If they want fewer free throws from bad free throw shooters, go back to the 1 and 1. Would speed up the game a lot in general, but might encourage more hack-a strategies. If they want to protect bad free throw shooters from their own shittiness, and discourage intentional fouling, while making trips to the free throw line unbearably long, go back to the 3 shots to make 2 in the hack-a situations. I say punish the bad free throw shooters, not the game.
Bring back the 1-and-1, AND make intentional fouls a 1-and-1 AND a technical foul (to be shot by the best FT shooter like a normal technical) on the fouling player. That way, in desperation, it can be deployed, but is effectively a last-gasp maneuver.
They don't want "fewer free throws from bad shooters"--they want fewer players choosing to foul rather than play basketball They don't want to punish the game or free throw shooters--just teams who are unwilling/unable to play defense.
This I whoel Hearftedly disagree with. Whats the average spread for the season for the teams.. 8pts? 10?. How many FT's are shot on average in a game by both teams? 20? 30? Those 20-30 FREE shots are absolutely a huge factor and can change most games. A team that shoots 60% will like win 5-10 less games than a team that shoots 80%. I have not stats to back that up, just my opinion on what seems like common sense.
Would Bird win without Mchale? Magic without Kareem? Michael without Pippen? Can be said about most regardless of FT%.
That illustrates my point. A minor skill (the ability to make an unguarded shot from 15-foot) has a disproportionately large impact on the game overall as compared to other much more intrinsic skills. Reducing the free throw's overall impact on the game would be a good thing.
Correct. That wasn't the discussion though. Discussion was if a shitty FT shooter could lead a team to a title. In today's game, I don't think so. Shaq was awful, but he had two top 10ish players alongside him
Oh gotcha. Damn you and BNM need to remember that some of us only understand layman's terms. Not sure if I agree though. I think the free throw is a great offset to fouls (except when the fouled player cant make a ft). What else would be a deterant to fouling then? Dont you think that that would slow the game down even more because more fouling would occur to stop the opponents flow?
The only change I've ever advocated is giving the fouled team the option to take a side out rather than free throws, and that option be available only on off-ball fouls. And no, I absolutely don't think that would result in more fouling. It would simply eliminate the incentive to foul intentionally.
Lol. Sure, for a flagrant foul. Regular ones get the 3 Stooges style. Would make the games WAY more entertaining...
Iggy was awful at the FT line in 2015 playoffs and he led Warriors to championship. Bogut was bad too.
