What's new
By:

The Non-Jazz NBA Thread in the Jazz Section

I saw today that Favs exercised his player option with OKC for about ten million. He signed a three year deal with the Jazz. What was the front office thinking?
 
How are they going to determine what is and isnt a fastbreak?

Seems like a rule that is going to require a lot of time looking at cameras.

Just let teams play through contact on fastbreaks. Treat it like soccer continuation. If a team wants to foul in transition, a team can continue the play and if they miss they still get the ball back.

So basically there is no upside to fouling in transition. You would have to foul very hard to stop a fastbreak, and you'd risk being called for a flagrant.
 
jom2003 said:
just like teach his players on how to be long, how to be athletic or how to stay in front of their man. you simply can't teach that ****
Click to expand...
No just simply teach them to all run back instead of lazily committing a foul.
 
Jingled said:
Quin's going to be pissed.


View: https://twitter.com/ShamsCharania/status/1526687402416394240
Click to expand...

Not sure I like this. It just means more ref review, more chances for the refs to favor one team over the other. What is a take foul anyway? They will have to really define it, because there will be endless debate over whether it was a play on the ball or not.

I would like them to reduce the take fouls but not sure this is the best way. Maybe just make it a delay of game, and so the first is warning and with the 2nd they start getting free throws. But you still have the problem of whether a given foul was a touch foul or not. Kind of like the break-away foul, but less clear.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Not sure I like this. It just means more ref review, more chances for the refs to favor one team over the other. What is a take foul anyway? They will have to really define it, because there will be endless debate over whether it was a play on the ball or not.

I would like them to reduce the take fouls but not sure this is the best way. Maybe just make it a delay of game, and so the first is warning and with the 2nd they start getting free throws. But you still have the problem of whether a given foul was a touch foul or not. Kind of like the break-away foul, but less clear.
Click to expand...
If it becomes like a clear path foul I'm out.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Not sure I like this. It just means more ref review, more chances for the refs to favor one team over the other. What is a take foul anyway? They will have to really define it, because there will be endless debate over whether it was a play on the ball or not.

I would like them to reduce the take fouls but not sure this is the best way. Maybe just make it a delay of game, and so the first is warning and with the 2nd they start getting free throws. But you still have the problem of whether a given foul was a touch foul or not. Kind of like the break-away foul, but less clear.
Click to expand...
There really isn't much review time for take fouls in Europe. It's often an easy call. And 1 FT and possession would make teams less likely to commit take fouls quicker.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
No just simply teach them to all run back instead of lazily committing a foul.
Click to expand...
It’s amazing to me that Quin doesn’t use challenges because “maybe I’ll need it later,” but has no problems with take fouls, not realizing that you may “need that later.” Seriously, how many times have we had 1) someone in foul trouble who earned at least one transition foul, 2) fouled while in the bonus, or 3) ended up clear path fouling? Total up how many times that hurt us and then compile a list for me of how many times we were hurt because we no longer had a challenge and see which list is bigger.
 
infection said:
It’s amazing to me that Quin doesn’t use challenges because “maybe I’ll need it later,” but has no problems with take fouls, not realizing that you may “need that later.” Seriously, how many times have we had 1) someone in foul trouble who earned at least one transition foul, 2) fouled while in the bonus, or 3) ended up clear path fouling? Total up how many times that hurt us and then compile a list for me of how many times we were hurt because we no longer had a challenge and see which list is bigger.
Click to expand...
Add in the amount of times we correctly executed the strategy but later in the quarter ended up fouling on a non shooting foul and gave up free throws because of it.

Also add in the fact that it sends a message to just not get back and how many times we could easily just get back in the play but preference is to use a foul instead cuz we lazy.

Then compare our willingness to commit those fouls freely and how allergic we are to fouling on the perimeter by being physical.

It’s annoying and the math probably still works in its favor but I hate how soft our team is and this strategy seems to feed that issue directly. We have some horrible “smart” habits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top