I think the opposite. There should be MORE fouls given and even NO FOULING OUT the game. Already in the college game a guy gets 2 fouls in 1st 6 minutes and he's sitting out until after halftime. No one pays big money to see Lebron sitting on the bench for half the game because of foul trouble. NBA would extend their entertainment dollar even that much more (And teams could shed 1-2 roster spots if players didnt have to come out the game) Thats called, variability and strategy in sports. As compared to tennis (singles) which the action doesnt stop but its very LINEAR I don't know... Yes I can admit there's some cheap tactics in basketball, and too much stopping play in some times when the game should just go. But I've never watched a game and thought "Why did they put Tiago Splitter at the line there? Thats it, too boring, gonna catch up on my Netflix queue now"
sad...but true..... everybody want to be bigger stronger more athletic than actually learn and practice basketball skill, knowledge, IQ, fundamentals... watered down NBA...even many street ballers are more skilled and fundamentally sound than NBA players, too bad their "too short, small, weak" for the NBA. just needed to rant sorry
Dunks aren't actually all that interesting, especially the ones where success is inevitable. An intentional foul to stop a score is more interesting because the defender is making a strategic choice -- which is costlier, the foul or the basket? Making the cost so high that no one will choose to foul makes the game more predictable and less exciting. Leave it alone.
Consider the play that injured Westbrook. In the last two minutes . .. every play would look similar Rocket River
