Hoops

Imagine our Boomers with no AFL

This is a great conversation.

One thing that struck out is that the extra SG's would make everyone else better shooters due to the extra competition.

This is one area that has always puzzled me. Look at the amount of guys who go a play basketball at the AIS in their formative teenage years, but still do not shoot the ball with correct fundamentals when they graduate, which leads onto them being poor shooters in actual game play.

One of the areas that hurt the Boomers the most in Turkey last year was their poor outside shooting.

In one of the games vs Spain we shot 1-of-24 from the three-point line.

I think its time the AIS had a full-time shooting coach on board.

Interesting thread this one.

A world without AFL in Australia and trying to work out where Aussie basketball would sit.

Out of all the discussions, one things sticks out for me that that is MEDIA EXPOSURE - especially in the southern and western states.

AFL dominates media coverage everywhere except NSW, ACT & QLD. Take AFL out, other sports have a chance to get a crack. However would the NRL have taken their place instead? Who's to know.

I reckon a few more SG's maybe, might have been on the radar, but maybe that's it?

If there was no netball, I totally agree that our Opals would be even better too!

No rights or wrongs in this argument in any case...all hypotheses...

Butterfly Effect- try this concept for size.

AFL never exits, but we are very good at both rugby codes, cricket and tennis and improving on the world stage in soccer. Basketball sits with baseball, ice hockey and gridiron as one of those American sports.

We should not dismiss the fact that the core philosophies that underpin both Aussie Rules and basketball are very similar, therefore basketball in this country benefits from the presence of Aussie rules.

Perhaps the question should be "how much better would the AFL be if no one in Australia gave a rats toss bag about basketball.

MACDUB, I think the reason people on this thread aren't talking so much about skill level is because we are talking about a world in which AFL doesn't exist. So all those who would have been learning AFL skills, would actually have been learning basketball skills from an early age. Hence they would have the same chance as current basketballers to reach high skill levels.

I also think you underestimate the ability it takes to not just kick and handpass, but to do it consistently well under constant pressure. I particularly admire the ability of AFL rovers to gather the ball in very tight spaces and find an open man through a tiny gap in a fraction of a second. That takes reaction time and a lot of skill!

AFL players also have to pass, shoot and defend. Its different to basketball, but it still requires a lot of skill and experience.

I still think it comes back to the type of athlete you are. The combination of physical traits you need to have a good chance at being a dominant basketballer are just so much rarer than those required to be an elite AFL player.

Ie, you can be a great AFL midfielder at average height (about 5'9) and weight and with average wingspan. The only outstanding attributes for me are stamina, reaction time and to a lesser extent, sprinting speed (nice to have but some under the pack guys aren't that quick).

Contrast this with an elite basketballer and you not only need reaction time and speed, you also need to be able to jump high, and have unusual height and reach. Stamina is the one area I think AFL players need to be better athletes than basketballers.

Alot of posters here are forgetting just how much skill basketball requires.
Sure alot of AFL players would have the strength, speed and physical tools to be a good SG.

But if you don't have skill, those athletic abilities won't be maximised.
You may be able to run fast, but can you run fast whilst dribbling, stop on a dime, and elevate and successfully make a jump shot.

An action like that takes years to perfect. However, Israel Folau is living proof that kicking the ball and handballing can be learnt in the space of one year.

Basketball players and Rugby players (to a lesser extent) can go to AFL. But it doesn't work the other way and it never could.
Basketball requires much more skill IMO.

When people always talk about Basketball, they talk about the ability to shoot, pass, play defence (all skill-based).
When people talk about AFL, they talk about the strength of a player and/or the speed of a player or the fitness of him (based on athletic abilites).

And I agree with the earlier poster--AFL lacks the international component to garner my interest and alot of other peoples interest.
NZ (which usually has a close association with Oz in terms of playing and following similar sports) doesn't care one bit about AFL.(we get an hour of AFL highlights a week on CABLE tv!)

Phil, I disagree that Australia is held back because of height in basketball. We produce a lot of big men -Bogut, Longley, Bradtke, Dorge, Anstey, Jawai, Andersen, Khazzouh, Ogilvy, Nevill, Schenscher, Helliwell.

I also disagree that Bogut does not have a high level of athletic ability compared to most centres in the US. There are almost none with his bulk and height who can explode to the basket and dunk like he can.

Our problem is athleticism in the wing positions. We just don't produce the athletes at these positions that the US does and to a lesser extent, some Euro nations and Argentina in the last decade.

I just don't think there are many AFL players who would have the right physique to be better than the existing, core Boomers.

I don't watch a heap of AFL, but would've said Chris Judd is a good example of a tall midfielder and he is 6'2 - P. Crawford's height.

Most of these guys taller than 6'2, in the AFL, they'd be key position players and ruckmen right? So what you are looking for is AFL key posn players and ruckmen who show high level agility, reaction time and skill level. (If they don't have high agility then they could only be a C or PF in elite basketball and then the min. height req is really 6'6").

Dean Brogan as an example, was always pretty mobile for an AFL big man, but he was never close to being mobile enough to be a decent NBL wing, let alone a Boomer. So you'd need to find key posn players and ruckmen MORE mobile than Dean Brogan was in his prime to even consider them as possible 'lost Boomers'.

I think we're agreed though, that at most you'd get 2-3 extra Peter Crawfords, who would be fringe Boomers at best, unless they are a freakish good shooter like Shane Heal or Brett Maher.

So I would still say no AFL would have minimal impact on Boomers stocks at best.

Phil, you are talking about building up your muscles and bulk to suit the sport you are in. I am talking about phyiscal attributes - length of arms and legs and whether you are naturally a lithe, quick athlete, or one whose frame can take on a lot of extra muscle mass without breaking down and getting injured all the time.

There might be a lot of AFL players out there who would be pretty good basketball players, but how many would have the elite height and length to put them in position to compete with Ingles, Newley, Barlow or even Dellavedova for a Boomers spot?

It would be good if someone had the stats on all AFL players and you could see how many are at least 6'3", with a decent wingspan and quick enough and manoeuvrable to play SG at international level. I think it would a pretty small number myself.

HO has it about right. It is always going to be difficult for an individual to have the right body to be both an ELITE (I'm talking NBL level and up) basketballer AND AFL player.

To be an elite basketballer, you really want to be wiry and long-limbed. But players like that really aren't suited to the hard physical contest of football, where long and wiry = snapped in half or repeated knee recons!

I think the biggest single difference no AFL would make to the Boomers and NBL is simply MEDIA COVERAGE.
The amount of column inches and tv time devoted to football is completely ridiculous. No other sport gets a look in (apart from Rugby in the NE states).

I would suggest that Europe loses people with similar body types and athleticism to that sort after for potential basketball players to Volleyball and Handball. Of course you loose potential players to every sport, but when you play a position other than point guard in basketball it is a pre-requisite for the player to be taller than the vast mojority of the population and so sports that draw players of similar height significantly impact on that (relatively)very small pool of available potential talent.

Same can be said about Rugby in NZ.
Imagine what the TB's could be like if there was no Rugby in NZ.