BuzzerBeater Forums

I don't think I ever said that we were unlucky to lose the game against you. Maybe I said in the chat that I didn't understand some of the stats early in the game - like why we were even in offensive rebounds and why you were winning the turnover battle. However, those things changed dramatically in the 2nd half. The only trouble was we just couldn't score - I think I remember one sequence where we got 5 offensive rebounds in a row but still couldn't score.

I don't really share the opinion, either, that we lose the game against you 99 times out of 100. I think it was at least a 50-50 shot. If you disagree with that, that's fine, we will just have to agree to disagree.

As for the patient offense, you are not the first to say it was a bad choice (read RIP's comments above). The community also pushed me to play a 3-2 zone in this game, which I did not do. I expected to get more inside looks with the patient offense against your 3-2 zone... Either that didn't work or your inside defense was just too much for us. Or you are right and a patient offense is just totally ineffective.

I'm not sure how effective an outside offense would have been for us, either. We maybe put up a proficient outside shooting rating against your proficient outside d. Maybe an inside offense was the answer but I really have not been impressed with how they work in the new GE.

As for not playing a 3-2 zone, I think whatever we would have gained there was made up for by our rebounding differential. I don't think our defense was horrible, either. Sure, you put up a prominent(low) OS, but our defense was right there with you. And that came out in the results because we pretty much shut down your offense. My feeling is we lost because your defense was just too strong or the patient offense didn't work.

In this context, I thought I'd respond to RIP's suggestion that the game against us was unlucky. This is the quote I was responding to:

No problem, I thought that's what you meant, but since the reply was to me I took it that way. As for RIP, I don't think that's exactly what he meant, either. I think he meant more that the game was 50-50... So in that sense, we were still unlucky to lose. I discussed tactics with him and both he and I have a lot of respect for your team and you as a manager.

One last thing... I just want to say that although our team performance was not as expected, I really appreciated the support from the whole community. That includes everyone who offered tactical advice and who helped with the scouting, whether it was scouting teams in our groups or scouting players.

Also, a big thank you to all the owners of U21 players. You guys did a great job of training this season. Thanks for listening to my endless calls for keeping your guys in good game shape. I couldn't have asked for anything better.

yes

I just heard that you're not going to run for NT manager. Now I feel mighty silly for the comments that I made.

I gotta rectify you on Bronson. He has had an unbelievable season of training.

Well, so did Milot, which I think is RIP's point. I think Milot will push $100,000 in salary next season. He is probably close to getting capped. He was definitely the best player on the team and it will be a while before Canada has another U21 player with his skills.

I could see Bronson scoring lots of points on Arel, even though Arel is still a good defender, but Milot was hands down the best defender on the team.

I thought you were going to TIE Brasil? ;-) I suspected they would crunch you in their last game - getting Peru was really the only way to get through to the finals. Although, after a crunch, Peru will be no cakewalk for Brasil.


Last edited by HeadPaperPusher at 12/11/2009 2:27:24 PM

By the way, we do have an 18 yr old coming up who will push Milot for the title of best ever Canadian U21 PG. I just hope he gets trained right. I didn't even know you could have skills like that by 19 (more details on that to come in my best-of-the-best series).