Hoops

Neil Craig = Phil Smyth

Smyth was a good coach, 3 titles in 11 years is a great effort, not many coaches in any sport have a better record than that.

He also built the 2002 team himself, so wasnt just a case of inheriting a good/vetran team who, which some say was the case with the first 2, and the 2002 had some young players like Holmes and Forman in it, so he did bring in young guys, and both of those guys didnt really improve since leaving the Smyth coached 36ers, Forman had a breakout season just this year, years later with a lot of help from McLeods system IMO. So IMO Phil had both of them playing at close to their peak at a fairly young age, so he could coach and develop young talent, and won the 2002 title with a team that many would have picked to miss the playoffs, i doubt anyone had them as favourites.

Yes he missed out on Newley and Ingles the 2 top SA talents, but that wasnt 100% his fault, management played their part in that too.

I do agree in the end he did seem to be over it, probably due to all the BASA/ownership/cash issues, which im sure played a big part in the recruiting process, ie lack of funds to pay the top talent.

IMO Smyth should be remembered as a great coach, if not the best/most successful in 36ers history, he did coach the club to 3/4 of its titles.

Those who knock him saying he cant recruit and develop young talent, Clarke and Ninnis (and Dunlap also in the past) were hired with a better reputation for this, especially Clarke with his AIS background, and many bag them out, so what would people rather? Its the coaches world, no matter what you do, fans will always bag you i guess.

Smyth Vs Craig

Smyth has 3 titles in 11 years, coached an attractive, free flowing, high scoring style of game.

Craig has 0 titles in around 8 years, coaches a rebotic, defensive style of game.

Not that many similarities IMO

Joe, in either coaches case, how do you know it was their fault players didn't develop? There's two sides to development and sometimes a player either isn't that talented, or just doesn't care enough to do the hard work.

With regard to Smyth, I think you might be down on him because you are judging the latter years of his coaching stint. The first five years, Smyth's teams were brilliant. After that, a combination of poor management and massive debts at the club gradually seems to have had an effect on the quality of player we were able to attract.

I'm not sure if it was because Smyth knew the Sixers didn't have the resources for him to assemble teams that could compete for a title, or what it was, but in the last few years as coach, he just didn't seem to have the drive for the job anymore. In the end, I think it was the right decision to make a change when they did.

You can't 'develop' young talent in the NBL, it's all about wins & losses as there is no draft system. In fact if you "bottom out" you could in fact signal the death knell for your club's existence.

So the fact that the team that won the NBL last season did it with mostly young players that club had developed in their own program doesn't throw up any red flags on that theory?

Joe, apart from the obvious fact that Smyth won 3 titles and Craig has done squat, they don't even have similar coaching styles! Craig focusses on defense and a rigid system whereas Smyth was all about offence and letting his players off the leash. There is zero comparison between the two.