BuzzerBeater Forums

- Roster management. We didn't cut the roster down to 12 at the enthusiasm reset, which is 100% indefensible. We've been carrying the same 14 players for as long as I can remember... possibly as early as week 1 of uflorin's term.

We started with 12 players, added another one based on injuries, then another one, sometime close to mid last season and stayed with the 14 players roster until now.

It was a choice I made and I see no issue with it.

Firing 2 players for the sake of firing is not an advantage, but, in this case, a dissadvantage for the team. There is still space for extra additions and, besides, I don't know of any great players that would be good assets to the team. The dissadvantage would be that the dropped players will probably not be available at the time I need them since they would be picked up by the U21 probably if under 21 (an one of the possible dropped ones would be).

Team kept flexibility with the still remaining open spots.

Of course, the explanation you gave means that's how you would have done it, but I don't think that's the best way... Stating it's 100% indefensible is rather curious. You have your opinion, I have mine. If season would end now and would have to deal with yet another season I would still keep the current 14 players roster, I don't have any problem with that in the current Canadian environment.

Marc Hederman is in no way or form a small forward and should not even be considered for that spot.

And Aubert and Caron?

Silly me to think that a post which followed mine so closely, and which referred to not knowing what's going after I commented that I hadn't followed the team that closely this season, might be addressing my post.

My mistake apparently.

SO U THINK U CAN MATCH MAH WRITNG SKILS???!!?! WTF LOL I ACAPT UR CHALAGE!1!1!11! LOL GOD LUK!!!11

you should be correct, but who knows if no evidence?

and my focus is not taking my player to play sf, I just suggest that uflorin can try use a player who is strong in forward skills to play at that spot instead of the player strong in guard skills. I dont care if he use my player, I just suggest using different player when using other offense tactis.

Last edited by laziester at 10/22/2008 7:52:09 PM

Yes, we did that already, when we played different tactic

I understand what you mean but you must realize that a SF has to have at least some decent outside skills.

In BB (I don't care about real-life here), in your opinion, is a better SF more outside-focused, inside-focused, or balanced? I realize that there are a lot of dependencies (tactics, opponent tactics, matchups, etc.)

In my opinion, all things being equal, the answer is balanced. Then you tweak from there depending on your own tactical goals and your understanding of your opponent.

Now I'm probably reading too much into what you're saying, but I believe that our current NT braintrust feels that a SF is outside-focused. That would be consistent with the player choices I've seen. It would also go towards explaining uflorin's dismissal of Look Inside as a viable tactic... if you play what's effectively a third guard as a SF at the NT level (which is precisely what we did here: (1758)), it's no surprise that Look Inside wasn't too effective.