Its possible but you have to have some heart. That was the whole point of the perth thing and getting flogged on the court.

Yes - he did train them hard, and they did look flat.

(Although - as Burston just said - a 30point loss should have the reverse affect.)

Cannot Believe Brad Hill Played that Many minutes in the second half. He is Fkn Average and plays for himself and not the team. Waste of a player on the court. Couldnt stop My Grandma on defence!

Ahh piss off...

FFS will you idiot Hill-haters at least wait for him to play a bad game to criticise him! He, Tez and Holmes were our only players last night. Get a clue mate.

Yeah i agree here, i think the blame needs to be shared, i really dont think that Ninnis should get off scott free, nor do i think the players should either, but at some point someone should have HTFU and got stuck into it..

be it the coach or a player...i have seen more heart from teams i have coached and played in, and they have had far less to play for then these guys...

yesterday i was all for having a hard look at the coach, and i still will be looking alot harder in decisions made, but there needs to be an on court guy that knows his role and does it...

Hill and Grooves were good..the rest left a little to be desired, ballinger needs more of the ball which again makes me think the offence is set wrong or the PG is not doing his job, which again tells me a coach does not have control..

Can't remember, but I think the tough training was Monday and then they might've gone with a lighter training on Tuesday? Swear I read that somewhere? Boti article?

I don't think that was the problem though - Gilchrist didn't look flat, just out of sorts. Ballinger didn't look flat, was more smothered out of the game.

I do agree about sharing of blame though.

Groves and Hill were two of our best, but with Groves not hitting threes, I think the meme that the two are too similar could have real merit. Probably worth looking for Herbert more often for the outside shot.

Something I've noticed is that other teams have players with the green light to turn the corner and shoot without even second-guessing themselves - Penney, Bruton and Forman do it in NZ, Corletto and Kendall will do it in Melbourne, Brad Williamson from Townsville does it, Rillie used to as well. In Adelaide, Cooper will umm and aah anytime he's out of the paint, Gilchrist doubts his shot, Groves must be thinking "Missed the last one, I should drive," etc. If they don't already, Ballinger, Ng and Herbert should have the confidence that they can take these shots at any suitable time. Right now, I think Ng might be the only one who does. Even Ballinger seems to hesitate for a fraction of a second.

Did anyone catch the last 25 seconds of the half? Melb calls time out to call a play. Scotty tells his players.... nothing. On the court there are three players with one foul each and two players with none. Three team fouls. I had the brains in under 12's that you use that foul with about 7 seconds to go and break their play and make them start again. Of course it was such a brilliant design by Westover. Clearly no Sixer thought the play would be to drive down the middle of lane and make an uncontested lay up. Letting them run down the clock from about the three minute mark - when we had NO team fouls - was also another brilliant coaching move. Almost as good as having our best three point scorer Ng, sitting on the bench. Why would we want to make up a lot of points quickly when you are down 9 with seven minutes to go?
There were plenty of underperformers but Scotty embarassed himself and he wears this one.... This team is done without personnel changes.

Good points. Real examples of coaching mistakes.

Also questionable was Gilchrist going for layups at the end - if we're fouling to stop the clock, surely hitting threes is our only hope in that situation unless they just wanted to minimise the points for-against in case it was useful at the end of the season? But stuff that, go for the win.

Another horrible coaching move was Starting Cooper in the last quarter!

Also as someone else mentioned running a zone near the end of the game which helped Melbourne run out the clock with no pressure was a terrible coaching decision!

Letting Crosswell drive Left most the game was another thing the coaching staff didn't scout for the game!

Isaac have to agree. There were a lot of questionable things that happened at the end of the game. I noted from watching Foxtel that the Assistant Coaches did not look happy and maybe that is due to the fact that Scott does not listen (??) to their advice. In media interviews Scott seems ready to blame everyone except himself for what is happening with the team. The big question that has to be asked - "Is Scott Ninnis a Head Coach or just a good Assistant Coach". Scott is a nice guy, was a great player and has had success as a coach at the ABA level. All of that does not necessarily make you a good coach at the top level. Top coaches also need to motivate players. That does not seem to be happening with the 36ers - and I don't think it was happening last year. Maybe the SOS group need to look at the situation and make some hard decisions with regards to coaches and players before their investment goes further downhill and cannot be salvaged?? Ben Fitz seems to have a reputation for making tough business decisions, possibly this is a situation that needs tough, quick and decisive action?

For mind I think it was mostly player issues - I think Cortez played well when he attacked that basket ... as did Hill.

I think Gilly needed to attack the basket more and shoot less - his jumpshot is Hodge-esque.

Conversly - I think Balls needed to step out a bit more and shoot more jumpers cos he is a good jumper shooter. It is hard for him without Burstons cos he needs to be down low more but he looks best when he can mix up his inside/outside game.

It was our inability to shutdown the 3 point shot - Kendall and Wortho.

Ninnis should have used more time-outs ... but he learnt from the best when it comes to not calling time-outs.

Side-note: My intense dislike for Wortington increased after Wednesday ... I loathe that smug half snear/half smile he always has on his face ... ahhh - i'm getting mad just thinking about it.

KJ, Cooper was started in that quarter on Wortho presumably so Holmes could close out the rest of the game. Could've run Holmes for the full quarter, but at least there was some merit.

ANON12, frustration from the assistants with Scott or just what they were seeing on court? I've never seen anything to suggest that Ninny wouldn't take advice from those two when it was provided.

I think the club would want to advertise the coaching position at the end of this season though - if Scott wins it, fine, but see what's available.

I am a well documented doubter of Cooper's meagre abilities but I honestly thought the only time we looked good on Wednesday night was when he was in the game, fundamentally just because he brought some balance. Ballinger is a great, great power forward, but he isn't a centre's arsehole. I thought Ninnis made a big mistake not rotating Garlepp through at the 5, as he did all of the preseason with pretty decent results. Again someone who is a bit more capable of playing the centre spot. Ballinger couldn't even container Johnson.

I disagree with Herbert getting the green light. He was a good role player for 10-12 minutes per game at the Dragons, but there is no way he should be playing the kind of minutes he is (in a shorter game) with us. Granted they will come down a bit as Hill plays more.

A pathetic effort. I was not happy with Gilchrist's obviously poor attitude, and it is easy to see why he has been sacked from just about everywhere. I thought Groves was pretty solid, and he looks great when he puts the ball on the floor.

I also think the under-23 rule is a joke, as a lot of teams are doing what Adelaide is with their token guy. Molitor might as well have "Hambour" written on the back of his jersey for all he is going to play this season.

It's very easy to sit back and criticise a coach for what his players do on the court. But realistically, how do you know what he has said in time outs or breaks? What if he has told them to push the ball and look for Ballinger? Pick up Wortho at the half and don't give him any easy looks? For al the things that they didn't do, a lot of the blame must go to players, as it's pretty hard for Scott to guard Wortho out on the court or run the floor hard. For me, Gilchrist looked out of sorts and maybe the banter and negative press from the Perth game played on his mind. He didn't really play like a leader and unfortunately Balls didn't play like a Captain.
Wednesday was the first game i've seen them play this season and after reading what was said about Gilchrist and Cortez messing around with it too much at the top of the key, I have to agree with those comments. Gilchrist doesn't seem to create for anyone else and neither does Cortez. They both penetrate to score and too many times that will leave them open to fats breaks.
Balls needs to get the ball more. Admittedly, Wortho did a very good job on Balls defensively, but that just means we need to work harder to free him up. There were times when it looked like Balls took a shot because he knew if he passed it off it wouldn't come back...once again.
As much as I like the motion style of offence, I still think you need a couple of set plays to isolate one player, we didn't seem to have that.
To also see your import sit on the bench and sook because he wasn't in the game (maybe because you were stinking it up!) and to then pentrate when you should be looking for three's was purely a selfish act. It was almost like he was trying to say to Scott, "see, this is what I could've been doing for the last 5 minutes".
Did anyone else see him at the end of the game grab the little ball to throw out to the crowd and simply turn from the group and just chuck it without looking as he walked off to the changerooms leaving the rest of his teammates on the floor? Not a good look John.

Fair enough Isaac however Holmes subbed out with 3 minutes left in the 3rd. So those 3 minutes (roughly 5 minutes in real time) plus 2-3 minutes quarter time break should have seen him rested and ready to go in the last quarter.

I guess my real point is not whether or not if he was fit enough to start the last quarter but rather more of a smart/normal coaching decision. We had just gotten belted in the 3rd quarter and had lost ALL momentum so surely the best thing to do would be to start your best 5 players to try to get back the momentum. If they wanted to give Holmes a break do it mid way through the last quarter for 2 minutes.

I guess I am using hindsight to my advantage however the smart thing for them would have been to start him for momentum's sake

^^^ +1 to all of the above. Ballinger trying to contest the 5 spot at either end of the floor is having a hugely detrimental effect to our game. The Sixers look much better with a legit center taking the heat off of him.

I'm never big on turning on a coach, but everything I've read above is spot on to be honest. Bevo should be coaching this team.

(My +1 was to Mutley)

Didn't Herbert light us up last year for 20+ when he was on the Dragons? And didn't he shoot a bunch of threes as part of that? I'd be happy to see some of that any time he's ready... :)

Yeah, he did. Apparently he shoots better in places he visits twice a year instead of twice a day!

I also was surprised not to see Garlepp get some time, but not sure how he would've gone against Johnson or Worthington.

Isaac, maybe in hindsight he couldn't have done any worse than Ballinger.

Great thoughts on game from posters and I think we all believe any training had nothing to do woth it.
The key here is we can all see it is not just a bad loss against a patched up team but lack of direction and court structure does not go well for team.
Trouble is how to correct short term and chasnges that need to be made long term.
I have sat on fence re Scotty coaching and saw some positive signs last year that could be our long term coach.
Whilst no doubt better coaches out there was doing ok but unfortunately has picked the wrong squad this year and put a lot of pressure on himself.
Apart from getting Burston back asap needs to make a change in squad as have too many of same type of players who are very limited in defensive skills and a outside or even a jump shot and rely on the drive to basket in Groves ,Gilchrist and Hill. and no game plan to get NG and Adam and even Herbert free shots.
Hill is and will be lomg player in team up to imports to add a shooting dimension to their game and Gilchrist to get the ball up there and get players free. You are not going to win too many games if your imports cant shoot open shots like they missed on Wed.
Facts and understandble limited funds are going to restrict choices in making changes but SOS will be forced to keep crowd support if something doesnt change I believe before season goes too far

I'd bet that at the very least Ninnis would see out the year. And short of more trouble, I can't see an import change either. Best chance is to make the most of the personnel that we already have - maybe recognising that Groves should be a distributor when Hill is on and the two have to be complemented by three long-range shooters, that Gilchrist needs to fix his attitude (though he is playing through a hand problem which would be frustrating), find a way to address the absence of Burston, etc.

I agree with Bretts the Man there has been some really good discussion on this topic.

I also think Ninnis will see out the season and so he should. He deserves a fair chance.

In terms of replacing an import I don't think the club will want to do that due to financial constraints. However, I think it is feasible if they predict the new import (and team being more successful) would bring in 500-1000 more people per game and help the team make the playoffs.

For those that are interested Boti has a brilliant article in the paper today about what we have been discussing. Link to it is below

http://linky.com.au/mopv4

Good article. He's right about Gilchrist. He's also right about the excess of guards. As for Ballinger, I'm not referring to him as "Balls" again until he shows some.

Given that there won't be any changes to team you have to change your offence or mix it up a bit.
Ng is your best perimeter option, so as has been mentioned you need to screen and double screen for him.
If Gilchrist isn't going to puil up and launch it, defense is able to take away the driving lane. So I don't understand why an onball scrren wouldn't create a mismatch for both Gilchrist and Ballinger (the screener).
I have always thought Ballinger is best facing basket, he can postup but only if he is marked by a leadfoot. He's more a finesse player.
Can Groves post up? He seems fairly athletic.

Point being what you are doing at present isn't working and need to explore other options.

We are heavily guard orientated and it would be a nightmare to try and manage the time amongst 5 guards who could all start.
I would trade any one of them for a 5 man right now.

All good ideas Bill, especially screens for Ng and pick and pop for Ballinger (you're right Mutley, needs to earn Balls at the mo). I really dislike the aimless motion offence the Sixers run. Create some mismatches and force the defence to play to your strengths FFS!

By the way, for those that have seen Groves and Hill and others play a lot of times over the years, can either of them shoot the long range shot adequately? Is one significantly better than the other? Or are they both strictly shoot off the dribble 14' and in guys?

Stop... playing... zone... defence...

And get Ng to create his own shots, instead of relying on open 3's. The man can shoot the lights out when he wants to.

And considering how Hill and Herbert have been playing, i'd considering starting Holmes at the 3 spot when Burtson comes back into the side. The man has a good jump shot and is a great post player.

Is there anything preventing Scotty from putting Eric Burdon into the rotation?

If you want to increase your perimeter threat, why not have that option on the bench?

The issue re playing Garlepp is at least might put some defence on and give Jacob some help in attempting to rebound.
But more importantly as I have stated previous and others then allows Ballinger to play his natural game as we wont win too many games with Ballinger not up near the 20 points at least each game.
Agree coaching wise cant do much apart from Scotty be clear how wants Guards to play and some systems and make the team run through them until get it right.

Bean, Groves is probably the better option from long range. I think Hill is a bit streakier.

In answer to the topic question:

No, the Sixers did not train too hard. If they had, they might have known where to stand and what to do at Wednesday's game!

To me it looked like the players were there not because they WANTED to be but because they HAD to be (ie because they were getting paid)Not sure whos fault that is - ure the coach made some decisions that didnt work but if your team hasnt got their heart in it its a pretty tough job.

It just seems that there was no chemistry between the group, no passion for the team. They were just going through the motions. For all his shortcomings Cooper to me is the only one who always busts his arse. Probably because he knows hes not quite at the standard these days he makes sure he blocks out, dives on loose balls, sets a solid screen. Yeah he gets shown up at times for a lack of talent but you cant say he doesnt get the most he can from his talent.

Leadership is one thing and something you cant switch on or off - you just have it (Worthington) and passion is another. Surely the guys should be wanting to help make each other - and as a result the team - better? At the moment its a team of individuals.

Do the guys actually interact much away from the court? Maybe they just need a good old fashioed bonding session, have a few beers, play some pool, talk crap and get to know each other away from the Dome? Amazing the extra lengths you will go for someone you actually know (and like)

I'm not disagreeing with the notion of teams bonding by any stretch, but they're supposed to be professionals. It shouldn't matter if you play Xbox Thursday nights with the guy to your left - you still go out and do what you're paid to do.

Couldnt agree more loco, but its not always the case.

Just like the fact the owner of a business will do the little extra things for their customers that a paid employee may not do.

We have all seen it before with teams. I guess its summed up as 'chemistry' some great teams have it and some other teams (that look like they should be great) just dont

When is everybody gonna stop the excuses - the team and the coach are crap. The culture is crap. The 6ers are just like port power, everything is done for the wrong reasons and until they change the methodolgy crap will prevail, the crows will drop again and interest will be zero and absolutely nothing saved. Start by getting rid of the coach. He simply can't coach and he has proven that. Bring Phil or somebody that IS sucsessful back and let them do what they do best - manage people. Pretty damn simply. Sick of the hype that cannot be justified. No wonder bball in this state is fuc.......

Not sure if you guys were aware but it was 36 degrees in Perth last Saturday. Obviously both teams needed to play in the heat but it would be common sense to me to let the players recover properly rather than bust their arses at practice. Possibly explains the second half fade-out?

Loco, you sound like someone who hasnt played sport at a high level, because how a team knits together is far more important than what their pay cheque says.

Money doesnt motivate you to play desperate basketball like you need to to win games.

My point exactly Paul, and its not just at a high level either.

The old saying about a great team being better than a team of great players is so true.

Sorry paul and statman but i agree with Loco. As professionals, they should be well aware of their role on the team (comes back to the coach) and be able to fill that role accordingly. As an employee, the player's individual role needs to be defined by the boss (the coach). As the "boss", the coach needs to define players roles and give them a structure which suits them and allows them to shine. Seems like it isn't happening atm.

A team of professionals filling there roles is ok, but they dont have too much success in sport. It takes more than that.

Knowing youre a prof doesnt help you push your body to the limit.

Beaniebear I agree that it 'should' happen like you and loco say but it often doesn't. How many times do we see a great team 'on paper' get outplayed, out hussled and beaten by a team of lesser lights who play well together as a team Perfect example would be the lakers when they brought in Malone and Payton - those guys are all very professional but couldn't seem to put it together to win the lot

Anon, I wasn't saying the heat cost them the game but if they play on those conditions, recovery is a lot more important than breaking balls at practice.

I'm sure there was airconditioning at the stadium in Perth when it was 36 degrees. As there is in Cairns.
Not humid in Cairns yet, but will be in another month.