Problem solved. You dont need to change the rules</p>— Mark Cuban (@mcuban) <a href="https://twitter.com/mcuban/status/595458869205147648">May 5, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> Pop:
I actually agree with Cuban on this. I always said I find it amusing/entertaining to watch DeAndre Jordan or Joey Dorsey shoot FTs What's so fun about watching Curry shoot them when 95% of the time they go in??
I don't think you understand the argument. The hack tactic is an artificial way to choose a player to do what he does not do well. It is artificial like the Skills Challenge or the Dunk Contest in the Allstar weekend. You just pick some skills (very fundamental, mind you) and ask the players to perform the skills in an artificial way. If a basketball game is like that, then we should let teams take turns to choose players from the opponent to perform those skills, say for example a contested jump shot, or a driving layup. Basically a game of "fundamental" HORSE. Do you want basketball like that?
Same people mad about hack a shaq are the same people who got pissed off watching manny vs mayweather. No understanding of sltechnique, skill and strategy. Why not just watch dog fighting?
The name of the game is to entertain people. People got used to the shot clock and the 3-point line. They'll get used to this.
Van Gundy on the radio with Charlie P dropping some truth. Either remove free throws (almost) entirely, or make them a part of *every* foul (and change the way fouls are called). Free throws are boring. Fans don't like them. Why do we shoot them all the damn time? For technicals? Why not just book a guy and keep play moving?
Just tweak it to where the foul has to be in the front court, or the players has to be involved in the play in some way like setting a screen (on or off the ball), fighting for post/rebounding positioning, etc. Basically it would just be an extension of the last 2 minute rule. So you could still "hack-A" but it would have to be on a put back attempt, screen, post up. That makes more sense and is strategic in the sense that you're still challenging that player on their weakness.
Come on son! If you think off-the-ball intentional fouling is fundamental then you aren't contradicting yourself. I'm all for intentional on-the-ball fouls. I think EVERYONE IS FOR INTENTONAL ON-THE-BALL fouls.
Because you can effectively run down the shot clock. I do not understand how anyone thinks its ok to exploit the entire game on a single players weakness. This rule is not by design. Most players have significant weaknesses, so its ludicrous to believe we should expect every player to be perfectly rounded. The solution is very simple. If a foul is committed off the ball, then either the team gets to choose the FT shooter or the player with the ball shoots FT.
LOL even Cubes agrees with me why make an exception for people who can't hit fts above 50%? If Shaq, Omer Asik and Josh Smith can hit fts above 50% what excuse do guys like De Andre Jordan have that the league has to make an exception to them? Bigs who can't shoot fts above 50% are the exception, and so they should man up and practice fts instead of just b****ing about it. As for the entertainment factor, that argument falls flat when as Cubes said you realize that teams have players like Harden who go to the line all the time. Harden goes to the line at least 10x a game, do you flip the channel whenever he does that? People always exaggerate, as if the NBA games are 100% dunks and highlight reels and fans go out of their minds when something boring happens on the screen. What the F are you, 10 years old?
So what's the difference between off the ball and on the ball fouling? It's the same act. The problem here is you guys want to make an exception for people that don't deserve it. Ft shooting is a weakness, but b-ball is all about exploiting weaknesses. So why is it that the guys with ft shooting weakness need to be protected but the guys who have 3 pt shooting weakness or passing weakness or blocking weakness allowed? Why make this preferential treatment to poor ft shooters that you don't do to everyone else? Like I keep saying if a lot of people are poor ft shooters go for it, but there's only a couple of them why bother? It's not like the Spurs were able to take advantage of Jordan's poor ft shooting and won the series 4-0 by fouling every play.
What's the difference between on-the-ball and off-the-ball fouling? I think it's pretty obvious. It's easy to keep the ball out of a bad free throw shooter's hands for several seconds of the clock with on-the-ball fouling. With off-the-ball fouling, you can just make a run at the bad free throw shooter, irrespective of what else is happening on the court. I, like most people, am in favor of on-the-ball fouling. Off-the-ball fouling just disrupts the game flow for the viewer.
