How about this new rule change thought: No player can foul out

[Jadoogar]

What problem are you looking to fix OP? How often do stars foul out?

I don't think it's necessarily fouling out but 2 quick fouls can cause a coach to sit a player to avoid picking up more fouls. This can result in limited minutes for star/key players.

[JonFromVA]

no player can foul out BUT...every foul committed by the player from 6 on results in a technical foul and the other team is awarded a FT.

pros
- players can actually stay in the game and play. no more sitting a quality player b/c of the dreaded "two quick fouls"
- no longer can refs dictate a game's direction with the dreaded "two quick fouls"

cons
- technical fouls can make the games longer

thoughts?

Want to speed it up? Just award the other team the 2 (or 3) points - with the option to shoot free throws if they want to try to miss one.

[E-Balla]

What problem are you looking to fix OP? How often do stars foul out?

I don't think it's necessarily fouling out but 2 quick fouls can cause a coach to sit a player to avoid picking up more fouls. This can result in limited minutes for star/key players.

They'd still do that no one wants to have someone out there getting attacked and getting techs if it works.

[metalinguss]

Who shoots the ft? If it's the guy who was fouled wouldn't that just lead to hacking?

[Capn'O]

I don't think you need to add all those stipulations.

Just no player can foul out. Teams still get in the penalty but you can keep your best guys on the court.

[gmoney411]

I don't think the foul out is necessary at all. The double bonus is a big enough deterrent imo. As long as they kept ejections for techs and flagrant fouls I think it would be fine.

[Pennebaker]

no player can foul out BUT...every foul committed by the player from 6 on results in a technical foul and the other team is awarded a FT.

pros
- players can actually stay in the game and play. no more sitting a quality player b/c of the dreaded "two quick fouls"
- no longer can refs dictate a game's direction with the dreaded "two quick fouls"

cons
- technical fouls can make the games longer

thoughts?

Fouls slow the game down. The idea is to limit them. I can see a player committing 8 or 9 or 10 fouls in a game and not being benched because he's too important to his team and because one free throw is not that big of a penalty.

Fouling out is a major deterrent.

[The4thHorseman]

What problem are you looking to fix OP? How often do stars foul out?

if no threat of fouling out then players can play a bit more freely and can stay on the court.

let's say game starts, and refs call 2 quick fouls on gobert. the entire complexion of the game changes now right? then when gobert comes back in the last 2nd quarter, he has to play much softer b/c of the potential of getting the 3rd foul before the half. imho, that hurts the quality of the game.

and as a bonus, it's actually a deterrent to ref's dictating the game from early on.

You're basing this off of the calls not being deserving. If the fouls and calls are legit, then that's a Gobert problem for not being more self disciplined early in the game.

[jazzfan1971]

If speed is the problem just award a point and ball out.

I do hate the 2 quick fouls thing. Seems like such an arbitrary way to lose a game.

[mplsfonz23]

What problem are you looking to fix OP? How often do stars foul out?

if no threat of fouling out then players can play a bit more freely and can stay on the court.

let's say game starts, and refs call 2 quick fouls on gobert. the entire complexion of the game changes now right? then when gobert comes back in the last 2nd quarter, he has to play much softer b/c of the potential of getting the 3rd foul before the half. imho, that hurts the quality of the game.

and as a bonus, it's actually a deterrent to ref's dictating the game from early on.

Stay out of foul trouble. Simple.

[NbaAllDay]

It's a stretch to suggest that a Ref these days tries to 'dictate' the game. If they see a foul, it's a foul. Why should it matter how good the player is?

Obviously you can get some "dodgy" foul calls. Like in every other sport.

Not fouling is a skill in of itself. It's either because your defense is good and structured. Or the skills diminish because you maybe play none at all.

I think people forget that sometimes playing "half defense" can lead to more fouls due to being out of position.
Other are overly aggressive and commit to hard and therefore also foul.

There is room for good defense in the middle and I see no point in getting rid of the threat of leaving the game by removing a foul cap.

[Thundershock88]

I'd rather bring back hand checking.

why you want hand checking in zone defense era? You want them 77-79 type of games like the early 00s had?

I don't have any problem with them.

[LBJKB24MJ23]

how about no 3 point shots? Bring back the big men

[Black Mage]

Bad idea. Means teams will employ hack a player all game long since no one can foul out.

[Soupman]

no player can foul out BUT...every foul committed by the player from 6 on results in a technical foul and the other team is awarded a FT.

pros
- players can actually stay in the game and play. no more sitting a quality player b/c of the dreaded "two quick fouls"
- no longer can refs dictate a game's direction with the dreaded "two quick fouls"

cons
- technical fouls can make the games longer

thoughts?

Hubie brown brought this up awhile ago and it was a brilliant idea.

Star players can stay in the games longer and would slow down the "star calls".

[6ixgrod]

If it's a matter of losing star players at inopportune times due to whistle happy refs, you could always just raise the number to foul out to 7 or 8.