Great news.
Too bad he had to wait until 28 to get a proper gig

So the Wildcats looking at something like:

Matt Knight / Tom Jervis (rumoured on Twitter)
Shawn Redhage / Jesse Wagstaff
Greg Hire / Mathiang Muo
Import / Erik Burdon
Damian Martin / Import 1/2

As much as I would have liked to see a Dunigan type 4/5 import, this may prove to be a more balanced team.

And given the above release I take it Burdon is more of a 2 than a point guard?

Would have liked to have seen Burdon at the 36ers instaed of Teys. I actually would have preferred him last year over SC

Jake, same and same.

Happy to see Burdon get a contract. When he did suit for the 36ers, I thought he worked hard and showed composure.

1 point player?

great value shooter for just 1 point. and you just know he will shoot well in Adelaide.

Dunnigan has signed on with a club from South Korea, so he's not likely to be an option anymore.

Hopefully Wagstaff will focus more on scoring and less on gamesmanship this year...

As a 1pt player he seems like a very handy pickup.

About damn time Eze got a contract. Taken far too long.

Classic example of the type of player who the league's contraction from 13 to 8 teams really hurt. Would have been a much better option than SC last year.

Good luck to him as a pinch hitter off the bench


Does this hurt the pioneers come finals?

"and you just know he will shoot well in Adelaide."

- I hope so, because it seems like shooting well at Perth Arena is impossible

I have a lot of time for Eze and I hope he has a great season with his only "below average" games against the Sixers

Surprised Benny Lewis hasn't been signed up yet. Is appealing his rating at 5. Seems like an excellent defender and could definitely add some wow factor on offense. Blew up in a couple of games last season and was definitely under utilised by Anstey

A 5-pt player wouldn't have fit in with the Wildcats available points profile (one of those problems with the points cap where people who have a fiddly number or a lot of competition don't have the option of taking a cheaper contract in a crowded player market in order to just get some pro court time - but anyway).

Really good to read the responses to Burdon, hope he adds some scoring (and some watchability) to the Cats this season.

I'm not sure that's a problem with the points cap. Lewis has had plenty of chances and hasnt produced or significantly improved. It's good to see players like Gleeson, Burdon, Teys, Bruce, Odigie etc getting a chance instead.

paul,

It was for us - a 5pt player would have screwed all of our plans. We had the points, but it meant we dipped below 20pts for the two imports.

It's one of the little quirks of any system like this with some values arbitrary, some not. Fitting players into the points cap is like playing tetris.

For me that's not an issue with the system, it's just how the Wildcats decided to operate within that system.

Maybe Bennie Lewis is the best example of the bad things about the points cap, and neither is David Barlow as has been suggested previously. But a proven decent player like Rhys Carter can't find a gig this year because of his rating so the NBL loses him. Its having an adverse effect on the quality of the league. Parity is one thing but at the expense of losing decent players...its starting to make less sense.

paul, you can't simply turn around and say well that's just how you approach the system when what we're doing is following the incentives. The points system provided an incentive to leaving that guy on the shelf and no amount of contract wheedling or discounting from that guy would get him a spot on a team. The points cap produces anomalies where the jigsaw pieces don't line up comfortably.

And yes, anyone in the 5-8pt category becomes a sticky proposition when dealing with the 10 into 70 cap, in large part because the rating tops out at 10pts. Because you can have someone who, in terms of points, would otherwise be worth considerably more than 10pts, and still have him only a few points more than the likes of Carter.

A Cedric Jackson or Lisch would have been worth 15-20pts if the rating didn't cap at 10. Thus you are incentivised to go for the 10pt and squeeze out the 5-8pt player.

Means we lose a number of solid, experience players who could/should be forming the league mainstay.

Can't tell if real Situation or trolling.

I assume Rhys Carter has a job in Sweden lined up getting paid the same or more, in an easier league, living in his pregnant wife's home country.

Why would you think that comment was trolling?
He has previously stated to me that the points cap has caused him grief.
Yes, he has a gig in Sweden and of course a pregnant wife does change things but to have no Australian offers on the table because of the points cap means it isn't necessarily have the right impact.

Well, he said he left because he didn't get an offer.---


FORGET THIS FIXTURES RELEASED

Sorry Nathan, but what you are effectively saying is because Perth cant sign whoever they want there is an issue with the points system. That is the purpose of the points system!

If the Wildcats want Knight, Redhage, Martin, Wagstaff and two imports on their roster they have to make some sacrifices at the other end of the roster.

The lack of teams is a much bigger issue for players, if there was another team or preferably two you can guarantee Rhys Carter would be in demand. Carter is a case of demanding good money in Sweden because he is a star there and not so much here because he is a mediocre player at this level.

paul, it's not an issue of "who we want" its that there is a band of points ratings which are inherently a drag on player's value and employement prospects, because just above them is a points ceiling that makes 10pts more attractive on a points value.

Anonymous -

Actually, your point # 1 is exactly what I'm saying is impossible. They CAN'T just drop their asking price, because you can't simply drop your points value. When 1 or 2 additional points can mean that you, completely independent of your own worth/value, tip the club past the space where they can hire an import, you become an intrinsically bad deal and no amount of wheeling or dealing on asking price will save you.

If every club completely rebuilt their roster each year that may not be a concern, but when you have irregular points amounts each year, it exacerbates the problem.

Sorry, disagree with you again. If they were valuable players clubs would choose to make room for them, as they have with other players of their rating. Lewis is out of the league because he hasnt produced over a number of years.

The points system encourages teams to recruit new players rather than keep ahold of low level bench players, but only Lewis has stopped himself from developing his game to something more than that.

But paul, that's the point.

They're NOT valuable players, they're 5-8pt players. Under this system, they're less valuable than 3pt players, because they don't benefit you much more than a college graduate and yet are significantly less useful than the 10pt players you can get with only a couple points more.

A system that keeps encouraging teams to recruit new players and then ditch anyone who doesn't become a star is a system that is not providing a meaningful career path to prospective Australian pro-ballers.

Nathan, 5-8 point players can be very valuable. Bennie Lewis wasnt.

Valuable in terms of their talents, yes, but their effective value get reduced by the presence of a points ceiling just a little above their head.

Not as cap friendly as college or promoted DP players, not as point-for-impact friendly as a strong 10pt player.

You get someone like a Jackson or a Lisch who if you extrapolated the point system would be a 12-15 pt player, and you getting more bang for buck by sticking with a mix of rookies and stars. Effectively free cap points.

The system is deeply flawed as anything except a blunt-force trauma method of keeping the salary cap policed to stop financial suicides. Which it does quite well. But in terms of creating competition parity or producing anything like a fair system for players, I don't like it. The arbitrary nature of the system is the chief virtue and vice.

Rush, Henry, Bartlett, Lewis, Carter, Bruce, Dann, the Cedars, to name a few. You can make a case for some of those guys not being wanted at another club anyway but the point is these guys become a whole lot less attractive to prospective clubs because they have x amount of points assigned to them.

paul, in a previous discussion I had with you about this, we used Carter (not being offered a contract to remain at the Cats) as an example. Your comment at the time was you think its a better thing that he goes to another team anyway. Well, he has now not gone to any team in the NBL, because his points value has made him an unattractive prospect. So exactly what is it you think is a good thing that the tool to force parity actually drives players away?

Nathan, let's look at it this way. Bennie Lewis and Greg Hire both started out as development players and were then elevated to the main roster at their clubs.

Hire has improved his weaknesses and become a very handy role player, earning a 7-pt rating in the process. He has signed a good contract with Perth after fielding other offers and looks secure in the NBL.

Lewis refused to play defence or get his head around the idea of shot selection, progressing only to a rating of 5. He has not been signed by a club.

The points rating has not determined where these two have ended up. It does encourage a team like Melbourne to take a young player like Odigie over an ineffective veteran like Lewis, but the points system didn’t make Lewis an ineffective veteran.

Situation, the guys you have listed havent performed. The points system doesnt hurt players who perform. I disagree with the premise that Carter is out of the league due to the points system.

paul, so you're saying that without a points system, those guys would have been axed/not re-signed anyway?

And not just axed, had no other club show interest in signing them?

Dann, Bruce (not because of talent), Lewis, Bartlett and the Cedars, yes. Henry has had clubs interested. Carter and Rush chose to go to Sweden.

With an 8-team league I like a system that encourages teams to invest in the future rather than rehash underperforming veterans. If a player performs they will be signed, if they are amongst the worst players in the league, which the guys you mentioned were, they will be replaced.

Off court also plays a large part in a players signing.

If a player is high points , low salary and a great person then they will get offers. If a player is High points , mid to high salary expectation and a bad reputation off court then they wont get an offer.

The standard of the league has gotten better each year since 2010. Write down who came in between 2010 and 2013 and who left and you will see that clearly.

No, you can't simply say that if you have high points but a low salary expectation you'll get offers. Your salary expectations become very much a secondary concern. The points are the primary issue with team structure, and its rigidity is what is seeing people disappear through the cracks.

Carter sent me a reply on twitter a while back that he quite simply didn't get any offers. You can't tell me that he wasn't worth his points or that, given he was replacing Robbins who, though he had leadership skills, was no Cedric Jackson and thus was unlikely to have freed up that much cap space, was asking for too much.

No one offered because he was in that awkward points zone where its large enough to make you a difficult tetris piece to puzzle into a points cap, yet not a 10pt player where you have maximum bang for points.

Honestly, the more I discuss this and think it over, the more appalling I'm coming to find the points cap system.

Desperately in need of, at a minimum, a point trading/buying system.

I dont buy that argument. If a players suits what a team is after they will get an offer.

There are 80 possible spots, 66 if every team signs 2 imports.

The 36ers gave their 10th man spot to a 9/10 point player only a few years ago

For every player that is being kept out of the league because of their points others are getting a shot.


As Paul says if you are good enough you will get signed. Some players dont make sense ( Carter) but obviously teams arent after what he offers right now

sorry typo there 64 Aussie / NZ spots

I think at best it has stopped teams fielding dominant teams at times but I don't think it has contributed to teams not being poor. Last season was terrible to watch in some aspects, despite every team using (almost) all of their 70 points.

No one in recent years has been like the old Brisbane, Cairns, Geelong, Townsville, Victoria Giants or Canberra teams from the 90s or early 2000s who would regularly get flogged. Not even close.

Rather than citing examples of random blowouts that occur every season, it's better to look at the overall trends.

For example, the percentage of games decided by single figures (or overtime):

1993 = 44%
1998 = 48%
2003 = 36%
2008 = 38%
2013 = 55%

Or the winning percentage of the bottom two teams:

90-94 = 18%
95-99 = 27%
00-04 = 22%
05-09 = 25%
10-13 = 33%

It's fairly clear the bottom teams are the most competitive now. No doubt the smaller number of teams plays a part in that, although there isnt a direct correlation, there was the same average number of teams in each of the 95-99, 00-04 and 05-09 periods but different results.

An interesting aside is the correlation between the bottom sides being most competitive (late 90s and now) and lower scoring. I guess it makes sense the less bunny teams there are the less cricket scores get run up.

When did 40 minute games come in?

Same time as the stricter points system and the drop to eight teams in 2010, so it's hard to get a gauge on how much each factor contributed.

Top teams less competitive, I love it!

Each to their own. I'll take watching close games more often than not over watching blowouts any day. Certainly more people are watching it now than in a long time, so there must be something good about it.

Given our bottom team beat a near .500 Serbian league team by 40 last pre-season, our top team is built from a national team that regularly finishes in the top 16 in the world, and a team made up mostly of NBL bench players finished second at the World Uni Games (matching Euroleague and future NBA talent) our league cant be that bad.

Thanks for that well thought out argument! But the improvement from the trough in 2010 to 2013 is clear.

The stars from the 2010 season who were lost by 2013 were Penney, Worthington, Williams, Ubaka, Gilchrist and McKee who played half a season.

Some of the other imports replaced include Roberts, J Mills, Melzer, Young, Storey, Rickert, M Rose, cast-handed Hodge and Groves.

Mackinnon and Anstey had retired after an injury-plagued 2010 where they struggled to contribute, as did Campbell and Hoare in later years.

Into the league to replace them had come Jackson, Ervin, Nevill, Wilson, Madgen, Knight, Deleon, Flynn and Scott, along with big improvements in that time from Abercrombie, Pledger, Johnson, Blanchfield, R Martin, Goulding and Lisch.

Im liking the 2013 side of that equation.

As for next year, Lisch, Jackson, Flynn, Scott and probably Nevill have been lost. In their place so far we have Ogilvy, Worthington, Markovic, Clarke and Ennis, with NZ and Perth still to unveil imports. Doesnt look like there will be a decline to me.

Anyway, we're not going to agree and that's ok, these forums would be boring if everyone did. Erik Burdon is some player though, responsible for the points system, salary cap and the standard of the league!

congratulations Eze!
another from the SA class of '85 to grace the NBL.