Dick Vitale foul proposal
 

So Dickie V. has been all over ESPN calling for the NCAA to move to 6 fouls instead of 5. Moreover, he proposes that, after the 6th foul, the player shouldn't be eliminated. Instead, the punishment should be that any foul committed by that player should result in two shots plus the ball out of bounds.

So my question is, with this punishment, how much of a liability would it be to keep a player on the floor who already has 6 fouls? E.g., imagine this rule were implemented in the NBA -- who would be the best player in the league that a team would normally choose to sit down once he had 6 fouls?

Re: Dick Vitale foul proposal
 

It depends on the stage of the game. In a close game with less than a minute left, there probably aren't many players you want out there. When the mistake is less critical, I'd guess something like half the starters in the league would still be +EV.

I don't know enough about the current NBA to actually give you a name though.

Re: Dick Vitale foul proposal
 

the NBA is rigged anyways... if they called a fair game the current rules would be just fine (although Dickies way might be better (i havent thought about it))

Re: Dick Vitale foul proposal
 

I thought it was Billy Packer advocating this.

Not that it matters regarding the question.

Re: Dick Vitale foul proposal
 

Intuitively, I think this would mean more big men sitting than guards. Big men are easier to 'target' on the defensive end.

Certainly teams would sit anyone that wasn't a major offensive threat. Guys like Ben Wallace and Bruce Bowen would be benched while pure scorers would remain on the court.

Best player to sit would be, I guess, Ben Wallace, Andrei Kirilenko types that are amazing defenders but mediocre scorers.

P.S: I think the idea that college games should increase their foul limit to 6 is stupid. They have 5 fouls for a 40 minute game, the NBA has 6 for a 48 minute game. Makes sense to me.

Re: Dick Vitale foul proposal
 

[ QUOTE ]
So Dickie V. has been all over ESPN calling for the NCAA to move to 6 fouls instead of 5. Moreover, he proposes that, after the 6th foul, the player shouldn't be eliminated. Instead, the punishment should be that any foul committed by that player should result in two shots plus the ball out of bounds.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a horrendous rule change and would completely bastardize the game. Keep in mind the NBA game is 20% longer thus...gets 20% more fouls, wow.

2 shots + ball is not necessarily as good as getting MJ to foul out of a game, for instance. Missed FTs, turnovers, 5 second violations, offensive fouls, et al. I'll take the 2 shots and one of their guys outta the game, with no chance to come back in for OT, rest of game, etc.

Here's a tip, Dick: Don't want your best players to foul out? Don't commit 5 fouls!

Re: Dick Vitale foul proposal
 

This rule is stupid. It decreases the strategy coaches have to use in the beginning of the game. With rule coaches wouldn't have to worry about one of their key players getting 4 fouls in the first half.

Re: Dick Vitale foul proposal
 

[ QUOTE ]
This rule is stupid. It decreases the strategy coaches have to use in the beginning of the game. With rule coaches wouldn't have to worry about one of their key players getting 4 fouls in the first half.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your response is stupider. Don't commit 4 fouls in the first half. I look forward to even dumber suggestions, like no penalty for goaltending, traveling [halfway there], pass interference, 6 men on the court, shot clock violations, anyone can use their hands to score in soccer/hockey, corked bats, etc.