He's already back from Europe! But seriously, could be a replacement for Goulding.

Isaac, that is a good move, I would have gone with 50% though...

and who would they look to bring is as their Marquee player? ;)

Fantastic news will make the league heat up that bit more! Forward positive moves, keep it up NBL!!!

50% over would make it a non competitive league.

Will be interesting to see if there is a salary floor.

Hopefully this provides incentive for teams to bottom out and rebuild properly as well.

I look at a team like Townsville this year: bringing in veteran players, having young players with potential glued to the bench, overpaying older guys, all for the wooden spoon anyway and it's just a waste of hundreds of thousands of dollars. You can come 8th with a team of 20 year olds.

Shit sorry...read that wrong...thought it meant teams could go over by 25%.

Bear is right...50% should be going back to the non-paying clubs.

How is it implemented so that the under-the-cap teams gets the money? What if one team waits until all other teams have filled their roster spots before signing a marquee player above the cap? I'm all for the money being re-distributed but it wont help them if they have already filled their roster.

So what you're saying is you'd like the money to be given out quickly so teams like Wollongong and Townsville can use it to top up their salary cap for the coming season?

I don't think you'll see the money distributed that quickly, Situation.

There is no way of knowing who will be a payer until rosters are set. You would think it would be a situation of teams paying tax for the previous season, not the upcoming one.

Big risks in waiting too long to fill your roster so not always the best to be savvy in that way. You may be able to see who everyone else has selected, but there might not be much talent left to pick from. Either way, clubs wont be arguing if the money comes back to them in any form.

Yeah, thats my point Mick. It will be given to the teams to use the next season but in the meantime, they potentially remain uncompetitive for that season, which puts them a bit further behind the eight ball.

We know that a losing season can quickly see crowds drop off for the next season.

25% pushes them closer to the cap too.

As long as there is some sort of mechanism like a points cap this won't have much impact on the competitive balance. I don't think NBL clubs don't have the money to spend on players who could have that big an impact.

Re Situation: it's not the money being distributed quickly, as players are paid over the course of the season, but the clubs being notified how much they are going to receive early so they can factor that into their recruiting.

Yeah, but how do they know? Are we relying on the richer clubs to say "we intend to spend $x..." and then tax them accordingly? That could work - won't be ideal and will result in more tax to be paid, or refunds due if they don't, but if it actually helps to keep the league competitive, I'm for it.

Will they be reducing the cap as well?

Yeah I agree that would be great, but I just don't think it's feasible. I also don't think there is any harm in those fiscally-weaker regional clubs carrying an extra couple of hundred grand into the next season (provided obviously they MAKE it to the next season).

Also what happens then when a guy gets released and the cap situation changes. The only way to do it is retroactively.

I know I'm in the distinct minority here but I am super AGAINST parity in the NBL, so I hope that this will allow a bigger divide between the top and bottom teams in terms of title hopes.

I think the organic process of contending and rebuilding is much better for the health of the league long-term. Shitty teams with young players getting 35 minutes a game are essential for sustainable growth. That's how superstars are born.

Teams spending loads of money trying to contend when they have no chance of winning it all is a bad situation, and it's what we have now. They are better off loading up on young talent, saving money, and giving lots of court time to exciting young players with an eye towards the future.

With this tax there is more incentive for teams not to go for the title every season, because they can top up the loss of revenue with the tax money and rebuild properly.

"Tracy McGrady to Tigers...."

And thats the sort of thing that will kill clubs.

Great to see the NBL showing some daring and coming up with great initiatives. Marquees also provide a great media and fan focus point in terms of speculation over prospective signings.

I'm with you in that minority Mick. There is a fair amount of parity in the NBL already. Townsville next year for example could replace PC, Hinder and Holmes with 3 young guys and build from the bottom up they have a solid young duo in Norton and Blanchfield, Townsville could be a contender in a few years.
Back to the parity point only 3 wins separated 4th from 8th.

I like the idea of it all. Thumbs up.

BUT, no disrespect to Barlow, you'd want the rule to attract bigger names than him.

The rule is designed to get marketable players, players who can sell tickets and pull crowds with flashy, but effective play (ala Del Piero)


I don’t know about you guys, but I don’t want the rule to be abused by Euro-based Australians just for the purposes of pulling a bigger salary. That isn’t how a marquee rule should work.

Teams will have to get it right.

Use it to as a vehicle to sell tickets/gain interest and not just because a Euro-based Aussie has come knocking because he realises the extra salary he can make with the rule.

may allow NZ to put a serious offer to Penney & Jackson.
Any word on the Points Cap?

Definately a step in the right direction and will need some tinkering to get the formula right.

"Make it dollar for dollar so it's actually a deter rant for the team going over the cap and brings some benefit to teams staying under cap."

They obviously don't want it to be a deterrent.

Cant say I am a fan of this initiative.

I'D still keep Markovic at 29 he is a young veteran.
I rate Barlow as a player but certainly not a marquee level player.

I'm all for the money being re-distributed but it wont help them if they have already filled their roster.

Makes no sense to me. Either have a marquee player outside cap or a luxury tax system.

I agree with this, this will will enhance the player's standards.

Everyone is worried if the money will be spent on players that season or next, that's the wrong issue at hand. The money should be pumped by clubs and the league from this tax into community building programs and marketing

Is there any limit to how far a team can go over the cap?

Will be fascinating to see how the more financially well-off teams approach the opportunity to exploit that marquee opportunity. Ideally it should be done with an eye to players who can bring showmanship more than anything else.

The more players in the league capable of putting each other on posters, the better!

The A-League's deal is worth a lot less than $40mill as that total includes Socceroos, which is the main attraction of that deal. But if the NBL could get even $5mill that could make a huge difference, $10mill would be game changing.

Re payments: I don't think it will be a big deal if the redistribution lags a season, but if it is it wouldn't be hard to make them the same year.

Clubs lodge contracts which show how much they are projected to spend. They could then be asked to lodge instalments as the season goes, very similar to how the tax system works for businesses. Any adjustments could then be factored into the next season's tax.

Has to be dollar-for-dollar IMO, not as a deterrent, but so the non-tax-paying teams are actually getting something of worth for having to play against a low-medium-rung NBA talent on a Perth Wildcats or Melbourne Tigers team.

25% is as good as nothing.

Great news and glad to intoducing marquee player.

No Mick, 100% luxury tax would hamstring the idea to the point of uselessness, and clubs under the salary cap would end up with nothing. The 25% mark gives something to both sides, and importantly, advances the league. A 100% luxury tax would just leave us with our current stagnation.

There's such a large wealth gap between NBL clubs and it needs to be fixed.

So what do you do if you're trying to achieve parity? Raise the taxes. Simple

Don't know if dollar for dollar is the right amount, maybe it is. But 25% isn't much if you're trying to give other clubs a fair go.

Great initiative for the league though. Will get more names in=more coverage and following=increased profitability. We already have the product, but we lack the ability to get the brand out there. This will help

The only problem with a high tax is that most clubs are poor to begin with, and they may not be able to negotiate means of covering salaries -- third party, corporate sponsorship etc

So an increased rate may be more viable in the future as the league and clubs get more profitable.

No Mick, 100% luxury tax would hamstring the idea to the point of uselessness, and clubs under the salary cap would end up with nothing. The 25% mark gives something to both sides, and importantly, advances the league. A 100% luxury tax would just leave us with our current stagnation.

NBA players names aside, it will allow teams to chase stud imports who would otherwise get better money elsewhere. Guys who didn't quite make an NBA roster but can't survive on D-League Money to buy Escalades & Rims for for Family members.
This combined with the NBL Summer League in Vegas could dramatically raise the quality of NBL Imports

Yeah, I think make it at least 50-60%. If you go over the cap by $150,000, that's about $75-90k to split between a few clubs.

..basicly..barlow got paid f.all this season...

That time of year when rumours fly around.
Would be a coup for Townsville if they snared Bairstow

Anonymous... I think your talking shit mate. LOL. Isn't McGrady on Millions in China? Do these teams even have their coaches set yet? HAhaha. Seriously. If you can give a source I would be amused.

Hey GWB it's probably the same anon who talked shit in Ennis trophy thread and couldn't prove any sources there either.

@Isaac,

Depends if this is just a way to fudge your salary cap and do a little squad strengthening, or if you're trying to actively compete with Euro wages for someone with showmanship. If you're dropping $200k for your marquee, you aren't really doing it right. You're more likely to be looking in the $500k sort of range, where a 100% luxury tax quickly starts to get prohibitive. Now a $500k player is not 2.5x as good as a $200k player, but when you have a lot of cashed up Euros to compete with, you have to offer at least a similar wage. We only got Ennis for that price because of the NBA release clause, which haunted us the whole bloody year.

Basically, if your marquee is just the same sort of player you would have had anyway, you're doing it wrong.

@'423
Is a marquee coach going to earn media coverage and create highlights?

Is it a "marquee player" rule though, or just an "expensive player" rule?

Ie. can they be a guy without a large profile who is just really good but not going to really do much for the NBL brand (guys like Ty Mckee who are priced out of the NBL but not well known to basketball fans), or do they have to have a legitimate profile and branding potential (ie. an ex NBA player of some note).

What I'm trying to say is can you just use it on anyone? Or does the league get to decide who is a marquee player.

I would like to see a tiered tax system.
25% seems like a nice number to me, for teams that are having to increase their salaries to keep good or improving players. If you've got a successful young team that you want to keep together then this will allow it.

However for recruiting superstars, if a club has that kid of money then they should be able to afford extra tax.
So I'd like something like 25% for every dollar over the cap, but say 40% for every dollar once you exceed $200k over the cap.

@429,

The luxury tax goes on to all payments made in excess of the salary cap; i.e., to the extent your marquee player takes you above the cap, that is what you will pay 25% cap on.

So, rest of squad signs on for $950k.

Sigh a marquee for $450k. You are now $400k over the cap.

You pay a luxury tax of 25% on the amount in excess of the salary cap. In this case you pay $100k in tax, which is then redistributed.

You pay no luxury cap at all on payments made beneath the salary cap.

All this talk of McGrady. The guy is trying to make it at baseball with a team he bought a stake in. He's not going to come to Australia to play.
I think with this we can now choose decent imports tempting with decent pay compared to Asian leagues plus the selling of the Aussie lifestyle. Plus they only play 20+ games.
We should be able to hang onto Rotnies, Ervins and Beals. Moving forward.
In fact the imports that come here cannot expect it to be easy because teams will sack and hire until they find a stud.
This gives tremendous flexibility to teams.

Re anon post earlier, I heard the crocs are hopeful of getting bairstow too, was close to signing last year but stayed in college. Would be a great signing for the crocs in addition to Conklin and or jervis.

Is it just me or is the age still advertising game two between Tigers and 36ers?

McGrady's knees cant take another season of basketball. why do you think he retierd?The spurs offerd him the minimum to comeback for another season and he chose to retier. He gave up on 1.3 mill to play for a contender in the nba to come and play for 700 thou in Australia?

There is some real idiocy sprinkled in this thread... Marquee coaches? Are you kidding me?... Hey I know what will make the game more attractive everyone! Slightly better coaching! HAHAHA. No. No... Not at all. If you signed an Allen Iverson to 1 team in the NBL the WHOLE league would benefit.. As for the few teams who can't do that... they will also experience more interest.. the whole league will. This thought of trying to retain "Kevin Lisch's" Is actually laughable!

Lisch was a good player, don't get me wrong.. He was a solid player who knew how to score.. But is he going to put asses on seats? Absolutely not.. the guy was solid and boring. I am hearing all these boring names brought up for Marquee rule... Cedric Jackson? He was here without the rule being in place and surely he would give it a shot again.. what are people thinking? Lets pay more for the exact same players we can already get?

Soon we are going to get better imports more consistently even without a Marquee rule so there is NO need to waste the rule on some semi solid import we would have regardless. If your going to get a Marquee player.. at VERY LEAST get an Ennis.. and at most.. aim for an Ex NBA guy with a name or a current one who is a bit displaced for whatever reason.

All this small minded low aspirations make me sick frankly!

"Oh townsville wont be able to afford it" or something. Lol. Fact of the matter is Townsville is a team that barely floats by now... Evolution, Survival of the fittest.. if a team like that is going to hold the league down.. questions need to be asked whether the license couldn't go elsewhere. My thoughts.

Sam Young came to Sydney and their crowds decreased, Melbourne had bigger crowds after Patty Mills left - the bums on seats argument is not a great one because there's no evidence marquee players have a big impact.

Using the rule to keep a Cedric Jackson or Chris Goulding is one great way of using the exception, keeping the stars fans love. For mine, building that consistent connection is a better strategy than chasing ex-NBAers in a country where most people have never heard of them.

One thing I do agree on GWB, is that from a marketing perspective it should be used on players who excite their fans, but they come in all shapes and sizes - Rotnei Clarke and Kevin Lisch were adored by their fans as much as some high flyers.

I think what happened is it irked people in Sydney when Sanders was dropped for Young.. I think they saw the character in him. But I would argue had the season started with Young it would have been bigger selling point. I think get the big names and get the hard workers who endear themselves also. I do thing James Ennis should be exactly the type of player we go for.. and if we can snipe a name EVERYONE knows in an Iverson, A McGrady or whatever then that has to be looked at for the good of the league. I just don't think I would use Marquee on Kevin Lisch. But a second import spot? sure.

I hear David Barlows name been thrown around as Marquee also. How is the guy Marquee? .. Would feel a bit duped grabbing him as Marquee and another team gets a draft pick! Brad Newley I would maybe consider.. Joe Ingles absolutely, Jawai.. No question.. But Barlow hasn't shown himself to be any more then a role player at most levels.. I wouldn't break the bank for him.

Definitely agree that players like Ennis and Young are great to have in the league, but I'm not so sure about older guys like Iverson or McGrady.

Their appeal would wear off pretty quick once people saw they weren't producing anything special on the court, and most sports fans in Australia don't really know much about those guys.

For me, playing good attractive basketball, engaging with fans and potential fans, and building memberships should be the main focus for clubs.

For the league, it's putting out a good television product and actively promoting the good things that happen on court to the basketball community and wider public.

Big names are just the cherry on the sundae, they aren't the answer on their own. Substance ultimately wins over style, although a mixture of both is best.

Iverson isn't coming to Australia to play in the NBL. Neither is T-Mac.

IMO Barlow is terribly overrated. I wouldn't go over the cap for him. Ingles, Newley or Jawai, sure. Barlow.. Not a chance in hell.

There are Aussies in the NBL already than Barlow. Wouldn't mind seeing Jawai,Ingles and Newley back.
Also hoping to see Luke Nevill and Daniel Dillon back but not as marquee players.

Absolutely Barlow is overrated. I don't think he would be a star in the NBL today. He is athletic.. can hit the occasional 3, but outside of that his game leaves a lot to be desired. When the Aussie team was weak in 06 he had some merit. But not anymore. He is no longer among the countries best players and only a fool would make him marquee.

Luke Nevill is a real chance at coming back. It would be good to see him replace Ogilvy in the NBL landscape.

Agree Nat, losing Ogilvy and DJ? could be offset with Nevill and Bairstow.

so will the team that signs a marquee player still be allowed two imports?

I would prefer it to still be 2 Imports per team and the Marquee Player can either be one of those Imports or a Aus/NZ Player ie: Penney/Ingles etc.

No need for 3 Imports imo.

I would assume it's still 2 imports per team with one of them maybe a marquee player or 2 regular imports and a high level Aussie eg Ingles.
Is points cap remaining next year?

I think 3 imports should be allowed if one is Marquee.. We are about to have 4 extra teams and probably not enough talent to spread evenly

Still two imports, the performances of local players who have come into the comp in recent years shows we are much better opening up more Aus/NZ spots than recruiting more Americans.

3 imports I agree with when expansion kicks in.

3 imports is a must to keep talent equal through expansion

Three imports should be considered for 16 teams.

Penney won't be back next season, I believe he's going back to the States to finish a degree and then possibly may be back the season after.

Tracy Mcgrady couldnt even defend MJ right now
so what he had big numbers in china 2 years ago?
whats he doing now?

McGrady is retired

lets not give up on Iverson rumours until the 36ers retire his jersey lol

I don't really know about NBA players. Look at their salaries even on a good teams budget you wouldn't get a seat filler for the money any NBL clubs have.

Source: http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/nba/limit-500/

percentage is too low to help all teams to fund an extra player
marquee coaching? your kidding me?
3 imports cost too much to get 2 decent imports as it is

A lot of imports aren't as expensive as you think.

The key maybe how the tax is distributed.

For example given it is about equalisation, if Townsville & Woolongong spend only 75% of the cap, they receive a larger % of the taxes collected than a team who spend 95% of the cap.

Could also tier the tax. Say 25% for up to $200k over the cap & 50% for anything above that.

The stronger teams will realise that having all teams in the league financially stronger with better rosters = better crowds, tv deals etc for their club and the whole league.

Ennis draws a crowd and is a great promo tool for the league, but imagine if each side had an Ennis level player going at each other every week. Anything that encourages clubs to get to this point is surely a good thing.

This is a great initiative but needs careful thought how to implement.

There's not more than a few Aussies playing in Europe you'd bring back to take a spot as an import. I think 3 imports should be allowed if your marquee player is Australian or has an Asian passport, otherwise 3 across the board is a decent number. I know in France they can have 3 imports with only 2 on the cour5 at once. That's not a bad idea.

Not sure if its been mentioned in the fine print but every club has to give the NBL it's summary of earnings and spendings on a monthly basis (to determine the viability of each club so they don't get surprised that at the end of a season a club has a $1m loss) so I reckon that with these monies being spoken about that clubs under the salary cap should get paid a portion of the money on a monthly basis. This would allow for roster changes like what happened in Sydney this season etcetera or Wollongong with Darrel Summers at seasons start to be taken into account if you up/downgrade your import.

It's a great idea and very positive, I agree with Mick about giving good young players court time on bad teams over veterans that could be chasing titles instead. I'm scared about getting NBA players that lack motivation in any facet whether it be on court, Practise or with media when we want them being the face of the league or atleast their region of the country.

Johnny Flynn came in and seemed excellent and that's the type of player is like us to attract