Storm Exposed.

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Paint.

Guest
Imagine the Dogs without Barba, Ennis and Reynolds?
The Tigers without Benji, Robbie and Moltzen?
Manly without Stewart, Foran and DCE?
The Broncos without Hoffman, Wallace and McC?
Cowboys without Bowen, Thurston and Payne?

lol, of course they struggled without their 3 best players. They didn't play as good as they have all season, but they didn't play poorly at all. You're talking like they lost 40-0 to the Raiders or something... they lost by 4 pts to the in form team of the competition, without the 3 best players in the NRL, and they were terrible?

Mr I exposed as a dud.
 

Stringer

CAR RAMROD
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
1,001
Reaction score
20
It's hard to win any game with a third of your salary cap missing, I would be extremely proud if I was a storm supporter with there efforts.
 

Hansta

Im Bain's Boss!
Joined
May 25, 2007
Messages
22,608
Reaction score
1,649
The point (that many missed) still stands.

The Storm are focussed around 3 key players. All are around the same age, and realistically not all that far from retirement. The older one gets the more injury prone they can be.

Storm should be starting to blood new players to cover the 1, 6, and 9 soon, to cover for when Slater, Cronk, and Smith leave.

Sure it may be years away and other clubs are most likely affected by a similar situation, however the Storm have had a hold on the NRL competition for quite a few years now, and namely due to those 3 players. Clubs like the Bulldogs on the other hand are blooding quite a few young players now and will be interesting to see how far they can take the side with a few years under their belts.
the point you missed is they a team worth around 3 million nearly beat a team worth 4 million. Even without these 3 players they can still compete with a top 8 team all be it looking a little lost in attack. But dont forget, without these 3 around, theyll have roughly 1.5 million to spend....
 

Malla

*********
Joined
Aug 30, 2007
Messages
10,870
Reaction score
13,470
The big 3 will be around for a further 6 years. Eventually younger guys will be blooded but what the big 3 have done in Melb is set that high level expectation. Anybody who comes in to fill the positions know's who they are replacing and what is expected of them. This is important and a reason why they can be competitive without them.
 

Özil

Hava Nagila
Joined
Oct 20, 2003
Messages
20,737
Reaction score
109
*bump*

Is three really the magic number for Melbourne?


'I know Craig [Bellamy] still believes you can build a team around three players, but I think we are starting to see the problems if you do.''

That was the reaction of one rival coach to Melbourne's current losing streak, which was extended to four defeats in five games when the competition leaders went down 20-16 to North Queensland on Saturday.

While comparisons between Cooper Cronk calling a press conference to announce he would re-sign with Melbourne and LeBron James keeping a nation in suspense as it waited for him to reveal live on TV that he was taking his ''talents to South Beach'' were far-fetched, there are similarities between the way the Storm and Miami Heat manage their salary caps.

The Heat allocate about 66 per cent of their US$78 million wages bills on James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh, and have built an NBA championship winning team around them. In comparison, the Storm's big three of Cronk, Cameron Smith and Billy Slater take up about 45 per cent of the club's $4.3 million salary cap.

Like Heat president Pat Riley, who has about $25 million to spread among the remaining 12 players on his roster, Bellamy has to accommodate another 22 players at an average of about $100,000 per head.

To do so, he relies on a combination of young players scouted and developed by the club, such as Justin O'Neill, Matt Duffie, Jesse Bromwich, veterans, such as Jason Ryles, and journeymen like Brian Norrie and Jaiman Lowe.

They are support acts who know their roles are to help the big three shine, and are happy to do so for the reward of a premiership or a big contract elsewhere. In recent seasons, the likes of Jeremy Smith, Brett White, Adam Blair, Sika Manu and Dane Nielsen have all signed for more money elsewhere after becoming representative players while at Melbourne, and Greg Inglis was squeezed out after the 2010 salary cap scandal engulfed the team.

It is a formula that has worked well for Bellamy, with the Storm winning last year's minor premiership and leading this season's competition since the outset. However, as happened last year, the absence of one or more of the big three due to State of Origin commitments and injuries has raised questions about the Storm's salary cap philosophy.

After winning their opening nine games this season, Melbourne's unbeaten run came to an end the weekend the teams were named for Origin I, as they lost 12-10 to Cronulla. In the absence of Smith, Cronk and Slater due to Origin duty with Queensland, the Storm were beaten by Wests Tigers in round 14 and lost their last three matches to the Bulldogs, Raiders and Cowboys.

Slater has missed all three games due to a knee injury sustained in Origin II that also ruled him out of the series decider, while Smith was unable to back up from that match for the game against Canberra.

Last season, the Storm got the wobbles later and lost their final two matches against Manly and Sydney Roosters before bowing out of the finals after losing in the second week to the Warriors at AAMI Stadium.

How they perform from here on in will be a test of the club's Miami Heat-like salary cap structure.



Discuss
 

Malla

*********
Joined
Aug 30, 2007
Messages
10,870
Reaction score
13,470
It's risky to have a 'big 3' and won't work in Rugby League. As the article stipulated, Pat Riley has $25 mil (or 40%) of their salary cap to spread among 12 players whereas Bellamy has double that, and a bigger percentage of players. It's probably sufficient for short term gain, as indicated through their form early in the year, however it is not a stable solution for the long term. In 2-3 years, guys like Gareth Widdop, Justin O'Neill, Duffie etc will be worth $250k-$300k and they'll leave for that pay-rise. We're seeing Melbourne slowly capitulate under this salary cap. Last season they lost Brett White and Adam Blair. They've already lost Sika Manu for next season also. If Melbourne cannot get themselves a premiership within the next 2 years, I'm afraid they won't be able to with the 'big 3'.

You need a good balance of young and old, rich and poor(er), good and better etc.. Dogs, Manly, Sharks and Broncos have that perfect combination hence why they're in or around the top 4 and will be there come September.
 

FaceBreaker

Kennel Addict
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
7,127
Reaction score
1,944
Bellamy is also very lucky, these three guys almost never seem to be injured.

They are immune to ACL's and pectorial tears.
 

BaYry Ward

Former Immortal
Joined
Sep 16, 2005
Messages
4,580
Reaction score
42
Dumb comparison really.

Melbourne's "big 3" can only contribute a perceived maximum of 23% (could probably be slightly more if taking into consideration amount of touches on offense and tackles on defense but cbf doing a formula) of the overall team performance. ie if they all play 80 mins they can contribute a max of 240 mins from a required 1040.

Whereas the "big 3" for the Heat can feasibly contribute up to 60% of the overall team performance (which would probably equate to even more should touches & shots taken etc be considered).

Therefore it's much less of a risk to invest a disproportionately hi ratio of salary cap into 3 players in basketball as opposed to rugby league.
 

Moe

Moderatwhore
2 x Gilded
Premium Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
14,922
Reaction score
92
I thought this was going to be like one of those Dateline stories.

 

Book

Kennel Legend
Joined
Nov 26, 2006
Messages
8,098
Reaction score
94
Dumb comparison really.

Melbourne's "big 3" can only contribute a perceived maximum of 23% (could probably be slightly more if taking into consideration amount of touches on offense and tackles on defense but cbf doing a formula) of the overall team performance. ie if they all play 80 mins they can contribute a max of 240 mins from a required 1040.

Whereas the "big 3" for the Heat can feasibly contribute up to 60% of the overall team performance (which would probably equate to even more should touches & shots taken etc be considered).

Therefore it's much less of a risk to invest a disproportionately hi ratio of salary cap into 3 players in basketball as opposed to rugby league.
Pretty much exactly what I was thinking lol stupid comparison
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top