BuzzerBeater Forums

My question for all candidates:

A lot of the U21 team being good is luck of having good draft seasons and dedicated managers getting the best trainees. How do you account for the variance this causes and what do you think (other than just offering up specific builds) is the best way to get ahead of the curve in training compared to the rest of the world?

Secondly, what type of gameplan and training analysis have you done and its cause on team play? Do you have databases or historical data for this information that you could utilize to the advantage of the U21 team?

Last edited by Coach_Nuggets at 2/17/2016 6:04:26 PM

I maintain that U21 and NT training are two different beasts. It's hard to view long term NT outlook, and also train for the U21. Not impossible, as there are builds, such as PGs, and true Centers where the NT training path nets the prospect on the U21. Stretch 4s, balanced 3s, LI guards, and true SGs on a NT build are not usually where the U21 would love them to be at. The great draftees, and the prospects managers spend 2+ MM on are definitely unattainable for the majority of the US managers.

It is not that often where a U21 prospect maxes out above a SS potential build before the end of their U21 season.

Not often. Tanner Winn did. There may be one or two Centers a season that do. SFs, PFs, PGs, and SGs rarely do. I trained Otto Reedy until he was 24, and when he was on the U21 team he was similar to some 28 y/o PAS guards on the market.

In past years manager's eyes didn't survey much beyond MVPs. An unusual build, or a really thin crop at that position and you'd see lower potentials.
That won't be me. I won't offer any radical builds, but I will change the way these players are scouted. What they're at now. What their cap is. How many pops, and where, would it take for them to actually cap. That could mean more PAS, and SS players on the U21. It would be ignorant to look at a PAS, SS, and possibly AS, say that they're good but you think they'll cap out before researching that exact question and seeing if they could feasibly contribute.

Americas doesn't count. The teams in Americas are not very good. We had bugs with good subs in season 31 and we barely made it out of the first round in worlds.

the teams are not as good sure, doesnt mean the numbers mean anything different.

Not to mention if that is the case then the donkey builds should have outplayed the well rounded build even more so, facing inferior competition, yet the numbers dont lie. Your welcome to keep lieing to yourself tho, I could care less.

Last edited by tetrahydroc at 2/17/2016 10:20:24 PM

Have you seen anything through analysis in the game that is not currently being taken advantage of that you could use to provide better training solutions to managers at the U21 level that is backed by data?

I think that NT and U21 paths are similar than we think. If we make our NT prospects into U21 SF that means they are balance and have a lot of TSP which is good long term for NT and good for U21 giving us a lot SF options. But once that NT prospect turns 21 then they should start molding tahat player into what they want them to be. If that's a big man , SG, PG or some type of specialist. Obviously if it's guard with low rebounding then he probably won't be able to be a U21 SF. Dailey in S31 is a great example of an U21 player that was on a NT path. He had high IS/ID but also had enough guard skills to be on U21. Woodard is also a nice example. Barrera is another player that played on U21 that has a good shot at NT one day. I remember Stratford who tough trained was a nice SF option for U21. Stratford came up a little short but tough still took him the NT route and he still had a shot at U21.

Last edited by Oreo Dunker at 2/17/2016 10:27:38 PM

Hypothetical question to all:

Someone comes to you with a 6'11" big man(HOF potential) with these starting skills: 6/3/3/4/4/5-6/6/7/6

This owner is really excited about this player but has little experience training. How would you go about discussing with this manager the correct way to go about training? What build style would you aim for for this player if I, the NT manager, also think he could be useful for the NT at a later point?

Firstly, I just want to quickly state, as I feel there might have been some confusion -- I am not running in this election. My main focus is on League/Cup/B3 play; however, I'm a big supporter of the U21/NT and want to help improve the education of managers training US prospects, sharing with them my experiences -- for NT success.

To answer the above question: I'd rather have a U21 team full of well rounded multi-skilled players as it's best for your club team and NT. Hit secondaries first: OD to 12, PS to 12, HN/PS to 12 (using 1v1f), then hit primaries; make sure to get IS to 20 and ID 18+ and at least 16 RB. I feel there well always be enough primary skilled players due to some lesser prospects having poor builds and low POT. And US-Utopian-managers can always smash some primaries on lesser prospects if need be. However, the majority of managers should aim for a well rounded prospects with an inside focus, training lots of 1v1f.

Last edited by A-Dub at 2/17/2016 11:21:55 PM

How anyone doesn't agree with the above sentiment I have no idea. It's not rocket science. It really comes down to potential and skill value. I use a system when evaluating a prospect. It is based off counting backwards from 12 on all skills with time it takes to train to hit twelve as a factor. There can be major differences in 55TSP 18 year olds.

The second question i have answered a few times, but i believe i did provide good analysis as far as what the other coaches would do once i got involved midway through the campaign. The whole 'what is the other team likely to try to do' is pretty easy when you analyze their position. It's an argument of "Hey, this US team has guards and bigs with 20 IS, what am i gonna do?". They're going to do what they did against italy. In all seriousness though, some teams are playing for the finals, and some teams are run by u21 managers seeking to put themselves in a position to say "look i've done something useful". Those are the easier calls for me to be right on, because i can say "They're going to go all in with a guess of inside and a CT", and it's hard not to be right. There were two games where we probably could've made a different call, but we won the first one and lost the second one, and thats the end of that pretty much (and to be fair, we had HCA and it didn't particularly matter).

Promoting "specific builds" isn't really a way to get ahead of the curve. In some cases it's different approaches to games (the difference between a proper LP and an LI for example), in others it's about solving a depth issue by taking a slightly SF and running out a third guard to aid in ball movement and clock control. Getting ahead of the curve requires revisiting how to obtain a higher percentage buy-in amongst managers. The more people contributing more players and information, the better the team is.

I don't know your build path enough to properly advise on what you want, and what the current NT team is looking for in future talents. I'd much rather get them to buy into OnevOne @ FW until either we've talked about the build path from the u21 to the NT, or talked about what you want out of players versus what i would want out of their first four seasons. Anything else i would really say here would be a shot in the dark and dishonest, given that i've worked extensively with 18-23 year old talents in the majority of my seasons and haven't owned a NT player yet.