Playing a Guy with 6 fouls costs just one point?

[ziggy]

Playing a guy with six fouls costs just one point?
April 15th, 2010 by Dwight Jaynes |

Now maybe I don?t totally understand the rule, but from what I saw last night, I cannot believe this is what the NBA really wants. Seriously, every rule has to be explored to make sure it can?t be exploited past what makes sense.

If you can actually do what the Golden State Warriors did last night, it has a chance to change basketball as we know it. The Warriors were able to use Devean George after he had acquired six fouls ? and paid such a small price for it, a technical foul.

Think about it. LeBron James or Kobe Bryant fouls out ? hey, I?m not going to go along with that if I?m coaching that. I?m going to take a technical foul and ? hell, the other team could miss the free throw and it would cost my team NOTHING ? and put him right back on the floor.

Yes, I realize you have to have used all your other bench players. Fine, put them on the floor, have one of them foul and then get them out of there. No harm in that.

Man, they ought to have to do what colleges do ? if you run out of able-bodied players you play with four. Or three. And that ought to teach you that in a league where the mandate is to dress eight players, you better make sure all eight are able to play. If they aren?t, you deserve that fate.

[WayOutWest]

Playing a guy with six fouls costs just one point?
April 15th, 2010 by Dwight Jaynes |

Now maybe I don?t totally understand the rule, but from what I saw last night, I cannot believe this is what the NBA really wants. Seriously, every rule has to be explored to make sure it can?t be exploited past what makes sense.

If you can actually do what the Golden State Warriors did last night, it has a chance to change basketball as we know it. The Warriors were able to use Devean George after he had acquired six fouls ? and paid such a small price for it, a technical foul.

Think about it. LeBron James or Kobe Bryant fouls out ? hey, I?m not going to go along with that if I?m coaching that. I?m going to take a technical foul and ? hell, the other team could miss the free throw and it would cost my team NOTHING ? and put him right back on the floor.

Yes, I realize you have to have used all your other bench players. Fine, put them on the floor, have one of them foul and then get them out of there. No harm in that.

Man, they ought to have to do what colleges do ? if you run out of able-bodied players you play with four. Or three. And that ought to teach you that in a league where the mandate is to dress eight players, you better make sure all eight are able to play. If they aren?t, you deserve that fate.

Agreed that one tech is not enough.  IMO the NBA should allow guys to play after 6 fouls but with harsher penalties.  Can you imagine the trade off of keeping a Kobe/LeBron, let alone a Devean George, in if after their 6th foul if every foul they commit is something like 1 Tech FT and possesion or in the case of a shooting foul or if they are in the penalty you get two FT plus possesion?  Coaches could try to switch them out for D and O but sometimes the flow of the game does not allow it.  I don't like it when stars have to sit out a game because of foul trouble, especially when some calls are bogus.

[Lurker]

The thing is that when the NBA says you have to use the rest of your bench; they mean until there are only 4 eligible players left.  Then you put a player who fouled out back in and "pay the price".  Not just after a bench player commits one foul. 

And if you have enough injuries and/or committed enough fouls to be in that situation, then you most likely aren't within striking distance of a win anyway.

[Joe Vancil]

Seems to me like there was a 1979 Finals game (an overtime game), where a situation similar to this came up - specifically with several Washington players in foul trouble.  My understanding AT THAT TIME was that it had to do with running out of players at a position (in Washington's case, Center), and it was a technical foul for *EVERY* foul committed.

Anyone else remember something along those line in a Washington/Seattle game the year Seattle won?

[westkoast]

The thing is that when the NBA says you have to use the rest of your bench; they mean until there are only 4 eligible players left.  Then you put a player who fouled out back in and "pay the price".  Not just after a bench player commits one foul. 

And if you have enough injuries and/or committed enough fouls to be in that situation, then you most likely aren't within striking distance of a win anyway.

Unless you were playing Hack-a-Howard or any similar tactic of just burning fouls up on players to send them to the line. 

To me it seems like too complicated of a rule for the refs to keep track of during the course of a game.  I know they have stat guys on the sidelines and coaches take their own stats down as well but it just seems like it would slow the game down if they had to run around to make sure all the criteria was fit before they brought back out a player to pay the price of a tech.

[Lurker]

The thing is that when the NBA says you have to use the rest of your bench; they mean until there are only 4 eligible players left.  Then you put a player who fouled out back in and "pay the price".  Not just after a bench player commits one foul. 

And if you have enough injuries and/or committed enough fouls to be in that situation, then you most likely aren't within striking distance of a win anyway.

Unless you were playing Hack-a-Howard or any similar tactic of just burning fouls up on players to send them to the line. 

To me it seems like too complicated of a rule for the refs to keep track of during the course of a game.  I know they have stat guys on the sidelines and coaches take their own stats down as well but it just seems like it would slow the game down if they had to run around to make sure all the criteria was fit before they brought back out a player to pay the price of a tech.

Not that difficult.  There official scorekeeper knows how many fouls each player has.  And who has been listed as active for the night.  You have 12 players and 8 have to be injured or foul out before the rule applies.  It could be determined faster than a lot of reviewed plays.

And I think Joe may be right in that if that player fouls then it is an automatic technical plus the FTs.

[westkoast]

The thing is that when the NBA says you have to use the rest of your bench; they mean until there are only 4 eligible players left.  Then you put a player who fouled out back in and "pay the price".  Not just after a bench player commits one foul. 

And if you have enough injuries and/or committed enough fouls to be in that situation, then you most likely aren't within striking distance of a win anyway.

Unless you were playing Hack-a-Howard or any similar tactic of just burning fouls up on players to send them to the line. 

To me it seems like too complicated of a rule for the refs to keep track of during the course of a game.  I know they have stat guys on the sidelines and coaches take their own stats down as well but it just seems like it would slow the game down if they had to run around to make sure all the criteria was fit before they brought back out a player to pay the price of a tech.

Not that difficult.  There official scorekeeper knows how many fouls each player has.  And who has been listed as active for the night.  You have 12 players and 8 have to be injured or foul out before the rule applies.  It could be determined faster than a lot of reviewed plays.

And I think Joe may be right in that if that player fouls then it is an automatic technical plus the FTs.

I think I misunderstood your break down of the rule.  I thought that all the bench players had to play but not necessarily foul out.