Are you crazy? Seriously. Not only you resort to personal attacks out of the blue but you also insult someone's country? And you also insult the wrong person? Can I report this clown or are personal attacks against someone's country accepted as normal around here?
Jordan does things on the basketball court that pretty much nobody in the game right now can do better...but because he can't shoot free throws he's making a farce out of basketball? Wow. I don't understand how obsessed some of you are with free throws. It should not be that important to the game. It's merely a supplemental deterrent to prevent games from getting ugly. That is the only reason they were invented. Due to an unforeseen loophole, they are now having the opposite effect.
Rules have been changed before because of 1 player. Leroy Edwards: 3 second Rule George Mikan: Goal Tending and wider lanes Wilt Chamberlain: Free throw plane Lew Alcindor: Dunking (later rescinded) http://www.school-for-champions.com/sports/basketball_players_who_caused_rule_changes.htm#.VVUZQ6ZjpUQ I'm tired of the "well he should make his free throws" crowd. The goal of a team is to win. The goal of the NBA is to provide an entertaining product. The rules should balance the combination of these two things. The shot clock was instituted because teams just held onto the ball forever vs superior teams. The 3 point line was added to space the floor and add entertainment. (http://www.usab.com/youth/news/2011/06/the-history-of-the-3-pointer.aspx) If there's any feedback from the fans of the league, it's that the Hack-A-Whomever strategy is unwatchable! The rule should be changed to reward teams for playing defense and stopping their opponent the way the game was intended.
How do you guys not know about the Shaq rule? In the last two minutes of the 4th quarter, if a team intentionally fouls someone away from the ball, it's 2 free throws and the ball. That's why nobody uses the Hack strategy at the end of the game. Just spread that out to the last two minutes of every quarter. Or make it 4 minutes. Whatever... just end this horrendous strategy. This crap is not basketball.
What the pro hack-a-Shaq crowd fails to acknowledge is that poor free throw shooters are already penalized for their deficiencies, by virtue of the fact that they are unreliable offensive options if they are fouled in normal game play. The ability to us hack a Shaq adds another artificial level of penalty, because they are not even involved in the offensive play. Every player has deficiencies in one way or another, but only free throw shooting is allowed to be artificially used by opposing coaches. Coaches can't force Muggsy Bogues to play center. They can't force Dikembe Mutombo to dribble the ball up the court. They can't force Deandre Jordan to shoot three pointers. Why should they be able to make a player shoot free throws who doesn't even have the ball? It doesn't even make sense in the spirit of the game. It would be as if you could force a pitcher to bat every single time or if a roughing the passer penalty in football meant the QB had to go kick a field goal. It is ridiculous.
Yes when he misses FT after FT he makes a farce out of the most principle of what is basketball : put the ball in the hoop. Do I enjoy watching hacking? Def not. Do I want to see the rule change because of one player? Hell no. Just because a rule has changed in the past because of a single player that doesn't make it okay to change again. The player in question is the anomaly not the rule.
Free throws are a fundamental part of basketball that applies to every player on the floor whether they are a center or a point guard. When you call yourself a pro you better be able to put the bball in the hoop when unguarded by the FT line. This is basics!! It is not like penalising height or mobillity or speed. And the spirit of the sport is definitely not to change the rule to accomodate one player. The rule are preexisting and it's the players who should elevate and improve their skills to become better. Instead of asking of Jordan to get better why demand a change of rules now? Talk about taking a shortcut.
Why must free throws be fundamental? The only purpose of free throws is to penalize teams for fouling, right? Instead they are currently being used to reward teams for doing something that is against the rules (fouling). It makes no sense. Shouldn't every baseball player be able to hit? Yet there is no way to force the worst hitters on a baseball team to bat every single time.
I don't know anything about baseball. I like basketball. Shooting is a part of basketball. It is a funtamental part of basketball. The rule is the rule. If someone doesn't play defence, doesn't box out etc etc and he hurts his team, the coach gets him out. Jordan if he can't hit a FT and he hurts his team, it's up to the coach to take him out. Noone is forcing the coach to leave the player in the court. The argument " it's not good for the viewers" and "turns casual fans away" is a slippery slope. Then why call fouls to star players? The viewers want to see the stars and it's not good for the "sport" to have the star fouled out. Why call travel? Why play defence at all? Let's just turn basketball in streetball so everyone tunes it to see fancy dunks.
Straw man argument. I didn't say shooting is not fundamental. I asked why free throws are fundamental. The only reason they exist is to penalize the opposing team for cheating (fouling). They are currently being used to the opposite effect.
I like this. I would like to call it a delay of game, since that pretty much what it is. How about two delays per half and then there is a technical foul shot. Good shooter would go knock one down, bad shooter can go clank em but the point is scored. At that point a 1 outta 2 type shooter will be scoring the 2nd point that makes it a bad strategy to continue... But not completely unavailable. Just eliminates halves like we saw the other night. That was stupid. No team would hacka17times again. It could be something to slow a teams momentum once per half but not a friggin gameplan. That's my best idea
Let me ask you a question. Do you believe FT shooting is MORE fundamental than dribbling? If not, then why don't they have a rule to allow teams to choose which player of the opposing team to bring the ball up the court? I mean, you are a professional basketball player. If you can't do the simple thing of dribbling the ball, they the opponent should be able to exploit your deficiency and choose YOU to bring the ball up court every single time. Good rule?
I like the rule Bill Simmons suggested. The team of the person who gets fouled gets to choose whether they take 2 free throws or take the ball out without any.
Dribbling is a actually a good example of the ft rule, if the opponent knows you cant dribble then when you touch the ball they're gonna force you to pass or dribble...in the same way that when you are a poor ft throw shooter the opponent should be able to force you to shoot fts. Why cant opponents straight up choose who brings the ball up for the opponent? Because that would give the opponent an unfair advantage, something that doesnt apply to hack an X because in hack an X the team that is hacking is digging a hole for themselves, they give up a foul and give the opponent a possible 2 pts. How is that the same as straight up choosing who brings the ball up for the opponent? But the reality is you guys are accusing malakas of having a straw man argument and then you pull crap like talking about baseball or this stupid ass argument about dribbling. I have no clue about baseball and this thread is about fts, not dribbling or anything else you might cook up. the only reason you will bring up unrelated topics and ask the same question is you dont have a suitable reply and thus using a strawman to change the fo us of the conversation.
I think several people have brought up valid points as to why hack-a-Shaq needs to be eliminated. Whether you choose to reply to them or not is another story. Calling another poster's comparison to dribbling "stupid ass" does not refute the point. I would argue that free-throw shooting is not fundamental to basketball. It is a penalty to discourage cheating (fouling). It should not be used to benefit the team cheating. Is that a suitable reply?
For me, this reply is typical of those who want hack an X gone in this thread, you project the stuff you're doing on other people-you guys accuse others of building strawman arguments then talk about baseball or whatever, and now this poster accuses me of ignorance when his reply is 100% all opinion and no data points whatsoever. 1) Hack an X only applies when the opponent getting hacked hits LESS than 50% fts a game, because otherwise that results in 1 point per possession which is around average for offense whereas the opponent has to score against a set defense which should be harder to do etc etc etc. You talk about league history but in the entire league history very few big men are unable to shoot less than 50% free throws, that's why it was called hack-a-shaq and because prior to this season Shaq was the only famous guy who routinely got hacked...and he also shot higher than 50% for his career! And because he shot above 50% I don't think hack a shaq was ultimately effective because it didn't stop him from getting 4 titles, an MVP and multiple finals appearances. So please spare me the sob story about how big men just suck at free throws, sucking at free throws is different from hitting 50% from the ft line, which is really all you need to stop hack an X. Nobody is asking Rajon Rando to hit 90% from the stripe, but 50% is something Shaq and Dwight was able to do so why can't he do it? 2) If free throws aren't good for business and make the game boring etc, why are you focusing on hack an X? How many free throws does De Andre Jordan make in a game compared to Harden? How about Rondo compared to Westbrook? Chuck Hayes compared to Lebron? The people who shoot fts the most are the ones good at them, and unsurprisingly the people who shoot the fts the least are the ones who are bad at them. If the point is to say fts make the game boring and cause the audience to make a sandwich etc. then taking out hack an X won't really make a difference because there are only a couple of players who hit below 50%...and those guys don't shoot a lot of fts per game. Or like Samfisher are you saying its exciting when Harden shoots 10 fts a night, but boring as **** the 5 times Rondo goes to the charity stripe? And considering how few attempts Rondo makes at the line, how many opportunities do you exactly have to make that samwich or flip the channel? It's not like we're seeing every series become Hack an X athon, in the entire playoffs only two teams got hacked an X...the Clips and the Rockets. If the league takes away Hack an X how much of an impact will it really have on the free throws the audience has to sit through? You eliminate the 4 times Jordan has to go to the stripe...whoopie! Now go watch the Rox shoot 98 free throws against the Mavs. 3) Your post is so condescending about "my demographic" but where are your facts to back your claim? How do I know it's now just the loud minority who are complaining about this? From all accounts the NBA viewership is as high as its ever been, in fact the league is about to sign a new TV megadeal that is gonna bring in the $$$. Is that supposed to happen to a league that is losing its audience to hack an X? Not only that if free throws are so bad and so boring why is Harden who is the free throw poster boy generating a ton of hype and got deals from sponsors like Under Armour? Apparently shooting 10+ fts a game doesn't affect Harden's popularity all that much, so why is the 5 or so times Rondo gets hacked supposed to pull the NBA down?
Niiiice. When I see the ad hominem attacks a'comin... well, you don't really have **** left to say, now do ya? Missing the point and intentionally disregarding it are 2 different beasts. Intentional, strategic fouling shouldn't give an *automatic and absolute* advantage to the fouling team, and on paper it doesn't (just like intentionally fouling a ball-handler with 20 seconds left in the game while down by 2 doesn't automatically give you an advantage...rather, it gives you a fighting chance to win - a more advantageous position than not intentionally fouling at all). The "advantage" completely disappears if you hit 1/2+ free throws with consistency. The loophole is closed & coaches will not hack-a. Headline: NBA Playoffs Ratings: Round One Scores Third Best Result Ever http://deadline.com/2015/04/nba-playoffs-ratings-round-1-cavaliers-celtics-1201412997/ I'm sorry your rage/crying about our pitiful FT shooters has blinded you to us repeating, time and time again, that no one likes watching professional players clunk/air free throw after free throw. Our solutions to the problem differ. The NBA doesn't only concern itself with watchability and casual fans when considering rule changes. Thank God for that.
It's a childish tactic to keep shoveling words and ideas into our mouths/posts. No one wants to see these guys clank FT after FT. We want them to be professionals and hit 1/2+ free throws, a respectable skills floor for a part of basketball that everyone playing organized basketball must perform. I'd love to see you back this up with some actual, factual information. You and Sam keep suggesting or outright stating that the laugh-fest big-men FT-shooting contest results in poor ratings... prove it. Where are your numbers? I watch basketball to watch basketball, never ever ever cared how many other folks are watching it around the country. Why should we? I'm guessing your response will be something to the tune of "oh, well bball is a business, gotta make money, gotta get good ratings." Ok, cool, leave that up to NBA execs. To my knowledge the league isn't in dire straits right now... ****ing hogwash. Really. You seem to ignore everything we tell you about the many, many, many poor free throw shooters (big/small men alike) that have practiced and/or gotten coaching, resulting in noticeable improvements in their FT shooting. Yes, some people are going to be awful at free throws. There is a difference between being acceptably awful (55%, 65%) and laughably, unacceptably bad from the line (38%). Again, I ask you directly, Bob, and also this SamFisher guy... are y'all cool with taking intentional fouling out before a player crosses half-court, but allowing it after a player crosses that line? If not, why?
It also doesn't concern themselves with deliberately obtuse ball bags so you're a bit out of luck my sweet little prince of punkass.
