saw not mention of that quote in todays paper either im blind and didnt read it or people are just stirring shit again towards a ceo of the sixers , suprise suprise like that hasnt been done before

Just read the article and although their was no mention of Daws thinking Ingles was a 5 man it is something I heard that he thought. Scary, if true!
As for the 36ers making him an appropriate offer, quite frankly I'm not sure how he would know.
Ingles from my understanding had much higher offers than the Dragons anyway.
As for Smyths comment about it being disappointing to miss out on a South Australian kid here's a hint; making contact with him in the last 6 weeks and offering him a spot in the 10 rather than the 13!!! would probably have helped considerably!

If it helps Thomo any more, I heard the same re a spot in the 13 rather than the 10 (big difference!) and also that Daws incorrectly referred to Ingles as a 5 in negotiations. Reliable source.

thanks isaac, got no quams if a person puts a name to the comment least gives it some cred, and offering him a spot in the 13 is ludicrouse. and i guess you can forgive dawes making a mistake like that remember hes come from 20 years of tennis administration

Assuming rumours are correct re Daws referring to Ingles as a 5 in contract negotiations, I don't necessarily agree that all should be forgiven.

If there is truth to this rumour it is again a surprise that Nagy has not picked up on it as he has loved playing the part of whistle-blower in the past and hard to believe that such a story would have escaped him.

If true, it just highlights that a person involved in tennis administration for 20 years shouldn't be involved in negotiations other than from a purely financial background. Not Daws' fault. I'm sure he doesn't profess to be a Joe Dumars' style architect of a NBL championship franchise. The fault is a result of the process.

If 36ers were serious about wanting Ingles (which I don't believe they were given log jam of SFs and SGs) then Smyth/Breheney and even Maher as captain should have been in Ingles/Ingles' parents + his agent's ear.

Again, I don't know how much contact the coaching staff had with Ingles but I do know that having Smyth and Maher rock up at your house would be a damn sight more influential than an administrator turning up and telling you that you would make a good back-up centre when you play guard.

I value and respect Nash's contributions to the 36ers. The guy has struggled through numerous rehabs to assist the 36ers.

However, the question has to be asked as to whether his spot and minutes would have been better spent on Ingles who could have a further 15 years in the league as opposed to Nash who has struggled with injury during the latter years of his career.

I don't think it's unreasonable to forgive someone coming from another background and getting a player position wrong, but remember that this is a person leading negotiations for the roster next year. You can't talk about Ingles being a centre and send out a contract with his name spelt incorrectly because as trivial as those elements are, they don't really add anything positive to the chances of wooing a player.

I don't know the specifics of how other clubs negotiate with free agents, but I can't imagine that it's always as separated as our arrangement - e.g., Smyth submitting a wishlist and the club CEO negotiating with agents. Why the coach and CEO can't co-host those negotiations, I don't quite know. In the past, I suspect spite came into play, but there comes a time when you have to co-operate in the interests of the team.

Update: Well, Stephon has beaten me to a few of the points!

Fair enough management can negotiate with agent re terms of contract.

However, why would CEO be involved in direct negotiations (ie come play for the 36ers, you will make a great back-up centre, yada yada).

That surely has to be the role of Smyth + Breheney.

In Ingles' case where the contract is dictated by league rules re rookies, I don't see any reason why our CEO should have been involved in negotiations period.

If Smyth convinced him to become a 36er, the contract stage should have been nothing more than a rubber stamp process.

Looking to confirm relatively solid tips that both Nash and Holmes are also leaving - as the offers made are for 1 year only and at money under what they WILL get for playing elsewhere?

It seems as if 36ers will attempt to operate well under the salary cap which seems a little self defeating?

With Dusty gone as well, do we think we will we be able to field a competitive team?

I will say it again.
We will be like Carlton in the AFL for the next 3 years.

You've got to spend money to make money. If the Sixers are not spending up to the salary cap, then they are not on an even playing field with the other teams. To top this, since the problems with BASA and the government taking control, there is job insecurity. The one year contracts being offered is evidence of this. How attractive is this current situation to any potential recruits. Dusty left because of this, who now in their right mind would want to fill his shoes? I also get the impression from other Sixers that in the past their loyalty would have brought them back. They now would not think twice about deserting their team for a better offer (not just the money). As passionate as I have been in the past and ready to renew my season ticket before knowing what team we have, I now think differently. The club is now going to have to work hard to get my renewal this year.

At least the AFL have a system in place where the Carlton's of this world can achieve success again in a relatively short period of time (St Kilda), the NBL doesn't and isn't in hurry to assist any club that is low on talent and money.

Lets start whinging and complaining in October when round 1 tips off and we haven't managed to recruit any player to the Sixers program. When the Sixer are sitting in the bottom 3 with very little chance of getting out that when it time to complain and whinge. Last few year everyone has been saying the same doom and gloom about a poor season if it actually comes into fruitions next season then complain and whinge.

At the moment is only speculation and hearsay that player have not accepted offers and recruits are never going to accepted any offer, if you are so certain about players leaving or not accepting the current offer given put your full name so everyone (including the player in question) know who is starting or spreading the rumours.

At them moment if you are posting under the alias as 'ammoniums' you're a nobody just like I am, if your actually someone in the know, put your nama to it or accept someone calling you a liar or simply someone know is just trying to start crap.

#74451 - What constitutes being "in the know", other than the "in the know" who posts?

The information I am getting seems to be relatively "on the money" as it has come from someone closely associated with the organisation... albeit someone who is owed plenty of money, but then they are a one of many to whom BASA owes plenty of money...

Its just that the stories about player offers, players futures, coaches future that are now coming out of the Dome are all pretty consistent...

for BASA it is just survival I guess, but cutting back on shoring up what makes them their money e.g. the players, just seems a strange counterweight to what they were asked to do - turn the organisation around...

Any chance the money tap(cash) has dried up since the new admin has taken over.
Players can't complain if under the table payments are gone can they.Players vote with their feet.

Looking to confirm relatively solid tips that both Nash and Holmes are also leaving - as the offers made are for 1 year only and at money under what they WILL get for playing elsewhere?

Have heard that Nash has had interest from another club and that Holmes has had significant interest including maybe an offer which is a substantial upgrade on the Sixers gig. Have not heard anything all that solid yet to suggest that they're leaving, but obviously it can't be ruled out.

Joe M, I've put my name to this as I always do, so think of that what you will.

I haven't heard anything to suggest that the club won't spend the cap so I don't think it's worth getting worked up about that. I don't think they're making cuts all over the place at all - Holmes' offer wouldn't be less than last year, Forman's isn't less than last year. Rychart's reportedly was but you must understand that it was realistically their best chance to improve the team and it's just unfortunate that it sees the departure of a hardworking, crowd favourite. And even had they put together a better offer, they wouldn't have matched Brisbane so it's a bit of a distraction in these discussions IMO.

also ranns? Cutting Dusty doesn't mean they're necessarily looking to operate under the cap - it gives them an import spot and some money to use. Maher/Farley/Cooper/Hill are signed. Holmes had an option, so wouldn't be offered less than 05/06. Forman has been offered more. I've mentioned the Dusty situation a tonne of times. That leaves Nash (not on big money), Rees (neither), Hambour (neither). e.g., if they get their import and maybe the back-up point, it's impossible for them to get too far under the cap if the rest in the roster are pretty much minimum-wage players.

Indiana - most of the current crop of players would not have been used to under-the-table payments anyway. I've never heard anything since Oscar and Jacob joined the team to imply that Adelaide had cheated the cap - so that would cover Holmes, Forman, Nash, Hill, Cooper, Hambour. We know Dusty's gone. No other departures have been confirmed. If someone like Holmes or Forman go, it would largely be because another team offered more - that's it.

I would be worrying about Hill when he comes out of contract. If he's not getting enough opportunities behind Maher and Farley, I could really see him moving on - anyone agree?

Isaac

You are one of the very few exceptions to the rule that actually does post under his or her real name; it is in your best interest to be seen as someone who has credibility and post the facts that are true. Not to been as sucking up but anything you post it has to been as the truth

Posting under the alias 'Anonymous' can be anyone (even if they actually someone) and if they post something negative that doesn't install much confidence in their credibility reading a negative post.

Even if the post is 100% factual; are they doing the best thing for the sport of basketball or the Sixer organization in posting it if they cannot put there name to it?

Given that this will next season will be Brad Hill 3rd year in the NBL (2nd full year) and the 3rd consecutive year Brett Maher has had a major injury concern to his legs in the second half of the year.

The question had to be asked if Brett Maher plays more than 35 mins a night next season. Brad Hill had to put in a big season with Eastern and then a huge pre season and demand approximately 30 mins a night but saying that Phil also has to reward him if he shows that commitment to his game.

If Phil continues to play Brett and he breaks down with out increasing Brad Hill court time he has every reason to look for a better situation.

Joe without meeting you or knowing you are real person to me JoeM is just like me posting as tony blair or someone posting as any other nickname.

Some on here are very in the know and of course many who read here daily are very well connected.

this constant debate about putting up under your name or not at all is absolute crap.

I'd actually believe a lot of the anon posts before some of the other 'named' posts. cause often the anon posters have the inside information and for obvious reasons do not want to 'out' themselves.

but of course you will twist that which ever way you and others who harp on it will.

its been said before so many times there are reasons why some post as anon.

Tony Blair, you may not post under your real name but anyone who does not know you personally is none the wiser that you post under Tony Blair. Atleast people posting under nicknames can be distinguised by that nickname and if posters are honest, they will not "steal" a nickname to cause confusion. However, posting under "Anonymous" is less distinguishing because there are many with the same name. If you are posting facts, its fair enough that you don't want to be identified, but if you are posting rubbish, then I have no time for all these anonymous's.

Isaac, you say "And even had they put together a better offer, they wouldn't have matched Brisbane so it's a bit of a distraction in these discussions IMO." All we know for a fact is that Brisbane offered a 2-3 year contract. The fact that Adelaide could not match this without taking into consideration the salary side, leaves the security being offered by the club a lot to be desired. Why is it only offering 1 year contracts? Do they know the club won't exist in 1 year's time?

Apart from Maher and Farley who are signed on for next season, I am really excited about the other 2. WOW, I can't wait for next season. It can't come soon enough. I can see really positive steps being made to next season (haha, even if I am the only one laughing).

Joe M, you'll find that Stephon will agree with you strongly there - Maher playing 40 minutes means that he misses games later in the season and that starts to cause problems. Play him 35 and give Brad Hill 20 minutes - he's shown that he can do pretty well if given the time. If he needs to accommodate a Davidson-type coming in, then go small and play a bit of Farley at the 3, move Holmes to the 4, etc. Like Farley, I think Hill needs to have his leash loosened.

EC - I don't know why exactly but it would have something to do with the government's control right now you'd think. With that uncertainty it is also reasonable IMO for the club to offer single year contracts - it'd be a little unfair for a club knowing that upheaval could be due to offer 2-3 year deals to players knowing that they might not be able to meet those terms. I wouldn't assume that Brisbane know what a cap is either.

I think you could do worse than have Maher, Farley, Cooper and Hill signed. I'd bet that Smyth would prefer Hill to be more of a point guard than a scorer but I think those four are all deserving of a position.

That's exactly my point. There is no security in taking a 1 year contract under the current Sixer's situation. Everyone knows it might be the only year they get. What would happen if the Sixers collapsed in the next 12 months. All of a sudden there would be 12 players without a team all trying to get contracts elsewhere. With Hunter going down this year, we are lucky that there is a new team starting out in Melbourne and also the license going to Singapore. This means there are opportunities for now. Unless new teams start up next season, what opportunities will there be for the Adelaide 36ers unemployed? That's why if the opportunity is there now to move on, they will move on.

Also an extra team in the league, even with retirements, rookies coming in and Heal/Drmic/Ryan returning, means that the quality of the league may reduce just slightly because of the spread of opportunities.

People have talked in the past about Adelaide having an advantage in cost of living comparisons with a city like Sydney, but consider Singapore and their lower tax rate - very attractive!

Notwithstanding the discussions on who and how the roster might be improved, the process and rumours still don't ring true...

If BSA have determined that they can 'only' offer 1 year deals, beyond the existing agreements, it seems a reasonable assumption that the Controller has determined the business can go forward?

It also seems reasonable that the decision involves NOT selling the team?

So, if that decision has been made then it stands to reason you would plan a team that can deliver some success, however relative that might be?

If that is the case then are the decisions 'correct' from the teams perspective, as there is a decision making process supporting the 'odd' rumours about who is staying and who is going, as the Ingles schemozzle also suggests?

So, why not now chase down the key players such as a dominant centre?

I imagine that decisions on the playing roster will have a MAJOR impact on other revenues - tickets, sponsorship, catering etc. ; so again, if they have made the decision to continue, surely you start on some line from where the revenue is likely to come from?

Dropping low paid players is one thing, but how this improves the team is not obvious?

This coming season is a unique situation for the Sixers. We don't know what the Controllers have in mind. Whether they want the business to succeed or not is still going to be a risk for any potential recruits. If indeed Adelaide becomes a more successful team this coming season which strengthens it for the future, it will be here later on for anyone interested in joining. For now, regardless of what the intentions are, it is risky.

I guess the point is that if there is going to be a next season, it makes no sense to limp into it with 'half a team' that can't win?

I just can't imagine anyone of either the Government, the sponsor, the player or the fan taking the punt on such a season can you?

Unless of course, the contingent liability of paying out the contracts for Maher, Smyth, Farley, Breheny, Holmes, Hill etc. say an amount of around $800k for their additional seasons will or does 'outweigh' the loss in terms of completing the season e.g. 'losing' less than the $1.2 million alleged to have been lost last season?

Still just feels half baked?

Agree with Isaac. Not panic station stage by any stretch of the imagination.

We already have a fantastic back-court inked for next season in Maher, Farley and Hill.

There are plenty of Aussie bigs still on the free agent list or in Europe in Cullen, Burston, Moore, Pero, Pennisi, Helliwell, Kingma that would all be able to split minutes with Cooper should we choose to look for an Aussie big man.

If we re-sign Holmes, Nash and Forman that leaves 2 vacant roster spots with plenty of cap space to burn for an impact import.

Even if we lost one of the above forwards we would still have a couple of legit NBL forwards with even more cap space.

Not only that but as alluded to above, we can always go small and play Hill, Maher and Farley at the same time.

My thoughts are that it will be a relatively slow off-season.

We will try to re-sign our own free-agents in Holmes and Forman.

Then we will try to sign a role player such as Brad Davidson or target one of the Australian big men referred to above.

We will then hold out until NBA summer leagues begin and try to unearth an impact type import.

The quality of the import will dictate whether we return to the top 4 or whether we slide into the bottom half.

We don't necessarily need an import centre either . Nothing wrong with the following line-up that is certainly attainable cap wise:

Cullen/Cooper
Holmes/Forman
Import such as Wethers/Nash
Farley, Hill
Maher, ABA PG

alternatively

Import centre/Cooper
Holmes, Cullen
Forman, Nash
Farley, Hill
Maher, ABA PG

About as good a team as you can have in the NBL without cheating.

Has anyone read Boti's article in today's paper titled "Stars giving Sixers the cold shoulder". I think he has summed up beautifully what appears to be happening. I talked about the attraction for potential recruits to come to Adelaide in an earlier post. I feel that the doom and gloom being referred to in this thread is more realistic than people think. Whatever moves are made by the club right now need to be extremely carefully planned. They definitely need to go after an import as Australians are boycotting this team. Wouldn't it be shameful for South Australian Basketball if it could not field an NBL team in a capital city when there are several successful regional teams in Australia? This sort of reasoning does not sit well with me and should not be tolerated by any Basketball lover in this state.