Hack A Shaq
However, it ultimately became better-known for its application against center Shaquille O'Neal and the Los Angeles Lakers, the team for which O'Neal played at the time. The strategy would be applied during specific phases of the game and consisted of intentionally committing a personal foul against O'Neal every time that his team took possession of the basketball.
Name
The name is a colloquial rhyme that comes from the term hack being common basketball slang meaning to commit a personal foul, and Shaq being the oft-used shortened version of O'Neal's first name.
Although the name is obviously informal, no more formal name for the strategy has yet come into common usage (probably because the strategy is relatively new and not widely used). Even in the context of more formal conversation, the name Hack-a-Shaq is generally used.
The term Hack-a-Shaq, with its "catchy" sound and its familiarity among basketball fans, is frequently used even when referring to the use of the strategy against a specific player other than O'Neal.
However in many such cases, fans, broadcasters and members of the media seek another appellation coined to use a different rhyme or alliteration based upon the specific targeted player's name. Recently used examples include "Bash-a-Biedrins" for Andris Biedrins Bruise-a-Bruce for Bruce Bowen, Bop-a-Ben, Bump-a-Ben, "Bang-a-Ben," or Whack-a-Wallace for Ben Wallace, Chop-a-Diop for DeSagana Diop, "Butcher-Boone," for Josh Boone,and Slap-a-Skinner for Brian Skinner.
In other cases, attempts at a clever sound are abandoned, and the name of the targeted player is simply substituted for Shaq in Hack-a-Shaq (e.g. Hack-a-Ben, Hack-a-Wallace, or Hack-a-Howard for Dwight Howard).
The Hack-a-Shaq name was originally used during O'Neal's college playing days, and during his NBA tenure with the Orlando Magic.
At that time, however, the term referred simply to opposing teams employing an especially physical style of play in defending against O'Neal. Teams sometimes defended him by bumping, striking or pushing him after he received the ball in order to ensure that he did not score easily with layups or slam dunks.
Because of O'Neal's poor free throw shooting, teams did not fear the consequences having personal fouls called against them when using such tactics. However, once Nelson's off-the-ball fouling strategy became prevalent, the term Hack-a-Shaq was applied to this new tactic, and the original usage was largely forgotten.
Background
Strategy of repeated intentional fouling
Committing repeated intentional personal fouls is a long-standing defensive strategy used by teams who are trailing near the end of the game. The downside of the strategy is that it results in the fouled team being awarded free throws. The typical NBA player makes a high enough percentage of his free throws that, over time, opponents' possessions that end by their taking free throws will yield more points than those possessions in which the opponents must actually execute their offense against a standard defense.
For example, even the highest scoring teams in the NBA average only approximately 1.1 points per possession overall.
If such a team instead shot two free throws on each possession, they could better their offensive output even while making fewer than 60% of those free throws. Therefore, intentionally fouling repeatedly is not generally the best way for a defense to assure that its opposition scores the fewest possible points.
However, the potential advantage of such fouling is that it stops the game clock.
If a team is trailing with time running out in the game, the strategy may be their only hope, as they cannot afford to allow time to elapse from the game clock while playing a standard defense, especially with the winning team looking to simply hold onto the ball until time runs out without even attempting to score, if possible. Also, the effectiveness of this strategy is heightened as tiredness and pressure can affect the ability of the free-throw shooter.
When this strategy was originally employed in the NBA, the trailing team often made a point of fouling the opposition player who was the poorest free throw shooter in the game at that time, even if that player did not possess the ball.
Fouling "off the ball" in that way, however, eventually became a problem for the league when a player came onto the scene who was of superstar calibre, but was an atrocious free throw shooter. That player was Wilt Chamberlain.
Wilt Chamberlain and the off-the-ball foul rule
Chamberlain was such a great player and dominant force that he would be certain to be on the floor in late-game situations if the score was close.
This led to the spectacle of virtually an entire other contest being held away from the ball and almost completely outside of the basketball game being played, as Chamberlain essentially played a de facto game of tag with defenders, attempting to run from and dodge them as they chased him trying to foul him.
The NBA decided to address this undesirable situation by instituting a new rule regarding off-the-ball fouls — that is, committing a personal foul against an offensive player who neither has the ball nor is making an effort to obtain it. The new rule stated that if the defensive team commits an off-the-ball foul within the last two minutes of the game, the offensive team would be allowed to keep possession of the ball after the awarding of either one or two free throws.
Since the entire reason for employing intentional fouling as a strategy was to quickly terminate the offensive team's possession, this new rule, when in effect, forced the team using intentional fouling to foul only the offensive player who had the ball. Some of the funniest things I ever saw were players that used to chase like it was hide-and-seek.
Wilt would run away from people, and the league changed the rule based on how silly that looked.
-- Pat Riley
The birth of Hack-a-Shaq
Nelson's innovation
Although there are a number of game situations in which it may make sense for a defense to commit an isolated intentional foul, from its inception, the strategy of intentional fouling repeatedly, on each and every possession by the opposition, was used only as a desperation measure. It was thought to make sense only when time was so short in the game, that a team trailing in the game, when they were on defense, had to make stopping the clock an even greater priority than stopping the other team from scoring.
The strategy was not thought to make sense at most other times because, as mentioned above, allowing a team to shoot free throws typically will generate more points for them over time than does playing a standard defense.
In the late 1990s, however, Don Nelson theorized that if an especially bad free throw shooter were targeted every time, then intentionally fouling him repeatedly might actually yield fewer points per possession for his team than would playing a typical defense against them.
Since Nelson would be employing the strategy even in the absence of any late-game need to stop the clock, he would be free to use it with greater than two minutes left to play. Rodman was shooting free throws at 38% on the season entering that game.
However, Nelson felt he could still employ the strategy at selective times by assigning a little-used player to commit the fouls — one whose contributions the team would not particularly miss upon his fouling out. In so doing, the theory went, Rodman's horrific foul shooting would result in the Mavericks actually giving up fewer total points during those Bulls possessions than they would give up by playing a standard defense against the Bulls' efficient offense, led by Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen.
In that game, Rodman shot 9-for-12 from the free throw line, completely nullifying the strategy, and the Bulls went on to victory.
Given its ineffectiveness on that occasion, the strategy was then largely forgotten, aside from the fact that Maverick player Bubba Wells, whose assignment it had been to foul Rodman, set the all-time NBA record for fewest minutes played (3) in fouling out of a game.
However, Nelson revisited the strategy in 1999, this time against Shaquille O'Neal (52% free throw shooting over his career). And this time, some other NBA coaches chose to follow his lead and also employ the strategy against O'Neal. The result was that despite the fact that it had been first used two years earlier against Rodman, the strategy became much better-known for its use against O'Neal.
Problem for the league
Just as had been the case with Chamberlain decades earlier, the using of off-the-ball intentional fouling against O'Neal became somewhat problematic for the NBA. As a result, there was some discussion of expanding the off-the-ball foul rule to encompass more than just the final two minutes of the game, or instituting some other rule change which would discourage the use of Hack-a-Shaq.
Ultimately though, the NBA decided at that time not to adopt any new rules designed specifically to discourage the Hack-a-Shaq strategy.
One factor cited in that decision was that the Lakers won both of the aforementioned games. Since the strategy had not worked well enough to provide a win for either of the teams that had used it, there seemed to be reason to hope that its use would not become widespread.
Increasing displeasure on the part of fans and the media with the continued use of the strategy in ensuing seasons — particularly in high profile playoff games — prompted the league in 2008 to revisit the possibility of a rule change. However, discussion of the issue at the league's competition committee meeting that year failed to yield adequate support for the idea.
O'Neal's response
O'Neal's own attitude toward the strategy has generally been one of defiance.
At that time, the Lakers hired Ed Palubinskas, a 99% free throw shooter during his own playing days, to help coach O'Neal. O'Neal managed to consistently shoot free throws slightly better for the next two seasons than he had earlier in his career.
However, he still managed to break 60% over a full season only one time: in the 2002-2003 season. And since that season, his free throw shooting has gotten much worse, remaining consistently below 50%.
I keep telling everyone that I make them when they count.
-- Shaquille O'Neal, in post-game interviews recorded by WOAI-TV on November 7, 2003.
Application against other players
A player against whom the Hack-a-Shaq strategy is most effective is one who shoots free throws very poorly, and also is so effective in other areas that their coach is reluctant to simply remove that player from the game. Hollinger wrote that Popovich was the "first to really master how to use this weapon to his advantage." He explained that Popovich used the tactic "to eliminate 3-point attempts" and with 25 seconds or less at the end of quarters to get the ball back for the Spurs to gain the last possession.
Basically, they were telling their players that they couldn't guard us.
— Detroit Pistons forward Tayshaun Prince, regarding Los Angeles Clippers coach Mike Dunleavy's decision to employ the Hack-a-Shaq strategy against Pistons center Ben Wallace in a game in December of 2005
Since its initial appearance, many coaches have become reluctant to use the strategy amid those criticisms of it, as well as doubts about its ultimate effectiveness in minimizing scoring. It should be pointed out that even when the players for whom the Hack-a-Shaq strategy is employed and where they "get into a rhythm", that they generally are not hitting 100% of the free throws.