Poll: Hack-a-Shaq fine or needs to go?

[wilt]

Needs to go. Saying "they need to learn to shoot FTs" is not a valid point imo. You can still foul them when they make a basketball play, just not off the ball in no mans land. I am all for hacking guys when they try to score and make them earn it, but things like Parker running around trying to foul Bogut yesterday are just stupid. In basically all other team (ball) sports, fouls off the ball get punished much harder than regular fouls.

I mean, guys who can´t shoot from 3 can be exposed by leaving them open, yes. But they still have the possibility to make plays in other ways. You don´t want to give coaches the possibility to hold up a card to stop play and have Rondo to have to shoot a 3 ? Guys who aren´t good ball handlers just don´t get to handle the ball, they aren´t forced by rule to handle it, are they ?

[sabonis]

Basketball isn't a free throw competition. It kills that flow and is bad for the product, which is why they got rid of it in the last two minutes. Just be done with it.

Can someone explain to me why it's bad in the last two minutes, but not in the minutes before that? If it's bad, it's bad and if it's good it's good. What's the point of not allowing it in the last 2 minutes?

I'm in favor of hack-a-shaq but I don't know why the limit is at 2 minutes. why not 1 or why not 4? or why not no limit?

btw as long as a big man sets a screen, the defenders can easily foul him while he is involved in the play. which would legitimize hack-a-shaq.

explanation for my support of hack-a-shaq simple. just make the damn free throws, easy as that. hell if a team isn't capable of hitting the 3ball, defending team will clog the paint and let them shoot as many outside shots as possible. Sure it's not affecting the flow of the game but it has the same principle when you think of it. For example teams left Eric Snow open in the past how much fun was it to watch Eric Snow missing shot after shot?

also, fouling a guy over and over again has its consequences. because it puts your players in foul trouble

[Joel Embust]

It should be called Hack-a-D.

Hack-a-Dwight
Hack-a-DeAndre
Hack-a-Drummond

[AussieBuck]

They should get rid of tall players too. Anyone over 6'3", it's just not fair the way it is now.

Plus guys with 24+ inch verticals and less that 20% body fat. Oh and everyone who can competently dribble with both hands.

[AussieBuck]

It should be called Hack-a-D.

Hack-a-Dwight
Hack-a-DeAndre
Hack-a-Drummond

Hack a Dogut?

[dike77]

I get both sides of the argument and its a good topic. I agree players should just learn to shoot FT's better. But does anyone on here think Shaq didn't put time into it? He was one of the most dominant players in the history of the game, just couldn't hit his FT's. Instead of completely eliminating the Hack-a-Shaq, give each team 4 per game then allow the team to pick the shooter. It can still be a tactic used but won't end up eliminating players we as fans want to see play the game at crucial times.

Yeah poor guys, they just arent able to learn it, its not their fault...too big hands, too uncoordinated etc

Ok, lets protect them with new rules. And which new rules we are gonna implement to protect all these poor white guys who are working hard every day but just never reach the athlecism of their black fellas?!

Black player cant drive against white player, ok?

[WVSArtist]

Hack a Zach (too bad he's good at them though)

[Hijinks]

I think he has been out of the league long enough. They shouldn't do that to retired players.

[leolozon]

I get both sides of the argument and its a good topic. I agree players should just learn to shoot FT's better. But does anyone on here think Shaq didn't put time into it? He was one of the most dominant players in the history of the game, just couldn't hit his FT's. Instead of completely eliminating the Hack-a-Shaq, give each team 4 per game then allow the team to pick the shooter. It can still be a tactic used but won't end up eliminating players we as fans want to see play the game at crucial times.

Yeah poor guys, they just arent able to learn it, its not their fault...too big hands, too uncoordinated etc

Ok, lets protect them with new rules. And which new rules we are gonna implement to protect all these poor white guys who are working hard every day but just never reach the athlecism of their black fellas?!

Black player cant drive against white player, ok?

"A fallacy is an argument that uses poor reasoning. An argument can be fallacious whether or not its conclusion is true. An error that stems from a poor logical form is sometimes called formal fallacy or simply an invalid argument. Arguments committing informal fallacies may be formally valid, but still fallacious. Some fallacies are committed intentionally (to manipulate or persuade by deception), others unintentionally due to carelessness or ignorance."

I can't believe how many of you say dumb things like that not realizing it has nothing to do with hack-a-shaq. Fouling someone off the ball to send him to the free-throw line is not equal to racism... Maybe some day you learn to think and realize that.

Rules are put in place for the best intention of the games. Is hack-a-shaq fair? In the context, yes. Is it good for the game? Not really. Sports, and society, have rules in place for the greater good. It's obvious that basketball is better served with games being decided 5 on 5 as much as possible. Fouls have to exist, but fouls outside the action don't bring anything to the game.

In hockey, you can't hit a guy who doesn't have the puck? Why? Because it's better for the players and for the game, else it would be chaos out there. The numbers of hockey plays would go down because players would be on their ass all the time and the game would be less interesting. Same with hack-a-shack, Fouling when the play is not there doesn't make a lot of sense.

You want to stop people from driving to the basketball? How does it make the game better?

Everyone saying they should keep it are ignoring the real problem : Does it make the game better or worst?
Why did they create a rule about hand-checking? Because it made the game better. Why did they put a shot clock? Because it made the game better. Why should they put a rule about fouling intentionally players who don't have the ball? To make the game better. They already changed the rule for the last 2 minutes. Why? BECAUSE IT MAKES THE GAME BETTER.

[dike77]

lololol, i knew someone would play the race card because he cant detect sarcasm.

Players always take advantage of other players weaknesses. If he is slow i drive, if he is a poor post defender i post him up, if he is a bad shooter i make him shoot. Watching Westbrook or Lebron drive on every single possession against guys like Nash or Novak isnt boring?

But no, hacking a bad FT shooter to send him to the line is bad and shouldnt be allowed and is boring etc.

Pffffff...

[contract]

Would like to see what the posters on here think of the rule. Let your voice be HEARD!

If a team chooses to put a god awful free throw shooter on the court, the opposing team should be allowed to exploit that deficiency.

[[GR]]

Basketball isn't a free throw competition. It kills that flow and is bad for the product, which is why they got rid of it in the last two minutes. Just be done with it.

get rid of free throws all togther

[leolozon]

lololol, i knew someone would play the race card because he cant detect sarcasm.

Players always take advantage of other players weaknesses. If he is slow i drive, if he is a poor post defender i post him up, if he is a bad shooter i make him shoot. Watching Westbrook or Lebron drive on every single possession against guys like Nash or Novak isnt boring?

But no, hacking a bad FT shooter to send him to the line is bad and shouldnt be allowed and is boring etc.

Pffffff...

Or maybe you can't express it correctly. Why does it always fall on the people reading it?

1-Your argument wasn't good because you are talking about a situation that has nothing to do with hack-a-shack. It's like those people saying : "Well if a man can marry a man, why not a man with a dog?" Making a bad comparison isn't an argument. You implying that one race should have preferential treatment had nothing to do with your poor argument.

2- If what you are saying made the game worst, then yes they should amend it like they did PLENTY OF TIMES.

If a player or a team finds a way to exploit rules to make the game worst to watch, the rules should be changed : shot clock, hand-checking, goaltending, also :

"George Mikan controlled the area around the basket to such a degree that the league widened the free throw lane and initiated the 3-second rule to give other players a chance. The 3-second rule states that an offensive player cannot be inside the free-throw lane for more that 3-seconds."

"Wilt Chamberlainhad a unique way of shooting free-throws. He would stand at the top of the key, throw the ball up toward the basket, take two steps, jump toward the rim and jam the ball through the net. Doing this resulted in basketball rules to state that a player cannot cross the plane of the free-throw line when shooting a free-throw."

[leolozon]

Big men made the game worst by camping in the now restricted area and stopping the ball from entering the hoop, so : 3-second violation and goaltending. Anyone has a problem with that? No, because it makes the game better.

Now imagine a world without hack-a-player, does it make the game better to watch, yes or no? That's the only important question and no one saying they shouldn't stop hack-a-player is answering it...

[CBB_Fan]

I think using fouling as a strategy was neither intended by the rules of the game or worthwhile to watch. Just like keeping the ball in the backcourt to win a game with only 2 points, or stalling before the shot-clock: technically they are winning strategies, but they are loopholes that detract from the essence of the game.

Fouling is not supposed to be a test of the offense's ability to shoot FTs. It is supposed to be punishment for a defensive team that breaks the rules. Instead, Hack-a-Shaq makes fouling desirable for the defense, the exact opposite of the rule's intent.

Just like earlier loopholes, excessive fouling completely changes the game. It stops being basketball and becomes a game of FTs and quickly jacked up shots. It hurts the sports popularity, and as a fan it is probably one of the things that I hate seeing the most.

Don't get me wrong; I don't think we should reward players for not practicing their FTs. But this goes beyond that. Players with bad FT% are still a burden under normal situations, as teams have to avoid giving them the ball (especially in post situations, which makes going to the post a less viable strategy late in the game for most teams). Don't reward teams for breaking the rules and abusing off-ball fouls. That is a gimmick and a loophole, and should be fixed like other loopholes in the past.

[prelude00]

It should stay. How hard is it to hit a wide open shot from 15 feet? NBA players should be able to hit that at a decent clip. Work on your damn fundamentals. Don't baby these guys any more than they already are.

[DoubleLintendre]

Needs to go. Saying "they need to learn to shoot FTs" is not a valid point imo. You can still foul them when they make a basketball play, just not off the ball in no mans land. I am all for hacking guys when they try to score and make them earn it, but things like Parker running around trying to foul Bogut yesterday are just stupid. In basically all other team (ball) sports, fouls off the ball get punished much harder than regular fouls.

I mean, guys who can´t shoot from 3 can be exposed by leaving them open, yes. But they still have the possibility to make plays in other ways. You don´t want to give coaches the possibility to hold up a card to stop play and have Rondo to have to shoot a 3 ? Guys who aren´t good ball handlers just don´t get to handle the ball, they aren´t forced by rule to handle it, are they ?

I understand what you're saying (I think you fairly summarized the arguments against Hack-a-Shaq). But, at the same time you're stretching a bit far with the hypothetical alternative versions of "Hack-a-Shaq". There's no such thing as a 3 point free throw, which realistically would be much harder than a real free throw.

The reason I feel that Hack-a-Shaq should be allowed is because it has negative consequences for the team employing the tactic. Your hypothetical forced ball-handling would tactic would likely result in a player turning it over. Hack-a-whoever doesn't guarantee the player will miss two shots (and thus results practically in a turnover). The player fouled has an opportunity to score 2 free points. All he has to do is practice one aspect of the game which needs improvement, which is free throw shooting.

The closest thing to forced dribbling would be when you trap a player so he's forced to pass it to someone who doesn't handle/pass the ball well. In that case, your tactic is to try and make that player mishandle the ball.

It is fair to make a lumbering PF/C ball handle while you stick a ball thief on him? Why not? It's not like he's guaranteed to turn it over. Just like sending a player to shoot free throws, there's no guarantee of that player missing either shot. You're just making a smart decision because by preying on your one of your opponent's supposed weaknesses.

Besides, by fouling player multiple times, you get yourself into the penalty really quickly. There are many definite drawbacks to hack-a-whoever. That's why it is really tircky for most coaches to know when/how to use it.

I get that it's an "ugly" game flow-killing way to play basketball, but all a player needs to do to counter this is practice free-throw shooting. With a shooting coach getting, how hard would it be to get yourself to shoot 70% at the line?

[r3demption]

The only people that will complain about it is LA fans . There is only one "star" in the nba that cant hit free throws

[CBB_Fan]

Let's put arguments for Hack-a-Shaq into context.

"It forces players to practice a fundamental basketball skill"

I don't think we should add a shotclock. Yes, stalling can make the game ugly, but it puts pressure on players to learn to pass and dribble the ball, and for defenders to learn to steal it. Stealing the ball is a fundamental part of basketball, and we shouldn't reward teams and players with an inability to put pressure on the offense.

"It is a strategy"

Furthermore, we shouldn't add a backcourt violation. Staying in the backcourt is a strategy that lets coaches and players play to win. It is just a smart decision that preys on your opponents weaknesses. If your opponent cannot take the ball away from you, then why should they win?

"It hurts the team employing it"

The biggest reason to support the game without a shotclock or backcourt violation is that teams face negative consequences for employing the stalling tactic. By placing the ball in the backcourt, you remove your ability to score. Any team that strips the ball from you has easy access to your basket, and could easily score. Therefore, the entire effort of your team is focused on stopping your opponent from stealing the ball and getting an easy bucket. It takes skill and effort to avoid letting the opponent back into the game.

[Yuri Vaultin]

I agree players should just learn to shoot FT's better. But does anyone on here think Shaq didn't put time into it?

Considering he routinely showed up for the season grossly over-weight I think it is more than fair to question Shaq's work ethic.