How would you fix the hack a Shaq problem

[KG Living Legend]

 Hack a Deandre, Hack a Drummond, hack anyone that can't shoot a free throw.

 I know some will say shoot better from the line but that's just not happening for most of these guys.

 Fact is it's terrible to watch and its horrible for the future of the game, coaches will do it as much as they please if they think it's going to win them games.

 My solution is simple, you can't foul the guy unless he actually has the ball. Problem solved.

[PhoSita]

I don't think it's really a problem.  If you prevent teams from taking advantage of crappy free throw shooters, it'll make teams with physical freaks at center that much harder to handle. 

I kind of like that guys who don't have the skill to hit free throws end up getting squeezed out of 4th quarter lineups because they're too great a liability.

[KG Living Legend]

 It's horrendous to watch when the coach repeatedly keeps doing it over and over again. Needs to be changed and probably will next year.

[saltlover]

I'd lock those players in a gym until they made the shots.  I'm not for changing the rules of the game because a few players aren't good at something.

[trickybilly]

 Hack a Deandre, Hack a Drummond, hack anyone that can't shoot a free throw.

 I know some will say shoot better from the line but that's just not happening for most of these guys.

 Fact is it's terrible to watch and its horrible for the future of the game, coaches will do it as much as they please if they think it's going to win them games.

 My solution is simple, you can't foul the guy unless he actually has the ball. Problem solved.

Not so sure it is that simple. Are you also saying, abolish the moving picks rule? What about falling behind your guy on a curl and grabbing his arm so he can't get to his spot? Is that no foul?

[LooseCannon]

Make it a one-and-one to punish teams for putting bad free throw shooters on the floor and discourage them from playing guys vulnerable to that strategy.

[Granath]

It's not a problem. Learn to shoot free throws.

[SHAQATTACK]

Ok.....it's not fair some guys are short ......let's say if your less than 6 ft ......you get to shoot three point shots from college distance .

You are being like NASCAR , making up rules as you go to apply to a FEW bigs who won't learn a new skill


Plenty of centers over the years could shoot free throws .  Howard is a mental mess.   

It's up to them to put in the work ......years and years of practice ......like us short guys did in 6 th grade .  .......the bigs grow up and don't realize they need to practice shooting , thinking height will always win the day.

You can invent rules to make up for lack of shooting ability one person who already has the a gift of height to give him an advantage shooting .......come on .....it's about developing skills ......a lot of bigs just don't take the free throw line seriously .

It's part of the game being able to shoot free throws .

[littleteapot]

Teams should always have the option to take the ball out from the sidelines instead of shooting free throws.

[Fan from VT]

Teams should always have the option to take the ball out from the sidelines instead of shooting free throws.

Thats one reasonable fix. You could tweak it and say in the last 5 minutes of a game the team has the option to inbound the ball or shoot free throws. This may also cut down on teams that are winning fouling a 3 point shooter before he shoots, because the team could just run a sideline set play to try to get a good look at a three.

You could also tweak the above so it is just "off the ball" fouls in the last 5 minutes (or 4th quarter) get the 2 free throws or inbound option.

A bit more extreme would be "in the last 5 minutes, off the ball fouls are 2 shots AND the ball."

Another fix would that would more address the specific "problem," but that would have a more subjective component and therefore more likely controversy, would be that INTENTIONAL off the ball fouls in the last 5 minutes get the new rule (either option to inbound, 2 shots and the ball, 3 shots, whatever). It would be a ref judgment call.

Another idea would be that every team at the start of the game can designate one player who, if they are fouled in the last 5 minutes, an alternative player on the team can shoot the free throws for off the ball fouls.


Regardless, i would definitely limit it to off the ball fouls. I hate the idea of coaches playing a guy who everyone knows is a bad free throw shooter and running plays where they get the ball then whining they get fouled with the ball in their hands.

Finally, in this case i do hope either nothing gets done or they start with something very small, because i dont think its really much of a problem. I dont mind rule changes in general, since its just a game designed to be entertaining, but in this case im not sure i like the idea of changing the rules to accomodate a few players' obvious flaws in their game. Every player has flaws, and teams try to exploit those. I mean, there would never be a rule that "no one is allowed to post up a player 6" shorter than themselves" or something.


In summary, i would either do no change, or i would say "in the last 5 minutes of the game, if a player is in the ref's judgment intentionally fouled off the ball OR fouled in the backcourt, then that team gets to choose 2 free throws or inbounding the ball."

I added the backcourt piece so that, for example, deandre grabs a defensive board and is immediately fouled, the clips still get to choose inbound or free throws.

[Who]

2 FTs + the ball for intentional fouls.

[Celtics4ever]

Part of the strategy of the game, you gamble out there with bad FT shooters, you may get bit by it.   For those who do not like it, they have good meds out there for attention I hear these days.  That should fix it.

[BudweiserCeltic]

2 FTs + the ball for intentional fouls.

Great, lets reward unprepared / unskilled players.

[mctyson]

First and foremost, intentional fouls (i.e. not making a basketball play) are always supposed to be 2 shots and the ball.  Almost every 'hack-a-shaq' foul is intentional, and by rule that should be the result.  These guys almost never have the ball and are basically as far away from the action as possible, and the fouler is by every measure intentionally fouling.

Having said that, it's not really that kind of intentional foul.  So here is what I would simply instate for the refs...

A foul against a player off the ball, with the intent of fouling outside of a basketball play in order to stop the clock or send a player to the free line, shall be called given the following criteria:

1) The foul is committed in the half-court of the team in possession.

2) The foul is in the act of positioning, setup, or movement.  For example, setting a pick, running a cut or trying to establish post position.

3) The foul does not qualify for a flagrant 1 or intentional foul (it is not a hard foul and is involved in a basketball play)

I think that that would solve a lot of our problems.  If Drummond wants to hang out in the other team's half-court so he isn't fouled, he should be allowed to, but his team will be severely handicapped playing 4 on 5. 

The second he crosses half-court he is eligible to be followed, as long as he is not just standing still doing nothing.  Again, that should be allowed and a player standing around motionless should by definition not be eligible for a foul.  But also, again, that severely handicaps his team because the essentially have to play 4 on 5 in the half court.

There doesn't need to be any crazy rule put in place.  The refs just have to establish what a foul really is (very hard for NBA refs) and call it consistently.

[bdm860]

Think outside the box.

Any player who misses 4 straight free throws in a quarter = automatic ejection. 

Think how interesting that would make the game.    The added pressure on the line after Jordan/Drummond just went 0-2 (or even an average or good free throw shooter).  Do you sit him for the rest of the quarter?  Even the worst free throw shooters don't often miss 4 straight, but now that added pressure!  Does the coach risk leaving in a player who just went 0-2 or 0-3?  Now quarters 1-3 just became a little more interesting too. 

Any coach who leaves in a player who is getting the "hack-a-" treatment should get a technical for conduct detrimental to the game.  Not the coach whose players are fouling, the coach whose player is getting fouled.

Spurs are playing the Clippers and Pop is going to do the Hack-a-Jordan strategy.  If Jordan is missing, and Doc leaves him in, Doc gets the technical.  Nobody wants to see a guy miss free throws, it should be on Doc to take him out.  You don't punish Pop for exploiting a weakness, just like you wouldn't punish a coach for packing the inside against a poor 3-point shooting team.  Coaching 101 is to force the other team to take shots they don't want to take.