BuzzerBeater Forums

Question regarding guiding managers:

During my tenure, I focused on encouraging managers to train balanced players. Connor Anderson, Paul Bull, and James Gascoigne were the three players who I played the largest role in guiding and each are well on their way to being world class thanks to managers who understood the value of balanced players and sacrificed accordingly.

My question is similar to Revo's: do you agree with the approach of training balanced players, and how are you going to encourage managers to train for balance when doing so can hurt their team (if they are training secondaries after primary training already bumped salary), or if doing so will exclude them from earning a spot on the U21 team (Wuyts is an example of this -- I trained secondaries first in order to keep salary down and this may have cost him a starting spot on the U21 team).

Cheers,

Mzungu

Hi,
question 1:

If I have to choose guard2 and bigman1. My results were from good defense all the time. Defense is really the most important in this game, imo.
But everything depends on other English players... If other players are weak guard1 and bigman2 also will be on squad. They are good of something so they re usable. It is hard to answer excatly this question, because I don't know NT worthy players.

question 2:

NT requirements? Hard to know. I must see all the worthy players to answer this. I don't like speculation like this. I can write anything.... But it will be just guessing without knowing other players.

Hi,

Only with balanced players a national team is poor. Need to several kind of players to be success.
How can encourage managers? With a lot of communication and advices. But if he does not want this, you are just wasting your time... i know it from Hungary.

The Hungarian training system is the way to be much more better.

To Revo:

Guards I'd go with #2.

Guard 1: Probably never make the team, OD is terrible, along with that passing. He'd be a pure shooter/ballhog, and I don't think we'd ever need him.

Guard 2: A solid player, would be one of our better defenders, and useable in any offense.

Bigman one is a bit tougher, but would choose #1 in nearly all situations.

Bigman 1: Likely reserve type player, solid at everything, but not great at any one thing to exploit opponents.

Bigman 2: Despite also having bad defenses unlike Guard 1 he might make the team if I felt we'd be primarily inside oriented because he can score and rebound(kinda).

Question #2:

Well first I'm going to wait to set my limits until after I've seen all our players. As for if I'd add a player if they didn't meet a minimum, well maybe. If they excelled in some other area it is possible. There would be skills I'd be more flexible with(example it'd be easier to make the team with bad JS and great OD/PA than to make the team with bad OD and great JS/PA). On things like OD/ID/PA I probably would set hard caps for certain positions, but they wouldn't be too extreme at first. Also I'd always try to take the age of the player into consideration, if he's old and capped then he'd probably not make the team, but if he's young and training he'd have a much better shot despite not meeting the requirements.

To Mzungu:

Yep I believe having mostly more balanced players is the way forward for England. Many of the top NTs monsters would just be unsustainable and we need to be able to count on all of our great players since we can't churn them out at as high of rate as say an Italy. Though as Vendabal said it's still nice to have some specialists for certain tactics, in the ideal world I'd think these would be our bit lower potential guys who probably wouldn't make the team without it.

As for getting guys to train out of position, well it's tough, I've found the best method is usually to be honest with them that it will probably hurt their team in the short run, if you don't do that than you run the risk of losing them as a trainer in the future. Recently I've been trying to get managers with high potential players (mvp+) to start their training with secondaries to avoid that salary problem. So basically all if they agree or not, no way to force them to it.

As for the U21 vs NT training, I usually advice completely based on NT potential until most likely midway through their 20 year old season. Then if it looks like they are going to be the leader of the U21 squad next season, or fill a role that no other prospect can I'll let Srez handle them until the end of their 21 year old season(I still check in every once in awhile). But if it looks like they are going to be a backup/non essential player then I continue advising completely based on the NT. An example of this would be Gregor Simpson from last season, he kind of popped up on me at the beginning of his 20 year old season, and it was immediately obvious he'd be an U21 star if he trained that route, with a lack of great big men this last season I agreed he shoulld be trained to help the U21's until they were out of the tournament, as soon as we were out of the tournament he switched to passing training and got in very nice 2 pops since then.


To everyone: I'll be moving over the next couple of days, so I'm not sure how available I'll be for the next week or so, but I'll try my best to continue to answer questions.

election time never is at a good moment.

i like your answers Eminence. You value Defense over offence, which is a great thing and which is what England needs most if they want to progress. I just hope that people know that they need to wait a couple of season before seeing real NT progress, but it will be a good start.

As for the hungarian candidate. England has got more than enough offensif minded players. But very few of them can defend. What use is a player if he can make a basket, but will conceive one right away on the next play. If a player can't defend his position, then he shouldn't be on the NT ( or on a clubs team, for that matter) but then again, that is just my view.

@ hungarian candidate:

Hungaria and England are very different in BB. England is more of a small nation, less talented pool of players to chose from than the hungarian community. (Hungaria got 2.5x the ammount of manager than england has). That means that you can't use the same system as is used in hungaria, cause you don't have enough managers to use it. So if you truely hope to run in this election, i hope you'll have a more addapted version ready for England... Cause the Hungarian system won't work.



Now that the draw has been made, where do the candidates think that england can end.

Cause the Hungarian system won't work.

Never say this, because u don't know it...
And how can it know? Because u r GM or cause belgian? Are u belgian? I have relatives there:)

Do u think Hungary started it with 1000 users? No-no.

Chances. Imo the fifth place would be the best in this very-very hard group, fourth place is a dream. Serious results are not real recently.

The group is really hard indeed, as far as I am concerned, it is the most difficult group. Fifth place is in my opinion a high, but achievable goal. I also know the Slovenian NT coach and I know exactly how they play Like you all already figured out, England needs balanced players, with higher defense. Since most of the current NT squad is already in theire best years, we should focus on training other 22-25 year old players. I believe there are quite a few interesting candidates like Andrews and Murphy, Gascoigne or Brewer...

Last edited by Icce at 8/22/2012 3:51:56 PM

We are getting a good debate going, so I am curious and want to ask another question.

For the purposes of NT (so, salary shouldn't be a factor), what value do you place on Jump Range? This question applies to all positions. Obviously everyone would love to have a player with 20+ at all skills, but this isn't possible. How would you evaluate jump range recognizing that it comes at the expense of other skills?

Last edited by Mzungu77 at 8/23/2012 1:53:12 AM

In my experience, JR is overrated by some extent..I rather buy and train players to have higher Driving in combination with Jump Shot. If you compare my two players:

Frodason (JS 16, JR 10, DR 19) and Novinscak (JS 18, JR 14, DR 17), they have almost the same % of 3pt, even though Novinscak has much better JR. And this is only one example, I have tried various combinations in the past and almost always came to the same conclusion, JR is overrated and it is not worth that much of a higher salary.

It depends also on the tactic you use. I prefer players with high passing and I believe it is a quite underrated skill and managers do not train this skill enough. If you want to have a really good Inside tactic, then it is the most important thing to have good passers all around (also for the BigMen).

Another very important skill for outside players (also here especially for Inside tactics) is Inside Shot. I am a strong fan of well balanced players, since they can really make the difference..That is why I train and buy more or less only players who are capable of playing in various positions.

One of the main skills I would tend to have for a PointGuard is also high Rebounding..A Pointguard with Rebound skill 10+, will almost always have 6+ RB per game...

Last edited by Icce at 8/23/2012 2:35:49 AM

A national team must have at least 3-4 players who have min. 12 jr. From that 2 SG-s should have 14. An outside tactics requires this. Without jr, for example a run and gun is ineffective because other squads have excellent OD. Big men's must have rather JS, if they have a level 6-7 JR is enough.

This is why it is inadvisable to play outside tactics in the first place In any case a PG should also have minimal 11-12 JR, but it is not the most important thing..