BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Canada > Canada's National Team

Canada's National Team

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
60836.114 in reply to 60836.113
Date: 6/9/2009 10:05:06 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
Wow, 25 votes. That has to be a record for Canada. I think that stands alone as a testament to how well you've engaged the community.

Anyhow, congrats. I'm looking forward to watching the team progress.

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
60836.115 in reply to 60836.114
Date: 6/15/2009 9:06:47 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
3737
So, another season starts, another enthusiasm reset occurs... and yet again, we have a roster with more players (13) than we can field for the first game.

Is there an explanation for hamstringing the roster flexibility so early?

This Post:
00
60836.117 in reply to 60836.116
Date: 6/15/2009 9:36:18 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
3737
It's still a poor explanation. Practically, only 8-10 players are part of the first game's strategy. So, 3-5 players are unlikely to be meaningfully involved. If any of those 3-5 players picks up a 3-week injury, they're going to be useless for pretty much the whole season.

You're right that it almost certainly won't matter. But the little things matter, and IMO you're doing this little thing very wrong.

This Post:
00
60836.119 in reply to 60836.118
Date: 6/15/2009 10:27:53 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
3737
I made my case above. Players who aren't part of your first game strategy run the risk of becoming dead weight if their status changes (e.g. injury).

I think carrying 12 is defensible for the first game, for the sake of maintaining unpredictability in strategy, and depth in case of in-game foul trouble or injury. The cost in roster flexibility going forward is just not worth it to keep 13. Add the 13th player, etc. when you need to.

This Post:
00
60836.121 in reply to 60836.115
Date: 6/15/2009 3:11:34 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155

Is there an explanation for hamstringing the roster flexibility so early?


Just curious - why bring this up now, after the election is over? It is not the first time you've made this gripe. If it is really an issue (which it doesn't seem to be), see how other candidates would handle the situation. It would also give the NT coach a heads-up (I would never have thought about it if I was a new manager).

Talking about it repeatedly after the fact seems counter-productive, unless your goal is just to make the NT coach look bad.

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
60836.122 in reply to 60836.121
Date: 6/15/2009 3:13:38 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
3737

Is there an explanation for hamstringing the roster flexibility so early?


Just curious - why bring this up now, after the election is over? It is not the first time you've made this gripe. If it is really an issue (which it doesn't seem to be), see how other candidates would handle the situation. It would also give the NT coach a heads-up (I would never have thought about it if I was a new manager).

Talking about it repeatedly after the fact seems counter-productive, unless your goal is just to make the NT coach look bad.


I guess I just think about it when I notice it. No-one has ever given me a satisfactory answer.

This Post:
00
60836.123 in reply to 60836.122
Date: 6/16/2009 9:58:17 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1515
Besides that, one would hope the conversation from last season could have stuck.

How could anyone think that saying essentially, "oh well, it probably won't matter anyways," is a good answer, especially after receiving the advice previously.

Advertisement