Comments on: NY Post: Julius Randle too much to handle as Knicks drop Lakers

By: Hubert

Hubert — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 22:55:35 +0000

the worst thing about game endings now is these constant, insufferable replay stoppages. Especially the ones that are obvious but take forever bc they’re trying to figure out how many tenths of a second should be on the clock.

I’m at the point where I’d rather they just get a few calls wrong than ruin every game.

By: marechal

marechal — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 22:49:40 +0000

I would make a rule change and treat non-shooting fouls in the last three minutes as if they were flagrant fouls (two FTs plus possession). This would resolve the foul and pray issue and pace of play at the end of games, though it would make those not very likely comebacks even less likely. I think FIBA had a similar rule at some point (or, rather, a more expansive definition of intentional fouling that would also give the team possession).

By: Brian Cronin

Brian Cronin — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 22:41:55 +0000

In reply to Z-man.

I like the current setup, but I’ll admit that I’m being driven by tradition on it.

By: Z-man

Z-man — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 22:35:59 +0000

I think the NBA game is in a pretty good place when it comes to end-of-game excitement in both regulation and overtime. If they adopt the Elam ending in OT, whatever. OT games are exciting by definition, and so few games go to overtime that it won’t make much of a difference. I prefer a defined time frame, the finality of a buzzer, and the potential excitement of needing to score in a few remaining seconds rather than having 14 or 24 seconds on a last possession, or not even knowing if it is in fact a last possession. There’s no right or wrong, it’s just personal preference. Even with the Elam ending, you’d still have lots of games end with a thud on FTs as teams try to keep other teams from making the winning shot.

That said, I still think things can be done to eliminate some of the intentional fouling. I would love to see teams have an option of either 2 FTs or a “technical foul” with 1 FT plus possession. If you think teams will still foul for a chance at stealing an inbound pass, you can give teams a free inbounds (defenders must stay a certain distance away until the ball is inbounded.) As to the foul-out changes, wouldn’t players (especially star players) be discouraged from committing fouls in overtime if they were benched if they fouled?

By: The Honorable Cock Jowles

The Honorable Cock Jowles — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 22:20:30 +0000

Plus, for every annoying ending that’s extended because of foul and pray you have those super dramatic ones where a free throw is missed and a team comes back and wins.

It’s more like for every 99 annoying endings you have 1 dramatic one.

https://www.inpredictable.com/2019/04/the-hackulator-win-probability-based.html

By: Raven

Raven — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 21:54:44 +0000

Ya ha deedle deedle, bubba bubba deedle deedle dum.

By: The Honorable Cock Jowles

The Honorable Cock Jowles — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 21:49:10 +0000

but its been a part of the game for as long as I can remember

t r a d i t i o n

By: swiftandabundant

swiftandabundant — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 21:32:54 +0000

How can anyone have a problem with OT or double OT? Its FREE BASKETBALL!

And when games go to double OT they are always the most intense games and turn into endurance battles LOVE IT!

Foul and pray is annoying but its been a part of the game for as long as I can remember and it really isn’t all of the games where this happens. Plus, for every annoying ending that’s extended because of foul and pray you have those super dramatic ones where a free throw is missed and a team comes back and wins.

By: Alan

Alan — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 21:20:28 +0000

On his talk show The Putback, Begley said he doesn’t get the sense that the Knicks want to get into a bidding war for Schroder. So that’s good to hear.

By: The Honorable Cock Jowles

The Honorable Cock Jowles — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 20:56:07 +0000

To me, the clock is an integral part of the game and the game should end when the clock counts down to zero, whether in regulation or OT.

How is foul-and-pray, a direct consequence of the game clock and foul rewards, an integral part of the game? Why is it that the last handful of possessions look nothing like the rest of the game? This is quite the take you’ve got, Z-man.

(1) Reducing the number of allowed fouls would mean more high-minutes (i.e. star) players would foul out. And foul trouble would come sooner, so defense would suffer even more. And in high-leverage foul-and-pray situations, you’d have to sub in bench players. Or have your star players foul out. And not every game ends in foul-and-pray, so you’re just messing with every game’s foul balance to fix an relatively unusual, but highly irritating, possible game outcome. Terrible solution.

(2) 2 FT or the ball would lead to — you guessed it — more fouling. Couple this with a lowered personal foul cap and baby, you’ve got a stew goin’!

(3) Eliminate all timeouts for all I care. Inbound plays can be technically interesting but no one outside of nerds wants more of them. Still, this does not stop foul-and-pray. It just means that you’re going to commit fouls without a timeout. This does not fix anything.