i remember in 2003 we made 8th spot with a record of something like 13 wins and 19 losses.

I think our best chance is if either the Breakers (far from convincing recently) or Crocs falter. Adelaide's schedule from here is pretty challenging.

At this stage we have to finish higher than the Crocs to crack 8th spot. If we end up with the same win/loss record, they rank higher due to having the season split over us (beaten us twice).
Our next best option is the Breakers. We're 1 win apiece, but they've got 2 new cracker imports & gathering steam too.
I haven't delved into the intricacies of the schedule for likely wins & losses, 'cos there've been plenty of upsets this season & I'm not one to speculate.
Interesting times ahead.

Still a long way to go with 3 wins away from our nearest rivals the Crocs. We are not only reliant on the wins, but the losses of this team. The Breakers and the Taipans are within reach also. Realistically, with some good wins from here on, we could finish as high as 6th. This full week of training before the Perth game is very useful for Hodge and hopefully the team will travel to Perth a much better team than they were last night, after all it was the Dragons they beat.

EC "3 wins away from our nearest rivals the Crocs"

What about perth there on the same wins?
If they loose then you will have your best chance at catching someone.
Breakers/Crocs are too far ahead.

Magic # is 13 wins, if 36ers don't that they have no chance on making the eight

Am i rite in saying we should am for 15 wins?.

(= 50/50, + probable win, - likely loss)

36ers' run home:

Wildcats (road) -
Kings (home) -
Wildcats (home) =
Hawks (road) +
Bullets (road) -
Tigers (home) =
Taipans (road) -
Bullets (home) -
Blaze (road) =
Taipans (home) =
Slingers (road) +

11 games, could go something like 2-9 - 6-5. 9/11 against top 6 teams. I think they might win 4-5. If they get in without needing one of the other sides in the eight to slide, they will have earned it.

Agreed Isaac. I think they will need to win 8 of 11. If we do that other results shouldn't matter. For starters we need to win ALL remaining home games, not an easy ask given some of the guests we will be hosting.

Could get through with less but would be relying on other results and that's far from ideal. I could see them sneaking 6-5 though it'd be tough to get those other games.

Last two wins have really restored some faith, but still have just that solitary win against a top eight team I think.

If they just miss out via season series', then I think a fair question for 2007/08 would be whether or not the time given to Chappell or the early malaise cost them a chance at the post-season. A win against the Blaze at the Dome instead of that L will end up having made a real difference I think.

Posted by Isaac a couple of hours ago:
"If they (DD suggested word substitute for 36er fans is we) just miss out via season series', then I think a fair question for 2007/08 would be whether or not the time given to Chappell or the early malaise cost them a chance at the post-season."

Have you an answer for the question that you've put up? I'm guessing you might.

Posted by Isaac a couple of hours ago:
"A win against the Blaze at the Dome instead of that L will end up having made a real difference I think."

Just checked, Blaze are still4th, but please, go on.

You're just trying to get banned aren't you........

KC, read my post. I actually mentioned the Breakers and Taipans are within reach.

We have to have an optimistic approach to the remainder of the season. What Hodge will bring to the team is relatively unknown at this stage. If he is the player we should have had instead of Chappell, then its not too late to make a huge upset in the league. If we now become championship contenders based only on the roster change and improvement from Dench, then it makes no difference as to how far we go. The only difference is we have to work harder at it but the result should be the same. The win last night was against a lesser team, but Hodge was completely new to the team and the league. Hopefully the improvement from Hodge will measure favourably against the difference between top teams and bottom teams. I don't believe for a minute that the 36ers' target at the moment is still the championship. I know they want to make the playoffs, but then why would you want to make the playoffs without the ambition to take it all the way?

Correction, should read - I don't believe for a minute that the 36ers' target at the moment would not be the championship.

"If they just miss out via season series', then I think a fair question for 2007/08 would be whether or not the time given to Chappell or the early malaise cost them a chance at the post-season. A win against the Blaze at the Dome instead of that L will end up having made a real difference I think."

I agree with you here Isaac but I actually believe the decision not to cut Chappell probably hurt the team more for the Townsville game. That was a pretty ugly one and we lost that game due to our offense being terrible. I think if we had either a productive import or a healthy Brett Maher, we would've got the offensive production we needed to win that one. We get the W in that game and we don't lose the season split with the crocs and we would be tied with them on the ladder at the moment for the 8th spot. This was at a stage of the season where Mike had been given ample time to prove himself and hadn't. As I've pretty much said in many other threads, if we don't make the playoffs you would really have to isolate the major reason being the incompetency of the club in managing the Chappell situation.

However, after watching the game last night, I'm relatively optimistic about the teams chances. Both Maher and Davidson really weren't at their best while the new import is still adapting yet we were in control most of the match. I think the teams defence needs to still improve if we are to be a threat and we need to start closing out games earlier and not giving up big leads. I think Julius is what this team really needs, a good long defender, solid ball handler, excellent passer and good rebounder - all attributes which really addresses most of our weaknesses at the moment.

The Blaze game was one example - the Crocs game is another and the Perth road game was there to be won as well. Blaze might be in fourth but they are just 2 wins ahead and that was a frustrating loss on our home court.

Had the result gone the other way, Gold Coast would be 10-8 and Adelaide would be 10-9...

Interesting to note that Boti, a big fan of Chappell's, has today said:

The trigger should have been pulled on Chappell after the 36ers lost to Gold Coast on October 27. Instead the club dawdled until he had played 15 games - half the freakin' season - before Adelaide moved.

Adelaide are 3-1 without and since replacing Chappell and, though the three wins were against battling teams, the two road wins weren't pencilled in.

Was anyone really excited by the Dragons game? They are travelling terribly, and we beat them (just) on the back of a 10/11FG game from Dench who was our clutch player down the stretch.

This does not fill me with confidence. Good win when challenged, but if we had have lost the "Fire Phil" banners would be out in force. Not enough to be even considering playoffs.

One thing I did like was Hodge's energy.

Valid points, but considering we were on the road and introducing a just-arrived import, I thought it was probably a 50/50 game.

Posted by Isaac yesterday:
"The Blaze game was one example - the Crocs game is another and the Perth road game was there to be won as well."

Let's look at the Round 4 Perth game 1st (as per the shedule). We had the ascendancy in the 1st freak'n quarter, only due to Wildcat turn-overs. Redhage took the game by the scruff of the neck from then on, & wrenched the Player of the Month title from anyone who had the audacity to think they had a chance.

Need I continue?

On a Thursday, Round 5 we go down to the Breakers away, after Rickerts goes for 30/13 & Ronno breaks out of his funk. Mikey the source of all evil, had 21/6 & 5 assists. Hey, let's cut this guy, he's crap.

Come Saturday in Townsville (still Round 5), we drop a game when Mikey's stats aren't far from Balls'. Hey, let's sack the guy, things are look'n grim.

I'll throw Round 6 into the mix for entertainment value. Kirk Penney 8/4, 4 fouls, 2 assists & 4 T/Os. Lock it in Eddie. Mikey goes 8/3, 5 fouls, 3 assists & a single T/O. Mate, what a dead weight. He's line-ball with a freak'n sheep shagger. FFS, he HAS to go.

Round 10 loss to the Crocs (who were on a 4 game winning streak) at the Dome. 6 Crocs in double figures & I don't see Brett's numbers on the box-scores. We lost by 10. Brett'd be worth more than that, wouldn't he?

Round 11 we get smacked around by the Blaze, mid-week in their house.
From the game report, both Mikey & Balls were shutdown. Nit-picking as to who had the better/worse game, but Mikey must've lost it for us. Damn right bro. He's gotta go.

I'm gonna slip the Round 12 loss to the Kings at home in for shock value. Down by 30 at the half, after the Kings put on a quality Boomer inspired ball movement & shooting clinic. Our boys get it back to 8, with 3 to go. 02:48 on the game clock, & we embark on a foul-a-thon to get back into the game? WTF, Draper who was held all game, gets 7 freebies to finish equal second highest Kings scorer. To me, THAT is what lost us that game, but I digress.

Round 14 we got blown away by the Seamus Tigs (18 point deficit)in their house. Be stuffed, a highly regarded Tigs fan (by my personal reckoning) acknowledged on OzHoops that the final score had no indication as to the closeness of the game. We lost it in the last minutes of the game through turn-overs, & that was with our best on the floor. Sackings? Nah, we can't, Mikey didn't play that game, but Phil should've called a time-out & told them not to turn it over.

Posted by Isaac yesterday:
"Blaze might be in fourth but they are just 2 wins ahead and that was a frustrating loss on our home court."

Two wins ahead, having played one less game. Significant? Of course not.

Posted by Isaac yesterday:
"Had the result gone the other way, Gold Coast would be 10-8 and Adelaide would be 10-9..."

Pfffffffffffffffft.

Very questionable logic. Just need to look at performances over the season to see that Chappell wasn't getting it done (due to injury or whatever): 11 PPG, 33% FG, 25% 3P, 54% FT.

You can compare individual statlines to Ballinger, Maher, Penney, whoever, but those three guys are all having quality seasons. Average games from them are rare.

Pffft all you like. Had we beaten the Blaze at the Dome, we would be 10-9 and the Blaze 10-8.

DDFan - as usual, I have no idea what your point is. Are you making a case for the Sixers keeping Chappell? Or are you saying he should have been cut, and that it was done just at the right time?

The point Isaac is making (correct me if I am wrong) is that Chappell had a season where a good game was a rarity, and his numbers were in fact inflated by the 30 point game, so his actual usual output is more like 9ppg.

You talk of Redhage dominating after the first quarter - what if we had pulled the trigger on Chappell earlier? Maybe Hodge or another import could actually have guarded him? There's a novel concept.

And Isaac - agree that the game was 50/50 - that's the problem.

We lost that Perth road game by just four points and Chappell had seven points (1/7 FG) in 32 minutes.

Brace yourselves, I'm about to confuse you thinkers even more.

I don't know if you guys have the capacity to think back further than breakfast, but I got the underlying impression from this site that it was solely Phil's fault that Mikey was retained. Perceptions have shifted, & it's now the Club's fault that Mikey wasn't shunted off earlier.
Take in that some opposition players had season/career scoring nights against us. "A rabbit's foot in the pocket" as Pud would say, or were we lax?

Baulk all you like, I'm merely putting a different a perspective, on the harsh subjective view-point on this site, with a stats backed point of view.

Question my logic all you like, that's what it's all about, but I'm still not won over by the continued negativity of this season.

Now iZac, you're close to the scene, did Oz block out Mikey out of the boards, or did Mikey just stand behind him? I recall it vividly, what're your thoughts?
the doctor, does that answer your question?

I still haven't seen any (I'd say credible, but there wasn't any) mention of medical reports on this site, to confirm/disprove Mikey's under-performance.

DDFan - as a Blaze fan who has seen a lot of them this year - trying to prove a point and using them as an example of a top 4 side to back you up is very dangerous IMO. Im with Isaac on this one - teh sixers should never have lost the Blaze game and it most proably WILL bite them on the arse come finals time.
Te Blaze at the moment are sitting in 4th position...very nice and I am stoked at the results to date. However, we have had a soft run of games and have been very lucky in a couple to find teams playing well below par and grabbed a couple of wins that were unexpected. The svhedule now for the Blaze is very tough and I would not be surprised to see the team slip significantly and I would think 8 or 9 will be where they finish the minor round. As a Blaze supporter I certainly hope we make the 8 but serously think to this stage we have OVERachieved. On the flip side teh sixers to date have UNderachieved and this seems to have been exacerbated in part by the slow reaction to the Chappell situation.

Now iZac, you're close to the scene, did Oz block out Mikey out of the boards, or did Mikey just stand behind him? I recall it vividly, what're your thoughts?

If you're referencing the NZ game in Auckland, Oscar is not a great defender (especially not laterally) and Chappell exploited that to the tune of both fouling Oscar out quickly, getting points on the board, and picking up fouls on Phill Jones too. Not sure how relevant that is to this sub-topic though.

I think the delay in replacing Chappell was probably the decision of both the coaches and the club, though later, solely the club as Smyth had his preferred import targets named a bit prior to Chappell being cut. I think "Chappell the nice guy", Smyth looking out for his player (often said that he hasn't made a cut in-season), and cost were three factors in the delay.

The medical reports came back clean according to the news report at the time. There were rumours that a second report was going to show a "mystery virus" but that wasn't stated formally and I don't believe that tactic was used as the team went three games before Hodge joined them anyway (NBL rules re missing games when changing imports).

Someone might be able to find a quote to confirm, but I remember Smyth saying as early as the Wildcats road game (Round 4) that Chappell was over the back injury and training/playing fine. I believe that post-injury (reported as back spasms at the end of his first training), Chappell will not return to his Cannons-level play and probably not his criticised season with the Breakers either.

I also think that Adelaide would have two extra wins had they made the decision on Chappell sooner, and that every win is going to be crucial later in the season for teams outside the top three.

Not sure if I want to encourage you, but no DDFan, nothing you posted answers my question. What is your point? You seem to be defending Chappell's play, and the Sixers record, based on the performance of others.

I think one can draw any conclusions they like from any stats/info at hand, but you can't avoid the fact that Chappell put up average bench player numbers at the crucial 3 spot wher many solid NBL teams have their best player - Worthington/Sav, MacKinnon, Harvey, Redhage.

Yes, Redhage had a career night on the Sixers. Did the opposing 3 man play any defence?

Posted by Isaac a few minutes ago:
"quoting DD: "Now iZac, you're close to the scene, did Oz block out Mikey out of the boards, or did Mikey just stand behind him? I recall it vividly, what're your thoughts?"


If you're referencing the NZ game in Auckland"

No, hold it right there. I was referring to the game in Adelaide. I'm surprised that you & most missed it. On one end of the court, Ronno was leaning back into Adam, muscling him out, with arms wrapped around his torso to make absolutely sure.
The other end, Mikey was standing behind Oz, who was standing with an arm flayed out for decoration. Mikey had a hand on Oz's hip & that was it. Neither gave any indication that there was going to be any contest. What I'm saying, is that I was frustrated with our effort to get into the paint. I hope I've painted a clear enough picture.

Posted by Isaac:
"I think the delay in replacing Chappell was probably the decision of both the coaches and the club, though later, solely the club as Smyth had his preferred import targets named a bit prior to Chappell being cut."

That's my belief.


Posted by Isaac:
"I think "Chappell the nice guy", Smyth looking out for his player (often said that he hasn't made a cut in-season), and cost were three factors in the delay."

Phil backs his man. Not a crime given the situation.

Posted by Isaac:
"The medical reports came back clean according to the news report at the time."

And how late in the season was that?
Answer: Long after Mikey's head was called for.

Posted by Isaac:
"There were rumours that a second report was going to show a "mystery virus" but that wasn't stated formally"

Tests didn't substantiate that mythical claim. I wonder why?


Posted by Isaac:
"Someone might be able to find a quote to confirm, but I remember Smyth saying as early as the Wildcats road game (Round 4) that Chappell was over the back injury and training/playing fine."

That has me scratching my head to this day. Was it said to quieten the fanfare?


Posted by Isaac:
"I believe that post-injury (reported as back spasms at the end of his first training), Chappell will not return to his Cannons-level play and probably not his criticised season with the Breakers either."

With in my view, appropriate medical attention, it shouldn't have dragged on at all, but that's my own point of view & open to criticism.

Posted by Isaac:
"I also think that Adelaide would have two extra wins had they made the decision on Chappell sooner, and that every win is going to be crucial later in the season for teams outside the top three."

Totally agree. It's the ignorance of the circumstances, that I've been arguing.

DDFan, I suggest you do not refer to 'logic' in trying to put subjective emotive illogical propositions that are not supported in any way by the stats you are trying to rely upon. It just makes your opinion (which I have heard you put succinctly from time to time, particularly on OzHoops, where you have admitted that being close to the scene, knowing Chappell as such a nice guy, and tending to the conservative puts you in the category where you would delay any change to the roster, but where you have finally admitted that he had to go) irrelevant.

Mike wasn't working. You acknowledge that. The stats don't lie. He was not producing as an IMPORT should (why compare him to Penney?). Every person you speak to would have a different breaking point as to when to pull the trigger and replace him. For me, 6 games is too early, but 15 games is way too late. The writing was on the wall. Because of the Sixers delay, it is open to speculation as to whether the Sixers loyalty (we will call it that, but by the end it was looking like procrastination) has hurt their season.

Ballinger, Maher and Davidson are quality. Cooper, Mottram and Ng are ok off the bench and Copeland shows from time to time that those old legs can still carry a load (such that has all season out performed Chappell). Dench on the right team can add something, Sutton I am not so sure about. But three good players and some role players will not get you there in this league. Without Newley, our second import position in this team was crucial. Chappell needed to be a gun to compete in this league. He wasn't. End of story. DD, Leave your petty gripes aside (preferably on a different site at least) and stop wasting my time by making me read your dribble.

Posted by XY a few hours ago:
"Mike wasn't working. You acknowledge that."

Mike was following a flawed rehab program. It didn't involve breaking out in a sweat, & Mikey followed it to the letter. That program would've been planned by a 36er endorsed professional, who I'd assume, would've had the over-riding say on what Mikey should've been capable of. The strange thing to me, was that even when the writing was openly on the wall, his rehab was exactly as it was from day one. That was also some time after Phil said he was 100%. Game-wise, Mikey played to the level of an injured player, barring a few games. That is also a mystery to me.

Posted by XY:
"Every person you speak to would have a different breaking point as to when to pull the trigger and replace him. For me, 6 games is too early, but 15 games is way too late."

There may have been things going on in the background. I don't know.
No denying, 15 games was excessive.

What if that's simply the best he is able to now play?

Doesn't necessarily indicate anything significant, but Maher and Davidson returned from injury well enough and Ballinger dealt with his back problem. Same professionals would have been advising and supporting through that?

I'm not sure it matters why he wasn't performing (injury, form, no longer has game), rather just that he wasn't - and needed to be.

Sydney would have replaced him in the first 4-5 games.