The new rules suck. Nba need to start calling fouls

[Desiderium]

Love the new rule changes. I hated seeing players like Harden get 25 free throw attempts per game. There was no incentive on being a good defender. we're seeing less and less lockdown defenders in our league now. Let players play defense and make defense relevant again.

[chilluminati]

The cycle continues. In a round-about way, this reminds me of 2004 when the last huge sweeping rule changes happened that impacted the game.

Give this a read

Mark Cuban (via "Fear KCP"):

"So a few years ago, Im watching the Pistons beat the Lakers in the Finals. I’m seeing Larry Brown’s Pistons fully take advantage of the rules. It was impossible to stay in front of Kobe. He could get anywhere he wanted on the court. The Pistons knew it as well. So every time he tried to get to the basket, they would body up and bump him. The officials did just as they were supposed to. Since Kobe had the advantage on the defender, they didn’t call a foul. However that little bump slowed Kobe down just enough that it gave Ben Wallace a split second more to on a pre rotation to the Paint, to be in a better position to defend the basket. Kobe still scored, but not quite as often as he may have otherwise.

At that point it dawned on me that the concept of playing the advantage in a one on one matchup had nothing to do with which TEAM gained the advantage. After all, its the team that scores the most points that wins. Detroit had a brilliant strategy and was playing it to perfection. After the finals, I sat down with the league and discussed with them the difference between player and team advantage. The discussion lead to changing the rules so that perimeter contact was called far more often."

Cuban got his wish and the already stringent anti-contact rules for perimeter play became even more strict. The unintended backlash ended up blowing up in his face:

The NBA eliminated all forms of hand-checking before the 2004-2005 season. The rule was intended to give offensive players more freedom, but has given offensive players an unfair advantage. It’s virtually impossible to keep perimeter players out of the paint.

Unfortunately for Cuban and the Mavs, the rule changes he helped initiate contributed to Dallas’ loss to the Miami Heat in the 2006 NBA Finals. Dwyane Wade shot an NBA Finals record 97 free throws.

When the change happened in 04, it created what we have today. Now, we're finally taking small steps to reflating the value of all defenders across the league. Perhaps we could eventually see an NBA again where defensive pures can get and keep a job? The Roberson's and Thybule's of the world will definitely be able to lockup the bag and have long careers, and maybe even a world where the Tony Allen types become allstars?! I won't get ahead of myself lol.

[Strepbacter]

How anybody can complain about ANY rule that benefits the defense is beyond me. The product has been terrible over the past several seasons.

[TheRaptor!]

Games are usually 9:20 long

With harden back then, we’re Houston games ge realy longer?

[theFireBlanket]

I might be in the minority but defenders are now getting away with murder and actually bad defense. No one wants to watch 2004 prison basketball. Bring back the old rules. Sorry these are fouls play better defense, come at me!

https://youtu.be/7jBgl2c9eMI

Watch on YouTube

Well, until they change things again... its here to stay.

Your username tells me just about everything about how you came to this viewpoint, though.

Let's be honest ... there's also a whole string of "inside" foul baiters that are crying too - Tatum, Embiid, Randle, Lebron, Doncic everyone's free throw totals are down. Embiid just lived at the line last year - it spoils all flow.

Giannis is doing fine.

Cause he always earned his trips to the line without theatrics. Went through years of getting no calls on obvious fouls.

[Dacost]

This has to be Trey Young burning account.

[Chinook]

I think the NBA should basically get rid of fouls as a strategic tool. This first bit about stopping offensive players from drawing fouls when a defender wasn't going to touch them is good. But it needs to be balanced out by players not being able to foul to stop a break or to force free-throws when they're overmatched. Fouls should be accidental. I'd also like to see them get rid of charge calls. It makes the game less safe to have folks running into a guy's path hoping to get run over. Offensive fouls would still be in the game in other circumstances, and players could use verticality to contest shots just as they do now. But we really don't need a ton of whistles.

It would take players years to adjust to these changes, but once they do, we'd have a much better viewing experience where almost all action is a basketball play and officials are much less a part of the process. The best players would still rise to the top, game plans would still affect playoff series. The biggest change might be that end-of-game scenarios would be completely different if intentional fouls weren't a thing, but I'm not sure if that's even a draw-back.

You'd have to get rid of fouling out...but in doing that you're create a lot more "accidental" fouls as teams would use bigger stronger guys who lack the skill of today's game as "enforcers" in situations.

You don't have to get rid of fouling out. In fact, I'd say dramatically lower the limit if anything. The point of all of these changes is to reduce fouls, not to have the same number of fouls but with more acting. Flagrant fouls still exist. The moment some guy starts lumbering around hacking people, throw him out. I appreciate good physical defense, but fouling someone to stop them from scoring instead of just defending and letting the chips fall where they may would but just as unacceptable as irregular movements to try to catch guys in a shooting motion.

Maybe you'd like to see that kind of fouling return, but I think the game is better off without it. You can bring bigs back into the game through other means.

[dhsilv2]

I think the NBA should basically get rid of fouls as a strategic tool. This first bit about stopping offensive players from drawing fouls when a defender wasn't going to touch them is good. But it needs to be balanced out by players not being able to foul to stop a break or to force free-throws when they're overmatched. Fouls should be accidental. I'd also like to see them get rid of charge calls. It makes the game less safe to have folks running into a guy's path hoping to get run over. Offensive fouls would still be in the game in other circumstances, and players could use verticality to contest shots just as they do now. But we really don't need a ton of whistles.

It would take players years to adjust to these changes, but once they do, we'd have a much better viewing experience where almost all action is a basketball play and officials are much less a part of the process. The best players would still rise to the top, game plans would still affect playoff series. The biggest change might be that end-of-game scenarios would be completely different if intentional fouls weren't a thing, but I'm not sure if that's even a draw-back.

You'd have to get rid of fouling out...but in doing that you're create a lot more "accidental" fouls as teams would use bigger stronger guys who lack the skill of today's game as "enforcers" in situations.

You don't have to get rid of fouling out. In fact, I'd say dramatically lower the limit if anything. The point of all of these changes is to reduce fouls, not to have the same number of fouls but with more acting. Flagrant fouls still exist. The moment some guy starts lumbering around hacking people, throw him out. I appreciate good physical defense, but fouling someone to stop them from scoring instead of just defending and letting the chips fall where they may would but just as unacceptable as irregular movements to try to catch guys in a shooting motion.

Maybe you'd like to see that kind of fouling return, but I think the game is better off without it. You can bring bigs back into the game through other means.

At the end of the day most fouls are because defenders can't keep an offensive player infront of them without getting physical and ultimately fouling them. If you let defenders get physical to stop offensive players, then it just makes sense to have defenders who are strong and can have more impact there when they aren't able to do other things. Conversely when you call more fouls outside you force teams to find more skilled defenders (able to better keep offensive players in front of them without contact).

You have to chose a level of balance here. You can't have your cake and eat it too as they say. If you cut back on fouls by letting more go, it benefits the defense to swing more that direction and that will cause a change in who's in the league.

[dhsilv2]

Games are usually 9:20 long

With harden back then, we’re Houston games ge realy longer?

Oddly couldn't find data quickly.

Rockets were 12th in drawing fouls in 2020 21.0 vs 20.8 for the league. They were 24th in 2019 at 20.0 vs 20.9 for the league. That's per game not per 100, but it wouldn't paint the picture that Harden's high free throws were doing anything to lengthen the game. People have to remember the rockets ran darn near every play through the guy, so if he wasn't getting fouled, it was a lob or jumper.

2019 the team took 24.4 free throws a game and Harden took 11.3 of those.

[Hoop Heavy]

Well, until they change things again... its here to stay.

Your username tells me just about everything about how you came to this viewpoint, though.

Let's be honest ... there's also a whole string of "inside" foul baiters that are crying too - Tatum, Embiid, Randle, Lebron, Doncic everyone's free throw totals are down. Embiid just lived at the line last year - it spoils all flow.

Giannis is doing fine.

Cause he always earned his trips to the line without theatrics. Went through years of getting no calls on obvious fouls.

... and good on the refs, if they are just refusing to call the "I got the guy off the ground ... now I'll jump into him" bull.

[Homer38]

Read on Twitter

[Goner]

I still think this is weird for NBA.
The league that caters to its offensive players.
Jordan rules, banned handcheck all benefited the NBA offensive superstars.

Why punish crafty players now?

People say players like harden, Trae, luka etc are baiting to get fouls called. I always saw that as being crafty. If u fall for it then play better more disciplined defense.

It's kinda like adding a rule to prevent crossovers cause defensive player fell for a hesi and got crossed.
Is that much different from baiting for fouls?

One thing I do agree that needs to be removed is the stopping in spot when players are behind you . I think that's really obvious. But driving to basket with full stretched arms hoping to get hacked for a foul is fine by me.

This conclusion is anachronistic. You are assuming that the best players have always existed before the specific rules, when in reality they are equally a consequence of the rules. Before Jordan's era (and largely during it), traditional, back-to-the-basket bigmen were the dominant scoring archetype. The abolition of hand checking changed the talent landscape in such a way that guards and perimeter players became more dominant. So, to say that "banned handchecking benefitted NBA offensive superstars" doesn't make sense at all and what we are seeing with the new rule changes are simply another shifting of the talent landscape in favor of different skillsets.

[My2CentsR]

Offensive foul baiting shouldn’t be rewarded. All the new rules have done is try and take away foul baiting. That’s a good thing

It’s not offensive foul. If you’re baited in to committing a foul then play better defense. You can now jump at jump shooters without being penalize. This will happen again

Watch on YouTube

I've noticed a few instances of defenders jumping into a shooter's landing spot--not to the extent in the video-- and that should still be strictly called a foul. But 90% of the time, the new rule application works best. I wonder if it just takes time for refs to get used to honing in on the difference between stepping into someone's spot and standing near it.

[LAL1947]

I've noticed a few instances of defenders jumping into a shooter's landing spot-- and that should still be strictly called a foul.

Agreed with this. That's dangerous play and should be kept out of the game.

[Chinook]

At the end of the day most fouls are because defenders can't keep an offensive player infront of them without getting physical and ultimately fouling them. If you let defenders get physical to stop offensive players, then it just makes sense to have defenders who are strong and can have more impact there when they aren't able to do other things. Conversely when you call more fouls outside you force teams to find more skilled defenders (able to better keep offensive players in front of them without contact).

You have to chose a level of balance here. You can't have your cake and eat it too as they say. If you cut back on fouls by letting more go, it benefits the defense to swing more that direction and that will cause a change in who's in the league.

I don't think that follows. You're not NOT calling fouls; you're not letting offensive players initiate contact to draw fouls. It works both ways. A defender can't jump in front of a guy to draw a charge, and the offensive player can't jump into a defender to get free throws. If you read what I wrote, you'd see it legislates things on both sides and reduces fouls not really by having refs swallow their whistles but by punishing acts that intentionally create fouls. You call offensive fouls for guys jumping into other players, and you make almost every "take foul" a clear-path call. After everyone adjusts, those actions will be gone from the game or much rarer, meaning there will be more fast-breaks and drives without guys sliding under each other. That's a huge win for the offense. It doesn't benefit shooters as much, but bringing the drive back into the game is a good thing.

When a guy like Bryn Forbes is being backed down by Embiid in the post, he's not seriously going to be able to stop him. Fouling him to force free throws in that situation is something I'd want removed from the game. Hold your ground, stay vertical, and if he scores over you, it's just the way of the game. That's a big help to post players who get a ton of contact and have to deal with foul shots that no one wants to watch them take. That's one of the many ways you can bring bigs back without bring back guys like Zaza.

I haven't really noticed the difference in fouls because I don't watch a team with a star who lived at the line. The Spurs post-Bowen were a great defensive team that didn't rely on being really physical. They were historic on that end and still went whole seasons with barely anyone fouling out and giving up among the fewest free-throws. So the entire dilemma you laid out doesn't really make sense to me. 00s ball where good defenders were supposed to get into a guy's head and shove them around or jump-kick them in the face shouldn't come back, and these rule changes won't bring it back if you remove the contact from both sides.

Also, as I said, if you lower the limit for fouling out, those physical defenders would foul out quickly regardless. So no, they wouldn't come back.

[DonaldSanders]

I've noticed a few instances of defenders jumping into a shooter's landing spot-- and that should still be strictly called a foul.

Agreed with this. That's dangerous play and should be kept out of the game.

Luckily it is in fact still a foul and can be called a flagrant. Just more "currygoat" nonsense that somehow it isn't a foul.

[dhsilv2]

At the end of the day most fouls are because defenders can't keep an offensive player infront of them without getting physical and ultimately fouling them. If you let defenders get physical to stop offensive players, then it just makes sense to have defenders who are strong and can have more impact there when they aren't able to do other things. Conversely when you call more fouls outside you force teams to find more skilled defenders (able to better keep offensive players in front of them without contact).

You have to chose a level of balance here. You can't have your cake and eat it too as they say. If you cut back on fouls by letting more go, it benefits the defense to swing more that direction and that will cause a change in who's in the league.

I don't think that follows. You're not NOT calling fouls; you're not letting offensive players initiate contact to draw fouls. It works both ways. A defender can't jump in front of a guy to draw a charge, and the offensive player can't jump into a defender to get free throws. If you read what I wrote, you'd see it legislates things on both sides and reduces fouls not really by having refs swallow their whistles but by punishing acts that intentionally create fouls. You call offensive fouls for guys jumping into other players, and you make almost every "take foul" a clear-path call. After everyone adjusts, those actions will be gone from the game or much rarer, meaning there will be more fast-breaks and drives without guys sliding under each other. That's a huge win for the offense. It doesn't benefit shooters as much, but bringing the drive back into the game is a good thing.

When a guy like Bryn Forbes is being backed down by Embiid in the post, he's not seriously going to be able to stop him. Fouling him to force free throws in that situation is something I'd want removed from the game. Hold your ground, stay vertical, and if he scores over you, it's just the way of the game. That's a big help to post players who get a ton of contact and have to deal with foul shots that no one wants to watch them take. That's one of the many ways you can bring bigs back without bring back guys like Zaza.

I haven't really noticed the difference in fouls because I don't watch a team with a star who lived at the line. The Spurs post-Bowen were a great defensive team that didn't rely on being really physical. They were historic on that end and still went whole seasons with barely anyone fouling out and giving up among the fewest free-throws. So the entire dilemma you laid out doesn't really make sense to me. 00s ball where good defenders were supposed to get into a guy's head and shove them around or jump-kick them in the face shouldn't come back, and these rule changes won't bring it back if you remove the contact from both sides.

Also, as I said, if you lower the limit for fouling out, those physical defenders would foul out quickly regardless. So no, they wouldn't come back.

Lowering the limit on fouling out I suppose would do some of this. But that all the more would create incentive for offensive players to try and get fouled.

Right now the league is allowing players to get fouled when going to the rim and not calling it. This will lead to more aggressive and physical defense as the season goes on if the refs don't stop it.This is where I was coming from. The reality is you can't help but foul a great offensive player if you can't stay in front of them and the only way to give defenses a shot there is with legalizing physicality like hand checks.

You're thinking more of "enforcer" like guys who try and hurt others, but I'm thinking just in general it makes sense for a non scoring threat to be 3-5 pounds larger, wing span is a bit less important, mobility a hair less. It's a subtle shift but a meaningful one.

and as noted elsewhere, Harden's teams for example didn't shoot all that many more free throws than other teams. They were pretty average. For all the complaining about Harden the rockets weren't up there in free throws.

[JonFromVA]

Refs are still working on it, they are missing some calls that they should be making, but they are laying the groundwork and then they can hopefully adjust from there.

If the refs are actually relying more on what their eyes see and not what they suspect happened, the natural result would be more missed calls.

Otoh, if they're just overworking a point of emphasis, they'll be back to business as usual in another month or so.

[theFireBlanket]

Let's be honest ... there's also a whole string of "inside" foul baiters that are crying too - Tatum, Embiid, Randle, Lebron, Doncic everyone's free throw totals are down. Embiid just lived at the line last year - it spoils all flow.

Giannis is doing fine.

Cause he always earned his trips to the line without theatrics. Went through years of getting no calls on obvious fouls.

... and good on the refs, if they are just refusing to call the "I got the guy off the ground ... now I'll jump into him" bull.

What are you even talking about? I'm sorry that the salt is weighing you down.

You'd think Giannis was Corey Maggette. He just draws fouls driving because people are afraid to give up that basket. They'd rather make him shoot FTs. Problem is he's hitting them (again) as of the playoffs.

[theFireBlanket]

I've noticed a few instances of defenders jumping into a shooter's landing spot-- and that should still be strictly called a foul.

Agreed with this. That's dangerous play and should be kept out of the game.

Luckily it is in fact still a foul and can be called a flagrant. Just more "currygoat" nonsense that somehow it isn't a foul.

Like when LBJ jumped under Jokic in the bubble playoffs in front of refs & it was a no call. (Re: LAL1947)

Otherwise this is a totally flagrant foul & someone is pulling that out of nothing to support their invalid take.