Onlooker
Years ago

Spend less on your Australian Talent

It seems to me the getting your import selection right is paramount to success at the NBL level.

To see the turnaround in the Breakers so far with Jackson back in the fold, after a sub par 2013/14. Cairns bring in Scotty W with the same team and have thrived. The relative success of the Kings with what i consider outside Childress very thin on talent. Whilst is United, and 36ers which have Australian talent heavy rosters (a number have suited up for the boomers) struggling to compete.

In terms of bang for your buck and creating a competitive team, my theory is spend big on imports leaving no expense to waste and surround your imports with relatively cheap Australian role players. Chasing big name Aussies has not led to success in recent years.



Topic #36017 | Report this topic


observer  
Years ago

agree with above, but imports must be consistenly game high scorers.

Reply #504950 | Report this post


Isaac  
Years ago

United are top four. Breakers have an import playing off the bench. Hawks have two imports and had two naturalised imports - bottom of the ladder.

There's no single way of doing things but I would disagree and say that spending on Australian talent is important for these reasons:

- more likely to stick around
- more likely to understand the league
- better continuity
- smaller talent pool, so locking in good locals deprives opponents of another option

Breakers and Wildcats have been top teams in recent years. Breakers have had a very good local contingent including Vukona, Abercrombie, Bruton, Pledger, etc. In Perth, their locals in Martin, Wagstaff, Redhage, Knight, etc are far more important than imports getting dropped in.

Reply #504951 | Report this post


paul  
Years ago

Agree, the key is keeping your nucleus of players, be they imports or locals, and then make wise selections to replace the guys who leave whose skillset and personality fits the team.

Reply #504956 | Report this post


Onlooker  
Years ago

I would argue that the mix in the gong is rotten atm. Their 2 imports are not as good as last years, and did better with less australian talent and better imports.

United when evaluating the talent on their roster are under performing on a massive scale. 2 ex boomers, NBA draft picks, prob the leagues best 6 man (walker). Maybe Dmac can turn it around time will tell.

Breakers had your core you mentioned last year however without jackson have proven they are a .500 team.

In Perth, redhage (ex import), martin and knight have been great players. The rest could be replaced at anytime without much trouble.

Plenty of ways to skin a cat, but people who think expanding the number of teams will dilute the quality of the comp are mistaken as i believe as long as clubs select and pay for good imports, solid local role players can be found on the cheap and you can challenge for finals.

Reply #504957 | Report this post


RMQ  
Years ago

One of the NBL's many mistakes was choosing to pick "role player" imports when local talent improved.

Instead they should have sort better imports to play alongside the improved local talent.

This of course would work in a perfect world where money wasn't an issue.

Reply #504959 | Report this post


D4444  
Years ago

Recruiting well is the key, whether it's imports or locals but then if you've done that part well, you need to retain the quality players you recruit. As others have said, Perth & NZ both currently have a strong nucleus of talented locals but they didn't start out as stars; they developed that way over several years. Both teams also have a returning import which is not that common these days.

Reply #504960 | Report this post


Isaac  
Years ago

In Perth, redhage (ex import), martin and knight have been great players. The rest could be replaced at anytime without much trouble.
Not sure you're right there. Guys like Hire and Wagstaff know that system inside out. They play D, can hit the three, work hard, seem to have the court smarts, etc - not always a common player.

I know someone who competes against that frontcourt and thinks the Cats get tougher when they bring Wagstaff in for Redhage.

Reply #504971 | Report this post


Tom  
Years ago

I couldn't agree more with this post, look at the last couple champions. Most of them were led by a gun import or had a stud import in the team

Reply #504973 | Report this post


Onlooker  
Years ago

Issac,

I agree that Hire and Wagstaff play hard, and are tough covers. In fact, i believe it is a testament to the culture or the organisation and leadership of guys like Martin that the past 5 years or so Perth Brand = Playing hard. I would like to see Hire and Wagstaff move from Perth and see if they sink or swim, purely from a curiosity perspective. We haven't seen too many people move from Perth as a case study to prove the theory.

Reply #504980 | Report this post


paul  
Years ago

"Breakers had your core you mentioned last year however without jackson have proven they are a .500 team."

NZ actually faced big changes last season, losing their coach (Lemanis), their best player (Jackson) and their best glue guy (Boucher), their biggest defensive piece (Pledger) relatively early in the season, and then Bruton became mostly a non-factor.

On top of that, the new coach put in a defensive system that simply didn't work with how the game was being whistled and made a major mistake by bringing in an inexperienced PG to match his own inexperience.

If anything, NZ last year is a strong case for why continuity is so important.

Reply #504993 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Great point onlooker. The Australian players are overpaid for what they do, plus it's a six month gig, but if a GM wanted to slash x% off of local players can they add it to the imports. I ask because is the limit still $150K per import outside of the marquee rule. Or can you now pay an import $whatever as long total roster spend is less than $1mil?

Reply #505003 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

If disregarding the marquee spot the limit per player is still $150K then basically the league is enforcing overpaying locals while underpaying imports. Two imports non-marquee at $150K is $300K with $700K to spare on eight main rotation spots who play in a league for five months of a regular season. So it is part time $700K/8 = $87.5K double that to compare that to most jobs that are year round and the low NBL revenues.

The system is promoting overpaying local players.

Reply #505004 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

I can see what you are saying Onlooker

I think in reality most championship teams have both, a MVP calibre import and a Boomer level Aussie, the really strong teams over a sustained period often have 2 of atleast one of these things, eg Wildcats have been good since having Martin, Redhage and either Lisch or Beal, when they had that plus an extra stud import ie last season with Ennis they were almost unstoppable, same with the 98/99 36ers with Mee, Brooks, Cat, Maher, you can see why that group went back to back.

I have often wondered what it would look like if say the 36ers went for a NBA style big 3 and then filled the roster with role players. The problem is to do this successfully your imports would need to be both MVP level and you would only be able to pay them a max salary of around $200k, which is probably unlikely to get a proven stud import, you would have to rely on finding a Lisch, Ced Jackson, Ennis, Clarke imports every year, as at first they would have likely been on $200k or less, and im sure thats very hard as teams would be always trying to do it.

But lets say you went for it and got the right imports, to use names lets call the imports Brooks and Mee, as to me they are the right style of imports you would need in this style of set up, you got them for $200k each, you lucked out on them being first year out of college

Then your stud Aussie would have to be a big, who is already in the NBL, as the ones outside of the NBL would be too expensive. You would be looking at Wortho, Loughton, Kickert, Knight that type of player, all with there good and bad bits, lets say we grab Wortho.

That gives us a line up of

C
PF Wortho
SF Brooks
SG
PG Mee

Which is great but we have spent $600k, so we have $400k on 7 spots, average of $57k.

So lets give Teys $70 k and put him in at starting SG, and the C spot is an issue lets go Burston at $80k, but not sure if we can even get him for that. (ideally you would love a Schenscher type for this spot, but i dont think you could afford him, unless he comes in at a home town discount)

Thats a solid staritng 5, but going to be a real cheap bench, and if anyone like Burston goes down with injury for any stretch its going to be costly.

So lets have a bench of
PG Daly 40k
SG Carter $70k
SF Henry 50k
PF Anthony 50k
C ??? Truslove (cant think of any cheap bigs) $40k

That gives you a roster of

Burston/Truslove
Wortho/Anthony
Brooks/Henry
Teys/Carter
Mee/Daly

For the $1 mil cap, obviously you can do this a little better and easier if you utilise the marquee player rule

(Thats possibly stretching it with a few of the bench salaries, but not too rediculous at the same time)

Is that roster better than the current 36ers??? If you get all those guys, have no injury issues especially to Burston and get imports who are both MVPish level then arguably yes, but it would only take a few of those things to go slightly wrong then you woukdnt have as good of a team.

You could argue watching Mee and Brooks type imports even if the team overall is only just as good is worth the risk as they would likely be more entertaining and be able to win a few games off there own back and be more consistant than guys like Gibbo offensively from game to game, that alone could be an upgrade in many peoples eyes.

But the problem is it would be tough to find imports of that level year after year for NBL money, otherwise id be all for it, there would be situations when you end up getting a Wilson type import who is decent but not a MVP level and pay them $200kish which is really the max a team can pay someone with a decent 7-8 man rotation under the $1mil cap imo, which isnt ideal, but not always a disaster either.

I wouldnt be against trying it, but to be a little safe you would want atleast one of the imports to have NBL experience, but even if they didnt it would be fun to watch year after year, and if you do get it right (or close to it) on the import front you would be very likely a playoff team atleast.

The problem is from the 36ers front is we have alot of good Aussies and its probably not worth the risk at this point.

The Aussies on higher salaries at the 36ers you would need to swap out the get a stud import would be guys like Gibson, Schenscher, Petrie. You could make arguments for getting a import to replace one of these guys, and you could upgrade your roster significantly if you get it right, but if you get it wrong it could be a even more significant loss to the roster, so is it worth the risk?

For me id try to keep our Aussie core, id try and swap out Jamar Wilson for Stephen Dennis, who isnt a stud so far, but is a nice, smooth, versatile player, who seems to blend in well with his team well and would likely be affordable, and he doesnt seem to have any sort of attitude/ego problem, so should fit in with Joey and the team.

I would then try and re-sign Schenscher who im pretty sure is off contract, for around $30k less (as much less as possible really, i doubt you would do better than that though, unless Schenshcer gives us a really good home town discount). Schenscher is a funny one, as his on court stats, production, when you take into account age and injury history is probably only worth $80-$100k, but then he is over 7 foot, Australian, NBA experience, plays fairly hard at both ends of the floor, and most of the teams he has played on, and even a very key role on, have won more than they have lost. So that all makes him a bit rarer, especially the 7 foot bit, which bumps his salary up $30k-$50k, if he was 6'8 he wouldnt get as much in imo. But yes keep him if possible for say around $120k instead of the $150kish he is rumoured to be on.
Then spend that extra $30k ish and upgrade Crawfords spot to a import for around $80k. Go for a young guy from college, see if you can get lucky and land a stud, go for a versatile swing man, worse case scenario Torrey Craig from Cairns would be a solid upgrade on Crawford.

This gives us 2 imports who are 6'6+, athletic, versatile and would enable us to go with a very wide variety of line ups, ie could run Gibbo at pg, Teys at sg and dennis at sf if you want Gibbo to be pg.
So the roster id try for next season, if none of our Aussies leave is
Motum/Schenscher
Petrie/Anthony
Creek/Import
Gibson/Teys
Dennis/Daly

If we lose say Gibson or Schenscher id be all for spending that money on the best import we can get.

Reply #505008 | Report this post


Mick  
Years ago

Regardless of nationality, some teams should probably allocate a higher % of their funds to their top player or two and skimp more on end of the bench guys.

With 1 or 2 games a week and 40 min games, teams are way too eager to go deep into the bench all game long, and it frustrates me as a fan. As long as you have 6 or 7 good guys it really doesn't matter as much as teams plan for, foul trouble notwithstanding.

For example, the team I watch most, Townsville, usually have all 10 guys see court time in the first 7 minutes or so of the game. It's insane. You don't need to do that.

Reply #505011 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

The great Marty Clarke might disagree with you there Mick.

Reply #505017 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

haha all good till you have a injury and have to use bench.

Reply #505027 | Report this post


paul  
Years ago

The best 40-minute teams around the world run nine or 10 deep, and in a league as fast as the NBL you're asking for trouble if you're relying on six or seven. The other team's fresh starters will pick you off in the second half more often than not.

The simple fact is, in the world of basketball, spending $50K or $100K more on a player doesn't guarantee you better output.

Reply #505028 | Report this post


MACDUB  
Years ago

paul's right.

Depth is key.

Look at the champions of the last decade or so. The recurring theme is that all the champions have had unbelievably deep teams:

2003 - 2005: Sydney Kings - Wortho, Crosswhite, Bruton, Smith, Barlow, Kendall, Smith

2007 - Brisbane - Need I say anymore. . Ere, Sam McKinnon, Gibson, Bruton etc.

2008 - Melb - Anstey, Thomas, D-Mac, Barlow and experienced vets like Hoare and Stiff.

2009 - South Dragons - Need I say more? Worthington, Ingles, Gibson, Donta Smith, Darden, Vukona, Carter, Horvath, Burston, plus Herbert, Dillon etc. In my opinion, the best NBL team I have ever seen.

2010 - Current - NZ - Throughout the three year reign, had the likes of Penney, Vukona, Braswell, Bruton, Hudson, Pledger, Abercrombie, Jackson, Webster, Boucher, Henare, Wilkinson

Perth - Lisch, Redhage, Martin, Beal, Ennis, Wagstaff, Cattalini, Weigh, Robbins, Jervis, Big Red, Knight.


The above list shows that depth is important. So is balance. Every team above had white collar scorers as well as "blue collar" workers who were willing to do the dirty work - i.e. Boucher and Vukona, D.Martin, Gibson etc.


Reply #505034 | Report this post


Isaac  
Years ago

I couldn't agree more with this post, look at the last couple champions. Most of them were led by a gun import or had a stud import in the team
Perth were good with Ennis, Beal or Lisch. You could put a half-decent import with their Australian contingent and they'd be very competitive. Ennis was excellent but icing on a decent enough cake, IMO. Jackson in NZ is effective because he plays D more than anything else and has all-round game. He's not a typical scoring "gun" import (low percentage shooter including 52% FT).

Reply #505039 | Report this post


Mick  
Years ago

Absolutely I agree with you, depth is the key to winning it all. The deeper teams will always run through the top heavy ones.

I was more pointing out a (potential) market inefficiency that could probably have you jump a couple of ladder spots (but won't get you all the way to the top).

When I see my team hanging around the bottom of the ladder, going 10 deep before the first quarter is even winding down, I scratch my head, especially when it's against a team who has an inferior starting 5 and no one is in foul trouble.

When you're not going to win it all you may as well get creative. You're not going to beat Perth at their own game.

(I realise this is probably more a critique of my team's frustrating substitution patterns than anything else)

Reply #505046 | Report this post


anonymous  
Years ago

Isnt this an Australian league???? Why fill it with imports this is where we should be supporting our aussie players not saying dish them for imports the only imports you get are ones who are either washed up or haven't made the cut to match the big guns in nba.
If you stop paying aussie player a decent wage what have tge younger guys got to aspire too.

Reply #505391 | Report this post


Fan-ciful  
Years ago

No Anon. The NBL isn't junior ball.
It is supposedly a professional league, the best players possible, regardless of origin, should be on the floor.

Bring on the best players playing in the NBL.

Reply #505464 | 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: 10:07 pm, Tue 19 Mar 2024 | Posts: 968,026 | Last 7 days: 754