- 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: Good ways to end "Hack-a-Shaq"...
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:21 pm to Sevendust912
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:21 pm to Sevendust912
quote:they put a rule in place for it already.
If they are worried about entertainment, they need to start ejecting guys for flopping. That's a bigger issue than hack a whoever.
It's a tough call to make, you can't eject guys, too big of a blow if you get the wrong call.
This post was edited on 4/25/15 at 2:22 pm
2
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:22 pm to shel311
quote:
they put a rule in place for it already.
and they just put the rule in for the hack a shaq too.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:22 pm to SPEEDY
quote:
Like I said before, if the NBA cares about the entertainment factor, they would make a serious attempt to address flopping.
Agreed, but it isn't mutually exclusive with the hack-a-Shaq problem. Why can't they address both?
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:23 pm to shel311
well it doesn't seem like they enforce it.
If you can't eject them then review it after the game and if it was a flop then suspend them a game.
If you can't eject them then review it after the game and if it was a flop then suspend them a game.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:25 pm to lsupride87
quote:
I agree with the choice to decline free throws.
FWIW, I don't think you'd see teams declining that much, if at all.
In Jordan's case for example they rebound his missed FTs at a pretty good clip.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:28 pm to castorinho
It probably wouldn't even come to that... because since teams have the ability to decline free throws, the teams who usually do the hack-a-Shaq wouldn't even try it in the first place.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:29 pm to Sevendust912
quote:I don't have an issue with this, just like I don't have an issue with giving the team the option to shoot the free throw or inbound the ball.
If you can't eject them then review it after the game and if it was a flop then suspend them a game.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:30 pm to PrimeTime Money
I'm not reading this entire thread but what's the consensus on calling obvious off the ball fouls intentional fouls. 1 Ft plus the ball.
Is that not what hack a shaq is essentially...an intentional foul?
Is that not what hack a shaq is essentially...an intentional foul?
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:31 pm to PrimeTime Money
Keep in mind that sometimes they use it just to cool the other team off (Spurs in third quarter of game 2, when the Clippers were making a run). So they'd still foul anyway to get them out of rhythm.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:33 pm to PrimeTime Money
To me, the MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR flaw in basketball is that "fouling" can be used as a POSITIVE strategy.
It is akin to letting teams commit penalties in football in order to stop the clock but where the negative of the penalty is only a maybe.
It's always been of the stupidest aspects of basketball.
Frnakly, I love to watch basketball except for the last 5 minutes. Then, it degrades into being one of the dumbest team sports ever invented.
A foul is by definition "breaking the rules". Breaking the rules, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES, should afford a team an advantage.
It is akin to letting teams commit penalties in football in order to stop the clock but where the negative of the penalty is only a maybe.
It's always been of the stupidest aspects of basketball.
Frnakly, I love to watch basketball except for the last 5 minutes. Then, it degrades into being one of the dumbest team sports ever invented.
A foul is by definition "breaking the rules". Breaking the rules, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES, should afford a team an advantage.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:37 pm to LSUzealot
quote:
I'm not reading this entire thread but what's the consensus on calling obvious off the ball fouls intentional fouls. 1 Ft plus the ball.
Is that not what hack a shaq is essentially...an intentional foul?
there are some off the ball fouls that aren't intentional. Its impossible to separate the 2
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:41 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
A foul is by definition "breaking the rules". Breaking the rules, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES, should afford a team an advantage.
again, the player who commits the foul is awarded....a foul
and again, you can't call it an advnatage/disadvantage because you make up a result in your head on which you think "might" happen.
what happens when they make both free throws on a hack a shaq?
what happens when a team fouls in hope the shooter misses 1 of 2, and he makes them both?
assuming something will happen and calling it a disadvantage or an advantage is not the train of thought you want to use in trying to fix this rule.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:43 pm to Lester Earl
Certainly it's subjective but 95% of the time it's frickin obvious. Put the rule in and make em play real basketball.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:44 pm to LSUzealot
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?
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:54 pm to Lester Earl
I don't think that scenario applies here.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 2:59 pm to castorinho
but under no circumstance should a team be at an advantage when fouling
Posted on 4/25/15 at 3:00 pm to Lester Earl
You can intentionally foul players with the ball, you shouldn't be able to intentionally foul players without the ball. Just extend the under 2 minute rule to the rest of the game. Off ball foul is one shot and the ball.
ETA: the league obviously has an issue with off ball fouls being exploited at the end of the game, it shouldn't be hard to just extend that rule for the entire game.
ETA: the league obviously has an issue with off ball fouls being exploited at the end of the game, it shouldn't be hard to just extend that rule for the entire game.
This post was edited on 4/25/15 at 3:03 pm
Posted on 4/25/15 at 3:04 pm to Lester Earl
Brah. It's not hard. Under 4 the rule changes. So make the intentional foul from 12 minutes down to 4.
Your scenario isn't not even in the same realm of conversation. Coaches all the time talk about fouling late to give 2 free throws instead of letting them shoot a 3. Studies have even been done about your win % is 80+% no matter what your strategy.
Your scenario isn't not even in the same realm of conversation. Coaches all the time talk about fouling late to give 2 free throws instead of letting them shoot a 3. Studies have even been done about your win % is 80+% no matter what your strategy.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 3:07 pm to Epic Cajun
quote:
it shouldn't be hard to just extend that rule for the entire game.
the competition committee shot that down just 2-3 years ago when they put the under 2 minute rule in. and it was david stern pushing for it, who obv isnt in office anymore.
quote:
You can intentionally foul players with the ball, you shouldn't be able to intentionally foul players without the ball.
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.
Posted on 4/25/15 at 3:14 pm to PrimeTime Money
quote:
wouldn't even try it in the first place.
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
Page 17 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News