BuzzerBeater Forums

BB USA > National Team Debate Thread

National Team Debate Thread (thread closed)

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
122310.10 in reply to 122310.8
Date: 12/14/2009 9:40:21 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
228228
So you make it clear to your trainers, you run your guy out 80min + regularly, they don't play

Unfortunately, we know this doesn't work. This was the strategy we tried last year, and it failed miserably.

I think the answer to the question is two-fold:
(1) Emphasize to owners why poor game shape is hurting their team. You mentioned Inez, and he's a good example. For much of last season, he was in inept GS. That means that while his stats project him to have a 16-17 rating at center, he was consistently putting up 12's. I think we can have much more success getting owners to watch GS by showing them how much better their players can be, than punishing them by leaving them off the team (although to be fair, I wouldn't add Inez either in the shape he was in last season).

(2) Keep track of other options. There are very few irreplaceable players in the US. Even Inez and Grubbs are no longer clear first choices. If someone is in consistently in poor GS, we aren't as hamstrung as we have been in the past.

From: Azariah

This Post:
00
122310.12 in reply to 122310.5
Date: 12/14/2009 9:45:22 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
103103
For all who are are running. The biggest drawback to the NT recently is the fact that our best players are rarely in top GS (from a pool of players that isn't in the top 5, maybe even top 10 in the world). What, if anything, might you do about this?


The most important thing is communication; getting the club owner to realize that having their player in better GS will improve the overall health of their club. For teams that have the one-big-guy and nothing else roster, there may not be much that the club manager can do with the player, as they don't have a backup that will take 10 minutes from the big guy. In those situations, I think I'd try to work with the club manager to see if I could line up an alternate home for the big guy, and help the club manager with finding new trainees to work up the next generation of NT players.

Of course, there are some club managers (whose names rhyme with Farles) that would still play their top player 100+ minutes in a week just because they can... not much you can do there, I suppose, except for make sure you're developing Plan B. I think that within the next few seasons, the problem will begin to rectify itself, as the depth of new former-U21 players filters up into the NT. In the long run, the only real solution is to make sure that both NT coaches and the staff is working to shepherd the trainees through the system, so that even if we don't win the worlds in Season 12, we'll be in contention every year.

I think it's a lot like the NFL -- give me a NT that will always win 12 regular season games and make the playoffs... you never know when injury and game luck will swing and give you the world championship.

This Post:
00
122310.13 in reply to 122310.10
Date: 12/14/2009 9:56:34 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1212
So you make it clear to your trainers, you run your guy out 80min + regularly, they don't play

Unfortunately, we know this doesn't work. This was the strategy we tried last year, and it failed miserably.

I think the answer to the question is two-fold:
(1) Emphasize to owners why poor game shape is hurting their team. You mentioned Inez, and he's a good example. For much of last season, he was in inept GS. That means that while his stats project him to have a 16-17 rating at center, he was consistently putting up 12's. I think we can have much more success getting owners to watch GS by showing them how much better their players can be, than punishing them by leaving them off the team (although to be fair, I wouldn't add Inez either in the shape he was in last season).

(2) Keep track of other options. There are very few irreplaceable players in the US. Even Inez and Grubbs are no longer clear first choices. If someone is in consistently in poor GS, we aren't as hamstrung as we have been in the past.


the problem with that is inez at 13rating for 100 minutes might well be more valuable for that team than inez at 16 rating for 60 minutes and then scrappy mcsucky at 10 rating for 40 minutes, even if the numbers seem to say the aggregate rating from a baseline favors the latter option

but you are right on #2. we will continually have more choices.

i guess this further begs the question to how come we failed so badly in the first place in this area.

This Post:
00
122310.14 in reply to 122310.9
Date: 12/14/2009 9:58:49 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
228228
I wasn't paying attention because i knew any suggestions i had would go unheeded

You've had an account on the off-site forum since May 23, 2009. In that time, you have made 0 posts. Your statement is a pretty huge assumption given that you apparently never attempted to contribute.

This Post:
00
122310.15 in reply to 122310.13
Date: 12/14/2009 10:02:01 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
228228
the problem with that is inez at 13rating for 100 minutes might well be more valuable for that team than inez at 16 rating for 60 minutes and then scrappy mcsucky at 10 rating for 40 minutes, even if the numbers seem to say the aggregate rating from a baseline favors the latter option

Well, he was paying a guy 200k to play like a 40k center. That's never going to work out to an efficient allocation of resources. But, I don't want to pick on Inez too much--he was the most noticeable problem, but not the only one. Charles wasn't either (he actually trained GS to make up for some of his big minute weeks). We had a slew of GS problems, and it was the cumulative effect that really hurt.

From: FatCurry

This Post:
00
122310.16 in reply to 122310.14
Date: 12/14/2009 11:00:18 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
112112
I wasn't paying attention because i knew any suggestions i had would go unheeded

You've had an account on the off-site forum since May 23, 2009. In that time, you have made 0 posts. Your statement is a pretty huge assumption given that you apparently never attempted to contribute.



That was my thought, I have been very active in the game for the past 4 season (short I know compared to some of you) but the only time I see Gunner is when its election time and he's one of the first out of the gate to put his name in the hat.

This Post:
00
122310.17 in reply to 122310.16
Date: 12/14/2009 11:10:36 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1212
I wasn't paying attention because i knew any suggestions i had would go unheeded

You've had an account on the off-site forum since May 23, 2009. In that time, you have made 0 posts. Your statement is a pretty huge assumption given that you apparently never attempted to contribute.



That was my thought, I have been very active in the game for the past 4 season (short I know compared to some of you) but the only time I see Gunner is when its election time and he's one of the first out of the gate to put his name in the hat.




may 23rd is more or less 2 seasons ago. as i said when juice won again, i was done with the nt, because any energy i would contribute would have been negative, and juice deserved better.

I also would like to apologize to Juice for taking a very cheap shot at him (deleted less than 3 minutes later so no one saw it) after our loss to spain. Im pretty sure no one read it but the gms, who can read deleted messages. It wasnt a personal attack, just an attack on how he managed the team. Still my apologies juice.

Let's just phrase it this way: if you are happy with how the national team has done the last 6 seasons, and you think we have achieved up to our potential, then vote for one of the establishment candidates.

If you think that having the 4th biggest userbase, and the oldest userbase, and a network of gm's, bb's and other general massive resources at our disposal means we should finish better than 8th in the world, (where we sit now) and expect continental dominance (we are afterall the biggest non-european country), and most importantly be moving forward rather than backwards, then vote for someone that has different ideas.


This Post:
00
122310.18 in reply to 122310.17
Date: 12/14/2009 11:22:44 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
134134
you think we have achieved up to our potential, then vote for one of the establishment candidates.


I think the point of juice not running it to get some fresh blood into the program. I don't really think there will be an "establishment" candidate.

This Post:
00
122310.20 in reply to 122310.17
Date: 12/15/2009 12:07:06 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
304304
Quite frankly, I wouldn't vote for you if you were the only candidate.

You have shown zero interest in the USA NT except when election time comes.

Azariah is a newer member, and I think he cares about the NT past the fact that he has a chance to run it, unlike you.

wozzvt clearly cares about the NT even though he has not been the coach - he's done a fantastic job of helping to build our scouting infrastructure and database of player skills. This is not something he had to do, and something he wasn't even asked to do - he volunteered and got it done.

It would be a terrible thing for the USA NT to see someone who is in it only for themselves, who runs away and hides if he doesn't get his way, and seems to be more interested in promoting himself than anything else.

I have no use for someone who wants to be a big talker but hides his bashing comments towards me. At least you were classy in the aftermath of your failed South Africa campaign: (78034.1)

Past that, performance is the thing that counts. I don't think you have the skills to run a large nation's NT. There's way too much work involved to go it alone, and you've done a good job of alienating a good portion of the community that would be helpful towards assisting you. A USA NT run by you would be lucky to make the Worlds, much less advance in them.


I support wozzvt's campaign. He's shown the skills and BB intelligence to not only win promotion to the NBBA not once but twice, and has also built a wonderful infrastructure.

If you dislike wozzvt or his campaign, then please vote for Azariah.

If there are any candidates that I have not mentioned, I apologize.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live
Advertisement