BuzzerBeater Forums

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.