BuzzerBeater Forums

One useful way of looking at the point is this: we, as a community, have accumulated too much knowledge of how NTs/U21 work, for there to be a promising newfangled approach. Any new team-composition strategy would need a comparable winning track-record to be even considered.

So, all that the prospective coaches have to address is this question: can you give us some good evidence you won't go rogue and start selecting players on the basis of bizarre arguments?

Beautifully stated, Coco. This is exactly my main though in choosing a manager. If someone says they want to do something more than a smidge different than what Rambo (and the collective wisdom) has been doing I want extremely documented and extensive agreements for the case. Otherwise I plan on giving you the stink eye.

First off, I agree that the way things have been done has been great for us. The future U21 coaches are very lucky to be able to be the coach after what has been done with this team. All the hard work put in by Jelme and Rambo at the U21 level should not be destroyed. Their work is in fact the base for which future U21 coaches should build on and that is exactly what I plan to do.

It's funny because Jelme for awhile refused to call up Mason Pate because Clifford Turpin was the exact same player but better. He waited to see how Turpin performed before he he decided upon Pate. Turpin worked out so Pate got called upon.

That is my line of reasoning for not having two of the identical niche player. There is little experience with dealing with them and you don't want to waste a day 1 call-up on two of the same, or very similar player, when they end up not working. That way you only have 1 "wasted" roster spot and not two. If I see that a guard with high IS is a dominant force, I can now feel more confident calling up another one of similar build.

We need them because there are situations that the general combo guard and salary behemoth big don't cut it. Hell there has been several well respected managers that have said the only visable reason we won vs Poland was because of offensive flow. Interestingly enough before the game we called up an 18 OD 15 passing guard, a form of a LI PG, to be our starting PG over our usual, somewhat common, players. Would we have won with Kenny Luther as starting Pg over Selby? I don't know, but we can certainly appreciate such a risky move in a crucial game.

Teams built for one specific offense positions 1-5 on the court have succeeded in BB. Why not now?

Last edited by oriolekid at 11/2/2011 8:36:07 PM

Sorry I have not been on lately.

If you have any questions for me please ask.

What is your position on immigration laws? Being AMERICAS team I feel it is important to state your opinion on these laws.

Last edited by Mike Rice at 11/2/2011 8:46:33 PM

I think that as long as people have the required paperwork, they should be aloud to come into America. However, if they do not they should not be aloud, because they could commit crimes and other criminal actions and then simply go back to their country, without going to prison.

Thanks for the quick response.

Couple more Questions:
I have recently noticed that you only have 3 american players on your team.

1.Do you still consider yourself AMERICA's team?
2. Do you plan on buying any good young americans to increase the number of americans on your team?

It was pre-announcement that he wasn't returning.

You're right, the whole "community involvement" cliche is quite overused, and rarely do you see highly substantial progress, which is what jfarb, Rambo, and Jason have done/did in their tenures.

By more of everything, the recent movements the offsite has made to reach out have been a good step in the right direction, however, to get more managers interested and willing to participate is easier said than done. If elected, I expect that not only will that stay the same, I expect it to grow by innovating our PR system and attempting to get to managers not only training prospects, but willing to train them and keeping a stable base of managers with steady amounts of training knowledge intact.

Thanks for the quick response.

Couple more Questions:
I have recently noticed that you only have 3 american players on your team.

1.Do you still consider yourself AMERICA's team?
2. Do you plan on buying any good young americans to increase the number of americans on your team?

1. According to the majority of Americans, yes.

2. I am looking at two guys right now.

I disagree that "what is good for U21" is very different from what's good for clubs. U21 players do not cost much, and usually their value is at the maximum just after the end of their 21yo season.

I weigh what you have to say about the game as highly as anyone. But I don’t think you understand the financial burden of any of the teams that aren’t in the NBBA or DII. In fact, the best U21 bigs are very difficult to carry for DIII and lower. Let me try to draw a parallel with Ade Maples.

Why has no one in the NBBA purchased Ade Maples? His subs suck, and his salary it’s so damn high. Right? It’s not worth it for your club team. The economic value isn't there. DIII and lower division managers look at a player like Hammond the same way you look at Maples.

There isn’t enough time to train bigs with good subs to 16/16/16 for U21. And if most managers (DIII and lower) want good subs on their bigs, and what’s best for their team, they’ll stop at 14/14/14. That's plenty for DIII and practically unaffordable in DIV. Hammond destroyed Poland’s 16/14/14/17 big in the final. We can’t have 14’s in the world’s final and expect to win.

Last edited by magiker at 11/3/2011 1:44:47 AM