Good signing.

With Hukporti and Digbeu, the Next Star program really growing in scope.

My only concern would be that 3 imports plus NS (plus sometime other exceptions like Yudai Baba) leaves less opportunities for young Aussies.

If more NS's are going to be taken up by guys who have already played professionally like Hukporti and Digbeu, and if more NS's are in the league generally (how many now signed for this season?) then I'd prefer they leave imports at 2 per team.

Although I guess the counter argument is that they should just have the best standard of basketball possible- which ultimately provides the best development for the Aussies who are good enough to be in the league. And if they're not good enough, they weren't making it anyway.

I'm sort of with you on that one. With how many next stars we have this season I'd already question the need for the 3rd import slot, and that's forgetting about the Asian player slots also - I'm expecting those will ramp up, especially if the EU guys do well this season.

Thirded on going to the 2 imports. Could one surmise that having only 2 imports (+ most likely a NS), would translate in to better imports?

I get fed up with the Helen Lovejoy "wont somebody PLEASE think of the Australians!?!?!" take every time we try to have more talent in the league. We have plenty of room for Australians that are good enough. We have development spots. We have multiple scrubs on every team who wouldn't get a game in basically any other half-decent league in the world. Why would we prevent bringing more talent to this league so we can have another Brendan Teys or Jarred Bairstow sitting on the bench? I just don't get it.

The best situation for Australian players is one where there is competition for spots and with the best possible players to compete against. You've got guys as it is like Harry Frolling who wont even pull their finger out for conditioning yet will have a 10-plus year NBL career if they want it just because they're the best of a fairly poor situation when it comes to Australian depth.

So while we're debating about whether Aussies are getting their shot can any of you name any Aussie players who really should be in this league that aren't. Someone who can contribute more than absolute garbage minutes who has a noteable upside? I'd be surprised. And if there is, there's about 8 guys on the Jack Jumpers who could make way for him.

Talking of Australian talent, what is the best long term situation for Australia - situation 1, Brendan Teys 2.0 makes it to the Jack Jumpers bench. Situation 2, an import comes here, loves it, stays here, naturalizes, and their son goes on to represent the Boomers?

Also, just to add, why do you think we're seeing guys like Landale and Dellavedova drop in? It's not because the league is full of borderline Aussies. It's because of the next stars. It's because of the level of imports who are dropping in and then going onto the NBA. Without opportunities for imports and next stars, we don't get either of those guys, we don't get the Maker brothers, we don't keep any Aussies with aspirations. So do you want Brendan Teys 2.0 or do you want the best possible Aussies who have higher aspirations like Broekhoff, Creek, Humphries who could all easily go to Europe if there wasn't this kind of upwards movement in the NBL?


Nah... lets' get more scrubs!

As it stands I could easily list a whole team of players in the NBL who have no business being paid to play basketball, and as such, I am not worried about Australians not having enough opportunities. They might even be getting too many if anything.

There has been two new teams added in the last three years. Plenty of spots for talented young Aussies.

"
This level of naivety is staggering. It is so difficult to be a pro basketballer in Australia compared to other sports with equal or lesser participation numbers.
"

Well... you should have to be particularly good at a sport to be paid for it. Might just so happen that more Aussies are good at football than they are basketball.

"Now we have 10 teams with 12-man rosters, so even with 4 spots for imports and next stars (which in some cases are Aussies) there are at least 80 spots for Aussies and Kiwis, so a good increase in recent years while also allowing teams the extra import spot if they need to add talent that way."

Yes, this. Aussies are not going without spots. I think a lot of them need a fire lit under their asses anyway.

"That said the NBL is not a national development system but a private sports entertainment business, should they really be expect to consider local player development if the audience wants more seasoned talent ?"

I think the NBL does have a responsibility for developing talent to some extent but the question is 'developing talent for what'? I don't think it has a responsibility to develop Australian talent to be 12th men on NBL teams for the sake of being a 12th man on an NBL team. Sure, there will always be guys who fit that role but I don't think it's the NBL's imperative to find those guys jobs.

As far as the NBL's development responibility, I believe it is to develop Australians for the Boomers, the NBL and to a lesser extent Europe. If a player doesn't have that kind of upside then I don't see how their development overly benefits Australian basketball in any meaningful way. And while I wouldn't wish every player without that upside out of the NBL I think we need to be realistic as to whether bringing in an extra import in that circumstance does the competition, and the Australian players with real upside, more service.

*the NBA and lesser extent Europe*

I think with development player spots there is plenty of opportunity for young Aussies with upside, or even young Aussies with question marks, to make the leap into a meaningful NBL role and beyond. But I think we need to preserve and improve the standard of play in the league, and you don't do that by cutting back imports. Take a look at Euroleague - no import restrictions. While we dont have the luxury of havinbg the money, population and depth of talent that Europe does, I am quite confident we could go to four imports, one next star, one Asian player, and have Aussies coming up getting their shots and chances. I mean, as it stands we already have Melbourne with only one import. There have always been teams that have kept an import slot up their sleeves until later in the season. And there wll always be teams that opt against getting Next Stars. In the same breath, you've got teams also putting marquee money on Australian players (Dellavedova, Landale) and you've got Aussies benefitting from the next stars program (Giddey, the Maker brother). If not for LaMelo Ball and what he did with next stars, would the program have the credentials it has for Josh Giddey to have been drafted so high? I doubt it. The relationship between imports and Australians has always been a symbiotic one, ever since the first imports came to raise the game in the 80s. Australian basketball owes a lot to its imports, and we should never forget that.

Some reasonable arguments in this thread.

I wonder how much the 3rd import actually increases the overall standard though? Most of them have been bench players.

I guess it's a debate about the degree to which you sign overseas talent vs developing talent.

If we took some of the "talent" arguments to their logical conclusions, why have an import cap at all?

Or I mean, why not cap at 4 or 5?

I think most of us would agree 2 or 3 is the right number. I'm just questioning if the balance should head back to 2 (as with the 20/21 season) given the expanding NS program.

I would argue 2 imports + a Next Star is enough. Unless you're the Sydney Kings most teams can really only afford NZ NBL level guys with their third import spots anyway so what's the point?

Three imports and a NS per team effectively four imports is overkill IMO.

Well that creates an environment where Aussie players have to step up, which is the ideal environment if you're talking development. I am yet to see a situation where garbage guys aren't getting minutes and until I do I wont be here saying we need to cut back imports.

I believe teams should have the option of 3-4 imports, a next star, and/or an Asian player. As for whether a bench import increases the standard of the league, of course it does? Unless you can point to an Australian player who is not in the league that should be, who is better than the bench import, than is that bench import not just one extra good player that you wouldn't otherwise have?

We saw a drop in standard of play last season compared to the ones before, and a change of import rules was a big part of why.

If we want the NBL to truly be the highest standard of basketball we can create to develop Australian basketball players in, then those very Australian players will need to stop being the sacred cows of the league. Guys doing very little getting 10-15 year careers over here. A career in basketball should be an opportunity, and not an entitlement like a glorified pension for guys who can "kind of play"

More imports - better competition - more highlights - more interest - more money - therefore more teams - therefore more opportunities for Australian players.

I mean can we truly question that Australian basketball players will develop more in a better league, or a league where Brendan Teys plays for a decade in?

ME take it elsewhere dude. This isn't 60 minutes it’s Hoops.

Why stop him when ME is on the cusp of approving open borders so Australia can draw the best talent pool across all fields of trade?

I've often wondered how much roster continuity matters to fans.

Imports place a higher premium on getting paid, whereas Aussies are likely to play longer stints with one team.

If you load up a team with say, 4 imports, a Next Star and an Asian player like Baba, in all likelihood you'll be turning over 2/3rds of your roster every year.

How much does this matter for league branding, fan retention etc? Does it matter at all?

I would add, I have enjoyed watching players who have played many years with teams I've followed. Watching their careers. Even guys who predominantly played off the bench like Hoare, Walker, Corletto, etc.

His dad Alain Digbeu was a French international, who was drafted in the 2nd round by Atlanta but never played in the NBA. Played in clubs like Real Madrid and Barcelona though.

Yes, I think continuity matters. I've typically lost interest when a team has seemed like a set of mercenaries rather than something built up over a number of years. Players don't need be locals, just sticking around for a bit.

"Why stop him when ME is on the cusp of approving open borders so Australia can draw the best talent pool across all fields of trade?"

I see what you tried to do there, and no. Not unless everyone coming in here is coming to do a job we've got a need for, like in the NBL and imports. Nice try though. If imports were unvetted randoms without any credentials then we could have that conversation.

Not sure why people are carrying on about the imports. When the NBL introduced three import rule it made the league great.

Who wants average Aussie/Kiwis on the bench if the NBL stayed with 2 imports with the ten teams we have now.

If there's 3 solid imports plus a good Next Star then you would have better locals in your team rather then locals who aren’t up to it. It’s better if the league becomes more internationally. Yudai Baba was great for Melbourne United. Really nice and humble guy.

Strange only Adelaide used the SRP player rule this season. Not many NBL teams find good asian players. My guess is too dear and most would be signed by other Asian clubs. I thought Melbourne would use it again. Looks like no one is interested in the 7-footer Chinese player.

I read article not many days ago and it said that he won’t be playing with any CBA teams.

Roster continuity is important for 1) fan investment and 2) success

The teams with the most success over the last 15 years have been the most stable - Perth, Melbourne, NZ

Fans become attached to the players who are around for the long-term. You can immediately name the respective stalwarts of the aforementioned teams. Even better is when you can get high calibre imports to hang around.

I don't know why you guys are complaining about imports.

As an outsider, I can see that it is good for you guys, especially in growth. Not only is it good for development, but it further solidifies the NBL as a world-class league.

European leagues don’t have any import restrictions or salary caps. This is also what the B league did to fast track the growth of their local players in the next 5-15 years.

The B league allows 3 imports, excluding a naturalized player, plus an Asian import who is also treated like a local. That could easily be 5 imports. The only restriction is that more than 2 imports can not be played at the same time, except for the Asian import, which is treated like a local.

All in all, the positives outweigh the negatives. In the future, 2nd tier Australian talent or 1st tier (NS) can have a higher ceiling or floor through this and this is also the right direction to penetrate the NBL into a Top 5 basketball league.

So would we rather see
- a tougher battle for local kids to play NBL, which means only the best get in, but also risks a lot of potential players giving up or going to AFL because it all seems too hard, or
- an easier road into the NBL, which allows good - but not great - players to get in and stay in, and gives prospective players hope that they COULD make it?

And then we need to take into account that some will really improve once they get the chance (Travers, Dech, Vasiljevic), whereas others probably won't (Harry F amongst many others).

At least NBL1 offers a bit of a pathway into the NBL.

@Hoopie

From my perspective, I am leaning towards the tougher route. I don't think players will quit if they are faced with adversity.

It could be a possibility, but if they really love this sport, they will do whatever they can do to be better. I am sure at one point, these NBL players in the present also faced some sort of adversity. If they quit, they just don't have it, in my opinion.

Is NBL 1 a second division? I don’t quite understand it. European leagues have 3 divisions, even the B league has 3 divisions.

I do you agree with your opinion. Footy is the logical choice to pick. Basketball there is only ten teams with 3 imports, 1 next start and possibly special restricted player that may take a local spot.

At least in the AFL there isn't the same pressure making a roster. Of course it’s not easy. I used to play footy till under15’s. But once it got more competitive I had no choice to leave. I did play basketball later after footy. Basketball is more of a fun casual sport you do week to week. I was lucky enough winning back to back in my last 2 seasons playing junior basketball. Now just play for fun twice a week.

Professionally in the AFL there is 18 teams and there’s no such things as imports and restrictions. Its Australian rules football. Only played in Australia which makes it special.

You can’t even compare the NBL to AFL. If you’re a superb athlete you have to pick footy over basketball if you can’t make NBA.