- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/25/15 at 3:53 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
my point is, you don't know what is next if you open pandoras box. It just doesn't set a good precedent, more than anything. Really for me, it has nothing to do with the new rule being fair or unfair.
This wouldn't come close to setting any kind of precedent, that was set many moons ago. NBA rules have been evolving forever. I'm sure 30 years ago people were screaming about opening Pandora's box of 4,5,and 6 point shots when the league instituted the 3 point line, but rational thinking has kept that from happening.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 4:25 pm to PrimeTime Money
quote:
Why couldn't the coach have the option to "decline" free throws for intentional off-ball fouls, and can opt to take the ball out.
This changes nothing in regards to stopping the clock at the end of games by fouling, because those are ON-BALL fouls, and the person who was fouled with the ball would have to shoot free throws like always.
Seems like a pretty simple way to get rid of intentionally fouling bad free throw shooters.
Are you also against the Spurs resting all of their starters for nationally televised games?
Posted on 4/25/15 at 4:39 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
Game 3 of the Pels/Warriors, Warriors down 3, and Curry has the ball with a few seconds left and they need a 3 to tie. Should it be against the rules to foul him on the floor as well? I mean, what's next?
The difference is that it's still possible to get 3 points in this situation.
My issue is that I don't understand why it's ok to do until there are under 2 minutes. What does it matter?
This post was edited on 4/25/15 at 4:40 pm
Posted on 4/25/15 at 5:07 pm to bg22
quote:
Everyone is assuming the team fouled would decline the FTs. I'm betting most coaches would shoot anyway. The clock is already stopped. You said yourself the strategy didn't work. Why would the coach elect to decline and risk getting stopped? I don't think your proposal is much of a deterrent
It'd be borderline retarded to let your players rack up a ton of personal fouls and still have to play defense. It's not that anyone is saying the strategy is terrible, they're more saying it's mathematically pretty neutral, and when it's statistically neutral, most coaches would likely elect to play basketball rather than let the opposing coach dictate the flow.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 5:27 pm to PrimeTime Money
I did not read all 344 replies so SIAP, but any foul deemed a non-basketball play by the officials should be a 3 to make 2 like the old days.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 6:07 pm to PrimeTime Money
Easiest solution to me seems whoever is holding onto the ball shoots the FTs
Posted on 4/25/15 at 6:15 pm to chrisksaint
The best idea I've seen-
an intentional foul away from the ball results in a free throw, that free throw is worth 2 points. Becomes a more calculated gamble, keeps the integrity of the athletic competition in tact.
an intentional foul away from the ball results in a free throw, that free throw is worth 2 points. Becomes a more calculated gamble, keeps the integrity of the athletic competition in tact.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 6:19 pm to TallMan
Again, what makes you believe the coach would decline the FTs and make the team "play basketball"?
Posted on 4/25/15 at 6:43 pm to bg22
Why do be people want fix something that isn't broken?
Here is how you can fix it: a) Just make at least half of your free throws b) take that player out of the game
The Spurs are taking advantage of a weakness. They are better at doing that than anyone in the league.
VDN used to bench Deandre Jordan in the 4th because of this, why are we providing Doc with cover for having no viable backups?
The Spurs for example basically eliminate the ability for the Grizzlies to play Tony Allen because his lack of shooting. Can we get a rule change for this?
Here is how you can fix it: a) Just make at least half of your free throws b) take that player out of the game
The Spurs are taking advantage of a weakness. They are better at doing that than anyone in the league.
VDN used to bench Deandre Jordan in the 4th because of this, why are we providing Doc with cover for having no viable backups?
The Spurs for example basically eliminate the ability for the Grizzlies to play Tony Allen because his lack of shooting. Can we get a rule change for this?
Posted on 4/25/15 at 7:26 pm to RonBurgundy
quote:
The best idea I've seen-
an intentional foul away from the ball results in a free throw, that free throw is worth 2 points. Becomes a more calculated gamble, keeps the integrity of the athletic competition in tact.
Agreed...if that were the only idea I had seen.
Page 18 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News