What's new
By:

Simple and practical solution to the "Hack-a-Shaq" rule!

carolinajazz

carolinajazz

Well-Known Member
Why this is so hard to figure out or contend with is beyond me! The solution is very simple! 1) When a player is fouled off the ball intentionally, he get's to shoot two free throws, correct? If he makes both of them, the shooting team RETAINS possession of the ball! 2) When a player is foul off the ball intentionally, he get's to shoot two free throws, correct? If he makes ONE of the shots, the shooting team retains possession of the ball!
Either rule makes it a bigger risk to intentionally foul a slop dummy that can't hit his free throws! Yet and still, if you want to gamble that the clown misses both free throws.....you are rewarded! Problem solved! It will almost put an end to the "hack-a-shaq" rule that seems to slow the game down and make an already unwatchable game, even more unwatchable!
 
It seems to me that it used to be if you intentionally fouled somebody without making a play at the ball they got 1 FT and the ball back. What happened to just playing basketball? Maybe this was just the rule in the league I played in as a kid. Essentially fouling a guy without making a play at the ball was a technical foul without the penalty of a technical foul. Same rule for end of game fouls. You must go for the ball not just grab somebody to foul them. That would completely eliminate this strategy from basketball. No point in fouling somebody if they just get the ball back anyway.
 
An even simpler way...to correct this....would be if the hoppers would spend....more time....practicing free throws....instead of....getting....jailhouse tattoos!!!!!!!!!
 
Perhaps if someone cant make FREE throws they should sit on the bench. It is no fun, but why someone cant make over 50% for their free throws is pretty sad.
 
I agree that they should learn to shoot free throws. It's pretty pathetic that some people could probably make as high of percentage blind folded as some of these professional players can make. But it's still makes games unbearable to watch. And when basketball is supposed to be the most fun to watch (in the playoffs) it actually gets boring as all hell because of this strategy.
.
I have a lot of respect for Gobert for seeing it as a problem and improving it.
 
I'm still surprised that the NBA wants to have discussions about possible rule changes to help out teams with poor free throw shooters in the game during crunch time. I realize they feel it's an entertainment issue, but it's part of the strategy and gamesmanship of the sport. What's next? Not allowing Defenses to sag off of players that sho0t 15% or worse from behind the arc?
 
gregbroncs said:
It seems to me that it used to be if you intentionally fouled somebody without making a play at the ball they got 1 FT and the ball back. No point in fouling somebody if they just get the ball back anyway.
Click to expand...

...the old ABA had a "No Foul Out" rule in which when a player commits his 6th foul, instead of having to leave the game, the opposing team would get 2 free throws AND retain possession of the ball! The idea was to allow the top stars of the game to remain in the game even if they fouled excessively. But the penalty was fairly severe! My suggestion follows that same format. You can intentionally foul a guy off the ball, but if he makes both free throws (or even 1 of the 2 free throws) they retain possession of the ball. The risk/reward factor is still there but this intentionally fouling a guy off the ball would be drastically curtailed....true or false?
 
jazzman12 said:
I'm still surprised that the NBA wants to have discussions about possible rule changes to help out teams with poor free throw shooters in the game during crunch time. I realize they feel it's an entertainment issue, but it's part of the strategy and gamesmanship of the sport. What's next? Not allowing Defenses to sag off of players that sho0t 15% or worse from behind the arc?
Click to expand...
When you are fouling a guy intentionally off of the ball then it's not part of the game IMO. I agree it's become a strategy that should ideally be corrected by learning how to shoot a FREE throw. But I also don't like that they can intentionally foul away from the ball, while not making a basketball play. Just like I don't agree that an offensive player should be allowed to intentionally hit a defensive players hand with his arm to draw a foul.
 
jazzman12 said:
I'm still surprised that the NBA wants to have discussions about possible rule changes to help out teams with poor free throw shooters in the game during CRUNCH TIME. I realize they feel it's an entertainment issue, but it's part of the strategy and gamesmanship of the sport. What's next? Not allowing Defenses to sag off of players that sho0t 15% or worse from behind the arc?
Click to expand...

actually this strategy is currently not allowed during crunch time already
 
carolinajazz said:
Why this is so hard to figure out or contend with is beyond me! The solution is very simple! 1) When a player is fouled off the ball intentionally, he get's to shoot two free throws, correct? If he makes both of them, the shooting team RETAINS possession of the ball! 2) When a player is foul off the ball intentionally, he get's to shoot two free throws, correct? If he makes ONE of the shots, the shooting team retains possession of the ball!
Either rule makes it a bigger risk to intentionally foul a slop dummy that can't hit his free throws! Yet and still, if you want to gamble that the clown misses both free throws.....you are rewarded! Problem solved! It will almost put an end to the "hack-a-shaq" rule that seems to slow the game down and make an already unwatchable game, even more unwatchable!
Click to expand...

it's a great idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top