OT G League to Test Single Free Throw Worth 1, 2 or 3 Points Depending on Shot

[BigGameDamian]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles...throw-worth-1-2-or-3-points-depending-on-shot


The NBA G League will test a new free-throw system during the upcoming season with the goal of shortening games.

According to ESPN's Zach Lowe, the G League will run a single-foul-shot experiment. Every trip to the line would have a player attempt only one shot. It would be worth two points if fouled on a two-point attempt and three points if fouled on a three-point attempt.

Players who are fouled on made baskets will attempt one free throw worth one point, as is already the case.

While most of the game will be played under those experimental rules, the last two minutes of regulation and overtime will use traditional free-throw procedures.

G League head of basketball operations Brad Walker said officials estimate the new model will eliminate six to eight minutes of game time per game on average, per Lowe.

Walker added that traditional foul rules will be used in the final two minutes of regulation and overtime so that fouling isn't incentivized. That is because the one-shot rule could result in teams coming away with no points at the free-throw line more often, which would increase the likelihood of comebacks.

Starting to foul earlier could also backfire, though, since poor free-throw shooters would only have to make a single shot in order to net two points for their team.

This isn't the first time that the G League has experimented with new rules to reduce game time and improve game flow.

The league shortened the length of timeouts, which Walker said shaved four minutes off the average game time and received no criticism from coaches or players.

As of now, the single-foul-shot rule is a one-year experiment, and it will be evaluated at the conclusion of the 2019-20 season before determining whether it will remain beyond that.

1. 
   

 

[tester551]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles...throw-worth-1-2-or-3-points-depending-on-shot


The NBA G League will test a new free-throw system during the upcoming season with the goal of shortening games.

According to ESPN's Zach Lowe, the G League will run a single-foul-shot experiment. Every trip to the line would have a player attempt only one shot. It would be worth two points if fouled on a two-point attempt and three points if fouled on a three-point attempt.

Players who are fouled on made baskets will attempt one free throw worth one point, as is already the case.

While most of the game will be played under those experimental rules, the last two minutes of regulation and overtime will use traditional free-throw procedures.

G League head of basketball operations Brad Walker said officials estimate the new model will eliminate six to eight minutes of game time per game on average, per Lowe.

Walker added that traditional foul rules will be used in the final two minutes of regulation and overtime so that fouling isn't incentivized. That is because the one-shot rule could result in teams coming away with no points at the free-throw line more often, which would increase the likelihood of comebacks.

Starting to foul earlier could also backfire, though, since poor free-throw shooters would only have to make a single shot in order to net two points for their team.

This isn't the first time that the G League has experimented with new rules to reduce game time and improve game flow.

The league shortened the length of timeouts, which Walker said shaved four minutes off the average game time and received no criticism from coaches or players.

As of now, the single-foul-shot rule is a one-year experiment, and it will be evaluated at the conclusion of the 2019-20 season before determining whether it will remain beyond that.

I appreciate the efforts to shorten the game, but this is the wrong approach.

Timeouts at the end of the game kill the flow. Also official reviews. They ought to be handled by other refs not on the court & the outcome told to the guys on the court.

 

[BlazerWookee]

I. D. O. C.

 

[Sarni]

Does shortening timeouts really shorten the game materially? They literally never take what they are supposed to anyway, and are at least 50% longer than they should be every single time - at least that's my impression.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles...throw-worth-1-2-or-3-points-depending-on-shot


The NBA G League will test a new free-throw system during the upcoming season with the goal of shortening games.

According to ESPN's Zach Lowe, the G League will run a single-foul-shot experiment. Every trip to the line would have a player attempt only one shot. It would be worth two points if fouled on a two-point attempt and three points if fouled on a three-point attempt.

Players who are fouled on made baskets will attempt one free throw worth one point, as is already the case.

While most of the game will be played under those experimental rules, the last two minutes of regulation and overtime will use traditional free-throw procedures.

G League head of basketball operations Brad Walker said officials estimate the new model will eliminate six to eight minutes of game time per game on average, per Lowe.

Walker added that traditional foul rules will be used in the final two minutes of regulation and overtime so that fouling isn't incentivized. That is because the one-shot rule could result in teams coming away with no points at the free-throw line more often, which would increase the likelihood of comebacks.

Starting to foul earlier could also backfire, though, since poor free-throw shooters would only have to make a single shot in order to net two points for their team.

This isn't the first time that the G League has experimented with new rules to reduce game time and improve game flow.

The league shortened the length of timeouts, which Walker said shaved four minutes off the average game time and received no criticism from coaches or players.

As of now, the single-foul-shot rule is a one-year experiment, and it will be evaluated at the conclusion of the 2019-20 season before determining whether it will remain beyond that.

Should make the rule such that if you makes the first free throw you get all possible points, but if you miss the first you still get the second (or third if you miss the first two).

 

[mook]

I like this rule, as I fast forward through free throws anyway. Does anybody really want to watch Curry take three free throws in the first quarter? Boringest shit ever.

However, I agree that the bigger problem is officiating reviews. Wayyyyy too much time. They should have a timer on ref replay. Onscreen and on the jumbotron should be a 30 second countdown, and if the refs can't pull their heads out of their asses by then a buzzer sounds and the play stands as called.

It'd add an element of pressure to the refs to hurry the fuck up and move on. 9 out of 10 times you can see 10 seconds of replay and know how the play will be called. You really don't need more time than that.

Maybe allow the refs to call for a 1 minute extensions in extreme emergencies, but refs will be evaluated on overuse of the extension.

Everybody would love this rule change except the refs (and coaches who use the current system as extra timeouts to call plays).

 

[kjironman1]

I'm not big on this one. There is a certain degree of game that goes away without having to hit both free throws. But i would have to watch it and see how it plays out. It is interesting.

 

[kjironman1]

It'd add an element of pressure to the refs to hurry the fuck up and move on. 9 out of 10 times you can see 10 seconds of replay and know how the play will be called. You really don't need more time than that.

I agree with this. Never understood the whole having to be reviewed back in New York (Or wherever it is?)and then translated to the Ref. Keep the replay local and have the lead ref make the call. Then get on with the game.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

I like this change, free throws are boring.

I'd like to see less and or shorter timeouts too.

Reduce replay reviews, if they can't quickly tell it's not a terrible call either way.

Reduce dead time on ball stoppage, out of bounds, fouls, etc. Teams have 5 seconds to take ball from ref or it's a turnover.

It would be great to get games in a 1:45-2:00 window.

Get rid of back to backs. The increased pace will make the bench more important, as well as in the playoffs, which would reduce the effectiveness of 2 superstar heavy title teams.

 

[mook]

I agree with this. Never understood the whole having to be reviewed back in New York (Or wherever it is?)and then translated to the Ref. Keep the replay local and have the lead ref make the call. Then get on with the game.

With modern technology, I think it would be faster to use a ref in New Jersey. The lead ref on court hits a pager button on his belt which immediately signals a ref in NJ to evaluate. NJ ref has 30 seconds. During the 30 seconds the fans at home see the exact same video feed as NJ ref. NJ communicates verdict to PA announcer. Then the court ref is told the verdict the same time as the fans (and viewers on TV) by the PA announcer.

None of the bullshit of watching refs hunch over ghetto monitors at half court. That shit looks so amateur I always feel embarrassed to have to watch it.

With maybe an extra 5 seconds on either end, there's maybe a 40 second delay in action between ref timeout and setting up the inbound, and that entire 40 seconds is actually pretty interesting and tense.

 

[BonesJones]

I like this rule, as I fast forward through free throws anyway. Does anybody really want to watch Curry take three free throws in the first quarter? Boringest shit ever.

However, I agree that the bigger problem is officiating reviews. Wayyyyy too much time. They should have a timer on ref replay. Onscreen and on the jumbotron should be a 30 second countdown, and if the refs can't pull their heads out of their asses by then a buzzer sounds and the play stands as called.

It'd add an element of pressure to the refs to hurry the fuck up and move on. 9 out of 10 times you can see 10 seconds of replay and know how the play will be called. You really don't need more time than that.

Maybe allow the refs to call for a 1 minute extensions in extreme emergencies, but refs will be evaluated on overuse of the extension.

Everybody would love this rule change except the refs (and coaches who use the current system as extra timeouts to call plays).

Remember CJ hitting the ball off Jamal Murray's hand in Game 3? They dont call that as Portland's ball with only 30 seconds to review it, and we likely miss the WCF because of it

 

[BonesJones]

Dont fix what isnt broken, you just might break it.

 

[mook]

Remember CJ hitting the ball off Jamal Murray's hand in Game 3? They dont call that as Portland's ball with only 30 seconds to review it, and we likely miss the WCF because of it

I think in that sort of a critical point they'd opt for a minute extension. Maybe two.

Right now we slog through hundreds of these long reviews, most of which are easy to decide and not life-or-death. I'm simply proposing we allow refs the time to review critical, really iffy calls carefully like they already do, but fast forward through all the rest.

 

[mook]

Dont fix what isnt broken, you just might break it.

Well, doesn't that sound like the voice of progress...

It's already broken. You're just so used to it being broken you don't even notice.

 

[Hey]

How about one free throw and keep the ball?

 

[The Professional Fan]

I don't like it. Intentionally fouling a bad FT shooter at the end of the game may bog the game down but it's a good strategy and has had success. Anything to get the win, IMO. Don't let these guys off the hook. Make all your damn FT's.

 

[handiman]

As long as we're making FT shooting arbitrary, why not have them attempt the FT from the same spot on the floor they were fouled? That might actually make stupid rule changes interesting. Foul a big man under the hoop? Fine, he gets to dunk his FT. Pick up a touch foul on the perimeter? Well, they have to hit one from deep to pick up the extra point(s).

 

[e_blazer]

Oh, just do away with the shot attempts entirely. Just compute the results with a probability factor for each player based on a pre-season free throw shooting test. It would make for some interesting scores: 112.395 - 104.878.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

As long as we're making FT shooting arbitrary, why not have them attempt the FT from the same spot on the floor they were fouled? That might actually make stupid rule changes interesting. Foul a big man under the hoop? Fine, he gets to dunk his FT. Pick up a touch foul on the perimeter? Well, they have to hit one from deep to pick up the extra point(s).

I would be down with free throws on three pointers needing to be shot from behind the arc at the top of the key.

 

[barfo]

To speed up the game, eliminate quarters 1, 2, and 3. They don't matter anyway.

barfo

 

[e_blazer]

To speed up the game, eliminate quarters 1, 2, and 3. They don't matter anyway.

barfo

Just go to the last two minutes with a tie score and go from there. No time outs allowed, of course.

 

[tlongII]

I don't like it. I don't think they need to shorten the games.

 

[kjironman1]

Oh, just do away with the shot attempts entirely. Just compute the results with a probability factor for each player based on a pre-season free throw shooting test. It would make for some interesting scores: 112.395 - 104.878.

Winner!

 

[kjironman1]

To speed up the game, eliminate quarters 1, 2, and 3. They don't matter anyway.

barfo

Well heck. Just play round robin tournaments once a week. Different city every week and make every game 20 mins?

 

[Sedatedfork]

I'm not big on this one. There is a certain degree of game that goes away without having to hit both free throws. But i would have to watch it and see how it plays out. It is interesting.

One of the things you miss is the opportunity to make the 1st and intentionally miss the 2nd if you are down by 3 with not much time left. Interesting idea, not sure if I like it or not.

 

[hoopsjock]

Getting fouled on a three and only having to make ONE 15 foot unguarded free throw to get 3 points seems incredibly lopsided to me.

 

[1eyedjack]

someone stole my idea I made this suggestion at least once or twice in here. I don’t care about speeding up the game I’m just tired of watching people shoot 20 free throws let them shoot 1 and Make or miss game gets back to action quicker

 

[kjironman1]

One of the things you miss is the opportunity to make the 1st and intentionally miss the 2nd if you are down by 3 with not much time left. Interesting idea, not sure if I like it or not.

Good point. It happens.

 

[kjironman1]

Getting fouled on a three and only having to make ONE 15 foot unguarded free throw to get 3 points seems incredibly lopsided to me.

Could be looked at both ways. If they miss???

 

[BigGameDamian]

Interesting idea. If this did happen maybe they should make a free throw line for the 3pt FG. Put it a couple feet back from the 2pt free throw line.