Why is a foul worth 3 points...

[Camron Rust]

I think he's making a reasonable point. It is a philosophical question, not what the rules are.

His point, as I understand it, is that he's not opposed to protecting the shooter, but after the release, a foul has no effect on the success of the already released shot. Instead, it is merely for the protection of the shooter....a step above a non-shooting foul but not really a shooting foul since the shot isn't actually affected. The # of FTs are typically considered a remedy for the harm caused by the foul. But, since the shot is already gone, it is going in or not regardless of the foul. So, why then is that foul worth 2 or 3 points depending on location. The shooter already didn't earn the points by missing the shot before they were fouled.

Now, to answer his question....

Am impending collision (or even less) can interfere with the shooter as they anticipate the contact.

Also, I don't think they want us to have to split that hair....whether the foul occurred before it was off of the shooters fingertips or not. Thus, we consider them shooting until they land. It is far more uncommon for the foul to occur close to the landing of the shooter such that we have to distinguish between shooting or not.