Hoops

Latest on Marcus Timmons

I think the rule re Traghard is stupid he should be able to replace Bradtke as amny times as required and anyone else the Bullets want him to aslong as they stay under the cap.
Same with Timmons i dont think it should matter if his rating matches copelands or anyone elses, again aslong as the 36ers remain under the cap which they are.
Any news on whether the NBL will let him play this weekend or at all??? or if the 36ers are going to be forced to make a decision on cutting someone for Timmons?? as i remember with the Moore situation im pretty sure the NBL said they could have Moore aslong as they cut Forman and Williams i think it was, and the 36ers chose to stick with Forman and Williams,which in my opinion was the right move at the time, so i wonder what will happen this time, i personally would make the tough call and cut nash and either buy him out or pay him to continue training and perhaps fill in for injuries, but NBL rules may prevent Nash doing that, i think you should be alloud to have upto a 12 man sqaud aslong as you fit under the points and salary cap and then just pick your ten for each game, or simply just make it both teams have 12 for every game, which would be fairer than just the home team having 12.

Ye i think the rule should be 68 points for any given game, why cant we sign timmons as our 11th man??, and we just have to pick 10 guys for any given game, i thought thats what perth had last year with Dowdell and were going to have this year with Robbins until they cut Leven. I think Treghard should be able to replace Bradtke (or anyone esle aslong as Brisbane are under the points cap), and yes if Sydney can sign Nieslen late in the season for a run, good on them, as long as he plays the minimum 7 games and the kings remain under the points cap as a team, as realistically they wont be able to cut a benchy for a nielsen callibre player it would have to be one of there stars and would probably never happen

Am I missing something here, we have 3 players out including Hill. We are only looking for 1 replacement. Wouldn't the combination of points of all 3 players be made available for 1 replacement? Isn't Sutton a 1 point player who replaced Hill a 4 point player? Doesn't that already give us a 3 point credit? Pardon my ignorance but I'll never get the gist of the point system. If someone like Smyth can admit to being confused by it, then its not that black and white.

Fair enough if they couldn't fit this $350K player under their salary cap. It amazes me on how strict the NBL come down on points, yet cannot police the salary cap properly. Unfair advantages can be gained in more ways than one.

Isaac, in regard to your question about the Kings, yes I would have the same view if the whole team fitted within the points maximum. If every team is playing on an even field, then all the teams are entitled to go maximum on both points and salary. The same applies with the Bullets.

God forbid the NBL giving Adelaide an unfair advantage. It might lead to us winning the championship, haha. Don't they think its already too little too late?

Some of the above posts are so ridiculous that I feel I should add to it. Sack the whole team and start again.

On a more serious note, why do replacements have to be no more than the points value of the ones they are replacing when the whole team is well under? Its a stupid and unfair rule and especially with a team like the 36ers who are struggling with injuries and performance.

Judging from todays article it looks as if they 36ers are going to have to chose between Timmons and one of Nash, Cooper, Majstrovich and Wheeler, i personally would cut Nash and bring in Timmons, but him having a 2 year contract could complicate things, well Mal would have to be willing to buy him out or something or they could pay him his wage to be a training player or something, i hope we can get him in and the 36ers roster is hardley stacked so if the Tigers got Dench i think we should be able to fit Timmons in