Hoops

6ers have no reason to be a bad team

I'm another one who really thinks the crap Brad Hill cops on this forum has no grounds other than certain people just not liking the guy. I was there last game against Cairns and when Hill spent most of his time on court (1st & 3rd periods) the 36ers were winning rather easily. Hill scored 9 of our first 11 points of the game and was almost single handed in keeping the team in front of the Taipans at that point. In the 3rd he combined very well with Shannon & Johnson and we actually built up to an 18 point lead at one stage before going into the last break up by 15. Suddenly the 6 or 7 players mostly used be Clarke in the 3rd, including Hill, who got us that lead were sitting on the bench in the last period and by the time Hill, Johnson, Ballinger etc got back into the game for some quality minutes, the horse had bolted and the Taipans confidence was soaring and Adelaide just didn't have the defensive players to stop them scoring. It also helped the Taipans cause that the 36ers have this great inability to penetrate a zone defense to save themselves, hence we only scored 7 lousy points and the snakes scored 27.

But seriously, give the guy a break. Brad Hill may not be our best player week in, week out, but he's far from out worst performer.

When you look at the teams/individuals state there is one glaring stat that clearly shows why this team finds it hard to win. We have only 1 current player on the roster scoring at over 10 points a game (Ballinger @ 15.8ppg. Next best is Eddie Shannon on 9.7). If the team is not scoring points, it will have a hard time winning anything.

Let's face it, good teams win on the road. Looking at the last few seasons, teams in the top 4 have won 84% at home and 55% on the road. For those outside top 4, it is 55% and 24%.

Not including this season, I have the Sixers at 67% and 27% over the last 7 seasons. We have always been woeful on the road (25%, 31%, 31%, 24%, 33%, 20%, 21%) and 9% this year. Our weakness has been hidden by great home performances, but it about time to talk about the elephant in the room.

The Sixers need to win 30% more games to see any finals action, and the away games are where we need to start. At this level, basketball is 90% mental and if they haven't already, I believe they need to get the sports pysch in to get them out of the rut.

And I agree Isaac. As I said earlier, I was on the Hill-bashing band wagon for the last two seasons.

However, he's improved significantly since last year in alot of areas I used to complain about. Even though his listed +/- has been steady, it doesn't truly represent his improvement.

Guess to summarise, +/- is a good calculation of their affect on the team as a whole, but mis-represents their individual efforts.

My comments were more towards the Black Hole that Balls has against him rather than Hill.

The season we had Schenscher Bruce Hodge , we won about 9 straight at home and lost about 9 straight on the road. A Championship team at home that couldn't win away. That was frustrating.

While Cornesy said , last nite, on radio that probably part of the lack of success for basketball
netball and perhaps soccer , - is the lack of player loyality.. - where it's hard to follow with the players moving on , every year.

True Isaac, but you can still be the only contributing factor to a team on the court and get a negative simply because of the efforts the rest of the team put in.

While I agree in a normal situation over 20+ games you could take into account the +/-, at the rate Marty subs players in game, I tend to lean towards my way of thinking.

But still, I don't really believe the Eff. stat tells you everything about how a player is really going, just as there isn't a stat for hustle and effort and being a defensive lockdown on a player.

Back to the +/-, if you had to blame anything on Balls' large sinkhole on the stat, I'd blame the lack of any 2nd offensive threat on the team to that. We've seen in enough games when someone like Howard, Shannon or Ng go off, that Ballinger usually equals or beats their score due to the lapse in defence.

If he was to get another offensive threat, like a 2008 Bruce or Schensher (or dare I say.... Hodge) then that stat would be alot lower, if not a low positive.

Your mumma, that stat may well be right. But when checking the league leaders in turnovers I noted that Will Blalock apparently plays for Adelaide, which makes me somewhat concerned about the accuracy of the rest.

your mumma
He is not ranked 3rd in steals.

Not a lotta difference between Bruce and Howard
Carter and Shannon.
Carter/Bruce not at their peak with time outta the game n injuries.

I used to say, on here , a few seasons ago , that fans don't see the best of Hill.
Played better away, than home, and we had Schenscher,Hodge etc. for 11 and 3 at home and 3 and 11 away.

Isaac, sorry; but I'm not a believer in the efficiency system for Basketball. Just doesn't set right that someone can be brought on for 30 seconds during a 10-0 run and walk of with -10 for the night just because of the timing of the sub. It doesn't reflect the talent level properly nor how they play.

Big Sexy, the hate wasn't that he wasn't scoring so much; for me it was alot of the little things. He'd have an open layup and he'd put too much effort on it and miss. Something you'd expect him to make 10/10. He also took alot of shots from the arc he just didn't get near on (lots of airballs). And he had quite a number of situations where he would bring the ball up the court and make a poor decision and cause a turnover.

Since last year, he's making more shots; contested shots at that; he's a better perimeter shooter than last season and he's either up the far end of the court when posession starts or he plays smarter when bringing it up the court.

While the Efficency stat says he's been consistent; the play and stats say otherwise. That's why I say he's probably the most improved.

Isaac, I think this needs to be banded into all the other threads to make the "Ultimate Sixers whinge thread".

I was a Hill hater for the previous 2 seasons because he wasn't do anything useful with the time on court he was given. With the extra minutes this season, even I have to say he's improved. Better scorer, finishes the majority of his layups now; good rebounder if he's in a position to.

From a direct look, Ng and Hill have been the most improved players on the team this year; even I notice an improvement on Balls Post defence. It's still not the best, but he's getting better.

I just can't believe how many 6er fans hate on Brad Hill.

The facts are that Hill has been one of the shining lights on what has been an otherwise disappointing season. He has improved his decision making under Clarke and therefore increased his effectiveness when on court.

Isaac has run a heap of numbers from this season that support Hill's importance and positive contribution to the team.

I'm not suggesting that others cannot have an opinion otherwise, however put up some compelling facts to support your claims against Hill.

If the Sixers cut Brad Hill you could almost guarantee that he would come back to Adelaide on another team and kill you every game and then maybe you would realize that life after Brad Hill isn't what all the whingers and complainers made it out to be ;)