(Awkwardly replying to own post...)

What about thinking outside the box and getting Copeland re-rated UP? Or have Squid pointing to Nash's two threes on the weekend and saying "Tell me that isn't a 7 point player!?" then swapping Timmons for Nashy? Playing assistant coach? Timmons in an Erik Burdon costume? Why is Slambour being overlooked here - has Timmons ever even submitted a video to Hoops SA? Anyone got money on Majstrovich getting injured at training today?

We can't even put Sutton and copeland together to get half a timmons.

Surley being out of the league for a few years his rating would have to nearly start from scratch???

Nashy's back injury to flair up and force an early retirement....lucky that we have Timmons here ready to fill a spot.

I'm starting a 'bring back blakemore' campaign. I think we need a little of what ever it was he used.........I don't think he actually slept for a whole season.

Than we won't have to worry about injuries!!!!!!

Ahhhh Chris Blakemore... now THAT was a player with heart (a little too much at times - and what a dirty heart at that... Cheap shot on Doggallini back in '95)... He did make one of the best dunks in Sixers history though drop step 2-hander - followed by the most embarrasing post dunk celebration EVER (if you have seen it you know what i am talking about - on both counts)...

Blackemore's best move as a sixer? Being the catalyst for getting Cat here.

Judging from todays article it looks as if they 36ers are going to have to chose between Timmons and one of Nash, Cooper, Majstrovich and Wheeler, i personally would cut Nash and bring in Timmons, but him having a 2 year contract could complicate things, well Mal would have to be willing to buy him out or something or they could pay him his wage to be a training player or something, i hope we can get him in and the 36ers roster is hardley stacked so if the Tigers got Dench i think we should be able to fit Timmons in

Seriously, if we are looking at cutting one of these guys now for Timmons, why the hell did we not sign Timmons at the start of the season rather than these current guys??? Was Phil really expecting Nash, Mastro and Cooper to be touched by the Basketball gods and come out this season and dominate?????
I thought picking up Timmons was to alleviate being down Hill, Sutton and Copeland? If we then cut one of the other mentioned players aren't we still down a player!

Yeah we would still be down a player but at least we would have a player that can actually play :P

Not on the defensive end......

Why would we have to cut anyone?

Maher - 5
Farley - 10
Horvath - 9
Cooper - 6
Wheeler - 6
Nash - 6
Majstro - 6
Copeland - 3 (inj)
Sutton - 1 (inj)
Ng - 3 ?
Hill - 1 (out 4 season)
TOTAL = 56.
add Timmons - 7
Total = 63

from NBL website...

2. For the 2006-07 NBL Season, the NBL Board and NBLPA determined the Total Player Points will be 68 points per club.



http://www.nbl.com.au/default.aspx?s=points_system

So what exactly is the issue?

(Im sorry if it has been explained and Ive missed it)

109457, that only works for the two weeks Copeland is injured, not until March. Also, he gets a three-point reduction, it's not halved AFAIK.

Dee-mak, salary cap.

Also, read the rest of the thread to see replacing injured players works.

See Brockman's post re a mystery Nash injury - wouldn't be a surprise.

Some of the above posts are so ridiculous that I feel I should add to it. Sack the whole team and start again.

On a more serious note, why do replacements have to be no more than the points value of the ones they are replacing when the whole team is well under? Its a stupid and unfair rule and especially with a team like the 36ers who are struggling with injuries and performance.

Email the NBL and ask them.

Would you have the same view if the Kings had an injured BJ Carter and brought in Matthew Nielsen?

The same rule (or set of rules) are preventing the Bullets from running Tragardh again for the injured Bradtke as Tragardh has already filled his spot once.

God forbid the NBL giving Adelaide an unfair advantage. It might lead to us winning the championship, haha. Don't they think its already too little too late?

Isaac, in regard to your question about the Kings, yes I would have the same view if the whole team fitted within the points maximum. If every team is playing on an even field, then all the teams are entitled to go maximum on both points and salary. The same applies with the Bullets.

This rule stops a team bringing in a $350k player for the last x games of the season to replace an "injured" player and get an unfair advantage.

All teams are on an even field with regard to this ruling on injured players and their replacements...

Fair enough if they couldn't fit this $350K player under their salary cap. It amazes me on how strict the NBL come down on points, yet cannot police the salary cap properly. Unfair advantages can be gained in more ways than one.

You can't allocate points via other jobs, in later years, to partners and children, etc. Much easier to police.

Panther's suggestion isn't unreasonable, in my opinion. Timmons was available at the start of the year - sign him then if he's a crucial piece.

My take on this is that we've written off Friday against the Kings, but cannot afford to lose the next two home games - and losing to the Pigs and Slingers at the Dome could well happen with Copeland and Sutton out if the rest don't perform - bit of a risk.

Hill was replaced by Sutton for the rest of the season, I think.

Let's consider for a moment that we can't get Timmons. This leaves us with Maher, Farley, Mastro, Horvath, and Cooper as starters, and only Wheeler, Nash, and Burdon off the bench for the next 2-3 weeks. Does that scare any one else?

Am I missing something here, we have 3 players out including Hill. We are only looking for 1 replacement. Wouldn't the combination of points of all 3 players be made available for 1 replacement? Isn't Sutton a 1 point player who replaced Hill a 4 point player? Doesn't that already give us a 3 point credit? Pardon my ignorance but I'll never get the gist of the point system. If someone like Smyth can admit to being confused by it, then its not that black and white.

Ye i think the rule should be 68 points for any given game, why cant we sign timmons as our 11th man??, and we just have to pick 10 guys for any given game, i thought thats what perth had last year with Dowdell and were going to have this year with Robbins until they cut Leven. I think Treghard should be able to replace Bradtke (or anyone esle aslong as Brisbane are under the points cap), and yes if Sydney can sign Nieslen late in the season for a run, good on them, as long as he plays the minimum 7 games and the kings remain under the points cap as a team, as realistically they wont be able to cut a benchy for a nielsen callibre player it would have to be one of there stars and would probably never happen

Jonno, Tragardh did replace Bradtke earlier this season because his points value is lower than Bradtke's. However, Bradtke returned and Tragardh cannot replace him again - the swap can only happen once.

EC, the issue isn't with the overall points cap (we are well under) - it is with the fact that you can only replace the injured player with someone of equal or less points value. Player for player - you can't combine them!

Sutton has replaced Hill already. Timmons can't come in for Sutton or Copeland (unless Timmons is significantly re-rated) but could replace another player if they were cut.

Nash plays his 300th NBL game on Friday by the way.

I think the rule re Traghard is stupid he should be able to replace Bradtke as amny times as required and anyone else the Bullets want him to aslong as they stay under the cap.
Same with Timmons i dont think it should matter if his rating matches copelands or anyone elses, again aslong as the 36ers remain under the cap which they are.
Any news on whether the NBL will let him play this weekend or at all??? or if the 36ers are going to be forced to make a decision on cutting someone for Timmons?? as i remember with the Moore situation im pretty sure the NBL said they could have Moore aslong as they cut Forman and Williams i think it was, and the 36ers chose to stick with Forman and Williams,which in my opinion was the right move at the time, so i wonder what will happen this time, i personally would make the tough call and cut nash and either buy him out or pay him to continue training and perhaps fill in for injuries, but NBL rules may prevent Nash doing that, i think you should be alloud to have upto a 12 man sqaud aslong as you fit under the points and salary cap and then just pick your ten for each game, or simply just make it both teams have 12 for every game, which would be fairer than just the home team having 12.

hinting at 300th and final there isaac ?

Well, I think it'd be a harsh call and I haven't heard anything to suggest as much, but just in case it happens I wanted to be the one that mentioned it first!

yep, have to admit have heard rumours that the slingers game was to be his last, but makes more sense now rather then that game