BuzzerBeater Forums

I plan to ignore it for the majority of this first season simply because I do not think we will need it to win any game. I would like some more examples and information though, so it can be utilized next season.

Bah... I accidently deleted my post instead of editing it.

The gist of it:

GDP is useless until any significant research proves its not.

I do like players with less TSP than those of the same position with more. Rex Engle and Tracey Gamez come to mind.

And depending on the team...can you cover weakness in personnel with GDP?

It also adds another level of mind games in a tournament setting which I love.

Thanks for your questions DRoss!

These have both been very lightly discussed, but ill try to expand a lot on them if I can.

I plan on trying to create a team that can run BO and LI with very few roster changes to switch the tactics. I feel like this season we have A TON of USA owned guys, which means they will probably be very reliable opposed to last season, when some of the foreign managers didn't care about GS as much. This allows us to look at adding more diverse players on the roster (18 guys) because we won't have to think as much about "what happens if he cannot manage game shape?". For this specific group our bigs will remain the same for the majority of the season as well as our top 3 SFs I think. The case where there will be switch ups will be at the guard positions because we have solid LI guards, good SGs and balanced guards. I think we have the pieces to be a successful two tactic team though.

As for the 18 year olds that have just been drafted, I am very excited and confident that guys will look at training different type players, or just very strong base players. Thanks to A Warrior and a few other offsite guys, many of the USA guys that were on sale have been bought by USA managers and will be staying home. This allows us to discuss more easily how they can help our U21 NT and what they would be willing to train when we send out our scouting bbmails (which believe have already started). I would want a mix of training the same ways in the past and new type of players, simply because if the new type of players do not work well, we have fallback players.

Thanks for the question Coco, but can they be discussed on the offsite because I do not want others checking in to get any info.

Great questions DRoss. They have been discussed some but ill try to put it all together.

1. Each season might require different tactics based on the personnel we have in the pipeline. Currently we are very limited on our selection because of very similar skillset for all of our players. There is nothing to hide for this season and most likely best season. We will be primarily a LI team with some base offenses mixed in, including base, PTB, and isos. I want to work on training so that we have more player styles that can allow us different play styles, such as mixing inside and outside offenses. These offenses will become more clear at the beginning of each season where we, as a community, can decide what tactics we want to work with each season. This, of course, is dependent upon having a diverse pipeline which I will work to create.

2. I do want to plan when players are 18 or 19, however I will not make every player go the same way. I believe your player style stems from the types of skills he has when drafted. If I have a guard with good inside skills and outside I would advise for a hybrid guard. If I have a guard with good passing to start but very low shooting I will advise a LI pass first guard. Have good shooting but lower other skills I would suggest a pure SG. All is based on their starting skills so we have a diverse pipeline to use.

1. I probably won't. I don't think there has been a single manager who has intentionally tried to piece together a roster that suits more than one tactic without skimping on its effectiveness. You pick your best players for the main offense you want to run, and if those players happen to work well in a different tactic, than that's fantastic. More than one tactic has been played seemingly every season, but the chosen roster is best at only one tactic.

I REALLY hate all this talk about "we must be prepared because GDP...." and stuff of that nature(certainly not aimed at you. I have no idea if you were talking about GDP or not with this question). BB is a game with a ton of active variables, so altering how we run things because of an additional, new variable is not practical at all, until it is proven that GDP can size-ably alter the game. It would be like finding out this season a change has been made to make ID more effective, making LI/LP less effective, and then picking a roster for Motion/RnG, even though the LI/LP roster is better. You don't know exactly how much more effective ID is, and how much efficiency LI/LP lost. Same concept here.

2. I would absolutely like to plan a player from 18/19 to have a specialized role for the U21, and possibly NT. Like you said, the owners cooperation is critical. If they are not 100% convinced with the plan that I lay out for them, than they don't have to follow it, and it will not be held against them. If I was given 5 guards of similar talents and potential I would look over which one would have the easiest path to the specialized build(among other things like owner nationality, offsite participation, overall participation, and willingness). Having five guards of similar build at age 21 is useless. You don't want to ever have more than two players on the team, at any position, that have a similar build, because team effectiveness goes down (you wouldn't run a team with 5 PGs, 5 SGs, 5 PFs etc.). So if that happens, three managers who have trained their player very well are S.O.L.

Player skill diversity is critical. It gives you so many more options, and makes it so much easier to run a team.

Here is a question for all candidates:

If you weren't running in this election, who would you be voting for and why?