I know everyone is going to bitch about the Hack-A-Jordan strategy, especially after the first half, but I would be annoyed if they changed the rules to get rid of it.

Hack-a-whoever is a legitimate strategy (which may/may not work on a given night, just like any other strategy).

DeAndre Jordan is a poor FT shooter. That's a fact. That's part of the scouting report. As players and coaches you are supposed to come up with a gameplan which exploits your opponent's weaknesses. Listen, Rajon Rondo is a poor perimeter shooter and he always has been. Teams will sag off of him and go under the screens set for him. If he clanks and misses like 15three point attempts in one game, should we now say "Oh well that's ugly so we have to change the rules now" ? Shaq, the man most infamously linked with this strategy, in his prime was very hard to stop since he could always get low-post position. If you were a coach, wouldn't you just give him the ball down low until his hands fell off? That's a legitimate strategy, but one which many fans find boring (something which many people forget). If fans tuned out, does that mean we should change the rules?

If you limit the amount of legitimate strategies which basketball teams can employ, then basketball becomes less legitimate. IMO, basketball loses as it becomes a shitty watered-down sport.

Also, a point which many of you may want to consider:

It seems to me that this sub really likes to talk about legacies, (Where do you "rank" LeBron? Shaq vs Wilt etc.) and if you are one of those people, then one of your favorite pastimes just becomes a whole lot dumber with any rule changes. DeAndre Jordan IS a poor FT shooter. When fans evaluate him as a player, they consider this as this is one aspect of his game. If you hide this with some rule changes, then you get a misinformed and inaccurate representation of his skill