Hoops

Ballinger needs to go.

Yes, AB is Balls.

The Ballinger/Johnson combo together is interesting. With this combo, DJ would be 5 and AB #4 - everyone says that's his natural position. One would expect this is when AB shines.

When DJ is on without AB, then his #4 is either Dodwell or Holmes, and the 3 is either Hill or Creek.

Isaac, would you have a +/- on the following combo? DJ, Holmes, Hill, Ng, Carter? (and the time spent on court)

The other combo would be: AB, Holmes, Creek, De Vries, Winder

Balls is an 'excellent' mid-range shooter in a spot-up mould, and a 'good' low post player. His range has been severely tested by the extended 3-point line this year, which has taken away one of his major offensive weapons (31% down from a career 39%).

Around the court, Balls plays as a spot up shooter on set plays or drive and dish passes created for him. Contrast Redhage, who plays a similar game, but who has the mobility to put the ball on the floor to create room for himself or drive to the hoop.

All in all, Ballinger is a good offensive player if you have the pieces around him and do not rely on him to carry the bulk of the scoring load.

But for a 'star', Ballinger unfortunately has a poor basketball IQ. He is a poor passer, and the worst player on the team to have inbounding the ball (he was 2 from 2 in turnovers on Friday when he was inbounding).

His well publicised defensive shortcomings are in my opinion more of an issue with Balls not reading the defensive play, particularly on switching defences. His post defence is not too bad although his on ball defence is atrocious. It has been suggested on here before that the reason he is played as a centre is to get him away from defending quicker PFs, where he is totally lost. I don't know given that I am not a part of the coaching staff, but this makes sense to me.

It would not surprise me if, as 'bring it' infers, a lot of our stagnant offence can also be put down to Ballinger. Again it is hard to say without being in the inner sanctum, but how much of that is to do with Balls himself?

Yes he is our best player, but I am not sure that the call of 'daylight' to the next player is fair. I am not calling for Balls' head, but we need to call a spade a spade.

Isaac, you might find that having Gilchrist and Groves (aka, the ballhogs) cost Burston a fair chunk of time.

He may have scored better if the ball was dished out. We know he's got decent hands and is a fairly good passer. It might be been a good tandom for the Sixers.

Guess it's sometimes a case of wrong combinations at the wrong time.

Bring it, yep. That's the last time we had a decent lineup that allowed Balls to score.

As for the W/L record, it's the best one we've had the whole time, so yes I would relate the lineup to that.

Consider too that Hodge joined up halfway that season. If he had been there since season launch, we would have had a better record.

Keep in mind to that 2007/08 we only lost out on the final game of the season. Cairns had to lose their last game for us to make the finals yet they won.

Otherwise, yes your points are as valid as the next man; however Balls joining the club doesn't mean he's brought on the "voodoo curse" upon us.

Balls isn't the problem. The supporting cast is the problem. I don't mean that they aren't capable players or aren't doing their job, but Ballinger lacks two key things:

A) Plays out of Position.
B) Lacks a 2nd potent scorer to draw attention from him.

With all due respect to the W/L record that has been here since he started; blaming one man for that is plain ignorant. During that same time he's also scored more 30+ppg games than I can count and at least 3-4 games with a 40+ outing.

Still think 2008 was one of our better seasons with Bruce/Balls/Luke. Keep in mind had Carter and Herbert been available that year, we would have been a completely different outfit.

All round better defensive team w/ more scoring potential.

Don't blame the guy who shows passion for playing the game on the court and fire when we're doing well; look at the whole situation and analyse it.

Anon - yeah, fair point. I apologize. I was still extremely frustrated at the Sixer's performance when posting.

I still don't agree that Ballinger needs to go though.

I hope not

I am sorry guys but its not Balls that has to go, he is a great player personally its Bruce that needs to go. For someone with so called experience, every time he steps foot out on the court he looks lost to me, and if he is so good & has experience why did no other club pick him up ?

The problem is that Balls is expected to play as a centre when his natural position is forward. The sixers need a proper centre.

Come on Schench come home

1 qtr that went wrong 2nyt! U guys were killing them!!! U need to support ure team guys!!! U beat us in the 1st game ove the yr, They played sik D that nyt!!! They shoulve continued to play like that every game!!! Sum times the players just dnt wana play. Brian Gorgian? Any wayz as a cats supporter, I really wish u guys come bak!!! At the power house!!! Belive n the team needs its members so they can get to where u guys b long!!!

Didn't bother reading the thread.

Assumed it was still school holidays.

Retards abound.

What! no Hill needs to go, Holmes needs to go, Clarke needs to go, Ng needs to go, Jared Kimber needs to go threads?????

Ballinger is suspect on D - Accepted, Ballinger is on big money - Accepted, Ballinger is one of the best Australian players in the competition - just maybe, Ballinger is the best player on a very weak squad - acceptable enough, Ballinger needs to be surrounded by better players - clearly!!!!.

There is no point singlehandedly pointing out one player. The whole team is on the nose (again!!!) as are the coaches.

Player sackings at season end - Accepted, reduction in existing player salaries - Accepted, new imports and players in 2011/2012 - Accepted, new enthusiasum - Accepted. Clarke has one more year to deliver what he preaches otherwise he'll be looking for a new place of employment around this time next year.