<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Living in Florida, I get to see lots of Orlando Magic games on the tube. A week or so ago I witnessed a jumpshooting duel between Tracy McGrady and Vince Carter. Why were these two artistic, creative and electrifying performers firing jumper after jumper? Because those were the only shots available. One Vinsanity fadeaway was worth a replay, but aside from that I didn?t see anything from either guy that middle-aged me couldn?t do. Three years ago that matchup would have produced highlights galore. In the first 19 minutes of a recent Magic-Hornets contest, T-Mac and Baron Davis ? the Barry Sanders of the NBA ? each made one attempt at halfcourt dribble-drive penetration. Each was whistled for a charge for his efforts. I don?t turn on the NBA to watch phenomenal, highly skilled athletes do stuff that I can do myself. If I?m frustrated, imagine what it?s like for the folks who pay big bucks to watch these games. Imagine the frustration of the players themselves. The freedom of movement that, once upon a time, made the NBA a joy to watch is vanishing before our eyes. The main culprits are (1) the zone defense (the worst ?innovation? in league history); (2) man-to-man ?system? defenses with aggressive rotations by secondary defenders to bottle up would-be drivers, installed by the Van Gundys, Rick Carlisle and other Stepford coaches; (3) a drastic reinterpretation of the block/charge call that has dramatically enhanced the effectiveness of all defenses, of mediocre man-to-man defenders, and of earthbound help defenders; (4) a ?culture of cheating? encouraged or condoned by many coaches and commentators that treats a variety of deceive-the-ref techniques ? principally defensive flopping ? as legitimate hoop ?skills? rather than as underhanded tactics worthy of long-term suspensions. The result of all this is timid, tentative play in the offensive end. Former frequent drivers (e.g., Davis, T-Mac, Nash and Iverson) are now occasional drivers and occasional drivers no longer bother. The latter ? I?m thinking of guys like Keith Van Horn who?ve got the good first step to get by his own man but not the Dante-Hall elusiveness to avoid help defenders, particularly when the rules are stacked in favor of the helpers ? are asking for foul trouble if they dare assert themselves. The quick-and-good halfcourt possession ? the drive-and-finish or drive-and-dish-and-fire-an-open-18-footer ? has become a rarity. Some experts say the reason is that defensive scouting is much improved, but the main reason is the timidity that the current rules regime imposes on explosive and/or creative offensive players. Ten, 20, 30 or 40 years ago it would have been impossible to be a decent defensive team with Reggie Miller and Kenny Anderson as the first line of defense. But the Pacers are tops in the league because Miller and Anderson?s vulnerabilities are minimized when halfcourt driving is next to impossible. Kudos to Carlisle and the Pacers for playing hard and smart under the same warped rules regime that all the other teams play under, but shame on the NBA for promoting the regime. Curtailed freedom of movement means a much slower pace, fewer shots, lower scores and, worst of all, limited opportunities for in-the-air inventiveness. Yes, the control freaks constantly bleat about the evils of ?leaving your feet,? but most every memorable highlight feature guys doing just that. That?s how Bill Russell and Hakeem Olajuwon blocked all those shots. That?s how George Gervin finger-rolled and Jeff Hornacek dipsy-dooed. Most every shot that raises goosebumps is a running one-hander, from Magic Johnson?s buzzer-beating hook across the lane to Dr. J?s fully extended up-and-under. The good news is that everything that ails the NBA is easily remedied. The Rules Committee must keep its ?eyes on the prize? ? a fast-paced, free-flowing, non-brutal game that rewards creativity, cohesion and skill, and leaves slack-jawed fans eager for more. I sketch below some of the changes I?d like to see. Should they result in a game that?s too wide open, we can always scale back. But first we need to give the pendelum a forceful swing in the offensive direction. 1) Outlaw the zone. 2) Get away from static, territorial thinking. That?s appropriate for officiating big guys in the post, but it?s a bad overall philosophy. The game flows toward one hoop, then the other; it doesn?t flow straight up in the air and straight back down. If you want players to display bursts of quickness, the rules have to allow for the fact that few such players will be able to stop on a dime. And that leads to our next two points. 3) Extend the safe-landing-area, semicircle line for airborne drivers an additional two feet ? but remove the line from the court. The original intent of the line was to promote driving, but it has had the opposite effect. The problem is twofold: the landing area isn?t large enough, and it diverts the ref?s eyes. A ref, being human, cannot look at two things at once. These days he?s focusing on that line, and if the defender is outside the line and stationary at the moment of contact, he?s calling a charge. This allows the ref to be consistent, but many of the calls are wrong, because the ref doesn?t know where the defender was at the driver?s all-important ?point of no return? (see next item). The result has been an increase in charging calls and, even worse, countless decisions by creators to pull up for yawn-inducing jumpers rather than risk the double whammy of an offensive foul and a wasted possession. By removing the actual line, the refs will be free to look outward at the unfolding play rather than downward at the defender?s feet. For more on this and the next point, see my article ?Block/charge interpretation is ruining the NBA.? 4) Fix the block/charge rule to make it fair for drivers. Henceforth, to draw a charge from a driver jumping off one leg, the defender must be outside the expanded restricted zone and his upper body must be stationary (no sliding or drifting) and directly in the path BEFORE the driver plants his second-to-last step (the foot opposite the one he will jump off). The placement of that second-to-last foot determines the driver?s path. Don?t believe me? Try it yourself. Get up a head of steam and try to change direction after that step. The benefit of any doubt in the ref?s mind goes to the active, creative party, not the guy impersonating a bowling pin. An added bonus is that by freeing up the refs eyes to watch the shot, they?ll see all the hacks they?ve been missing while staring down at that line. Another way to solve this problem (should the above prove insufficient) is to adopt the concept I call ?Landing Rights.? If a player beats his defender off the dribble and ascends, he?s entitled to land wherever he lands. The onus is on secondary, helping defenders to avoid collisions. Those help defenders are entitled to leave their man to defend an airborne driver, but only to make a play on the ball. We could also call this the ?Ankle Protection Act.? The popularity of the bowling-pin, statue-with-arms-raised, and walk-under ?defenses? accounts for the explosion of turned ankles. 5) Penalize rather than reward the deliberate breaking of the rules. I?m not talking about the 80-90 percent of fouls where the player is trying to make a play without fouling. The current penalties for such fouls are fair. I?m talking about fouls committed intentionally to prevent what the defender perceives will be a likely or definite deuce: intentional grabs to prevent fast breaks or breakaways; intentional grabs or whacks in a halfcourt setting by beaten defenders to prevent a layup or dunk. Award the player or his team 2.5 points. No free throws to slow down play, no varying penalty based on the FT shooting ability of the fouled player. The focus is where it should be: on the deliberate rule-breaker, not the object of his action. The unavoidable half-point penalty will stop this nonsense immediately and will signal the death of the preposterous concept of a ?good foul? or ?smart foul.? We?ll replace the clich? ?Make him earn it at the line? with ?Make the chump earn a defensive stop.? 6) Speaking of 2.5 points, that?s the new payoff for the overvalued ?trey.? The best way to improve mid-range shooting is to quit providing a ridiculously high bonus for sinking a slightly longer shot. Next season, we can have a 2.5 ?trey? in the East and no trey in the West, then pick one or the other as the permanent, league-wide solution. 7) Clean house at the Rules Committee. Put someone like me in charge of it, and pack it with former refs who had a much better ?feel? for the game than the current crop. Assuming they?re still alive, let?s bring back Jake O?Donnell, Richie Powers and Earl Strom. All ex-players on the Committee will be creative types like Nate Archibald, Gervin and Hornacek ? guys who drove to the hoop and don?t want to see the rich variety of running one-handers become extinct. Everyone on the Committee must be of the mind that deceiving the refs is neither cute nor clever, but a form of cheating that won?t be tolerated. Those seven steps will help to speed up play, increase scoring and excitement, and make the NBA a joy to watch and play. Dennis Hans?s essays on basketball ? including the styles, rhythms and fundamentals of free-throw shooting ? have appeared online at the Sporting News and Slate. His writings on other topics have appeared in the New York Times, Washington Post and Miami Herald, among other outlets.</div> http://www.hoopshype.com/columns/scoring_hans.htm I know its alot to read, but its pretty intresting (if this is in the wrong forum, please move it)
I read the article on the site earlier today, and liked it. Some of the stuff is unlikely, but it'd be nice if Stern and Granik take a look at it nevertheless. I wish scoring was up in the triple digits again. I mean, the game is just so much more exciting that way. I heard someone bashing the pro game, saying that there was too much scoring. COME ON! This freedom of movement thing is good stuff, and couldn't come at a better time.
Increase scoring by teaching player the art of something called a jumpshot. Most teams dont use a complicated zone. They use the basic 2-3 zone, teams just can shoot. The zone was actually surpose to help scoring because it was surpose to eliminate teams standing around & watching their star player go one on one for the whole 24 second shot clock. It was surpose to create ball movement,thus increase scoring.but teams lack of execution against the zone has made it a key defensive tool.
