AJ16
Last year

Changes to ‘All-NBL’ selection criteria

The NBL have changed their 'All-NBL' selection criteria from dedicated inside/outside to ‘top 5’ regardless of position.

Not sure how I feel about it, the NBL in recent years seems to rehash everything the NBA changes..... however as we’ve seen with the NBA they make changes and then the league trends back (front and back court in the all star game due to lack of centres and now the league is swimming in them!).

NBL should stop tinkering with this kind of stuff ….. if anything bring back the jump ball!

MVP award should be a round by round award, much like the Brownlow! Combination of coaches, media and umpires votes.

Topic #51620 | Report this topic


Dunkman  
Last year

It's a joke surely, you’ll end up with five point guards, it’s ridiculous. Refs and designated commentators should also vote on mvp, every round, it’s not a popularity contest, it should be best player throughout the season.

Reply #931365 | Report this post


LC  
Last year

Very poor decision by the NBL IMO.

We can now have an ALL-NBL team of guards...

Reply #931367 | Report this post


Pablo Escobar  
Last year

Garbage decision. And yes, it should be round by round voting for the MVP and be transparent, similar to the Brownlow.

Reply #931370 | Report this post


LC  
Last year

Should effectively also now be renamed:

ALL-NBL TOP FIVE
ALL-NBL SECOND FIVE

there is no longer a team concept involved.

Reply #931373 | Report this post


Kev  
Last year

Is this showing the business doesn't have crisis management principles in place. The work experience kid must be thinking this is a train wreck, the idea is stupid. However despite everyone in the game slapping their forehead, no one has told the decision maker, so therefore the train crash just has to happen.

Reply #931389 | Report this post


BigD  
Last year

If only people realised that even the Euroleague has had position less voting since 2011...

People will complain about anything these days.

Reply #931393 | Report this post


koberulz  
Last year

Positions haven't meant anything in basketball in years.

Reply #931398 | Report this post


LC  
Last year

I have never seen a team at pro level run 5 guards with any success...

Reply #931399 | Report this post


Bored  
Last year

What I don't understand with this is why still maintain the voting process for NBL first team? If there are no positions and no need for it to resemble an actual team.. shouldn't it just be the top 5 from the MVP voting make the ALL NBL first team???

Reply #931403 | Report this post


Zodiac  
Last year

Another poor decision much like last year opening up ROTY award to Next Star guys. Who keeps coming up with crap like this? Imagine, the NBL being a smaller league we end up with five guards in the first-team? It would make a mockery of the league.

Reply #931406 | Report this post


koberulz  
Last year

Another poor decision much like last year opening up ROTY award to Next Star guys.
There was no RotY last year, and Next Stars had always been eligible for RotY when it did exist.

Reply #931407 | Report this post


Silent Observer  
Last year

Next is genderless

Reply #931420 | Report this post


AussiePride  
Last year

You could in reality have both. Essentially now you have the 5 best players or 10 if you include the 2nd 5. In addition you could have the best team and the second best team with a focus in selecting a balanced outfit covering all positions that is essentially an all star starting 5 for the league.

Reply #931423 | Report this post


McBlurter  
Last year

All-NBl just becomes;

1st in MVP voting
2nd in MVP voting
to
5th.

I would assert 'Team' in 'All-NBL team' is what should attempted to be constructed.

What would have the 90's looked like?
Gaze
Grace
McClain
Loggins
McDonald

Reply #931424 | Report this post


Anonymightymouse  
Last year

Not quite, because the voting systems are different.

I think the way the NBL had it wasn't ideal, and this method isn't ideal either. I think a better balance would have been voters could select either 2 x frontcourt and 3 x backcourt, or vice versa with 3 x frontcourt and 2 x backcourt.

That way in a year where Cooks, Creek and Pinder were all standouts, all of them could make it, and in a season where Doyle, Cotton and Goulding are standouts they can all make it while still having a balanced 'team'.

Reply #931428 | Report this post


Yup  
Last year

2 + 2 and a wild card

The team should resemble (somewhat) a team.

This is top 5, second 5

Reply #931431 | Report this post


Perthworld  
Last year

Another unnecessary change for the sake of change. Be better NBL.

Reply #931444 | Report this post


koberulz  
Last year

It's not "for the sake of change", nor was the RotY change last year. It comes after years of dumb debates about eligibility that proved the criteria were nonsensical. All-NBL discussion for years has been about who qualifies as inside and outside and the vagaries of it all, rather than about the ability of the players under consideration.

Reply #931446 | Report this post


RobT  
Last year



Anonymightymouse wrote, " I think a better balance would have been voters could select either 2 x frontcourt and 3 x backcourt, or vice versa with 3 x frontcourt and 2 x backcourt."

An obvious compromise, how about 2 frontcourt, 2 backcourt, plus 1 other.

Reply #931454 | 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: 4:30 pm, Mon 22 Apr 2024 | Posts: 968,026 | Last 7 days: 754