Moneyballer
Years ago

3 Import Rule- For or Against?

I'm all for it but only if we have 12 man rosters. Whats your thoughts

Topic #32643 | Report this topic


Isaac  
Years ago

How are 12 players going to get on the court in a 40 minute game or even a 48 minute game?

The change wouldn't be players per team but number of teams in the league.

You can search for the previous thread about this and see what everyone said about it then.

Reply #436497 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

I agree with anon above,

but see Isaacs point with 12 players for 40 min games,

i spose in the majority the 10th,11th, 12th men wont get much court time, so some would say its a waste of money, but id like to see rosters extended to 12, without a raise in salary cap, just spread the money out slightly more and reduce the minim to around $20k and have them as part timers, it would help keep some of our promising young guys like a Tom Daly in the league, and they will likely work there way up the rotation in the future and also teams would use these guys more in the event of injuries or foul trouble and get a few minutes in blow outs.

I guess it isnt much different to the current set up with 2 development players, but it keeps guys like Daly who are no longer eligible for development spots, but cant crack a 10 man roster in the league.

Maybe a inbetween is remove the restrictions on who can be a development player and allow guys like Daly to take one of these spots if he cant make a 10 and a club wants him in that role, which i think a club would.


But back to topic i think a 3rd import, even a SEABL import would be great, would help clubs fill out there rosters a little better and less likely clubs would have glaring weaknesses in their starting 5, ie C at the Crocs, SF at the Tigers, imagine if they could fill those spots with imports, even if its just Rickert and Markson from the Wellington Saints take those 2 jobs, the teams are better balanced, which makes the league stronger and more entertaining.

Reply #436516 | Report this post


paul  
Years ago

With eight teams, Im definitely not for it, we currently have imports and quality Australians coming off the bench, and very few spots for young players.

But with 11 or 12 teams I think it would be great, potentially allowing players like Farley, Williams, Ubaka and Dorsey etc to stay in the league longer.

Reply #436519 | Report this post


The Situation  
Years ago

Three imports would work but only if they spent the entire 48 minutes....wait, make it 56 minutes...competing in jump-balls, which is the true spectacle of the game.

Reply #436521 | Report this post


paul  
Years ago

In white home uniforms?

Reply #436522 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Paul, just curious you wouldnt want the Crocs to be able to replace say Vandy with say Rickert? without losing any of there other imports, wouldnt being able to do that make the league stronger?

I do see your point though re few spots for young players.

I guess its enabling some of the teams to plug a glaring weakness with an import, or have a bit more bench depth eg Farley for Teys in Adelaide vs having jobs for young players.

Thats actually why i like the 12 man roster idea, you can get the best of both worlds, allow teams to plug the gap they need to with a cheap, whilst not costing any young guy a job, even creating one for each team.

Reply #436524 | Report this post


paul  
Years ago

We have such a poor pathway for young players, I think we need to create more spots not less.

Five guys in the NBL under 21 compared to 100-odd in the NRL and 200-odd in the AFL, it makes the choice of a teenager pretty easy. Even the NCAA pathway doesnt deliver much, with an average of only 4-5 Aussies per year graduating to a pro job usually aged 22 or 23.

For me, replacing Vanderjagt with a declining talent like Rickert doesnt seem like a good argument for the rule change, especially with guys like Brandt, Hodgson and Loe returning from college next year looking for a centre spot, and a WUG starter in Dumovic not able to get a gig.

Not to mention the fact Vanderjagt has been out of the league for so long, he was a decent player for Townsville back then, and for a 213cm 24 year old with his best years in front of him to be largely shut out of the league is not a good situation.

Reply #436526 | Report this post


FYI  
Years ago

NBL actually do have 12 man rosters at home games

More teams are needed to stretch the talent out to create more chances for kids coming through

I would actually like to see a 1 import rule. Teams would double the current wage onto one gun import of a known name and ability. Star power of a big name would have big spin off benefits for the NBL.

Condense the season by 1 month also means that the import budget goes further as they are paid on a per month basis. $300,000 over 4 months means a different calibre of player.

It also creates an extra slot for 8 locals to play in the league making the pathway broader and more achievable than present.



Reply #436528 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Very true Paul.

Do you expect some of the young talents you named to play NBL next season upon completing college? or are they more likely to get Euro/NBA gigs?

I agree we need to get spots for these guys if they want to play NBL, but not a issue if they are all headed overseas.

I guess this is a scenario which shows the need for more teams in the NBL to create more jobs for the young talent and so guys like Daly and Vanderjagt can stay in the league for 10 years, which they are probably capable of.

As a fan, i would also love to see guys like Farley, Ubaka, Dorsey stay in the league as these guys appear willing to play cheaply and are very entertaining and definatly NBL quality, seem to be good personalities and fans will love having them there year after year, a bit like Copeland at the Tigers i suppose, stayed for years until he was around Farleys age and would likely draw more crowds than a Aussie like a Daly or Vanderjagt, who i also want to stay in the league.

I guess the more ideal is as you suggested originally 10-12 teams with 3 imports per team, acheives the best of both and opens up a few more spots and playing time for young talent to come into.

Reply #436530 | Report this post


Bear  
Years ago

How about this idea...?

A 16-18 player roster with a focus on two teams per club, one which is a development team and will play in an under 23 youth league style of competition as a curtain raiser to the actual first NBL team games.

That way you can promote those development players up if you wish and keep your three imports in the top team also.

I know it will cost more, but it will create a pathway and introduce younger players into the NBL!

Reply #436537 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

I like your thinking Bear.

Could even make the youth league under 25 or something if not enough quality under 23 guys going around, i know some clubs had filling the YAP spot when that existed.

Reply #436539 | Report this post


Bear  
Years ago

NBL Premier League - Seniors
NBL Youth 'D' League - Development

Two games on the one night or day (schedule), more entertainment and a focus on local product, maybe more of a connection with the local Associations and the kids...?

Like I said, just an idea...

Reply #436540 | Report this post


Isaac  
Years ago

As a fan, i would also love to see guys like Farley, Ubaka, Dorsey stay in the league
If teams wanted them, they would keep them or sign them. They aren't and it might be because of their personalities, defence, flaws in their game, whatever.

If they aren't signing them when they have two vacant import spots, why would they get them if they had three? They'd probably go out and try to unearth a fresh gem or cheap roleplayer.

Reply #436544 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Very True Isaac, i think 3 imports gives them more of a chance as it would be a cheaper import spot, so not expecting MVP callibre players which is what would have been expected in the spots they once held, Farley lasted whilst he was of MVP level, as soon as he dipped slightly he wasnt picked up, (possibly other reasons aswell?) even though id say he would have been better than most of the imports we have had since he left.

I dare say if he was willing to sign as a 3rd cheaper import, hence club not requiring him to play at MVP level he may have been able to stick in the league, the 36ers/most clubs wanting to use there normal 2 import spots on top notch imports, but you do make a good point, clubs may just gamble on younger ones and see if they can find a diamond in the rough with this spot, so doesnt guarantee it, but i think it helps the cause for some fan favorites like Farley to stay in the NBL in cheap spots. Which i think is good for the fans and the league, it may make it a bit less of a import merry go round, not many stay here more than a year or 2 these days, which isnt great imo.

Reply #436550 | Report this post


paul  
Years ago

Isaac, I think teams are more likely to keep an import who has slipped a little but still contributes and fits the team chemistry if they have an extra spot. They can get another import to fill the output the older player used to produce.

Some teams would do that, some would go a freshy, and some wouldnt use the extra import spot.

If we have 110-120 spots in the league I have no problem with 30-35 of them going to imports. With 80 spots I think having 20-25 is too many.

Reply #436560 | Report this post


skull  
Years ago

one import and one bring an aussie home (BAAH) option that has both player point and salary cap incentives.





Reply #436612 | Report this post


FM  
Years ago

Mix of Korean rules and 3 imports could work for team rosters.

2 Imports on the court at any given time for 1st and 4th quarters. 3rd import allowed on the court for 2nd and 3rd quarter.

This would allow the game to be started with majority of Australians on the floor and the local lads need to win the game also. Gives the advantage of your import getting rotated with another import, plus allows teams to carry 3 imports across the floor.

Disadvantages are cost. Wouldn't suite the league now, but would be good to bring in during years of expansion.

Reply #436619 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

I think the NBL is missing a great opportunity here to expand the league. The quality of the imports are improving due to the economic situation is europe.

Allowing 3 imports coupled together with 2 good Aussies and some young Aussie role players could allow new teams to put a viable product on the floor, whlist saving money on their rosters. Look what the gong do on a budget, you don't need to spend alot of money to compete in this league.

Reply #436622 | Report this post


Mick  
Years ago

I hate rules that restrict who can be on the court at any time. It reminds me of mixed social comps where the men arent allowed to score or some shit. 3 imports isn't a good idea whichever way you slice it. Either keep two or open it up entirely.

Reply #436625 | Report this post


Mick  
Years ago

And its townsvilles fault they built their roster without any professional quality options at the 5. They didnt have to. They could have used local options at other positions and built a more balanced roster. Give them 3 imports and its just as likely theyd still go ahead and do something dumb and leave a glaring hole at a certain position.

Reply #436626 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Yes, the league needs more colour, so three imports is perfect in addition to the away side wearing their primary uniform. There is too much white at the moment.

Reply #436629 | Report this post


KET  
Years ago

» 3 Imports, no limit on "maximum salary" for any individual within the $1mill salary cap.
»Players from Asia/Oceania don't count as imports. »Add Brisbane & second Melbourne team to bring the league to 10 teams.
»Top 5 make it, use SANFL type system of finals with single game playoffs and for the Prelims and Grandfinal they play 3 game series.
» Change the game time to 48 minutes.
» Change Adelaide Arena to The Powerhouse

Reply #436634 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Against Would like to see some of the Australian team players playing in the NBL instead of spending big dollars on imports

Reply #436652 | Report this post


Proud  
Years ago

I'm tremendously proud of the Perth Wildcats and how they had Grace, Crawford and Fisher as naturalized Australians and believe the incentive has to be there that if you look after your imports and they look after you by sticking around and become an Australian/NZ citizen then you should be able to go out looking for an import to plug another hole you may have.

2 is fine by me and please don't make it harder on teams that have naturalized Australians ala Redhage, Gruber etc. that have given great service to the league and its fans over many years as we the fans should be wanting our imports to wanna stay around, become citizens and get their jersey retired... I'm not sure how going 3 imports per team is going to improve that.

Fun to think about though

Reply #436665 | Report this post




You need to be a registered user to post from this location. Register here.



Close ads
Serio: Tourism photography and videography
Little Streaks - The fun and interactive good-habits app designed especially for kids.

Advertise on Hoops to a very focused, local and sports-keen audience. Email for rates and options.

Recent Posts



.


An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 10:17 pm, Tue 19 Mar 2024 | Posts: 968,026 | Last 7 days: 754