Three blowout games of the Western Conference Finals led to a wildly exciting Game 4 between the Thunder and Timberwolves.
Bench players becoming heroes, the MVP scoring 40, and controversial calls; this was a classic playoff game for 47 minutes.
In that last minute, the Thunder resorted to their strategy of intentionally fouling while they’re leading by three points.
https://x.com/SeanFennessey/status/1927203048184582403
The basketball world was outraged by the return of the strategy, but what does it mean for the NBA?
The Logistical Approach
The idea of fouling while up three points is a newer strategy that brings a safer, smarter, and boring approach to the final minutes of a game.
As of right now, this strategy is perfectly legal and follows the NBA’s rules.
It makes perfect sense for an NBA team to resort to this. Most coaches would rather force free throws than allow an elite scorer to possibly tie the game.
That doesn’t mean that it’s overpowered, or that it works at all.
There are success stories to this strategy, but there’s still a chance for failure when you resort to free throws.
This is very similar to a team forcing a layup by crowding the three-point line, to ensure that the opponent can’t tie the game. Except fouling guarantees two easy shots compared to forcing a contested layup (or something similar).
Either way, teams still must make their free throws for either side to succeed or fail.
It’s arguable that making a team shoot free throws is a safer approach than allowing a layup, but both ideas can lead to failure.
In addition, it’s important to consider that this is of double standard. If one team can intentionally foul for free throws, why can’t the other?
The Fan’s Approach
As a fan of basketball, it’s hard to root for a team that’s intentionally fouling while ahead.
The excitement builds when you see that the team is within one shot of tying.
Then it comes to a screeching halt when the opponent intentionally fouls to avoid this dream scenario.
It’s just a bad approach to ending the game. 47 minutes of pure, intense, playoff basketball that leads to…a free throw shooting contest.
It’s true that it doesn’t automatically guarantee a win, but it’s also true that it’s an strategy that just feels wrong.
Yardbarker’s Sean Keane gave a great football equivalent. If the NFL defense could repeatedly jump offsides to run the clock out and avoid a game-winning play.
The argument against fouling is mainly a fan’s perspective, but it’s hard to deny that it feels unnatural to watch, and unfair in a sense.
It feels similar to a team manipulating the rules to sway their chances of winning. If the approach doesn’t work consistently, it feels appropriate that the NBA could put a stop to it for the sake of the game.
How to fix it
After a lot of articles, discussions, and X threads, the most feasible solution is to adjust the rules of intentionally fouling.
If you’re inside a minute, or the shot clock is off, the league could view the intentional foul in the same light as a transition take foul.
Fouling while leading could give the opponent one free throw AND possession of the ball.
This way it could bring the game to two points every foul, and they still have a chance to get a shot they want.
https://x.com/NateDuncanNBA/status/1927203494848536910
This makes it much easier to punish the strategy and encourage teams to play the game straight up.
A seemingly simple solution, but still a far-fetched idea from the fan’s side of the ball.
It’d be much more entertaining to watch, and it’d feel like the game of basketball that the world is used to.
At the end of the day, it might end up being something we have to live with, and hope that it doesn’t happen to your favorite team.
Leave a comment