Magic and Howard Frustration (Schmitz blog)

[Mr Charisma 0]

quote:

Dwight Howard said after he was yanked down by the neck by Andres Nocioni on Wednesday that he was thisclose to retaliating against the Bulls' goon.

 

"I thought about it...then I realized what it would have meant for my team. You saw him walking away from me," Howard said.

 

Van Gundy is even flirting with drawing a fine from the league, saying NBA officials police post players different than perimeter players, allowing big guys such as Dwight to be beat on more.

 

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports_magic/2009/01/magic-are-frust.html

 

Obvious answer is for Dwight to improve his free-throw shooting, but...

 

Does the NBA need to change it's rules concerning fouls?

 

Thought to start the discussion: all defensive fouls (other than "and 1s") result in retaining possession. All shooting fouls and fouls committed after the bonus would be 1 FT (2 FTs if fouled on a 3-point shot) plus retain possession. In the last 2:00 (or 1:00) of the game (not the quarter or half), any defensive foul would be 2 FTs (3 FTs if fouled on a 3-point shot) plus possession.

 

This type of rule would likely result in higher scoring games, as the penalties for playing extremely aggressive defense would be too steep to risk.

 

Not sure if that would improve the game or not. Just a thought....

[Mr Charisma 0]

quote:

Dwight Howard said after he was yanked down by the neck by Andres Nocioni on Wednesday that he was thisclose to retaliating against the Bulls' goon.

 

"I thought about it...then I realized what it would have meant for my team. You saw him walking away from me," Howard said.

 

Van Gundy is even flirting with drawing a fine from the league, saying NBA officials police post players different than perimeter players, allowing big guys such as Dwight to be beat on more.

 

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports_magic/2009/01/magic-are-frust.html

 

Obvious answer is for Dwight to improve his free-throw shooting, but...

 

Does the NBA need to change it's rules concerning fouls?

 

Thought to start the discussion: all defensive fouls (other than "and 1s") result in retaining possession. All shooting fouls and fouls committed after the bonus would be 1 FT (2 FTs if fouled on a 3-point shot) plus retain possession. In the last 2:00 (or 1:00) of the game (not the quarter or half), any defensive foul would be 2 FTs (3 FTs if fouled on a 3-point shot) plus possession.

 

This type of rule would likely result in higher scoring games, as the penalties for playing extremely aggressive defense would be too steep to risk.

 

Not sure if that would improve the game or not. Just a thought....

[rc0101 1]

They didn't need to retaliate against Nocioni. However, a team mate should have at least said something to Nocioni. I didnt seen anyone in a Magic uniform even so much as look at Nocioni.

 

Dwight needs to hit his free-throws and it will begin to disappear. I would definitely be against your proposed rule change though.

[Mr Charisma 0]

quote:

Originally posted by rc0101:

They didn't need to retaliate against Nocioni. However, a team mate should have at least said something to Nocioni. I didnt seen anyone in a Magic uniform even so much as look at Nocioni.

 

Dwight needs to hit his free-throws and it will begin to disappear. I would definitely be against your proposed rule change though.

The more I think about the rule change, the less I like it. Maybe some others will have some other ideas, or some modifications to my concept.

 

I guess my concern is that basketball is the only sport that regularly uses "breaking the rules" as a viable strategy throughout games. (Yes, I know that there are a few exceptions, like a corner seeing that Moss is going to burn him on a deep pattern, so committing pass interference is better than giving up a TD; but these types of examples are the exceptions, not the rule; and are not generally the type of thing that is actually formulated as part of the game plan).

 

In the other sports, the penalties are severe enough to make the infractions too costly. If the NBA could figure out a way to do the same thing, then they just might find that less of their players will get injured. Why does anyone think that the Kobes, Lebrons, KGs, etc. of the worlds seem to have less injuries? Because the officials PROTECT them more than they do the other players. All NBA players should be better protected by the enforcement of the rules, and the penalties imposed.

[BigBoy 0]

That is why back in the day Shaq said, if someone doesn't start protecting me like they protect the other "all stars" then I am going to retaliate.

 

The NBA does not want another brawl and will have to start doing something.

 

Dwight needs to take more offense to being man handled like that (especially when it is a cheap shot around the upper body). Instead of sitting on the floor and laughing about it.

[Rabid Fan 0]

Yeah, this has been driving me nuts lately as well. It is amazing that Dwight hasn't cracked somebody in the mouth yet. The last time someone stepped up for Dwight in one of those situations was Brian Cook against (I think) the Clippers! I think he got hit with a fould retaliating agains Barron Davis (it was a couple of weeks ago). His teammates need to return the favor on the very next play to whomever touches the ball-preferably their star.

 

I agree with all of you though, the system needs to change. At the very least, expand the flagrant rule or police it differently. How about ANY time that a foul is given where they don't go after the ball (which is about always with Dwight), give him 1 or two shots and then keep possession as well. This will be more of a penalty and might cut it back. Also, the Refs HAVE to be able to see the difference between a simple foul to get someone to the line and the kind of crap where he gets thrown to the ground like the Bulls did. I am a season ticket holder and trust me, the TV doesn't show enough of how often and how hard he gets hit down there. The same thing happened to Shaq back in the day, but it wasn't right then either. Both of these guys have shown INCREDIBLE restraint!

 

Later All!

[Goulet 0]

Yeah it may sounds low but i think we need to start defending dwight and retaliating a little. Either Dwight needs to do it himself or we need to have someone take care of it on the next possession(especially when we are up by 20 and it wont hurt the outcome). You know baseball has a good system in that if a person does something stupid on one team then the next inning the pitcher comes out and throws one right at his backside.

 

Some of the fouls i have seen on Dwight are ridiculous. Just because he is big does not give the other team the right to wrap him up around the waist and drag him down. Isnt it a flagrant foul when you make no play on the ball? I have seen so many fouls where the guy makes no play on the ball and it never gets called. I might be mistaken but I thought that was the case.

 

The NBA doesnt make any sense to me on their foul system. If the ball is outside of the paint then a slap on the wrist is a foul. However if the ball is inside the paint then you have to bear hug someone or Judo chop their arm for it to be a foul. Doesnt make any sense and if we don't start taking action Dwight is going to get seriously hurt one of these days.

[KillingInTheNameOf 63]

I'm not in tune with the letter of the rules, but it seems to me this would be less of an issue if the refs simply enforced or slightly expanded the rules already in place.

 

How is stopping Dwight from dunking the ball any different than a "clear path foul" that occurs on a "break away"?

 

Second, I believe the definition of flagrant foul is when a defender uses excess force &/or doesn't go for the ball. That constitutes about half of the fouls on Dwight if you ask me.

[no_ma'am 0]

quote:

Originally posted by KillingInTheNameOf:

I'm not in tune with the letter of the rules, but it seems to me this would be less of an issue if the refs simply enforced or slightly expanded the rules already in place.

 

How is stopping Dwight from dunking the ball any different than a "clear path foul" that occurs on a "break away"?

 

Second, I believe the definition of flagrant foul is when a defender uses excess force &/or doesn't go for the ball. That constitutes about half of the fouls on Dwight if you ask me.

 

i agree with this, the original poster's rule changes are too severe. It would completely alter strategy that has been in place for a long time.

 

When a guy grabs howard's shoulders, he's not making a play on the ball, when a guy grabs him around the waste to prevent him from going up he's not making a play on the ball. When a guy just puts him in a bearhug he's not making a play on the ball. If those start getting called flagrants it will stop. Maybe they should institude a level of foul between personal and flagrant. College has the intentional foul rule...that could be an option.

[KillingInTheNameOf 63]

quote:

Originally posted by no_ma'am:

quote:

Originally posted by KillingInTheNameOf:

I'm not in tune with the letter of the rules, but it seems to me this would be less of an issue if the refs simply enforced or slightly expanded the rules already in place.

 

How is stopping Dwight from dunking the ball any different than a "clear path foul" that occurs on a "break away"?

 

Second, I believe the definition of flagrant foul is when a defender uses excess force &/or doesn't go for the ball. That constitutes about half of the fouls on Dwight if you ask me.

 

i agree with this, the original poster's rule changes are too severe. It would completely alter strategy that has been in place for a long time.

 

When a guy grabs howard's shoulders, he's not making a play on the ball, when a guy grabs him around the waste to prevent him from going up he's not making a play on the ball. When a guy just puts him in a bearhug he's not making a play on the ball. If those start getting called flagrants it will stop. Maybe they should institude a level of foul between personal and flagrant. College has the intentional foul rule...that could be an option.

 

Great point about the intentional foul. Completely slipped my mind as I was typing.

[Kramer 0]

quote:

Originally posted by KillingInTheNameOf:

I'm not in tune with the letter of the rules, but it seems to me this would be less of an issue if the refs simply enforced or slightly expanded the rules already in place.

 

How is stopping Dwight from dunking the ball any different than a "clear path foul" that occurs on a "break away"?

 

Second, I believe the definition of flagrant foul is when a defender uses excess force &/or doesn't go for the ball. That constitutes about half of the fouls on Dwight if you ask me.

 

I agree. NCAA basketball makes you try to go for the ball at all times and it seems to work well for them

[Osprey 199]

The thing is, when Dwight is in the game, usually with starters, who on the floor can protect him? I would argue that Hedo and Shard are too important to the team to risk an ejection as well. Do we bring someone in immediately off the bench to throw down after the next stoppage?