Too many Vics?

Yes Victoria are grabbing hold of the coaching positions and using their influence to select teams. Would wonder how some Vic kids would go if they had to battle away in inferior state teams where structures and talent are inferior

Got to admit...and i'm a Vic...there are too many vics who play the exact same position and play too similar...Unco-ordinated talls all very similar who just lumber up and down the court..There is either then, a lack of quality tall players elsewhere or melissa phillipou using her bias yet again...and no...my kid didn't miss out...just stating the obvious

From the few times i saw her in Ulverstone (Under 18 Nationals) Jas played extremely well. Drove and shot well. Averages as follows ;

Played Minutes FGM FGA % 3PM 3PA % FTM FTA % OREB DREB TREB AST STL BLK BI TO PF FO PTS
8 18:32 4.0 9.3 43.2 0.8 2.8 27.3 0.6 1.1 55.6 2.5 2.5 5.0 2.3 1.6 0.3 0.9 1.8 1.4 1.3 9.4

Fred. Where did you get the minutes played stats. I can find the others but not time spent on the court.

POG - I've got a serious problem. I copy the Live Stats info into an Excel spreadsheet and use a ton of formulas to extract all the info.

Your all right. Marissa is selecting VIC players so she can take the worst possible team to the Championships.

Seriously...what coach would choose to take any player that was not going to help the team be as successful as possible.

MELHOOPS - while your logic is sound, and its and argument I've used in BA's defence before, given the lack of merit in the coaching appointments themselves, and some of the decisions I've seen made with other teams, I'll be surprised by very little in BA's selection/development pathways.

Without labouring the point, Vic coaches get the bulk of the coaching gigs based on their winning recod at Nationals - perhaps a better test would be to send them away with the ACT team for a year and see how they go. Vic kids get the bulk fo the opportunities based on their winning record at Nationals - again, send them away with an ACT team and see how they stack up (no disprespect to ACT - could be any other team which doesn't have that many players to draw from.)

There is no doubt the Vics produce an immense number of talented, capable players who are well-coached and perform well at Nationals. But I think you'll find that many of their championships are won not by their starting five but by the depth they have on the bench - they simply have too many bodies for almost everybody. But that doesn't necessarily translate into them having the vast majority of the best players.

But I have to agree with anon577 - they produce a lot of 'cookie-cutter' players (5'11 - 6'1, good skills, reasonable athlete, plays a role well) and coaches are most comfortable coaching these players, because they already have their game plan to suit. Those tall, lumbering bigs, that change shots and drop shooting perentages from 45 to 35% present a challenge to their coaching skills so let's not go there.

Don't know many of the personalities in this group - just making general comments that seem to hold true pretty well.

"But I have to agree with anon577 - they produce a lot of 'cookie-cutter' players (5'11 - 6'1, good skills, reasonable athlete, plays a role well) and coaches are most comfortable coaching these players, because they already have their game plan to suit"


I would have to agree.
Coaches (Vic coaches!)ARE picking players who fit their role. This is an easy out for coaches as they dont have to look outside to players from other states who are equally as good if not better in my opinion. Some of these "true basketball atletes" from other states unfortunately have to play multiple roles and positions within their team. Their "position" is possible judged unfairly.

They are not given the oppurtunity to show their skills at camps.
They are not given the chance to develop through the AIS (they pick players already developed!or who have the oppurtunuty to develop in their own state)

Easy for players to perform well in a talented team.
Easy for coaches to win when you dont have to actually coach.


"Without labouring the point, Vic coaches get the bulk of the coaching gigs based on their winning recod at Nationals - perhaps a better test would be to send them away with the ACT team for a year and see how they go. Vic kids get the bulk fo the opportunities based on their winning record at Nationals - again, send them away with an ACT team and see how they stack up (no disprespect to ACT - could be any other team which doesn't have that many players to draw from.)"

Agree, Agree, Agree

Melhoops agreed, the coaches would be seeking the best kids regardless of which state they come from.

Ankles

This coaching group is highly experiences, with 2 of the coaches having coaches at top level for over 20 years (each), thats perfect for a entry level Australian team, that needs a focus on development.

Wam - my beef isn't with the coaching group. Its with the Head Coach who has been appointed over the top of two guys who both continue to work with State teams, one of whom has been (and as of recently, is again) a Head Coach in the WNBL, the other who, as recently as last year, won the National U20's with a non-Victorian group.

The feedback given to one of the unsuccessful applicants by BA was that the successful coach 'has won a Nationals' - well so have most people who have coached Vic Metro/Vic in the last 15 years. My point is that I'm not sure winning with a Vic team is sufficient evidence that you are a good coach.

Yes, winning with Liz in your group almost works against a coach, she covers up lots of mistakes.


The experience of the last worlds would be a major factor in the coach winning the job.

have to agree with "Agree" and "Ankles" You got to feel sorry for those kids that carry less talented teams, have to play spots 1-5, playing 30 plus minutes per game, scoring 20 plus a game and running the offence and defence. Like Agree said "They are not given the oppurtunity to show their skills at camps. They are not given the chance to develop through the AIS (they pick players already developed!or who have the oppurtunuty to develop in their own state) Easy for players to perform well in a talented team. Easy for coaches to win when you dont have to actually coach.

These kids teams finish in the latter half of 10-14 and never ever get a look in because why? well its already been explained. No wonder they end up disullional when the see who makes the cut for this 17s team.

Its rigged, only three SA players. Need more players like Kaylee Biddell, tall, amazing skills and be able to handle the boards. Can shoot aswell