Bingo. You are 100% correct about a lot of the commissioner's role, and if we see a double hack-a back and forth in the playoffs (Clippers Rockets? - hack-a-back-a-forth?) I wouldn't be surprised to see the league make some alterations next year (I've already said I think most folks, myself included, would be fine changing off-the-ball/intentional fouls in the bonus to award either 2 shots or possession w/ 14 seconds on the clock, coach's choice). I disagree with the wussification of the league, and have for years. I was just as entertained at 11 as at 25 or whenever the hell they made Mutombo stop wagging the finger... my point is, I was just as entertained and lit up about that in both decades. No reason to take all the emotion out of an emotional, frenzied game. I find passion, grit and aggression in basketball exciting to watch. I don't think it "hurts the game" when a player throws the ball out of frustration (after a dead ball is whistled on a foul he committed) onto the player-padding attached to the goal-post (saw Kevin Garnett get T'd up for that once), or when 2 players go at it with furious physicality. I shudder to think about how many more "fouls" Olajuwon would've been called for in today's wimpy game, with the sick rim protection and aggressive block attempts he put out. Over-calling technicals (I believe that started in the mid-late 2000s), no taunting, no hanging on rims, wimpy flagrants, elimination of hand checking and shoving/contact of cutters through the lane... these are all things I'm still sad to see. Others that you mention are almost no-brainers to me and are every bit as much about the game itself and what's "fair" to players and teams, like the clear path foul. It's less about the "watchability" of the game than it is what makes sense. The restricted area makes sense, because it's really a cheap play to slide under someone mid-dunk to take a "charge" and expect to get rewarded with a charge call. You can regard it as whatever you'd like. I'd think people that fall in line with Morey's total "advanced" stats-obsessed train of thinking would agree with Popovich and other coaches that it is much more smart and statistically rewarding than it is "desperate." I haven't changed my tune since 1999, or whenever teams figured out they could send Shaq to the line and reap potential benefits. 100% onus is on players to hit the FT. Not the league, not the coaches. 1/2 from the line. Then this whole thing disappears.
it always seemed odd to me that the nba, which valued rule changes for entertainment above all else is the only professional league that allows the ugliest thing in all of professional sports. There really havent been many things that are as bad as the hack to the watchability of a sport, you'd probably need some experience with england or australia to pick the one that is probably worse, ever.
I edited all your ad hom. stuff, since it just runs your own reputation down around here. On topic, I looked up all the free-throw stats, league wide, since the start of the NBA about 65 years ago. In the beginning, underhand free-throw shooting was very common, if not ubiquitous. These days, the league is commonly shooting around 75%. In the good old days, it was closer to 70%. Lots of fluctuation, but in general, if you look over 65 years, NBA players shoot between 70-76% on average, as a league, and that's always included 90% guys and 40% guys. Yes, there were terrible underhand free throw shooters. My point is I don't think Dwight would hit 75% underhanded. There's no evidence to really suggest it is that superior a form, based on history and data. I agree that practice would seem to make it better, but for someone like Dwight, I think practice and muscle memory will only go so far. He is fundamentally not a shooter. Period. There are certain humans who would never be very good at it. And as long as some guys are good at most of the game but naturally bad at that part, this ugly loophole will be a problem, like so many other rules. To me, it's less about free throws, and more about off ball fouls. Intentional off ball fouls, to me, are like getting to tackle people without the ball, in football. It makes no sense to the fundamental game. Smith is a different story than Dwight, because he can hit (some) jumpshots and has (some) range. It does seem like a guy with Smith's talent should get close to the league average at the line, if he dedicated himself and focused. I'll give you that. Glad we agree on the fundamental issues, clearly. There's no reason for all your outrage at other posters. It makes the thread as tedious as Rockets shooting free throws.
I don't blame the Spurs for employing the strategy. But the NBA is in the business of entertainment, and reducing a basketball game to a FT shooting competition is not savvy from the league's perspective. It's time to fix that. While you're at it, shorten the season. You don't need to play 82 games to let more teams into the playoffs than you exclude. It dilutes the regular season and encourages teams to rest for long stretches the star players you're trying to sell to the public. If you insist on 82 games, then reduce the number of teams that make the playoffs from 16 to 12.
Don't see why people think it makes boring basketball. It's strategy, which is intrinsically interesting. People aren't dunking or anything, but basketball shouldn't be only feats of physical prowess.
I'm not talking about dunking. I'm talking about the game of basketball...matchups...offensive sets..plays...all of that is lost when it's reduced to a FT shooting competition.
Yes, let's make it part of all-star weekend, since that event couldn't get much worse anyway. You could have 5-on-5 with the worst free throw shooters from both conferences just constantly hacking one another and bricking free-throws.
Agreed. This crap is making the games cringe worthy to watch and I don't care to sit through an hour of free throw practice on television. If this keeps up I'll be watching less and less NBA. MUCH less.
Random question that me and some buddies were wondering during the game What if the player being hacked just stood out of bounds the whole play so the team could play 5 on 4? I'm assuming you can't foul someone who is out of bounds
If the player being hacked just stood out of bounds, then the other team would be given the ball, since it is illegal to stand out of bounds.
So in summary... Fans dislike hack-a-whoever when their teams have someone who can't shoot FTs. But have no problem when their team employs the strategy with success because winning > all. The NBA has not cared to change this rule in the past decade despite prominently being used on multiple big men (Shaq, DeAndre, Dwight). Conclusion: Rules aren't going to change anytime soon so players should just practice free throws.
I don't think you should be able to foul a player without the ball. If you do, free throws and retain possession. The caveats include fighting for position (rebounds, posting up) and impeding players (picks). Those can be addressed.
I don't understand how it hasn't been a rule already. Yes, free throw shooting is part of the game. But intentionally touching someone 90 feet from the basket is not part of the game. It has nothing to do with basketball and should be eradicated. How about if a team is in the penalty and an off-the-ball foul occurs, the team can choose to have the player who was fouled shoot two free throws or can take it out of abounds. Intentionally fouling is still in play like it always has been when the player has the ball. Meaning, Shaq gets the ball down low, you can hack him and send him to the free throw line. So, it still give a minor disadvantage to teams with bad free throw shooters...if they don't want him shooting free throws, then you have to play 4 vs 5 on offense and not give him the ball.
Yeah, I erased that after thinking about it some more. I think there does need to be a solution to that though.
Eh, maybe the solution is don't be down by three when the shot clock is turned off. I can't think of anything that isn't overly-contrived at the moment.
My e-mail to the NBA front office. So I sent this e-mail to the front office via NBA.com, subject NBA officiating... Greetings NBA front office, I am writing this e-mail to propose an action against coaches who use the "hack" strategy on teams and/or individual players during the regular play of the game. The proposal is a simple take on the "If you do 'a' because of 'b', then why don't you do 'c' because of 'd'?" principle. Basically, the reference is to flopping. Flopping in the NBA for a number of years was a distractor to the game, and as you know has recently been reduced, due to the administering of fines to NBA players who have been deemed to be frequent floppers. My proposal is simple, if you fine NBA players for flopping, why can you not fine NBA coaches for directing his team to hack their opponents? When a player flops, his attempt is to draw a foul, a "fake" foul, with the direct intention of halting the opposing team's play. When a coach calls for the hacking strategy, they are committing a foul, a "fake" foul, with the direct intention of halting the opposing team's play. It's the same concept, with the same intent, but just converse executions. Any thoughts?
You get paid millions of dollars if you don't want it done then just knock down your FT. If Yao who is bigger than these guys can hit his FT then these guys should be able to too. If you can't hit the FT shooting it conventionally then shot it under hand like Rick Berry. Is it more embarrassing to clank FT after FT shooting 20-30% or shoot it under hand and make a difference to your team success.
