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

[wetsthebed]

If you gont a problem hit your **** rfree throuws!

[Edrees]

I actually voted to keep it, then I read the post comparing this to removing the shot clock and that honestly totally changed how I see this. I'm for banning it. Should they have just told players to "learn' how to steal the ball better to prevent teams from holding the ball too long and kept the shot clock? Maybe, but it was still better for the game to just add the shot clock. I feel the same here.

Not even really close to the same thing. Shot clock change was something that changed the rules big time equally for everyone.

Getting rid of hack a shaq would be catering to players that can't do something they are supposed to. Next should we make it so PGs get 5 free turnovers a game? So if they turn it over they can call for it back.

I fail to see how letting PG's get 5 free turnovers would improve the game for the fans. Without fastbreaks a lot of the excitement would be gone. Nobody minds turnovers. If there were enough people who wanted this change and it made the game better, I dont see why it couldnt be on the table, but nobody in the world wants to do this so it's a moot issue.

Hack a shaq ban wouldn't be catering to any players. Nobody argueing for it gives a crap about the players. It's about the fans. Both rules would have been instituted purely for the fans. The idea that hack a shaq would be instiuted to help players who are bad at free throws is completely erroneous. That is not the reason for the movement, just as the shot clock change wasn't there to cater to every player. It was to cater to the product and fans. In addition the shot clock rules DOES impact point guards more than it does centers, because often you have a pg chucking a shot at the end of the shot clock, it probably reduces their fg% more than it does a center's fg%, so there is some 'catering' there as well. I find the claim that removing the shot clock would impact every position equally a BOLD statement without any evidence to it.

[Im Coming Home]

Its a fair tactic, I'm a normal non-athletic person and I can hit 80+ FTs.. they should be able to hit 70% AT LEAST. Its their damn job, if I was in the NBA I'd never be bad at something labeled as 'free'

[Bskey]

I fail to see how letting PG's get 5 free turnovers would improve the game for the fans. Without fastbreaks a lot of the excitement would be gone. Nobody minds turnovers. If there were enough people who wanted this change and it made the game better, I dont see why it couldnt be on the table, but nobody in the world wants to do this so it's a moot issue.

Hack a shaq ban wouldn't be catering to any players. Nobody argueing for it gives a crap about the players. It's about the fans. Both rules would have been instituted purely for the fans. The idea that hack a shaq would be instiuted to help players who are bad at free throws is completely erroneous. That is not the reason for the movement, just as the shot clock change wasn't there to cater to every player. It was to cater to the product and fans. In addition the shot clock rules DOES impact point guards more than it does centers, because often you have a pg chucking a shot at the end of the shot clock, it probably reduces their fg% more than it does a center's fg%, so there is some 'catering' there as well. I find the claim that removing the shot clock would impact every position equally a BOLD statement without any evidence to it.

You understand I don't actually want that right? The point being that just because a player can't do his job (and yes it is the job of anyone that gets to the FT line to hit them) doesn't mean rules should be changed. Fans may not like it but it is absolutely the fault of the players. If they practiced enough to at least not be a complete joke at the line it wouldn't happen, period. Big men can make free throws, lazy ones that think it's not important for them are the cause of this.

It's not cheating even if it isn't the most honorable way to win. If you only want to argue about the pace of the game why not get rid of timeouts too? They slow it down and commercials/time out entertainment sucks.

[pross]

For the people who are all for Hack-A-Shaq. Wouldn't you all agree this would be a better rule if the player actually had to have the ball at the time of a foul? Fouling a player INTENTIONALLY off ball should be 1 FT plus possession back to the offensive team.

[r3demption]

Where were all these threads when shaq was in the nba ? Dwight on the magic? No where enough with this bs if he doesn't want to get hacked go learn how to shoot fts. Almost any scrub in HS can hit fts

[Nuntius]

Hack-an-X is completely fine. Professional basketball players should be expected to make FTs.

[CrymeTime]

For the people who are all for Hack-A-Shaq. Wouldn't you all agree this would be a better rule if the player actually had to have the ball at the time of a foul? Fouling a player INTENTIONALLY off ball should be 1 FT plus possession back to the offensive team.

That helps the bad freethrow shooter, becuase he wouldn't have the pressure to make the shot, they'll end up with possesion anyway.

Even if you don't have the ball, you are still on the court, which means you are always apart of the play. On an iso play, it's considered a 1 on 1, but it actually 5 on 5. The other 4 guys are asked to stay out of the way, but they are still in the play. That is why the hack-a-shaq should stay(even in late game situations).

[yaaar]

Bad logic. A guy is trained to be a rebounder and a defender. He's not required to shoot well, that's not his job. Just because it's possible that he can be called on to shoot is meaningless. Any player can be called on upon to do anything, including defense, pass, rebounds, ect. But they not cannot be forced to do it by an opposing team cheesing it.

A defenses job is to be as forceful as they can. Clogging lanes, fronting passes, trapping, doubling... it's all about forcing the offense to do what you'd prefer them to do and exploiting their mistakes. Fouling a bad shooter may no be considered honorable but it is a legitimate strategy. As I said, when you are fouled and going to shoot you've already been rewarded. Think about it, the other team is counting on your shooter being so bad that they can live with the reward. Why WOULDN'T a player work to prevent that? That's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard, that a guy that isn't expected to be a scorer shouldn't worry about free throws. Obviously maybe if they did they and their team wouldn't be embarrassed so much. You can't try and claim it doesn't matter for them but then say they should just be protected instead. Yeah, it matters, regardless of team role free throws are for EVERYBODY.

You keep thinking this is about something that happens naturally during a basketball game. It's not, it's about a team intentionally fouling a player to send them to the line. That's the very essence of cheating, they're intentionally breaking a rule to gain an advantage. If there were a cheesy way to force jump balls, it would be like intentionally breaking a rule to force a short player in to a jump ball. It's stupid and misses the point of the game.

They are breaking the rule, and the advantage is given to the other team. Just because he can't make his free throws doesn't mean the other team is responsible for stealing the advantage. Maybe spend more time on those reps and it won't be a problem?

Like I said this is no different than the shot clock. There is no basketball reason for having a shot clock other than making the game move yet we have it and it greatly improves the game. If you're in favor of this hack a shaq garbage, you should also be ok without a shot clock. Getting rid of a shot clock just forces teams to play better defense or to pass better, things every player should be able to do. It's basketball in it's purest form no? But it's really not. It's just one team being cheesy to gain an advantage, just like hack a shaq.

Yes, it is different. Shot clock completely changed the game and wasn't put in to protect certain players.

You keep saying free throws shouldn't be an important part of the game for these guys, but if that were true why would this even be an issue?

To simplify it, it doesn't matter if a player should be expected to shoot freethrows. The matter is 1. what the purpose of the rule is, and 2. what it's doing to the game. The rule isn't there for teams to abuse. It's there as a punishment for teams for infractions right? A team shouldn't be able to intentionally break a rule to utilize a loophole to gain an advantage. Point blank. It's the very essence of cheating. On top of that it slows the game down and it's dishonorable.

It doesn't matter if a player should be able to shoot a free throw. Not one bit. What you think a player should and shouldn't be able to do is immaterial. It doesn't matter that you think that extra reps will magically make anyone a 90% freethrow shooter. (Apparently everyone just doesn't try.) The fact that changing this rule helps only guys that are bad at freethrows is also unimportant. The original act itself is what is wrong. It doesn't matter what they get paid, it's bad at any level of the sport. It's a loophole and a gaming of the system. Even if you think that everyone should be amazing at freethrows, it doesn't change the fact that they're breaking the rules to gain an advantage. This is all aside from the fact that it's cheesy and pathetic. Grabbing a player that is just standing there isn't basketball. The fact that shooting a freethrow is basic basketball doesn't automatically mean the act that got the player there is also basic basketball.

What difference does it make if the shot-clock changed the game? That was the whole point of putting the rule in, to change the game. To make things move faster so it's more entertaining, and to save the game from people like you that think cheesing is ok. The very simple fact is that you think loopholes like this are ok for teams to use no matter how cheesy or game killing they may be. If that's the case then you should also be ok with playing without a shot clock. It's there to make the game move faster. It's not there for pure basketball reasons is it? It's also something that hurts slower teams so it's not something that affects every team evenly. But they they get paid millions! Running is basic! Yeah, none of that matters.

You think everyone should be able to make freethrows and if they just practice they'll be good at it. Fine. It doesn't mean that it's ok for teams to use loopholes and slow the game down. They're separate. It's not like getting rid of it actually disrupts any real basketball.

[inquisitive]

don't see the rule getting changed...it will be in place for a few more years at least.

[Bskey]

To simplify it, it doesn't matter if a player should be expected to shoot freethrows. The matter is 1. what the purpose of the rule is, and 2. what it's doing to the game. The rule isn't there for teams to abuse. It's there as a punishment for teams for infractions right? A team shouldn't be able to intentionally break a rule to utilize a loophole to gain an advantage. Point blank. It's the very essence of cheating. On top of that it slows the game down and it's dishonorable.

They are punished. The other team gets two FREE throws. Their problem for not making them. You really think this is the only rule bent and abused in the game of basketball? They aren't breaking a rule and getting away with no punishment. It's the inability of the guy shooting that hurts his team and opens them up to this sort of tactic.

It doesn't matter if a player should be able to shoot a free throw. Not one bit.

It always matters.

What you think a player should and shouldn't be able to do is immaterial. It doesn't matter that you think that extra reps will magically make anyone a 90% freethrow shooter

.

90%? Do you like putting words in my mouth? Any player getting to at least 70% would be good enough to completely put a stop to this. And reps don't magically make them better, the whole point in doing it is practice. You know... how people get better at things they aren't good at?

(Apparently everyone just doesn't try.) The fact that changing this rule helps only guys that are bad at freethrows is also unimportant.

Why is it unimportant? The only reason it happens in the first place is because of bad free throw shooters.

The original act itself is what is wrong.

Hence why they get free throws.

It doesn't matter what they get paid, it's bad at any level of the sport. It's a loophole and a gaming of the system. Even if you think that everyone should be amazing at freethrows, it doesn't change the fact that they're breaking the rules to gain an advantage. This is all aside from the fact that it's cheesy and pathetic. Grabbing a player that is just standing there isn't basketball. The fact that shooting a freethrow is basic basketball doesn't automatically mean the act that got the player there is also basic basketball.

Throwing the ball off the other team's legs so it's out on them is also cheesy. So is grabbing jerseys, throwing elbows, scratching them with your nails, etc. These things are done on purpose and either bend rules or exploit bad reffing. Players break rules as part of the game. In this hacking stuff at least the other team is being properly rewarded.

You think everyone should be able to make freethrows and if they just practice they'll be good at it. Fine. It doesn't mean that it's ok for teams to use loopholes and slow the game down. They're separate. It's not like getting rid of it actually disrupts any real basketball.

You can call it a loophole if you want. They aren't doing it to slow the game down. They are exploiting the weakness of a player on the other team to win.

[martypython]

7 footers can hit free throws, even Joakim Noah can hit them. Besides, all they need to do is hit at least one free throw and the strategy doesn't become viable in the long run. Earlier in his career, Tim Duncan would get hacked because he was a mediocre free throw shooter. Now, you can't do it anymore because he will hit the free throw 80 percent of the time.

[seren]

What is by far the highest percentage play in the NBA outside of dunks and layups?

The Free throw...

The onus is on the player to being to make free throws... just because some people can't do it doesn't justify that we have to change the rules because of a lack of skill from certain players.

You know just because several point guards can't dunk... we can't have dunking anymore... that is the logic that is being throw out here.

Not really. The logic that is thrown out there is it stops the game and adds nothing to the entertainment value. And as another person already said, why have a rule that changes in the last 2 minutes? If it is wrong, it should be wrong the whole game not just last X minutes.

[CrymeTime]

What is by far the highest percentage play in the NBA outside of dunks and layups?

The Free throw...

The onus is on the player to being to make free throws... just because some people can't do it doesn't justify that we have to change the rules because of a lack of skill from certain players.

You know just because several point guards can't dunk... we can't have dunking anymore... that is the logic that is being throw out here.

Not really. The logic that is thrown out there is it stops the game and adds nothing to the entertainment value. And as another person already said, why have a rule that changes in the last 2 minutes? If it is wrong, it should be wrong the whole game not just last X minutes.

Isn't it the same with fouls to give?
Every team is given 4 fouls to give before the penalty. If a team has not commited a foul with 2 min to go, automatically changed to 2 fouls. This takes 2 aditional steal attempts away from the defense.

Also a hack-a-shaq does add entertainment value. Seeing a bad freethrow trying a make a freethrow is entertaining.

If you want to protect a bad freethrow shooter at a certain point in the game, keep him on the bench.

If you are on the floor, you are ALWAYS apart of game, whether you have the ball or not.

In basketball you play both sides of the ball. Don't turn it into football where you are a specialized player, that only plays 1 side of the ball.