BuzzerBeater Forums

BB USA > U21 National Team Debate Thread

U21 National Team Debate Thread (thread closed)

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
11
199844.89 in reply to 199844.88
Date: 11/2/2011 8:45:52 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
104104
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

This Post:
22
199844.90 in reply to 199844.89
Date: 11/2/2011 8:50:48 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
122122
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.

This Post:
00
199844.91 in reply to 199844.90
Date: 11/2/2011 8:57:49 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
104104
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?

From: Panic

This Post:
00
199844.92 in reply to 199844.84
Date: 11/2/2011 9:03:00 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
5656
It was pre-announcement that he wasn't returning.

From: Panic

This Post:
00
199844.93 in reply to 199844.79
Date: 11/2/2011 9:12:09 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
5656
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.

This Post:
00
199844.94 in reply to 199844.91
Date: 11/2/2011 9:33:38 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
122122
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.

From: magiker

To: Coco
This Post:
00
199844.96 in reply to 199844.69
Date: 11/3/2011 1:35:26 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
199199
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

From: magiker

To: Coco
This Post:
00
199844.97 in reply to 199844.64
Date: 11/3/2011 1:44:08 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
199199
I kinda meant you might be underrating driving. (I don't mean this as a criticism, eh, just as a topic for discussion).


Yeah, I see what you mean. I only had 90 points to work with, so I was probably gonna be short on something. What I meant by saying the player wasn't realistic is that it's difficult to put some driving on a big, and then have his inside skills good enough to play U21. Azariah might have something for us though, so I'm hoping it's possible!

This Post:
00
199844.98 in reply to 199844.72
Date: 11/3/2011 1:57:52 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
199199
You have said that you want to see more primaries on centers, and you have used Terrence Hammond as an example. Although Hammond was possibly the best player on the team last season, Jimmie Brown, arguably our best guard, shot 0-20 from 3. Due to the fact that we ran a LI offense last season, the big men will get more touches of the ball, and they will have more opportunites to kick the ball out to a guard for 3. Do you think that the low passing on some of the bigs we had caused such poor shooting performances from Jimmie Brown?


Sure it contributed to his poor shooting. I'd say that's a logical explanation. I also think we've seen a pattern of good shooting guards shooting terribly in a LI offense. I'd say its more of a "feature" of the GE than the lack of passing on the bigs, but it's hard to tell and it's definitely both. If you have an hour, jfarb can tell you all about this. But, as vice president of the Ricky Logsdon Fan Club (I just found out...) you might be offended with what he has to say.

At the end of the day, you can't have perfect players. Hammond's atrocious passing was a flaw, and he would have been even better with 7 passing. But it's not like there are a lot of 100k U21 bigs with more than 4 passing. We had Merrill, but that's it. Hammond's dominance inside outweighed his inability to create open shots for the guards.

Advertisement