Member clubs have the right to be in div1 and div2. If your club is strong in that age group, their div3 team would probably be competitive, if not definitely better than some div2 teams. So it's up to the players and families if they want to stay in a strong div3 team or go to another club and be in the div1/2 squad. A few years back I remember Sturt had 2 div 2 teams in under 18s and they finished top 2. IMO, their loss. Doubt any went on with their career yet could have if they changed clubs. North has become a monster atm in terms of numbers and teams. Why penalise the club for being successful. But on the other hand, you would like to see an even competition, so kids should be encouraged to seek other opportunities elsewhere. Who does that though, coaches want to keep winning so don't want to lose best players, JDO's keep their jobs if overall club is successful. Should poaching be allowed in lower divs, could a div1 coach be lawfully able to openly approach a div3 player and put an offer to them. They shouldn't be allowed to do it to 1/2 players at another club to stop "super teams" developing, but we all know them and players do it now all the time anyway.

Sturt Norwood and North are in an arms race running around trying to poach and stockpile all the big junior talent in Metro/Country SA so they can compete at Dandenong/Eltham and Melbourne Classics.
They couldn't care less about district Adelaide junior basketball. That’s why the results at Nationals never hold up, local comp is weakened and crippled by poaching.

Interesting theories. In my experience, these clubs do very little poaching. In fact the club that systemically poached this year was a certain club in Green and Yellow. But all good, if they didn't they would probably have been just about shutting the doors this year. It is good to see them getting some wins on the board and doing well for once.

Other interesting theory is that a talent imbalance weakens the competition, thwarts performance at nationals and hampers talent development. The fact is it is just the reality and decades have proven it. Age groups that have a team or 2 stacked with the bulk of the talent tend to have better results at National Championships and more numbers going on to play at higher levels than when the talent is evenly spread. THere are a whole lot of reasons for this which I won't list here but I just wanted to clear up your assertions based on your false reality.

#283

Spot on with both points.

Some of the strong clubs have very strong Div2 teams which could easily be middle of the pack in the Div1 competition. So what is better for both those teams - for each kid to be actually on the court for 25 minutes lets say each week against some ok teams and some poor teams with only a real challenge occurring once a month or to train against each other for 3 hours a week. You don't need to be Einstein to work out which group will develop best.

Forget Sturt North Norwood or whoever, heartland of Adelaide basketball is in the South
Bradtke was born there, Schensher Ingles, Creek played there, all NBA.
Add Olbrich who is at NBA Global Academy and the only realistic chance of making it big from the current crop of Adelaide players and you have all the evidence needed
Sturt Norwood North etc all talk and hype it up, but Southern Tigers and the region have the NBA talent history in SA.

Southern LOL

Do you even have a girls program? How long until the Tigers are forced to merge again to stay alive due to arrogance and self destruction?

Is it correct U10s cancelled?

I would not trust a thing you read on Hoops.com.au. Check with your club.

NCT, no Olbrich did not.
Was there briefly in about u12.

Some great there from the past. BUT clinging to names like Mark Bradtke who would have played at NCT around 40 yrs ago wreaks of desperation. If there had been sustained success in growth and development then maybe they would have relevance to this conversation.

Much respect to all these guys and also the Bev Chapman's of the world who supported their journey, development of their love of the game and growth as juniors though but has almost no relevance to Southern now. And if South is a destination club I really feel for the players in the South.

Great to see Olbrich (he has a chance for sure) doing well but let's see a bigger sample size before we get excited about Southern's great program.

Those players were Tigers juniors and or born in the southern region
Where's all the other clubs NBA players? That’s right there are none
Tigers good club, few crooks there in the past, got rid of them on the right track with Scholes running the club

Paul Roger's drafted by Lakers, north / norwood.

Do you really think poaching by Norwood and North of Southern or South is impacting Southern and South. How many parents have travelled from down south to up north for trainings etc. Hey good theory but where are the facts?

'485, if only the quality of Southern's current coaches reflected that sentiment.

^ dude you need to get out more

Interesting points but players have always moved around and will continue to move around.

Parents as opposed to clubs are mostly responsible and good luck to them. Most of the transfers relate to parents being unhappy (whether fair or unfair). Might be a clash with a coach, parent, between kids and they start to consider their options.

Once that happens they inevitably decide to go to one of the clubs they deem to be successful or nearby.

Happens every year.

You bring up the u18 boys case study but even Southern's best three players in u18s all played elsewhere earlier in their junior careers. Good luck to them. Freedom of choice in going where each family wants at any given time. Great that they found a place to be successful.

In an ideal world parents and players would be more resilient and stay where they started but if they aren’t happy then they are hardly creating history in transferring.

Just have to look at the transfer list year by year to see each and every club gain and lose players.

Sixer, wow. So much misguidance there. If a poor parent is being guided by you I suggest they do the opposite to what you tell them.

Go out and watch the top 3 teams training (no indictment on those clubs just looking at the ladder) in U14 D1 boys. Then go and watch the bottom 3 train. You will see these are VASTLY different sessions. That's 4 hours a week of vastly different sessions with great players, with common goals.

Not only are the sessions vastly different the wants, needs and desires of the kids are vastly different.

Your suggestion about robots is based on 70s/80s premise that kids succeed because of their knowledge of x's and o's. You must be one of those guys that constantly look at "IQ" guys then wonder why your guys consistently get passed by. Kids don't succeed on "IQ". They succeed by learning to execute skills in game situations and making decisions against high-level players that will push them, developing a love for the game in an environment that develops their aspirations, with like minded peers.

Often (not always) only parents are willing to coach the teams that are going to be pounded by 60 pts week in and week out.

Your other specifics have so many flaws and mistruths I can't be bothered going into it.

Sixers, kids/parents don't move if they are happy. Do a better job and your kids will stop leaving.

516 - that is only part of the issue.

I think basketball has more conflict at a player/parent level than other team sports that is unfortunately conducive to player movement.

Coaching styles, court time, role, shots, relationship with other players and between parents and importantly relationships with the coach are all factors.

One kid might leave as they want to go to a team where they score 30.

Another kid might leave a situation where they are a main player to play with better players.

Impossible to please everyone.

There is never a simple/easy answer or one rule fits all. One family may love a particular coach and club and another might not.

There is a huge difference between "player movement" and poaching. If players aren't playing div1 at their current club and get offered a div1 opportunity elsewhere, that’s player movement and there’s nothing wrong with that.
Poaching is where “bigger” clubs & programs prey on top end talent from smaller clubs.
Best example of this is North Boys div1 18s last year poaching the big Centre from Centrals.
Everyone was told the Rockets would sweep all before them, win everything in sight, undefeated etc the GOATS part 7 according to Jantke (history will say they won nothing) they had 3 huge future COE players....a team of champions that couldn’t be moulded into a champion team.
Central were coached by the best junior coach in SA Sapwell, had patiently built a strong list that was ready to peak and were looming as a genuine threat.
So North go and poach Centrals biggest and most important player....whisper all the college NBA best coaching blah blah crap in his ear
North didn’t need him, just wanted to weaken Central, which weakens the overall competition.
That’s the type of shit that needs to be outlawed in juniors, not player movement.

Centrals were nowhere near a genuine threat last year.
It was always a two horse race, and Centrals were not one of them.

I think someone needs to clubs like Woodville and see where some of their players come from

or the 40 odd North Adelaide Warriors.

Centrals didn't have a legitimate chance. Forestville even beat them at state champs. The kid involved had/has a huge ego. Even quit on north on eve of finals, (very cranky Jantke after that call) apparently only went there for classics. Decides to go back to Centrals because thinks he's gods gift and will walk into mens team. Dousnt make team so goes to Norwood I believe now, actually could be anywhere that plays to his ego.
Woodville go out and recruit/poach a lot of African kids, no way Berry goes to a bad team, slightly behind Jantke in that respect.
BSA are a joke in all of this. Unless a coach is caught red handed, they don't know what to do. Should nearly be a zoning system like footy had/has and kid has to show good reason to go to another club, in which case the original club should get compensation. State is totally corrupt, state coaches should not be coaching the same age level to prevent poaching. How many kids make a move just in off chance they can gain favours with powers that be. Don't we have a high performance coach. How about they earn their money and actually coach the state teams without being a member of a club. Look at bullets and Lemanis, how many guys did he dodgily pickup being the Australian coach?

531 not a good example at all.

It has already been addressed above but that kid was at north trials the year and was offered div 2 and didn't move.

He then trialled following year with Woodville and was all set to go there but ultimately didn’t.

God knows how many other teams he trialled with or talked to before ending up at north but for whatever reason he was hell bent on leaving centrals.

Now he’s at his third club in 12 months.

Another example of player movement of a disgruntled player.

Most are the same.

I remember a few years ago when the best non-Sturt guard on SA junior bball joined an already loaded Sturt classics winning team.

It happens and will continue to happen and most of the reasons families move clubs in division 3 equally apply in division 1.

Division 1 is often worse with conflict due to 9 or 10 players with parents thinking their kid is hard done by with court time or role.

Very rare for any club/coach to have 10 happy players and families at div 1 level.

That reality results in most of the player movements.

WOW! A lot of discussions here about kids playing sport by anonymous men.

You guys do realise that last year there was minor thing called CovID that interrupted the running of a piece of dirt called Earth. I think basketball comps and club programs may have been affected by this "minor" hiccup.

I'd say any examples to add weight to arguments of super teams being ideal or not or discussions on results is irrelevant. It was a once-in-a-generation pandemic.

Now go back to your thumb sucking, trolling, throwing darts at pictures of your most hated kids that play or volunteer coaches.

^ having a go at anonymous posters having a crack whilst posting anonymously having a crack. Genius!

545 anyone you're not mad at? Chill.

90% of what you just typed is absolute BS.

When the state only has 10 teams and half are trash then there are only a few clubs kids can move too. When the options are so poor and limited then it's always going to be the usual suspects either "poaching" or losing players. Until SA basketball expands expect more of the same.

Zoning system is a great idea. Make it like footy, where clubs share a zone so that we still have competition.

For example north eastern suburbs Norwood and North share a zone. A kid has a choice of going to either club. Western suburbs West and Woodville. South and Sturt share a zone. South overlaps with Southern a bit and Forestville overlaps with a couple of zones.

Divide it up and let clubs compete without worrying about big clubs taking players.

If we don't zone these arguments are going to keep happening over and over again.

Jeez imagine being allocated to the zone of your club. I'd go play another sport. Zoning is DEFINATELY not a positive way to service athletes. It is a great way to not service them infact.

"Zoning system is a great idea" LOL

Dismiss it all you want but what's the problem with being in a zone when you get to choose from 3 clubs.

Let's say you live at Mitchell Park and have a choice between Sturt, South and Forestville. Is that really not enough choice?

If I am a boy why would you force me to go to Sturt for good player development and experience? What if I want to go to Norwood? Nope not interested.

It is not about serving committees and coaches, who want to force better players to play with their children to the detriment of the better players. Do what serves participants best not what serves you best. Provide a great service and in time your club will get stronger by players making a free choice to play for you.

Well if you don't want to zone fair enough but can't complain when players move clubs. It's a free for all then and forgot complaining about poaching.

Easy solution in SA
Southern Tigers Eastern Mavericks and Central Lions are primarily SA Country clubs, let them have their regions to invest in and develop players free of the threat of poaching.
Let the other 7 Metro clubs sort it out between themselves, plenty of players to choose from, develop through club and school programs and geographically close.
A club like Eastern has been smashed by Sturts poaching over the years.
BSA are happy to sit back and watch it happen because it's a Sturt based organisation.

Eastern juniors train about 8 times a season. Nobody would follow zoning from the country. Clubs would improve by offering a better product.

Both. Every case is different.

The only reason kids/parents move from Eastern in the first place is that the development is less than impressive. They can see no future whatsoever and thats the truth. It doesn't have to be Sturt, in fact other clubs have taken in disillusioned Mavs cast offs.

The complete mess that is the junior Promotion system has to result in someone being fired. They clearly are not qualified to run and manage competitions. Pay some decent money and show the members some respect. Get someone in there that knows what they are doing. Please.

my understand is Div 1 & 2 will play GFs while DL divisions play a 10th round.

Followed by a still unclear Nationals/Classics qualifying tournament, I believe is invite only to top 5/6 Div 1 teams from Summer.

Followed by start of winter.

But no idea, as BSA has no calendar available. Just working from what I've heard.