Hoops

Breakers are too good?

I'm not sure what the obsession, with how many Tall-Blacks they have, is all about?
If they were that good, they'd be playing in Europe and the NBA like most of the Boomers are. Lets not forget that the TB's PG is on the bench for Perth.

Yes & No.
As I pointed out elsewhere, various teams have gone through their golden patches.
NZ are well resourced, that will always put them ahead of say a Townsville. Plus success does attract talent. Just look at the Cats. Without dominating (except in a couple of patches) they have made 30 successive play-offs. There's not much you can do about that. I suspect that MU are starting to develop into a similar power club. Unfortunately if you want to have regional teams, unless you can get Clive Palmer on board, its hard to redress such advantages.

I do agree that they possibly have an attraction bonus when it comes to their local players. Aussie players don't seem to prefer their home states like NZ players prefer their country. SO yes, to that extent having a "National" team in our competition is probably nolonger acceptable.
I have said at length that a 2nd (and possibly third when Christchurch is fully rebuilt and has a decent venue) makes sense, for a number of reasons. Fact is that but for Neill's obstinance we might already have a Wellington team.

Besides, teams like NZ and Wildcats also demonstrate the benefits of building and maintaining a squad, instead of throwing the baby out every year and starting from scratch. Other teams should emulate that instead of bitching.

Ultimately this season, NZ players have stepped up when it matters most. If they win another flag it will be due to strength of character.

No one said it was easy to entice players away from the breakers but nothing stops aussie teams atleast attempting to raid the talent the breakers have assembled at some point when they're free agents.

Its important for the breakers to hold onto and develop their local talent and they do just that. They've been brilliant for the NBL.

Their success has nothing to do with having and kind of advantage because they're the only team based out of a small country.

I have raised this point before in other threads but I'll raise it again.

NZ's development program is second to none.

Vukona, Pledger, Abercrombie, Webster, TeRangi, Bartlett were all Breakers development players.
That's 6/10 players with Shane McDonald (Aus) and Tai Wesley (Guam) and two US Imports rounding out the playing group.
Young DP Shea Ili will be the next fully contracted player to come through the ranks into the team with Isaac Fotu, Rob Loe and Duane Bailey the only former DP's plying their trade overseas.
Former DP's Tai Webster, Tai Wynayard and Jack Salt are all playing Div 1 NCAA.

I think that any nationalistic viewpoint regarding the NBL being an Australian competition needs to be viewed more liberally.

The NBA is an American national competition, however has a team from Canada, if they suddenly won it would people in the States be up in arms about the fact they could have a few Canadians in their side, really>?

I would hope not and I would hope we can also be above that level of insecurity.

Let's not worry about building a wall just yet (pun intended)...

Want to entice players from New Zealand to leave the Breakers? Have a better situation for them to go into.

Why leave your home team that wins and pays you money?

Glad to see some sense being injected into this discussion.
The whole "national team" thing is a silly basis for an argument IMO. It's meaningless. There are no rules that would have stopped the Sydney Kings having the same roster as the Breakers currently do.
Full credit to the Breakers for the way they have developed and retained their playing talent.

They may well prove too good this season (based on the last two games they've played...), however they operate under the same rules as everyone else. It should encourage other teams to strive to improve so they can beat them, not try to think of ways to make the Breakers weaker.

To say the Breakers are too good just because they are made up of many locals is ridiculously insecure. Good for them, they are coached extremely well and the United went in with a game plan that didn't work, so the Breakers are in the grand final again, so what?

If and when NZ is ready for a second team it will obviously cause some players to move on, but it will also provide young Aussies another NBL team to consider. And, should that team be coached successfully into being a great team, well good luck to them too...

It is the NBL and NZ is part of it, get over it I think!

I think the Breakers are a great example of patient and persistant building. Just think about how long that group has been playing together, and they seem to have really organised succession plans with their coaches. Throw in a brilliant import who hangs around, coupled with intelligent, team needs based recruiting with your second import and you have built a well deserved dynasty.

NZ is a counrty of 4.5 million people where two rugby codes dominate sporting participation. They defintely punch above their weight but the fact that they currently represent an entire counrty, and therefor have a supposed talent pool advantage because of this, isnt really the case in my view.

Plus, nothing stops Australin clubs from recruiting NZ's best players to play here.

The NZ national team draws on a total population the size of Sydney to find it's players. Think of NZ as basically the same size as an Australian state.

ROFLCopter: We arnt watching a Year 5 athletics competition here. Just because one team is 'too good' we dont just break them up to dilute the talent and give every team a chance to 'win'.

If other teams want to win, then they have to build a team than can win.