I'm not trying to be rude, but you're being incredibly dense.

You clearly lost the other point, so you've resorted to an entirely different point. And i can tell you're quite into this cause now you're dropping fuck bombs left and right.

1) You fail to understand the intentional foul is less about the free throw and far more about clock management. It stops the clock and gives possession back to the team who committed the foul. This is the major benefit of the intentional foul.

2) A secondary benefit is that if you choose a shooter who is not that good at the shots, it increases your odds even further.

3) The idea that every NBA player should be a great shooter from the line is silly. There are simply players whose role is not to shoot very often. These players are typically not that good at FTs. An equivalent would be a pitcher/catcher in baseball, they're typically awful hitters. Or a goalie in soccer, probably not the first guy you'll call up to take the PK. But yea, everyone in baseball "still bats" it's just not everyone is good at it, pitchers often bat under .100, that's 50-70% worse than good hitters in the league.

3) You still completely fail to understand the underlying issue. Not a single sport you can name has any sort of situation where constant, intentional fouling late in the game is the best winning strategy for the team that is losing. You've thrown like 4-5 posts at me and each one shows less understanding than the previous.

The only people who typically defend the intentional foul are people who are usually only basketball fans and are usually pretty ignorant about gamesmanship, sportsmanship, and just sports in general (you've proved all 3 of those as you probably don't even know what gamesmanship is, you clearly could careless about sportsmanship, and you didn't even know how PKs work in soccer which is the #1 sport in the world).

I can't imagine I need to explain this further, but if you still get it, i'm here all day I guess.