Please Stop the Intentional Fouls

May 6, 2015; Houston, TX, USA; Los Angeles Clippers center DeAndre Jordan (6) reacts after a play during the first quarter against the Houston Rockets in game two of the second round of the NBA Playoffs at Toyota Center. Mandatory Credit: Troy Taormina-USA TODAY Sports

Sunday night, May 10th, 2015 — Mothers Day no less! — should be seen as a turning point for the NBA and vacuum-based decision-making. Some would brand this as “analytics,” but I tend to think that gives the events that transpired far too much credit.

Of course, what I’m referring to is the Los Angeles Hack-A-Thon masquerading as a second round playoff game. A game where Deandre Jordan took 34 foul shots. A game where the first 24 minutes of game play took 84 minutes of real-life time. I’m not going to woo you with statistics; they aren’t worth citing. Call it an eye test, call it entertainment value, call it whatever you want — this game went too far. Days, months, and years from now we should collectively be able to look back at this game as the moment where things got out of hand. Now is probably the time to draw the proverbial line in the sand. What we witnessed was foul: a game where the hackers lost by 33 points to the hackees.

Does The Hack Attack work? I am not entirely sure. However, there are three quick, non-trivial points to consider when it comes to intentionally fouling these Clippers in this series:

Rest. 

When one of the three best players on the court, who is nursing a significant injury where rest is of the essence, is afforded in game time to heal, can this really be the optimal strategy to employ?

Rebounds. 

Seth Partnow made this point a few weeks ago about offensive rebounding rates on missed foul shots (read it here). When specifically engaging in Full DJ Hackmode, the Clippers are nearly doubling the league average free throw rebounding rate.

Pace and flow.

As Bob Voulgaris noted on the TrueHoop TV Spreecast noted, initiating an offense from a free throw (made or missed) is a completely different dynamic. It’s an apples to oranges comparison to regular missed shot. When a team plays at the 2nd highest pace in the league (as the Rockets do), intentionally fouling significantly disrupts that style. It’s not just an eye sore (and it is an eye sore); it has detrimental effects on the team doing the hacking. The Rockets had a 107.0 Offensive Rating all season… and an abysmal 91.4 ORtg on Sunday night.

Yes, not all of Houston’s poor play can be attributed to The Hack. However, I dare you to go back and watch that game and observe the tensions slowly boil as the fouls keep coming.

Let’s take a broader optic. In my humble opinion, the issue is actually bigger than a case of The Hacks. There’s an offensive strategy that has grown in popularity, post hand-checks; a strategy encourages/favors attacking the lane (notably, instead of attacking the rim) in the hope/expectation of drawing the foul. The poster child (fair or not) has become MVP-runner up James Harden. Interestingly, over the past three seasons “Moreyball” has gone from a quirky phenomenon – can this really work? – to a real, tangible system. Cultivated and experimented in the D-League, honed in the Association. Thus, it lends itself to comparison to its statistical predecessor, Moneyball.

To drastically oversimplify and potentially mischaracterize a baseball evolution , in the 1990s the cash-strapped Oakland Athletics sought to exploit market deficiencies to better understand value in an uncapped industry. This led to non-conventional signings and new in-game strategies; in particular, an increased reliance on a base-on-balls (walks), and the mere act of getting on base. Bore out of necessity (the A’s simply did not have the firepower to pay for the biggest stars), these strategies worked — to an extent. The A’s made the playoffs, the Little Guy felt great, and the analytics movement went Hollywood.

Here’s the catch, though – not swinging at a pitch is a perfectly normal baseball-related play. Here’s the definition of a walk, per Wikipedia:

“A base on balls (BB), also known as a walk, occurs in baseball when a batter receives four pitches that the umpire calls balls, and is then entitled to reach first base without the possibility of being put out.”

It’s an intended choice, within the allowable rules of game play. In contrast, here’s the Wikipedia definition of a foul in basketball:

“In basketball, a foul is an infraction of the rules more serious than a violation. Most fouls occur as a result of illegal personal contact with an opponent and/or unsportsmanlike behavior.”

The difference? Legality. One is an option, the other is a regulation. Seemingly when a player or team resorts to distorting the rules of play and using infractions to further their chances of victory, are they not destroying the spirit of the game? Is intentionally drawing fouls and intentionally committing fouls the baseball equivalent of beaning the other team’s best hitter?

Am I unfairly picking on the Rockets? To an extent, yes; the beloved, can-do-no-wrong San Antonio Spurs did this (albeit to a lesser extent) in the first round. I consider myself an “analytics person” (hell, I write for this site), Harden and I are alums from the same college, and I’m a fan of Daryl Morey (and really enjoyed him on the Grantland Basketball Hour last week). However, a quick peek at Sunday’s box score is telling:

Plenty of teams and players have done what the Rockets did on Mother’s Day; Houston is merely the most recent, most egregious example. The FIBA-inspired clear path, blatant hack that ceases all progress of a fast break (as Zach Lowe and Chris Hayes nail at the 52:45 mark of The Lowe Post) is equally bad. This is not an indictment on the Rockets, and certainly not on analytics; rather, it’s a call for decency and common sense in gameplay strategies. Think about where we’ve come from. It was already bad enough to intentionally foul to stop the clock at the end of the game. If this was always the natural progression, then we’ve failed and should have stopped this a long, long time ago.

Don’t change the rules. Change the culture. Ultimately, the issue is simple: when a weekend consists of not 1…

…not 2…

…but THREE game winners

Isn’t that what we should be discussing the next morning? Probably not this.

Is this a hot take? I hope not. It’s my take, tho. I can appreciate good strategy like the rest of use. Yes, there is a certain entertainment and suspense to whether the opponent’s Big Man can make his foul shots, or whether the coach will bench him. The cost is exceedingly high, and appears to be outweighing any marginal gains.

Can we make it stop, please?