Hoops

Holmes wants points system scrapped

Yeah, there was discussion of the points cap pretty much forcing Teys to stay with Adelaide because of his option keeping him at 1pt as other teams wouldn't be interested him at a 5...

I think that would be fairly untrue, comparing him to other players ranked as a 5... But it (as well as the Jervis rating) brings into discussion at least if there should be a max increase that is applicable to players... if there was a 3/4pt maximum increase that a player could go up, it could negate a few of these concerns... Players who come into the league and just happen to fall into a good situation don't get blown up ratings and also teams that benefit from picking a rough gem, like Perth, don't get shafted when they actually have a good season (as much as it pains me to suggest ways that Perth could benefit even MORE from points discounts!)

342 - Teys was rated a 1, Daly was a 3.

As others have pointed out: the player points cap didn't keep Daly out of the league as other teams had the cap room to sign him. For the most part the points cap distributes talent, rather than restricting it

You could argue that the PPC is a barrier to trade as players are often forced to relocate more than they otherwise would in order to distribute the league-wide talent, but it rarely does it actually prevent trade (which is Holmes's claim).

Barlow's issue has been that he would have had to accept below his market-value in wages to play in the NBL, which is almost a completely separate issue from the PPC.

I'm sure Holmes does a lot of valuable work for the NBLPA, but this is a waste of everyone's time.

aw, adrien sturt will get an offer then, after expansion. he's a 9

I'd like the numbers doubled to 20 max and 140 per team. Then you have enough graduations to actually do a proper analysis and points allocation.

At the moment each "1" player point is really too large a step in value. Too many players end up on the same value, and when that single range group is looked at there is too much clear variation in game impact between the ( say) high 7 and low & players. splitting that same group up into 15, 14 and 13 point players within a 20 point range makes it less debatable.

JMHO

Couldn't agree more, jonno...

Holmes is ready to mouth off about the points cap but always ignores comments about most teams last season not even using the maximum allotment as well as salary restrictions (not even the cap, but more just not being any money to give in that sort of range) being the real reasons that they aren't back here... Barlow himself has blown his weak-as-piss argument that the points cap is keeping him out of the league by signing with Melbourne United (Basketball).

Ballinger at a 7pt rating is the only player anywhere close to being an example of the points cap being used as a scapegoat to get rid of a player, but you look a bit deeper, his age, output from last season (and apparently his salary?) were even bigger factors... The fact that Melbourne United (Basketball) were too lazy to honour their contract with him and work within the limits of the points cap, when every other team seems to manage to, with points to spare, is not a problem with the points cap, it's Melbourne United (Basketball) being greedy and trying to stack their team with as much higher level talent as they can... Just like the Breakers when they cut Trueman and all those other guys...

I'd like a more veteran based rewarding points system.

I like the points system however I think 70 is too low and it's too easy to be considered a 10 in this league (Shawn Redhage isn't a 10 even before his loyalty discounts).

I think keep the points rating but raise it to 75 and let's see if that improves things

Well, sometimes that's what it takes anon,

Maybe that rule should change to age based or years in the league eg allowing aging veterans to be 8,9 & 10 on teams,thus increasing longevity for our players?