RealGM

So long, Hack-a-Shaq.

After years of debate over whether the strategy of fouling a weak free throw shooter in order to force him to take foul shots has a place in the NBA, it appears the league will find a way to eliminate the practice this summer.

“It’s not unanimous, but there’s clearly an emerging consensus that we need to address the situation,” NBA Commissioner Adam Silver said in a meeting with the Associated Press Sports Editors on Thursday afternoon at the league’s midtown Manhattan headquarters. “Exactly what the new rule should be is open for debate, and at least I’m hoping that between now and the next owner’s meeting in July we can create and form a consensus as to what the change in the rule should be.”

Kiki VanDeWeghe, the NBA’s vice president of basketball operations said it has been easy to note the explosion in use of the strategy this season, and that the league’s competition committee would be taking up a discussion this summer to try and find a way to fix the problem.

“It goes against the spirit of the rule book,” VanDeWeghe said. “Free throws were to compensate and deter fouls, not to encourage them. So I think we’re at the point where everyone agrees on that, not to belabor that, so what are the solutions?”

The thing that seems to have moved Silver more than anything on this issue was the impact the practice has on the length of games. Silver has been conscious of the length of games since becoming commissioner – including trying out a 44-minute game in an exhibition in Brooklyn, a proposal that fell flat – and said the practice’s impact on television has become an issue.

“One of my concerns from a business standpoint is when Hack-a-Shaq happens three or more times in a game, it adds approximately 11 minutes to the game,” Silver said. “Putting aside whether you like watching guys who can’t shoot free throws be placed in those pressurized situations and seeing if they make free throws, whether that’s good television or not, from our national broadcaster’s standpoint, it’s become a real business issue when many of our games are dramatically exceeding two-and-a-half-hour windows we have scheduled in our national broadcast window. …

“That’s one of the reasons why I feel the need to address that rule.”

MotownMadness wrote:Drummond will be a monster again

flow wrote:

MotownMadness wrote:Drummond will be a monster again

What do you mean? How does getting fouled/not getting fouled off the ball affect his 'being a monster'? Whatever the rule change is, it won't affect teams' ability to foul him when he has the ball or is going for the ball/going for a rebound.

.

MotownMadness wrote:

flow wrote:

MotownMadness wrote:Drummond will be a monster again

What do you mean? How does getting fouled/not getting fouled off the ball affect his 'being a monster'? Whatever the rule change is, it won't affect teams' ability to foul him when he has the ball or is going for the ball/going for a rebound.

.

It makes a big difference. Being able to foul him off the ball can take him out of the game at any time and completely stop us from even setting up a offensive play. It's clearly taken a huge toll on his play since it's gotten worse as the season has gone on.

flow wrote:

MotownMadness wrote:

flow wrote:
What do you mean? How does getting fouled/not getting fouled off the ball affect his 'being a monster'? Whatever the rule change is, it won't affect teams' ability to foul him when he has the ball or is going for the ball/going for a rebound.

.

It makes a big difference. Being able to foul him off the ball can take him out of the game at any time and completely stop us from even setting up a offensive play. It's clearly taken a huge toll on his play since it's gotten worse as the season has gone on.

Right, the team is the big winner in the rule change because they can now simply choose to run the offense away from Drummond without the risk of being impeded by hack-a-dre. But I don't see it helping Drummond that much individually. Teams are still going to foul him; now they'll just wait til he's near the ball or has the ball.

bstein14 wrote:The simplest way to fix it is that if there is a foul away from the ball, the team gets to choose the free throw shooter they want out there.... I think that is what they will do. The bad thing is, this still won't prevent fouls on dre when he sets a screen, goes for a rebound, or has the ball... I don't think they can completely get rid of the hack a dre strategy only tone it down a bit.

Snakebites wrote:

bstein14 wrote:The simplest way to fix it is that if there is a foul away from the ball, the team gets to choose the free throw shooter they want out there.... I think that is what they will do. The bad thing is, this still won't prevent fouls on dre when he sets a screen, goes for a rebound, or has the ball... I don't think they can completely get rid of the hack a dre strategy only tone it down a bit.

I don't necessarily think such fouls should be eliminated. There should be some consequence to being a bad free throw shooter.

Its the fouls that happen before a play that I really have a problem with.

Snakebites wrote:

bstein14 wrote:The simplest way to fix it is that if there is a foul away from the ball, the team gets to choose the free throw shooter they want out there.... I think that is what they will do. The bad thing is, this still won't prevent fouls on dre when he sets a screen, goes for a rebound, or has the ball... I don't think they can completely get rid of the hack a dre strategy only tone it down a bit.

I don't necessarily think such fouls should be eliminated. There should be some consequence to being a bad free throw shooter.

Its the fouls that happen before a play that I really have a problem with.