top of page

Camels, Blazers Headline Trade News

The Cora Lynn Camels and HP Blazers have sent shockwaves through the league by making a surprise trade.

Cora Lynn Camels send Scott Elliott to HP Blazers for Kyle Glover

Cora Lynn Camels

The trade has come somewhat out of left field after Scott Elliott had been on a tear in his first few outings as a Camel, averaging a double double (12pts, 12rebs). His play has kept the Camels in games thus far, but with the Camels at 1W-2L, GM Lachlan McGrath has decided to shake things up early. What was no secret was that the Camels we after another perimeter player with elite pace to make life easier on their stud scorer Joel Donnelly.

The addition of Kyle Glover to the Camels figures to be more about fit, rather than anything else. Although around the same % as Scott Elliot from deep, Glover will be a man to hover around the perimeter and always be looking to punish the D for sagging off. This could prove very handy for the Camels, as in their early season match ups have seen teams really target Joel Donnelly on defense to minimize his impact on the game. If Joel can spot the open shooter when the defense helps, this could be a big win for the Camels.

HP Blazers

This somewhat also took us by surprise - the Blazers trading Glover after a couple of terrific showings on the offensive end, clawing the Blazers back from defeat with his outside shooting. Glover is also averaging over 10ppg, albeit slightly. His pace seemingly fit very well with this team of run and gun stars. Perhaps this trade is about adding another dimension to the Blazers attack? A move away from being so transition heavy?

Adding Scott to the line up bolsters their inside guys, in Ash Turner, Jack Whelan and Scott Mcquillan. The move seems to balance the team up a little bit and the Blazers are looking like an elite rebounding team. Combine that along with some elite scoring, which they already have in The Bagel Bros (Kyle and Corey Nagel) and this could be a lethal recipe for opposing teams.

We asked The Stats Don't Lie's Jordan Hendrix to analyze this trade from a purely statistical standpoint:

Scott Elliot (round 6 pick 84) vs Kyle Glover (round 6 pick 81)

With the recent trade announcement of Scott Elliot and Kyle Glover I decided to analyse the deal in more detail to see who was the winner of the exchange.

Original Draft Position

Both players were selected in round 6 of the draft with Scott Elliot taken with pick 84 of the draft whilst Kyle Glover was selected 3 picks earlier with pick 81. These positions are very close so no real winner here.

Points per game

Both Scott and Kyle have been averaging well above the league average for 6th round selections.

On average a 6th round player scores around 4.5 points per game.

Kyle is averaging 10 points per game where as Scott is averaging 12 points per game.

As well as having a slightly higher average Scott also has a higher field goal % at 36% compared to Kyles 30%.

Both players are hitting 3 point ball at a very respectable 30%, once again well above a 6th round draft selection expectations.

Scott has gone to the free throw line more times than Kyle and overall is just ahead as far as shooting is concerned.


Kyle has 6 assists which places him in the top 25 in the league in this category. Scott on the other hand is yet to register an assist this season.


Scott however has the upper hand in steals leading Kyle 7 to 2.


It is on the boards however that for me is where this deal is won and lost.

With 37 rebounds, Scott is 8th in the league in this category. He is also 2nd in the league in offensive boards with 18! This is compared to Kyle’s 6 total rebounds.


For me the Blazers win this trade. Scott narrowly leads Kyle in points per game and field goal % but absolutely dominates in rebounds.

Kyle on the other hand distributes the ball well which perhaps is an area the Camels are wanting to improve in considering they already have the fridge (Dave Moresman) to clean up the boards.

192 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


Couldn’t Load Comments
It looks like there was a technical problem. Try reconnecting or refreshing the page.
bottom of page