What can we say about the first two matches?
Unfortunately, there was no viewing of the players before the season. Not to say that there are a lot of candidates, but it was still worth doing it.
The match against France was played according to my set-up, almost the strongest and most balanced squad, with the exception of Chapp. However, the coach changed tactics, the team played Motion. Defeat -23. The game turned out to be very successful for us, the team did not get lost in front of a strong opponent. Our attack looked reliable. I think the French were expecting a much bigger difference in the score.
By the second game against Romania, the squad was changed. Boyd switched to his more classic SF position. Blair became the starting PF, and Michael was sent to the bench. In principle, equivalent replacements, although when translating Boyd to SF, we weaken the paint, our not the strongest place. Also, the starting SG was the Fitchy GS 8 instead of the MacShimes GS 9. I didn't quite understand this movement, even with the same GS MacShimes a level stronger on SG. Nevertheless, it is the coach's choice. In addition, Chapp was sent to the reserve, MacKersey was returned to the bench. That just looks logical. Chapp is good, but still lacks fundamental skills.
The coach again chose the tactics of Motion. After the match with France, the result was expected to be better, but we got a -22 defeat. The opponent chose a good Look Inside tactic and crushed under the basket. Spens' not-so-good GS and Boyd's transfer to SF affected. As a result, the starting line-up did not play the best match, the bench held up quite well. It seems that internal tactics will often play against us. I hope that the coach will draw some conclusions.
We continue to observe)