For those of you not wanting to see me clarify something for Lemon please skip to the bold title half way down "In terms of..."
I do apologise, allow me to clarify.
Yes i realise jeapordising and efficient are different words, thank you for checking. Let me make it slightly clearer; I do not want to share the stats of my players on public forums hence not wanting to jeapordise the private stats of my own players, because they are private. I am also reluctant to declare how many tsp they have, I would say however that given how poor Mac was when I started, he has trained exceptionally well considering he started with 33 tsp and played his first game for the NT at age 22. Perhaps you may rate my efficiency based on that if you are willing to forgo the need to know the intimate details of his training and stats.
This may have a bearing on how efficient you feel I am, however that is ultimately not my concern, the players are doing well and as you are probably aware, there is a difference between impossible and inefficient. I never questioned what was the 'most efficient', you see me advocating one on one early, so I am not arguing against you. However you said it was impossible to go the defense route for 'a world class player' at this stage you had not specified they had to be a guard, I simply stated that it was possible because when I trained my players, Morwood wanted players with heavy inside stats so I delayed the one on one and worked hard to produce heavy primaries for him. Mac was at 100k salary at 21, trust me training his secondaries after that was painful but possible. Please don't make me explain it again, that took a lot and please just read this, no need to reply or pick holes or make a discussion out of it. I'm not arguing and the more you seem to want to argue, the less likely I am to even bother.
I see you are keen on the meaning of words, with the deepest respect, I recommend that you read the words written and interpret them according to the meaning the author intended. I am happy to address any further confusion you have with my english but I would rather you didn't feel the need to remind me that there is a difference between words such as 'jeapordise and efficient'. I used jeapordise for a reason, that reason is found in why I used not, not what you think I should be saying. Please don't hear this as criticism, I am patiently trying to explain how you have come across in your post as I am sure you did not mean to sound condescending but were just working hard to clarify for your audience.
Now to the point of this thread and the point of training for the NT
Training is always a tradeoff between the needs of a team and the desire of a coach to make compromises. 200k salary players are capable of playing in D2 teams but you make compromises. I will have 2 x 200k players in my team next season and that is a big compromise for me as it creates a big imbalance in my team and makes it harder for me to challenge for the top. For example, notice I sold Canning and Barker in order to keep Mac and Innes and bought a 30k backup to replace Canning and a 50k starter to replace Barker.
In terms of what I see as the system we ideally would set up...
Going forward the recommendation I have made in the past and am happy to make again is that we need 20 managers dedicated to training 10 for the NT (selling to EBBL if they don't plan to promote) and 10 split into 2 5's for the U21 in cycles of 2 years. That way we have enough throughput of players and balance of MVP up players coming through the system. Just 20 dedicated managers can produce a world challenging NT (Finland have 15-20 for example)
Our problem is not that we do not get enough HoF's etc. I used to agonise over not being able to save what seemed to be 12 HoF's per year who went to computer managers in a draft or the majority were drafted but not trained or just bot'd. Seriously it was the most soul dest