How would you fix the hack a Shaq problem

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

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.

Ditto.

[KGs Knee]

The only problem is guys not being able to hit free throws. Otherwise this is a good strategy regardless of how boring it is to watch.

That's the problem, it's boring to watch. The NBA is in the entertainment business. Since this is not entertaining it needs to be eliminated. Since it is an intentional foul, it should be 2 shots and the ball. End story.

Does that also mean that teams who are down at the ends of games should be penalized the same way if they foul intentionally, i.e. the other team gets two shots AND the ball? That would take a lot of drama out at the end of games.

I'll be honest, I have never cared much for the strategy of 'extending the game' through the use of fouls. Using rules violations to attempt to gain an advantage goes against the very nature of a 'penalty'.

But it's not quite the same, you still have to foul the player in possession of the ball. Otherwise it is considered an 'intentional foul' as the current rules read, which means you get the ball back.

Personally, I'd be in favor of some sort of clock 'run off'. Maybe 5 seconds per intentional foul.

[wayupnorth]

I wonder how many of you saying "there is no problem" realize the NBA long ago conceded it in fact IS a problem? Thus why you are not allowed to commit intentional fouls against a player not in possession of the ball in the last 2 minutes of the game.

The NBA just simply needs to extend that rule throughout the whole game.

No way. Hack a anyone is a sound strategy.

Learn to shoot free throws and it isn't an issue.

Why give  unneeded advantage to poor free throw shooters.

There is no problem, and I believe the majority of fans would disagree  with what you are suggesting.

Get mad at the idiot coaches who won't adjust their lineup.

[wayupnorth]

2 FTs + the ball for intentional fouls.

I'd be open to this. It annoys me to no end when a team that is down with virtually no chance starts fouling. Like last night, weren't the Bobcats down like 11 with 40 seconds to go and they start fouling? I hate that.

In the mean time if they want to stop giving calls to star that would be good too.

And get rid of Joey Crawford, Violet Palmer, and Bill Kennedy.

Why does that irritate you?

It is the last chance for the team to squeak out a win.

Adds tension and make it  game nor  exciting.

[GratefulCs]

I would fix it by learning how to shoot free throws

[wayupnorth]

The only problem is guys not being able to hit free throws. Otherwise this is a good strategy regardless of how boring it is to watch.

That's the problem, it's boring to watch. The NBA is in the entertainment business. Since this is not entertaining it needs to be eliminated. Since it is an intentional foul, it should be 2 shots and the ball. End story.

Does that also mean that teams who are down at the ends of games should be penalized the same way if they foul intentionally, i.e. the other team gets two shots AND the ball? That would take a lot of drama out at the end of games.

I'll be honest, I have never cared much for the strategy of 'extending the game' through the use of fouls. Using rules violations to attempt to gain an advantage goes against the very nature of a 'penalty'.

But it's not quite the same, you still have to foul the player in possession of the ball. Otherwise it is considered an 'intentional foul' as the current rules read, which means you get the ball back.

Personally, I'd be in favor of some sort of clock 'run off'. Maybe 5 seconds per intentional foul.

You have a very strange view of a foul.

[mgent]

Wait so we remove three pointers too because some players can't shoot threes?

 These are the type of comments to avoid.

 Three's are fun and create space for exciting basketball.

I'm sure everyone here has seen a hack a Shaq game, and usually you just change the channel.

??

Everyone who isn't a basketball fan?

You seem a little misled, bud.  I've never in my life changed the channel due to an intentional fouling strategy (Celtics or otherwise).  I'd bet 95-99% of the fans on this site have never either.

[KG Living Legend]

Umm your 95% to 99% theory is way off. Shamelessly hacking bug guys that can't shoot drives viewers away it's not even debatable.

[Celtic Fan Forever]

I personally love the strategy. Basketball, and sports in general, are about finding mismatches and weaknesses and exploiting them. If you take this away, you're rewarding guys like DeAndre Jordan and Drummond and providing huge advantages for their teams. Who cares if it's boring? It's part of the game. You're getting paid millions of dollars, make your free throws or sit on the bench.

[freshinthehouse]

I personally love the strategy. Basketball, and sports in general, are about finding mismatches and weaknesses and exploiting them. If you take this away, you're rewarding guys like DeAndre Jordan and Drummond and providing huge advantages for their teams. Who cares if it's boring? It's part of the game. You're getting paid millions of dollars, make your free throws or sit on the bench.

This.  I have no problem with the hack-a-(insert player here) strategy.  I always find it interesting to see if it works.

[Ogaju]

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.

Hahahashaha

[CelticsFanFromNYC]

hack a shaq is "almost" like force walking a great hitter in baseball. (I only know NY players so i wont make any analogies  ) Im actually eager each time to see how the player reacts to being fouled and whether it works or not.  A coach is calling out a player for sucking at freethrows. I enjoy these in game challenges as they unfold

[LatterDayCelticsfan]

I reckon that player should only take his own free throws if he had the ball in his hamds when he was fouled.

[moiso]

Wait so we remove three pointers too because some players can't shoot threes?

 These are the type of comments to avoid.

 Three's are fun and create space for exciting basketball.

I'm sure everyone here has seen a hack a Shaq game, and usually you just change the channel.

??

Everyone who isn't a basketball fan?

You seem a little misled, bud.  I've never in my life changed the channel due to an intentional fouling strategy (Celtics or otherwise).  I'd bet 95-99% of the fans on this site have never either.

But if it's a game on dvr, I bet a lot of people use the fast forward button.

[littleteapot]

Everyone who isn't a basketball fan?

You seem a little misled, bud.  I've never in my life changed the channel due to an intentional fouling strategy (Celtics or otherwise).  I'd bet 95-99% of the fans on this site have never either.

I'm not a fan of boredom personally.