Goodbye Blaze!

Trevor, Ian or Greg.... couldn't possibly be the same cripple that played here last year....

That would cause a bit of media..
It was either Boti or Isaac, I dis-remember the exact quote, that they were considering him, pre-season.

If over his back injury he could be a surprise pick up.He is good mates with Pero also he is talented if not carrying injuries.

Will be interesting to see if he comes back like he did at sixers or regains sum of his pre-sixers form.
I remember seeing him carve up for West Sydney back in the day. (was a long time ago so dont hate on me if is wasnt exactly west sydney its just the team thats in my head. lol)

I think it was with the Cannons where Chappell played really well a few years back.
Will be interesting to see how he goes if he returns, i think he played a few games under Joyce with the Hawks when he first arrived in the NBL, maybe thats why they are going for him, and he is probably coming quite cheap, considering his last stint with the 36ers, he also probably isnt a 10 so maybe another bonus for the blaze if they sign him.
Other non 10 imports that may be worth a look for teams looking for a SG/SF type player such as the Blaze, and possibly the 36ers are Farley, Crowe, Wethers, im pretty sure they are all 8's and Crowe and Wethers having played in the NZBL would probably come a bit cheaper than other imports if thats an issue for the club.
According to my quick look on the usbasket.com website Farley and Crowe appear to be unsigned and Wethers i think was listed on the same team as Chappell in the Ukraine. Chappell is averaging 8ppg while Wethers is averaging 16ppg both playing around 21 mins/pg, so if Chappell is a option for a NBL team Wehers may be also, and seems to be playing better aswell.

yeah way to go nbl, bring back another recycled dud of an import who is averaging 8ppg in the Ukraine league WOW! sorry if i dont go rush to purchase a ticket when the blaze come to town. i feel even more sorry for the league if chappell is still an import option in this league.

vanexel, see Jonno's comment about them having to go for an import under 10 points to fit under the points cap. That really restricts their options.

Wethers was fighting a back injury in the NZ NBL last season. Also, lining him up at SF with Heal and Harvey might mean that they find it difficult to defend any back court?

Wethers and Crowe both played with Pero in the NZ NBL so would have some chemistry you'd assume.

I would personally chose both wethers and Farley over Chappell, but Chappell is more of a forward and bigger, has played for Joyce before and may be cheaper $$$ wise and would be the same or possibly less on the points cap so if $$$ and points is an issue i can see why they went Chappell

Marquin Chandler, who played for the slingers is also another SF who i dont think is a 10, would he be a better option if available and affordable??

why isn't he a 10? he was here as a 10 and left here as a 10.

They can not use the he was cut excuse either otherwise they will set a dangerous precedent.

if thet re rate him then Luke Martin will have a case to lodge an application for rerating at the spirit as well.

How can the Blaze roster be anywhere near the points cap? another example of how the system is flawed in a big way.

After the season he had with us i wouldnt be surprised if he was re rated to something like a 8 at the end of the season when they do the re-ratings (if not there would certainly be a legit case to get this done), remembering guys like Farley, Wethers and Crowe are not 10's and all finished in the NBL with stronger form than Chappell did.

Because they signed players with inflated values:

Melmeth 9 in, 8 ex
Cameron 8
Frank 8
McGregor 7 ex, 6 in (down from 8)
Heal 8 (down from 9)
Harvey 9

Add in two 10 point imports and that's 68 from just eight players.

Jonno where have you seen those three are not 10's?

I just hope they do lots of blood tests before signing him =D

Isaac - that's my point. Why does any player have an "inflated value"? The system should recognise players downturn in production, age etc. Pero shouldn't be an 8, when Harvey is a 9.

Some blame goes to the Blaze (or alot of blame?), but the system is keeping better players out of the league.

Would a system that rates players, not only against their stats and court time, but relative to other players in the system be more effective?

i.e. - every season players must nominate to be an NBL registered player (imports excepted, unless already in the system) and the NBL then rates players as against each other with a maximum number of 10's, 9's, 8's etc. No way under that system Pero is an eight. More like a 6 or 5.

Definitely keep discounts for long-term players and long term contracts. Good for the player and the fan base to identify with stars over several seasons.

Also like the idea of a marquee player rule, although the less affluent clubs would not be able to take advantage.

System should be a vote by peers as it used to be.

Or as i have mentioned before the only 10 point players should be those that have been nominated for all star 5 teams. They have to be the best players in their positions to be nominated so therefore shoudl be the highest ranked points wise.

no chance in the world

Doc, but Pero, not long ago, was very highly rated in international basketball. And he'd only be a 5-6 now because he's playing poorly, getting crappy minutes, and probably quite disillusioned with it all.

The points values are pegged at the beginning of a contract and probably have to be in case they rise. By the same token, they're pegged even if they fall (as is the case with a few here with the Blaze) now that the cut-and-resign "Tucker" loophole (also used by NZ with my brother) has been removed (AFAIK).

The process I'd use:

- 1-15 or 1-20 rather than 1-10
- statistics provide a figure or range as a guide
- adjust for minutes played (as is done now, but not to disadvantage guys who are efficient off the bench, but wouldn't have the same impact as a starter - see Oscar dropping from 8 to a 6 as an example)
- adjust for position of team where appropriate (e.g., 20 PPG for the Tigers is not necessarily the same as 20 PPG for the 36ers right now)
- tweak based on votes from a panel of coaches/players/media/etc
- publicise those votes to add some sort of accountability

yea, i agree with Issac, there are many cases with guys being too high, which has caught the blaze out.
Im pretty sure i remembered reading those guys as 8's or maybe 9's on the NBL site a while back when they released the spreadsheet of points value. I have not checked recently but i do remember seeing guys like Farley, Wethers, Crowe as less than 10's im pretty sure they were all 8's, since Chappell is in there ball park talent wise and also had worse form in his last stint i think a case could be made for him to be a 7 or 8, which is probably what the Blaze are trying to get done to fit him in.

If the salary cap was well policed, you wouldn't need a points system and you wouldn't have all this disparity over what a player's point value is. The points system is only there because its the only way the NBL can keep tabs on fairness in the recruitment of players. If the salary cap was adhered to and every club spent the same amount of money on their roster, who cares who they spend it on. They are all going to try and get the best they can for that money. At the same time, every player has his price and how much he wants is going to be dictated by whether there is enough money under the cap to spend on him. Like thedoctor said, how can the Blaze be right up there in points and yet have a roster that can't win a single game. At the same time, you are denying good players a gig in the NBL because they can't be fitted under the points cap. Points have to go, the salary cap has to be thoroughly scrutinized while at the same time, be realistic to recognize the fact that its professional players that play in this league and the ability to pay them accordingly.

Chances are, that Blaze roster costs them the cap anyway so relying just on that (and not a points cap) hardly makes more room for good players "denied a gig" or wins them more games. They just spent their points and money on an average combination of players and have struggled with a couple of import injuries too.

I did say that the salary cap should also be realistic to recognize the fact that it is professional players that play in this league and should have the ability to pay them accordingly.

Also agree with Isaac, I think they give away '10s' far too easily.

There should only be 3-6 players in the league who rate as a 10 (the elite players such as Anstey, Redhage, Ballinger, Penney).

To have Anstey and Derrick Alston both worth the same amount of points is ridiculous.