Hoops

Kings look good, but are we missing an import

I think you can use "get the arse" in the context of "wasn't brought back". Whether he was out of contract or cut mid-contract, they didn't look to keep him.

Probably not a lot and was probably started by a kings supporter and when Lisch goes down (hopefully not as I’m lisch fan) Wilson will be your man in the trenches.
Hyskipup makes a lot sense there though.

Seriously, wtf has any of that crap got to do with this post? If anons want to bitch at each other, can you at least do it in the appropriate threads?

Tom is very deserving under the criteria used but imo it’s poor way of doing it, not certain to many coaches out there would take Tom ahead of Moller or Hooley, again my opinion and good luck to Tom, he’s not the issue here it’s how it’s done. Again look at the nba in 10/15 years all mvp played on sides that made play offs including LBJ who’s side this season who were average.
The girls was also IMO strange as Kelly Wilson played on an unbeaten team with amazing stats and didn’t win, again this not a knock on Lauren Nicholson, just the way it’s done.

End of rant, good luck to you all.

"It's easy to get votes when you play in a side where the talent around you is not that good".

So Nunawading were no that good last year? & that's why Simon Conn won MVP last year?

I agree it is what it is, but the way you put your case you are suggesting Tom is not a deserving winner, which I don't agree with. As I said there were many deserving winners.

Also, whilst I wasn't there the article on SEABL's website indicates Tom got 110 votes.

They beat Simon Conns team in the grand final. Exactly what I’m saying,it’s easier to win awards as a very good player in a poor team. Tre Nichols got 80 points, Craig Moller got 99, Tom got 101, so yes it’s why a lot of these personal awards go quite often to teams down the table, top teams take points of each other. It is what it is so good luck to Tom .

Sorry Mt Gambier won, beat Dandenong

I'm sorry but I don't follow your logic?

In effect, you're saying a good player in a bad team would stand a higher than normal chance of winning every year. However, I don't think the past winners (evidence) supports that theory.

Also, didn't Simon Conn win MVP last year, but Dandenong won the title?

It’s easy to get votes when you play in a side where the talent around you is not that good. BOG is also an afl term and at least last year the premier team also had the best player. Good luck to the Tom but the talk before the event was he would win because of which team he played for and he’s a popular amongst all Victorian coaches referees. Your opinion is fine but I’ll stick with mine.

Ok. I'll stoop to your level. Try 11 points behind.

Now having said that. There are many deserving winners. However, votes were cast by coaches of both teams & the Refs - each giving a 3-2-1 for each game.

We all have different opinions and what we like or don't like about particular players.

However according to the criteria above the votes were cast and young Tom won. Not saying that is right or wrong.T
try congratulating someone, it wan't cost you anything.

Also, thanks for you opinion about who should win MVP awards (Winning programs). I'll write to BA and request that be enshrined in a by-law. Maybe BA should employ you in their competitions & by-laws department. Maybe some research on your behalf would uncover that MVP's don't always come from winning programs.

While I'm at it what is a winning program? One that develops their youth or one that buys success through employing 'hired guns' & imports.

I'm sure you will think the latter. For me I'd like to see an open book on what teams spend on their players and see how the teams ranked, as I am certain that a lot of programs BUY their success.

^^ Melbourne ran 12th, Hooley equal 2nd 2 points behind with Moller also 2 points behind equal 2nd. Ballarat were 4th and Hobart equal 1st not certain how that happens, mvp should be from winning programs.

If they would’ve hung to dreads last season he fills that 3/4 spot nicely, but JVG knows best.

Kings are an intriguing mix, often have ability to recruit great talent but never seem to have chemistry and play to their strengths trogh implementatin of x and o's .

Have be very disappointed with how they treated Garlepp last year. Agree with original poster they still look thin at the 3 / 4 spot

@AussiePride - this was the supremely idiot approach they took last season and look at how well it ended up for them... and before anyone mentions Randle, look at where they still ended up...

I'm ok with them only going with two imports, if they get the team balance right... it's hard to argue with the talent they have assembled for their starting 5, but that lends to a cheaper/less experienced bench... There's a line between bringing in young talented players to develop long term, but where in the Kings recent history have they been able to do that?

I was all for them getting a starting quality SF import and bringing Newls off the bench like last season where I think he played better (as did Gaze if I recall, mentioning their thinking in some article) but with the budget already, the 11th will be a benchie, and I think that Kendall Stephens could fit what you were thinking, D2, and all wrapped up in a "local" player as well...

Losing Blanchfield and not signing anyone else in his place is a net positive.

JVG has said before that they can pick up a better quality of import at a price they can afford a few weeks into the season with the guys who have missed out on big US or European contracts at that time.

Can be a risk with integration of these players into the team dynamic that far into the season but it can also pay huge dividends with the right guy.

Round 23 of the NBL season and only four games this weekend and overall the games had some good attendances.

Hawks vs Kings - 3,616 @ WEC (60%)
36ers vs Breakers - 4,936 @ AA (62%)
Crocodiles vs Blaze - 3,969 @ TEC (75%)
Wildcats vs Taipans - 4,314 @ CS (96%)

For the Hawks this season it was a decent home crowd but it was the type of crowd they should really have been drawing to the WIN Ent Cent all season. Still, it was good to see the Hawks draw over 3,500, even if it was against 'local' rival Sydney which would have drawn ok anyway. If only the Hawks had a better team then maybe their attendances might be a lot better.

The rounds biggest crowd showed up to the Adelaide Arena on Saturday night to see the NZ Breakers clinch top spot on the ladder. Almost 5K is a pretty good crowd really, despite the fact that some people indicating they stayed away because the result was supposedly beyond doubt. Whatever happened to the old saying 'any team can beat any other team on any given day'? Good to see that most Adelaide fans will still come out and support the 36ers despite the lack of recent success.

While on the face of it the crowd for the Crocs v Blaze game was a good one at almost 4K (75% of the Townsville Ent Cents capacity), I would have thought that for 4 v 3 game this late in the season that they would have drawn at least 4,500 but it wasn't to be. Well done to those who turned up but where are the rest of the Crocs fans? I wonder if they'll suddenly show for playoff games should they make it?

Ok, this next one is a first for me this season. We have an ACTUAL CROWD FIGURE from a game in Perth. Up until now its been 'approx' crowds but here we have a crowd that seems to have been counted, not estimated based on ticket sales and I must say its good to see. Perth have once more posted a 4K+ crowd for the 13th straight time this season and on the game side of things it showed that the NBL top 4 is pretty much set and it would be (IMO) wrong if Cairns qualified now because I don't think they deserve to.

So there you have it, my take on Rd.23 of the NBL season. Nothing special this week really but it was good to see the bottom two teams pull good home crowds.

It has also been announced today by NZ Breakers General Manager Richard Clarke that the Breakers will in fact play all of their playoff games at the larger Vector Arena (capacity will be approximately 8,500 for the playoffs but that could rise if the demand is there). IMO its a pretty smart move to hold games at an arena that will be able to hold at least 4,000 more than their regular venue...and something earlier this season that I predicted might happen :p

http://www.nbl.com.au/news/article/2012/march/breakers-confirm-venue-dates-for-semi-finals/