- 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
re: ‘Not enough support’ among GMs to change ‘Hack-a-Shaq’ rule
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:16 pm to boom roasted
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:16 pm to boom roasted
quote:Because they have those 18 fouls to use on three otherwise DNP (coach's decision)'s.
I don't follow this reasoning. Why would teams continue to foul?
If the Clippers won't take Jordan out, then in come three benchwhites, one after another, to foul Jordan away from the ball every time the ball gets anywhere near the basket. This can eat up five minutes of clock where no shots are taken, no points are scored, and the ball stays on one side of the court the whole time. And that five minutes I'm talking about involves 18 play stoppages. This would be WAY WORSE than what we have now.
2
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:16 pm to ballscaster
quote:Huh? I don't follow your logic. I'm thinking you don't understand what hack-a-Shaq is...
This creates a nightmare scenario of a team employing their bottom say, three players to waste 18 fouls in the span of a couple minutes. You would have to come up with more rules to curb this gaming of the system, and it would be muddled to the point that we'd wish for the current situation we have now.
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:17 pm to SwaggerCopter
quote:
So a big man getting fouled on a dunk gets the same number of attempts as a guard taking a fade away three that he likely wasn't going to be making anyway?
Wanna go back to the 3 to make 2?
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:18 pm to ballscaster
I see what you're saying. Then change it to 2 shots plus possession. That's what an intention foul is anyway, right? Isn't that why the defense can't foul whoever at the end of the game?
This post was edited on 5/13/15 at 3:20 pm
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:19 pm to boom roasted
quote:
I see what you're saying. Then change it to 2 shots plus possession. That's what an intention foul is anyway, right?
That's what I would go with and would be the simplest fix
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:22 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
Let's take 1 and 1s out of the equation (but they play a big role) to make it easier. Jordan is a 42% FT shooter, his fake "offensive efficency" is 84.0 which is much less than the clippers OE at 109.8
To be fair...it has already been demonstrated that it doesn't make sense to intentionally foul Jordan either. When you factor in offensive rebounds, the "efficiency" is higher than that of their typical halfcourt offense.
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:22 pm to ballscaster
quote:
Because they have those 18 fouls to use on three otherwise DNP (coach's decision)'s.
If the Clippers won't take Jordan out, then in come three benchwhites, one after another, to foul Jordan away from the ball every time the ball gets anywhere near the basket. This can eat up five minutes of clock where no shots are taken, no points are scored, and the ball stays on one side of the court the whole time. And that five minutes I'm talking about involves 18 play stoppages. This would be WAY WORSE than what we have now.
Fuuuuuck. You're right. The Hack-a-Shaq strategy is at best a way to muck up the game. Nobody believes it is good for gaining a lead. Using this, you could slow the game down for sure. At some point, is the coach choosing to let Jordan shoot?
This post was edited on 5/13/15 at 3:23 pm
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:25 pm to brgfather129
How do offensive rebounds effect offensive efficiency?
Is an offensive rebound considered a new possession?
Is an offensive rebound considered a new possession?
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:25 pm to PrimeTime Money
quote:Here's the scenario. Spurs vs. Clippers. Starting five vs. Starting five. Spurs have four team fouls, three minutes left in the third quarter. Jordan is 0-4 from the line. Ginobili is guarding him and has only one foul.
Huh? I don't follow your logic. I'm thinking you don't understand what hack-a-Shaq is...
Clippers bring the ball up the court. Manu grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball. Fifth team foul. Clippers decline free throws.
Ayres in for Ginobili. Clippers in-bound the ball at the timeline.
After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Ayres grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball. Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline.
After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Ayres grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball. Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline.
After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Ayres grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball. Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline.
After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Ayres grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball. Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline.
After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Ayres grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball. Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline.
After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Ayres grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball.
Ayres fouls out, is replaced by Baynes.
Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline. After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Baynes grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball.
Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline. After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Baynes grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball.
Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline. After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Baynes grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball.
Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline. After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Baynes grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball.
Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline. After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Baynes grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball.
Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline. After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Baynes grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball.
Baynes fouls out, is replaced by Joseph.
Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline. After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Joseph grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball.
Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline. After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Joseph grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball.
Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline. After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Joseph grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball.
Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline. After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Joseph grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball.
Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline. After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Joseph grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball.
Clippers decline free throws and in-bound the ball at the timeline. After about 10 seconds of ball movement, Joseph grabs Jordan's jersey away from the ball.
Joseph fouls out, is replaced by Ginobili.
Above accounts for three minutes where no points are scored, no shots are taken, and the ball never leaves the Spurs' defensive side of the court. 19 clock stoppages happen; 19 fouls are explained by the officials to the scorers.
If a team is dead set on declining free throws and keeping a player in the game, this is what we risk happening. It's way worse than the worst-case scenario under the current rules.
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:30 pm to boom roasted
quote:Last two minutes of the game (or maybe the first half as well), yes, and that's the best compromise you'll get in terms of off-the-ball fouls. It's one thing to change a rule for Wilt Chamberlain, but none of the four or five players to whom this situation ever applies are anywhere near that status. Like I said, Los Angeles benched Jordan in the fourth quarter because of it in a game won by San Antonio. Hard to say if any other players have been benched because of it, but I'm sure it's happened more than once.
I see what you're saying. Then change it to 2 shots plus possession. That's what an intention foul is anyway, right? Isn't that why the defense can't foul whoever at the end of the game?
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:31 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
How do offensive rebounds effect offensive efficiency?
Is an offensive rebound considered a new possession?
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:31 pm to ballscaster
Making that off-ball intentional foul rule cover the entire game would solve it, I think.
I wish someone could tell us how many times it's been employed in the playoffs.
I wish someone could tell us how many times it's been employed in the playoffs.
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:33 pm to ballscaster
Any why in the world would any team keep fouling when they keep declining free throws?
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:35 pm to PrimeTime Money
You can use it to reset an offensive possession. It's a far-fetched strategy, but possible.
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:35 pm to brgfather129
quote:Apparently Doc doesn't know this. Jordan only played 36 minutes (averaging 44 a game in the playoffs) and had three fouls in game 5 vs. San Antonio. Spurs used hacka-deandre, and Clippers flinched...and lost.
To be fair...it has already been demonstrated that it doesn't make sense to intentionally foul Jordan either.
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:36 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
Is an offensive rebound considered a new possession?
Maybe for official stats. But we are trying to figure out actual benefits. And the Clippers are scary good at rebounding Jordan's free throw misses. Partly because his misses are hard as hell to predict.
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:37 pm to PrimeTime Money
quote:
Any why in the world would any team keep fouling when they keep declining free throws?
If I am on the road with a 10 point lead, I might as well make sure I go to the locker room with it. 18 fouls out of 3 scrubs guarantees I can protect it.
This post was edited on 5/13/15 at 3:37 pm
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:38 pm to SwaggerCopter
quote:Well, something's gotta give eventually in this case. The hypothetical Spurs have 18 fouls to waste, and the hypothetical Clippers have Jamaal Crawford on the bench. The minute the Clippers get any momentum, I put in the scrubs and start hacking.
At some point, is the coach choosing to let Jordan shoot?
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:42 pm to PrimeTime Money
quote:Because I can. And while I do, you can do literally nothing. My old players get rest, and your young players get annoyed and out of their rhythm. And your loud home crowd? No longer a factor.
Any why in the world would any team keep fouling when they keep declining free throws?
Imagine there's a mismatch down low that favors you. As soon as your big man gets the ball, I have one of my scrubs foul Jordan. All that work you did achieving that mismatch, and all that ball movement it took to get the ball to that spot in that situation...for naught because you have a forward who can't shoot free throws.
An option to decline free throws has the potential to ruin a game and a telecast. Not gonna happen...
Unless we change a rule to where all two-shot fouls are three-shot fouls and all three-shot fouls are four-shot fouls. That alone curbs fouling and ends hacka. (Not that I'm in support of this half-baked idea.)
This post was edited on 5/13/15 at 3:47 pm
Posted on 5/13/15 at 3:44 pm to burdman
Good. The rule doesn't need to be changed. They're giving you a chance at 2 easy points. If you can't capitalize on that, that's on you, not them. And this is coming from a Rockets fan.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News