Rule change coming to Hack A Player?

[JonFromVA]

Suspend crappy free throw shooters. Changing the rules because of 3 guys is dumb. Getting rid of those 3 guys is easy.

[tasball]

Just need a FIBA-like rule "not a legitimate attempt to directly play the ball within the spirit or intent of the rules" = tech.

edit, bonus would be getting rid of deliberate fouling on fast breaks. Bogut gains on the anti-hack fouls but loses on fouling the fast break. ha

[StocktonShorts]

Just need a FIBA-like rule "not a legitimate attempt to directly play the ball within the spirit or intent of the rules" = tech.

We need fewer rules that force the referees to judge intent, not more.

"And now it looks like the refs are sending this one to Secaucus where a three-person panel of judges will determine if Drummond was intentionally fouled or not."

[Capn'O]

[MotownMadness]

Suspend crappy free throw shooters. Changing the rules because of 3 guys is dumb. Getting rid of those 3 guys is easy.

I think fixing a ridiculous loophole the same way it has been fixed in the final 2 mins makes more sense then getting rid of 3 of the top Centers in the game.

[Sofia]

How about the clippers , pistons and rockets get a C who can hit free throws? Changing the rules to support three players who are horrendous at a certain skill is disgusting.

How about all the other teams learn to play defence?

What a joke!!!

Criticizing the D of teams when you have grown men that can't make a 15 foot set shot without a defender on them?
Pathetic.

How about coaches sit the guy down if he can't make free throws, and have him work on it!!

What a joke!!!

Putting your scrubs into the game to play chaseys with an opposing big man because you need to rest guys instead of making them play defence? Pathetic.

How about coaches sit the guy down if he can't get defensive stops, and have him work on it!!

[YogurtProducer]

I love how internet warriors hate on guys for not being able to shoot FTs. There's a trend amongst the players who can't. Big hands, broad shoulders, etc. Grab yourself a tennis ball and try to hit it into a cup that is about 15 feet in front of you and 1 foot above your head. All of you 5'10 players don't understand what it's like for a 7'0 guy to try and palm a basketball. Some guys are able to become respectable FT shooters, but very rarely do you ever see a true 7 footer (especially those who aren't jump shooters) be able to nail FTs very well compared to guards.

One guys can't play D and we don't force them to match up with Lebron, some guys can't shoot 3's but we don't expect them to shoot like Curry, some guys can't box out and we don't expect them to play centre, and some guys can't shoot FTs, so why do we expect them to be able to hit them? Every player has his weaknesses, sheesh.

Also don't think people understand the mental part of it. These guys are getting hacked to be sent to the line because the opposition knows they suck. Every time they shoot a FT they know it's because it's strategically smarter to make you hit FTs. On top of that thousands of people are watching you do this and are holding you up on a pedestal.

And to those saying "work on it", just sit down. These guys hit 90%+ in practice, they do work on this **** hard, some guys just can't do it

[CoachD]

How about all the other teams learn to play defence?

What a joke!!!

Criticizing the D of teams when you have grown men that can't make a 15 foot set shot without a defender on them?
Pathetic.

How about coaches sit the guy down if he can't make free throws, and have him work on it!!

What a joke!!!

Putting your scrubs into the game to play chaseys with an opposing big man because you need to rest guys instead of making them play defence? Pathetic.

How about coaches sit the guy down if he can't get defensive stops, and have him work on it!!

Right.

So a guy who shoots 30% from the line should be protected.

And FYI .. if you watch games, they are rarely SCRUBS in there fouling ... it is the better defensive teams in the league who employ this strategy.

[Capn'O]

#basketball

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYBF_dw9ESw[/youtube]

#basketball

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPN0ylFEaFo[/youtube]

#basketball

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4pq0W62kF4[/youtube]

#basketball

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-uVZ_aRffY[/youtube]

#basketball

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_Chf5qBQPY[/youtube]

#basketball

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_T3ZYX1Tzg[/youtube]




#whattherestofyoucanwatchnextyear

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtvRN5S7m_U[/youtube]

[MGB8]

Why not make it three free throws, instead of two, once a team is over the limit, it's within the last 2 minutes of a half, and the foul is off-ball.

That still makes free throws important to hit, but penalizes the tactic somewhat.

[durden_tyler]

Whatever the changes, great innovative coaches will find a way to get around it. That's just the nature of competitiveness. So am really interested on the "solutions" offered.

[Navas]

I've been advocating for letting the fouled team choose their shooter. Soccer has designated free kick takers.

And people who are against the rule changes don't seem to understand that a lot of were rules were implemented for entertainment purposes.

[Capn'O]

I've been advocating for letting the fouled team choose their shooter. Soccer has designated free kick takers.

And people who are against the rule changes don't seem to understand that a lot of were rules were implemented for entertainment purposes.

I'm fairly sure that's universally understood. When you read between the lines, the main reasons people want the hack-a strategy to remain is that it either benefits a team they're a fan of (fair enough) or they simply derive enjoyment from watching the big guys suffer.

I mean - who wants to watch this ****?

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crXq8RBCs3U[/youtube]

Look at how miserable everybody looks in this video. The fans. The coaches. KJ. Andre. Everyone on both teams. It's the **** worst. And it didn't even help the Rockets in the end. Yet people will have you believe it's some brilliant strategy, the likes of which could not be conceived by mere mortals like us. The flipside is that for virtually every other facet of the game, Dwight, DeAndre, and Drummond are three of the most statistically impactful and exciting players in the entire NBA.

There are simple rule changes that resolve this and take virtually nothing away from the rest of the game. I'm buying. Check please? It's finally going away!

[Edrees]

I have to ask eveyrone. Do you think the NBA designed the shot clock with the intention that teams down under 24 seconds are going to intentionally foul to stay alive so time doesn't expire, hoping the other team misses?

If they are going to change this rule, they should ALSO change the rule of fouling at the end of game intentionally just to extend the game. Otherwise it's a very inconsistent rule change. Because that ALSO makes games boring and is a stategy to circumvent playing defense. Why not go for a steal or apply foul court pressure when down when 24 seconds or under? All the exact same logic applies.

Hacking Solution I've seen #1: let the team inbound the ball. - So why can't teams choose to do this when intentionally fouled at the end of games?

Hacking solution I've seen #2: let the team choose anyone to shoot FTs - So why can't teams choose to do this when intentionally fouled at the end of games?

The consequences of this rule change can change the way NBA games end. Unless you change the rule for hacking away from the ball but leave it the same on the ball, but that is a completely inconsistent way of doing things. You are saying teams can abuse the rule at the end of games to gain an advantage but can't abuse it in other situations.

[jbk1234]

I was thinking about this. What if you made this simple rule change?

The team has an option instead of having any player to shoot free throws, to just automatically get 1 point. Would a 100% sure thing at 50% free throw shooting be enough to prevent it?

If you think about it, it would really speed up the game a lot. The less free throws, the more enjoyable the game to be honest.

A better option is just let the team inbound the ball rather than take the free throws.

This. A team shouldn't be penalized because the other team is in the penalty.

[jbk1234]

I have to ask eveyrone. Do you think the NBA designed the shot clock with the intention that teams down under 24 seconds are going to intentionally foul to stay alive so time doesn't expire, hoping the other team misses?

If they are going to change this rule, they should ALSO change the rule of fouling at the end of game intentionally just to extend the game. Otherwise it's a very inconsistent rule change. Because that ALSO makes games boring and is a stategy to circumvent playing defense. Why not go for a steal or apply foul court pressure when down when 24 seconds or under? All the exact same logic applies.

Hacking Solution I've seen #1: let the team inbound the ball. - So why can't teams choose to do this when intentionally fouled at the end of games?

Hacking solution I've seen #2: let the team choose anyone to shoot FTs - So why can't teams choose to do this when intentionally fouled at the end of games?

I'm fine with No. 1. I'm not okay with No. 2. Teams with bad free throw shooters shouldn't be rewarded.

[quatin]

Suspend crappy free throw shooters. Changing the rules because of 3 guys is dumb. Getting rid of those 3 guys is easy.

69% of the hacks go to those three players. There's plenty of other players in the NBA who are susceptible to being hacked. The hacks will just spread out to everyone else.

Players who shot FTs worse than Dwight Howard in 2015:

Joey Dorsey
Ian Mahinmi
Rajon Rondo
Lou Amundson
Miles Plumlee
Andre Roberson
Ed Davis
Mason Plumlee
Josh Smith
Hassan Whiteside
Steven Adams
Kendrick Perkins
Greg Smith
Andrew Bogut
Thomas Robinson

[Edrees]

I have to ask eveyrone. Do you think the NBA designed the shot clock with the intention that teams down under 24 seconds are going to intentionally foul to stay alive so time doesn't expire, hoping the other team misses?

If they are going to change this rule, they should ALSO change the rule of fouling at the end of game intentionally just to extend the game. Otherwise it's a very inconsistent rule change. Because that ALSO makes games boring and is a stategy to circumvent playing defense. Why not go for a steal or apply foul court pressure when down when 24 seconds or under? All the exact same logic applies.

Hacking Solution I've seen #1: let the team inbound the ball. - So why can't teams choose to do this when intentionally fouled at the end of games?

Hacking solution I've seen #2: let the team choose anyone to shoot FTs - So why can't teams choose to do this when intentionally fouled at the end of games?

I'm fine with No. 1. I'm not okay with No. 2. Teams with bad free throw shooters shouldn't be rewarded.

As long as you are either for or against either one whether the foul is away from the ball or on the ball, I find that acceptable.

[Capn'O]

The "coach's choice" option for both end game fouls and hack-a fouls is intriguing. Keeps the game moving, at least.

I would give a very short window for that decision to avoid "extra timeouts." Maybe 5 seconds. It would add an element of strategy, as well.

[Todd3]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtvRN5S7m_U[/youtube]