khans2k5 wrote:I don't think they would make the change just to cover up a player weakness. They would make it because it slows games to a halt and hurts their watchability. People don't want to watch 50-60 free throw games regardless if they are hack a shaq free throws or regular free throws. The rule has been in place since Wilt Chamberlain was in the league so why would players all of a sudden become good free throw shooters now? It's like the 5 foul rule in college. At times it keeps some of the best players in the league off the floor. How is that good for the league? They took away hand checking so why not intentional off-ball fouls? Dribbling and movement are inherent basketball skills everyone should have and yet they did away with a defensive strategy that made life hard for ball handlers and off-ball movement.
You can try to twist it however you'd like but the root cause is players inability to hit free throws. If the league makes a rule that doesn't allow a poor free throw shooter to be put on the line then the fact is they have created a rule to cover up that weakness. You can try to mask it with excuses of slow play or watchability but the fact that the rule will benefit poor free throw shooters is undeniable.
The rule isn't taking anything away but a gimmick. Fouling a guy nowhere near the ball isn't basketball. Foul him when he gets the ball. The rule change would be so you can't just pick who you want to take free throws whenever you want. You'd actually have to foul the guy with the ball. If the guy can't touch the ball because you're going to foul him right away you're taking away an offensive option anyway. If it's not ok in the last 2 minutes of games why should it be allowed the rest of the game? You either make it a rule for the whole game or allow it for the whole game. It makes no sense to have the rule only apply to part of the game.
So you're saying every foul when someone doesn't have the ball would be considered intentional? They might as well remove defense and the regular season could look just like the all star game. There would be no more battles in the post for position or guys fighting through screens for fear of fouling someone without the ball.
There is a pretty clear difference between looking at the ref, telling him you're trying to foul and then proceed to foul the guy 60 ft from the basket and fighting for position in the post. Fighting for position is not an "intentional" foul. It's clear as day what is and isn't an intentional off-ball foul. It's not hard at all to discern the difference between an intentional off-ball foul and a normal foul. I don't think your concern that defense in the league would crumble because the refs just can't tell the difference between the two is valid at all.
The problem with that is how do they draw the line. What is stopping teams from waiting a few more seconds for the player the want to foul to get closer to the basket before fouling him? If defenses just play more aggressively off the ball on the guy they want on the line then they will still be able to accomplish their goal. Then there is no point to this entire discussion of the rule change because all the league would be doing is altering the teams methods of fouling.
khans2k5 wrote:I don't think they would make the change just to cover up a player weakness. They would make it because it slows games to a halt and hurts their watchability. People don't want to watch 50-60 free throw games regardless if they are hack a shaq free throws or regular free throws. The rule has been in place since Wilt Chamberlain was in the league so why would players all of a sudden become good free throw shooters now? It's like the 5 foul rule in college. At times it keeps some of the best players in the league off the floor. How is that good for the league? They took away hand checking so why not intentional off-ball fouls? Dribbling and movement are inherent basketball skills everyone should have and yet they did away with a defensive strategy that made life hard for ball handlers and off-ball movement.
You can try to twist it however you'd like but the root cause is players inability to hit free throws. If the league makes a rule that doesn't allow a poor free throw shooter to be put on the line then the fact is they have created a rule to cover up that weakness. You can try to mask it with excuses of slow play or watchability but the fact that the rule will benefit poor free throw shooters is undeniable.
The rule isn't taking anything away but a gimmick. Fouling a guy nowhere near the ball isn't basketball. Foul him when he gets the ball. The rule change would be so you can't just pick who you want to take free throws whenever you want. You'd actually have to foul the guy with the ball. If the guy can't touch the ball because you're going to foul him right away you're taking away an offensive option anyway. If it's not ok in the last 2 minutes of games why should it be allowed the rest of the game? You either make it a rule for the whole game or allow it for the whole game. It makes no sense to have the rule only apply to part of the game.
So you're saying every foul when someone doesn't have the ball would be considered intentional? They might as well remove defense and the regular season could look just like the all star game. There would be no more battles in the post for position or guys fighting through screens for fear of fouling someone without the ball.
There is a pretty clear difference between looking at the ref, telling him you're trying to foul and then proceed to foul the guy 60 ft from the basket and fighting for position in the post. Fighting for position is not an "intentional" foul. It's clear as day what is and isn't an intentional off-ball foul. It's not hard at all to discern the difference between an intentional off-ball foul and a normal foul. I don't think your concern that defense in the league would crumble because the refs just can't tell the difference between the two is valid at all.
The problem with that is how do they draw the line. What is stopping teams from waiting a few more seconds for the player the want to foul to get closer to the basket before fouling him? If defenses just play more aggressively off the ball on the guy they want on the line then they will still be able to accomplish their goal. Then there is no point to this entire discussion of the rule change because all the league would be doing is altering the teams methods of fouling.
You literally have to tell the refs you are fouling the guy right now to get the intentional foul called. That seems pretty easy to tell when teams are trying to do it. The point of doing it is to put a bad foul shooter at the line with no time coming off the clock so you can get back into the game.
It's not as difficult as you make it sound to discern an intentional foul from a regular one. Besides some clutching and grabbing off a few screens and some over aggressive defense in the post pre-pass there aren't any other off the ball fouls. Time would come off the clock and you would have to try to make it look like a basketball play to be able to get away with it and that only gets you a couple trips to the line and not 28 attempts in a half and a decent amount of time comes off the clock. The problem is the use of it making games 3 hours long because of overuse. Putting a bad shooter on the line a couple times within the play of the game (i.e. when the guy has the ball) is fine.
