Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

[redsox4evur]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

Begs to differ with me? I'd guess most players who have the shift put on for them think it should go away... I bet the Jordans and Howards of the NBA want to get rid of the Hack-a-Shaq too. Probably not a coincidence.

From everything I've known, an on purpose foul (not using "intentional" just bc it's the actual term) away from the ball is generally called intentional, while on the ball it needs to be borderline flagrant to get that call. So, for example, in HS or college on a late in bounds pass you won't see someone just grab a player to get the foul called without running time off the clock... instead you might see them jump in front of a guy to cause a collision and fall, forcing the ref to call a charge or foul. The lower the level, even grabbing a shirt when someone tries to take off may get an intentional foul call.

This is how it used to be in the NBA but I can't put my finger on when that changed. Either way, it's a subjective rule left up to the refs. So it's strange to me that they are discussing making rule changes rather than just having the refs enforce this rule as it should be. That is, unless the rule actually changed in the NBA at some point. That's what I don't know.

Yes he does on the shift he has said he would be at 3K in base hits if the shift was illegal. But different sport so I'm going to leave it at that. But I guess what my real question is how would this change anything?

[23]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

The reward is 2 free uncontested shots. They don't need anymore help.

Not sure if you can stop it without making it easier for the team with the ball

[wwharton]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

Yes he does on the shift he has said he would be at 3K in base hits if the shift was illegal. But different sport so I'm going to leave it at that. But I guess what my real question is how would this change anything?

He'd be at 4K in base hits if curveballs and sliders were illegal. That's kind of the point. Because it's hard for him doesn't mean it should be banned from the sport. It's a bit OT but it fits the conversation. Instead of your guy I'll use mine... Chris Davis hit an opposite field HR last night with what looked like a little flick of the wrist. Knowing the power he has that way, it makes even less reason for him to not be able to hit a dribbler into the HUGE hole that's created when teams shift.

An intentional foul is 2 free throws and the ball (NBA may be 1 free throw and the ball)... most important part is the team doesn't lose possession.

[Threesus]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

The reward is 2 free uncontested shots. They don't need anymore help.

Not sure if you can stop it without making it easier for the team with the ball

Yeah I agree. All solutions to the problem that I have seen are punishing the team committing the foul. Honestly, I don't feel the problem even needs fixing.

[JODYE]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

Glad this was brought up, because last night, very similar situation occurred where the Diamondbacks shifted on Morneau in his first plate appearance. What does he do? Pokes one down third base line for a stand up double.

Rest of game, no shift.

Just friggin get better and it will go away lol

[jeebs9]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

So question... what if players get better. And every player shots at least 70% and up. But coaches are still fouling players.

[JODYE]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

That wouldn't happen. Mathematically, from a point per possession standpoint it wouldn't make sense and the odds at that point would be against you even greater in regards to it having long term success.

Even the worst of free throw shooters get lucky at some times and render the tactic useless. But now you're talking about a guy who makes 7+ out of 10 and then you're enabling him to get into a rhythm at the line.

The only way you can consider the tactic itself a success is if it's holding the other team to less than a point per possession. Meaning the shooter is making 1 or less FT per times he is fouled. So if you start fouling guys that shoot 65-70%, and they shoot that percentage over, say, 100 FTs, you're talking upwards of 1.3-1.5 points per possession which is well above what even the best scoring teams in the league average. At that point it just isn't smart.

[23]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

So question... what if players get better. And every player shots at least 70% and up. But coaches are still fouling players.

Then they deserve to lose and should be on the hotseat if thats all they can muster up

[702]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

Nice try Pop but every counter factual he came up with doesn't start with a non-basketball play. Can you stop a game and make someone block shots? Or Dribble? Leaving a shooter open in the halfcourt isn't the same as fouling someone 1 second into the shotclock, 15 feet from the ball.

It's just.... not the same thing.

On ball fouls for bad free throw shooters to put them on the line? No problem.

Clearly keying in on the worst free throw shooter on the court to put him on the line with a non-basketball play? That's gotta go. I just want actual basketball, when I watch basketball. What's wrong with making someone do something basketball related to implement their strategy? Blatant intentional fouls should be shot and ball. If a ref can't tell the difference, we need new refs.

This argument is getting me and something I've been thinking about for a few weeks.

It's a non-basketball play. They aren't attempting to make a play, or score, or play defense or anything when they're intentionally fouling someone. That just seems silly to me. Ziller elaborates on it well:

1. "Free throws are a part of the game!"

Well, yes. They are. But*why*are they a part of the game? Free throws were created as a deterrent to fouls, not as a supplementary skill test to determine the best team. Free throws exist to prevent defenders from beating the Holy Hell out of prospective scorers on every possession. Free throws and the fouling system (including the six-foul limit) are simply deterrents against overly physical play.

The NBA tweaks its rules on what sort of physicality is allowed with some frequency. The norm is to allow*less physicality over time. There's a reason East Coast Basketball is a pejorative term these days: open, free basketball is far more entertaining than burly, brawly action. In a perfect world, there would be no fouls and there would be no reason for free throws. Watching actual offenses face actual defenses is way more fun than watching anyone shoot uncontested set shots.

The time of play factor can't be ignored, either. In a Utopian paradise where no one fouled anyone, games would last no more than two hours, if that. The Rockets' Game 2 win lasted three hours. Game 1 of this series was 2 hours, 42 minutes. By contrast, the comparatively low-FTA Bulls-Cavaliers Game 2 was over in 2 hours, 23 minutes.

Free throws are a part of the game only by necessity. No one likes them. Players who are good at shooting them and capable of drawing them use their existence strategically. When players are bad at shooting them, opponents use their existence strategically. Frankly, reducing free throws to zero should be a goal of the NBA. It can never happen, but the NBA should look for policy fixes to reduce how many free throws we have to watch and how much time they waste.*

It's the same reason people are making arguments in certain corners about eliminating charges that aren't actual basketball plays. Plays that aren't someone attempting to actually defend a shot/drive. I also agree with that.

[jeebs9]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

Two more stupid questions....

1. What rules at the college level stop teams from doing the hack-a whatever? I don't know why. But I can't remember if it happens at the the college level or not. I remember the championship game Memphis vs Kansas. Kansas fouled them and sent them to the line. But I can't remember if they were intentional fouls.

2. What if 2k had off ball fouls? Could you imagine the games? And would you play it 2k? If you could do that? Or imagine hack-a in a street basketball game. I'm pretty sure people will laugh at you. It's like when I learned about the charge and tried doing it in a street game lol

[dsallupinyaarea]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

This argument is getting me and something I've been thinking about for a few weeks.

It's a non-basketball play. They aren't attempting to make a play, or score, or play defense or anything when they're intentionally fouling someone. That just seems silly to me. Ziller elaborates on it well:



It's the same reason people are making arguments in certain corners about eliminating charges that aren't actual basketball plays. Plays that aren't someone attempting to actually defend a shot/drive. I also agree with that.

Ziller explained it way more sophisticated than I ever could. And I agree 1000%.

[wwharton]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

Two more stupid questions....

1. What rules at the college level stop teams from doing the hack-a whatever? I don't know why. But I can't remember if it happens at the the college level or not. I remember the championship game Memphis vs Kansas. Kansas fouled them and sent them to the line. But I can't remember if they were intentional fouls.

2. What if 2k had off ball fouls? Could you imagine the games? And would you play it 2k? If you could do that? Or imagine hack-a in a street basketball game. I'm pretty sure people will laugh at you. It's like when I learned about the charge and tried doing it in a street game lol

1. It'd be an intentional foul

2. Plenty of things can be exploited in video games so I don't think it even matters.

Also the mention of charges, getting rid of them is ridiculous too. As well as the sweep through move or pump faking to get a defender off their feet, etc.

We complain about how often Harden goes to the line but want to get rid of charges? There are some offensive moves where taking a charge is the best defense for.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

I didn't catch the game until the last 2-3 mins but judging from the posts about the Rockets-Clippers game, I'm assuming it was out of control tonight and that there's going to be serious discussion about removing it completely or tweaking the rules somewhat.

Am I correct to assume that?

[vtcha]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

Do you guys think it would work if they deem the hack-a-shaq a common non-shooting foul where a free throw would only occur if the opponent is over the foul limit. They could then also extend the part where you can't apply the strategy in the final 2 minutes of the quarter to say 5 minutes?

Would this dissuade teams from wanting to be over the foul limit so early in the quarter?

[jeebs9]

Re: Let's Talk About The "Hack-a-Shaq" Strategy

Do you guys think it would work if they deem the hack-a-shaq a common non-shooting foul where a free throw would only occur if the opponent is over the foul limit. They could then also extend the part where you can't apply the strategy in the final 2 minutes of the quarter to say 5 minutes?

Would this dissuade teams from wanting to be over the foul limit so early in the quarter?

I think that's what I'd like to do. Make it 5 minutes. But it won't stop what happen yesterday.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/IUFD65woJHo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I just don't think there can be a middle ground. It's either they take it away or modify it.