What would you do if you had the opportunity to address the growing 'Hack-A-Whomever' trend? Any ideas on rule changes that could prevent this tactic from disrupting the flow of the game, or would you leave it as is? We get to see this tactic far more than most other average NBA fans, outside of LA (Jordan) and Detroit (Drummond). Personally, I would change the rule to this: Intentionally fouling a player that is currently off the ball, while in the bonus and not in the final two minutes of a half, will result in two free throws to be shot by the player who is currently handling the ball. Or who last handled the ball (In the event of a pass). And-one/Continuation rules are applicable as well. So if the off the ball foul happens while the player on the ball is shooting, and the shot goes in, it’s two/three points plus the foul shot for the player that was on the ball and took the shot. Also, I saw another good idea in an SB Nation Article: “…the league could end the practice in one fell swoop by giving teams in the bonus the option of free throws or an inbounds play on non-shooting fouls. In other words, make the bonus optional. There would no longer be a benefit to using an intentional foul. If the Pistons are in the bonus, and the opponent intentionally fouls Drummond off of the ball, Mo Cheeks can decide whether to give him his two free throws or inbound the ball on the side. Adding the option totally closes the loophole intentional foulers exploit. No extra shots for the intentional foul, no technicals, no extra judgment calls for the refs. Just a simple option for coaches.” If this were the rule, I’d make it to where it only applied to intentional fouls off the ball. If you check out the article it goes on to explain some of the consequences of not doing that. Any other ideas on possible remedies, or would you leave the rule as is?
Take away the 6 foul limit. After a player's 4th (or 5th?, I can't decide) foul, the player who was fouled gets an extra free throw. If the foul was a non-shooting foul, give one free throw and the possession. Teams wouldn't have to take players out when they get quick (BS) fouls at the start of the game, either.
I don't think a rule change is necessary. The whole point of doing the Hack-a- is to change the flow of the game and expose a player's weakness. I know it has been played out and is a cliche, but if you want them to stop doing it, make your free throws.
Nah, I'm fine with a 6 foul limit. It adds an element of strategy. However I think that they should add 1 more foul with every other overtime. So a player with 5 fouls would have a limit of 7 in the first OT. And a limit of 8 in the 3rd OT. I hate seeing good players forced off the floor because a great game went to double or triple OT.
KEEEEEP IT. Morey loves when teams do it and statistically it should always be a dumb play in basketball
Yeah, I agree. 50% FT = 100 ORtg I think the rules are fine as they are regarding the hack-a-xxx tactics. Was just trying to come up with other ideas. But I really hate the quick bull**** touch fouls. They really ruin some good matchups.
I have never been to a match where it has happened in aus so maybe I'm missing something, maybe when your their live it would make me mad but normally I celebrate as soon as he is fouled, even if he misses both I still dare the opp coach to continue it. My rule Change would be make it like the rest of the worlds interruption of just a 2 shots and the ball.
I hate intintional fouls that arnt just trying to extend the game. So I would take out the "Hack-a-player" by making the under two minute rule effective thru-out the whole game. Then I would take away the "foul before they can shoot a 3 to tie the game". I would make that free throws and the ball for the team that gets fouled.
I foresee unintentional consequences. Like a hack-a-shaq to burn down the clock in the closing moments of a game. But, I don't have a problem with intentional fouls anyway. No desire to change it.
Create a super-penalty. Teams go into the penalty at 5 fouls. Perhaps at 10 or 12 fouls in a quarter, the team should be in the super-penalty where every non-shooting foul gives one free throw and the possession. Teams would still be able to do a little hack-a-shaq but it would have big risks. Or you could just give the team the choice of free throws or the ball in these cases.
After X (maybe like 5) amount of off the ball intentional fouls before 2 minutes should result in 2 free throws plus the ball. This way you can still use the technique but you have to choose wisely when to implement it.
Hack A Player is the only way most teams can neutralize a dominant big man. The NBA would be a boring league if the few teams with dominant big men dominated the league all the time, as big men don't sell shoes or jerseys as much.
i hate it, it kills entertainment value of the game and you end up with 3+ hour games. as far as fixing, you don't have to fix it. just start calling it what it is, a flagrant 1. it's unnecessary and excessive foul which is the definition of a flagrant foul. simple, no rule changes/additions required.
My two cents..... I am not in favor of taking the "Hack-a-????" out of the game. It is a strategy, just like iso ball, full court press, screens, or fouling a player in the last seconds to prevent them from attempting a 3pr. They are all done to increase your chances for winning the game. The problem with "Hack-a-???" is that it disrupts the flow of the game, and makes the games longer, because it can be done in long stretches and in consecutive plays. There is no benefit for the fan because in reality what you're left with is watching 9players standing around, and a bad free throw shooter usually embarrassing himself. If this is truly a strategy then it should be used strategically and not be encouraged to be used for long stretches of time! How do you stop it from being used for long stretches? Simple, you GIVE the player being fouled 1pt automatically, AND 1free throw! You want to slow the game down? Okay it's going to cost you 1pt! I don't think many teams are willing to give up FREE points, especially for long stretches at a time! ....... ....... .......
That's silly. A foul only benefits the other team if your team doesn't make the shots. The foul didn't benefit them. Your team missing your shots did. If your team makes the shots, it hurts the fouling team.
Any rule that punishes fouls too hard just encourages more flopping. With that said, I feel you have to earn your foul points and retain possession. Hack a Howard is not a "legit" strategy. It is a desperation move made by the other coach when they are against the wall. Like other posters had said, fouls are things that players should not do. It is punished upon by rewarding the other team two free throws, or one extra free throw on top of the scored point. When fouling becomes an advantage for the person that fouls, then that goes against the spirit of the rule isn't it? Hack a Howard also kill the entertainment value of the viewer. Entertainment value matters to the league. Ask coach Pop, he knows all about it when he received a hefty fine for benching his star players so that they can rest for the next game. The reason why it's not addressed is because I feel there is not enough skill big man in the league right now that CAN'T shoot free throws. If they address it, it will just seems to be catering to Dwight. The reason why they made the rule change for Shaq because Shaq was a dominant force, a superstar, and team had no ways of answering to him so they foul him EVERY game. Dwight is just lucky to be in an era where big men are a rarity. But in the end, Dwight Howard should see a mental specialist or something. I can make more free throws then him and I don't even play this sport/practice it religiously.
