BuzzerBeater Forums

BB USA > U21 National Team Debate Thread

U21 National Team Debate Thread (thread closed)

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
199844.61 in reply to 199844.40
Date: 11/2/2011 4:17:10 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
199199

How do you plan to sacrifice success for your club team for the greater good of the U21 team?


I paid 1.3 mil for a HOF 6'0 18 year old two seasons ago. I have a level 6 trainer and a level 4 doctor just so the dbag doesn't get injured and I lose 2 weeks of training. I do my best to play him only 48 minutes a week, just to lower the chance of injury. I train him in the first game of the week, so in case he fouls out or has an injury, I can play him later in the week.

I obviously don't care all that much about my club team. I find the U21 and NT aspect of the games much more exciting.

This Post:
00
199844.62 in reply to 199844.40
Date: 11/2/2011 4:23:23 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
5656
Because the U21 coaching job is such a large responsibility, I would put a lot more time into that than my club team. Besides, my club team seems to be going nowhere again so I'd like to focus on things that actually make me happy. :)

From: magiker

To: Coco
This Post:
00
199844.63 in reply to 199844.43
Date: 11/2/2011 4:29:45 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
199199
So, do you think that Rambo made a mistake in having Battle, in addition to B-Rod?


I think the question was referring to an initial roster of 12 players, not the whole team. Rambo called up B-Rod at the start, and Battle later on. I don't mind SF's at all, it's just difficult for them to enough skill points to be effective in 3 seasons. Easier when they get that 4th season of training. But if there are a lot of options there, I'm all for it.

Are you speaking out of experience here or out of speculation?


Speculation.

This is the player (5766859) and he was with me in season 14.

In my experience the specific type of player is not particularly effective (brian tried with something similar too about at the same time and, as I recall, also ended up being skeptical of a certain kind of shooting PF). He will absolutely torch lowly teams, but wouldn't be much better than a regular big man in most other games. In particular see: (25966671)

I am pretty sure that there is a player similar to the player you have in mind that is terrific, but I don't think that player can be very effective with 4 driving...


It's possible you're absolutely right. My PF doesn't have that much JS/JR, so it is pure speculation. But there's a big difference between club teams and U21 teams. The best U21 bigs are usually over 7 feet so they train primaries really quickly for 3 seasons. Those guys usually have very low OD, and defend PF. In general, I'd guess that U21 bigs at PF have way less OD than the guys that defend PF in the NBBA, so I'd assume it'd work better for U21 than the NBBA. But that, is again, just speculation.

Also, this guy isn't realistic in 3 seasons of training, obviously.

From: Rambo
This Post:
00
199844.65 in reply to 199844.63
Date: 11/2/2011 4:43:17 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
219219
I really want to revisit my first question.

I think only magiker really got the jist of what I was asking. Obviously, we all want the best players in the best game shape and to leave spots open on the roster. However, everyone has 7 GS and a fixed starting point for their skills in week 1. Our first competitive game is in ~10 days, then we have 13(?) weeks of games.

So how do you plan on making good decisions in week 1 that last the season? What are some things you are going to look for and how are you going to find the answers?

From: jfarb
This Post:
11
199844.66 in reply to 199844.64
Date: 11/2/2011 4:56:58 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
556556
Again, Terrance Hammond arguably was the best player on the U21 by the end of the season. Here were his skills:

4/2/2/1/1/1 -17/16/17/8

In the end his secondaries didn't matter. I think magiker is right, the point he is making is that whats good for NT/U21 is different from whats good for your club team. U21 is an arms race.

Now obviously we went solely LI last season, making big guys with great primaries but terrible secondaries (Hammond, Ashville etc) more valuable. Every team and every season is different. In Season 16, until Harris Carson and some others came along, the team was somewhat based on outside offense (Suarez, Beverly, etc). In that situation, a big with less IS and more JS, and other subs is more useful. K now I'm being super obvious. Just saying that I understand the point magiker is trying to make differentiating club teams and national teams.

Last edited by jfarb at 11/2/2011 4:58:16 PM

From: Stauder
This Post:
11
199844.67 in reply to 199844.66
Date: 11/2/2011 5:04:19 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
246246
Most of you that are candidates have used the buzz phrase "further community involvement" within your speeches or answers to some of the questions. However I haven't heard a lot about HOW this could be accomplished. SO my questions is simple...If you think more community involvement is needed, HOW are you going to make this happen? Please don't use the token phrases "continue what we are doing" or "reach out to the community". I am very interested in specific ideas you have.

From: Panic

This Post:
00
199844.68 in reply to 199844.67
Date: 11/2/2011 5:13:21 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
5656
Part of our PR disarray was solely my fault last season. I apologized already on the offsite, and completely forgot to issue an onsite apology. If elected, I'd be all for more contests and more of everything. We have some newer managers recently influxing into the offsite in the past couple months, and their involvement could be crucial in future seasons. Helping out newer managers is always a smart move, because the more hands on deck and more support across the board is never a bad thing.

For another, scouting changes may not be necessary, but changes to make them more community-involving could also bring some more new ideas to the system.

From: jfarb

To: Coco
This Post:
00
199844.70 in reply to 199844.69
Date: 11/2/2011 5:22:59 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
556556
Agreed, for the most part yes, whats good for U21 isnt all that different from whats good for clubs. Perhaps I am letting NT matters cloud my opinion on U21. U21 guards especially are not going to go train past a point of declining returns. But a player like Hammond? Hes nearly 200k now. His manager could've stopped at 15/15/15 type primaries to keep his salary down and his value intact, and maybe gotten a few pops from subs in the process. However if he had done that, maybe we wouldn't be celebrating a Worlds gold right now. Which is why I generally agree with magiker's sentiment of focusing on primary training for U21 players. These are all general statements, we will always have some specialized players with unique goals and skills.

From: Isaiah

This Post:
00
199844.71 in reply to 199844.65
Date: 11/2/2011 5:26:58 PM
Smallfries
II.1
Overall Posts Rated:
419419
Second Team:
Smallfries II
I really want to revisit my first question.

I think only magiker really got the jist of what I was asking. Obviously, we all want the best players in the best game shape and to leave spots open on the roster. However, everyone has 7 GS and a fixed starting point for their skills in week 1. Our first competitive game is in ~10 days, then we have 13(?) weeks of games.

So how do you plan on making good decisions in week 1 that last the season? What are some things you are going to look for and how are you going to find the answers?

Week one decisions will be based off of who the best players are at the time as well as potential. If a player is already capped I do not want him on the team to start. Also, I will be making decisions based on potential. If I have to choose between 2 guys, obe that is a little better but capped or another one that is a little worst than the first but better potential, then i would pick the second.I dont think i mentioned anything about GS in my other post about regarding the first 12 on the team but I may have.

Advertisement