BuzzerBeater Forums

Just a couple points to contend:

the key to the success was the fact that Italy can play a 2-3 zone and still manage to shut virtually every perimeter offense,

That's nice if you have the players, especially superior ones, to have the "best of both worlds" defense you laid out. If you were manager, what can be done differently to influence training, other than advising managers of key players on training?

nigeria had to be stopped, even on a normal vs. a CT. was it possible with the given roster? no way.

Overall, the US team was undermanned (talent-wise) IMO, against teams like Brazil, Spain and of course Italy, who also had the benefit of home court. Since the US had to maintain higher enthusiasm to overcome these teams should they meet, do you believe it better to CT to get a win, even if that means you're risking any chance of the ultimate goal, winning the tournament?

This was the case against Nigeria were it wasn't even assumed they would CT and even if they did, we'd still have a chance (only 8 point loss). If you knew that a normal would give you a "toss-up" chance of advancing, would you take that to keep the ultimate goal intact?

Overall, the US team was undermanned (talent-wise) IMO, against teams like Brazil, Spain and of course Italy

And the first two we beat and the 3rd we play on Monday.

Overall, the US team was undermanned (talent-wise) IMO, against teams like Brazil, Spain and of course Italy, who also had the benefit of home court. Since the US had to maintain higher enthusiasm to overcome these teams should they meet, do you believe it better to CT to get a win, even if that means you're risking any chance of the ultimate goal, winning the tournament?

This was the case against Nigeria were it wasn't even assumed they would CT and even if they did, we'd still have a chance (only 8 point loss). If you knew that a normal would give you a "toss-up" chance of advancing, would you take that to keep the ultimate goal intact?

I don't believe the US team had the players to win the whole thing. So, that being said, I feel like the goal should have been to advance as far as possible. CTing against Nigeria in a must-win situation would have ensured that. Should the US team have beaten Nigeria Normal vs. CT? Yes, probably. However, there was a chance of losing, which is what happened. As Juice has said, he would have done it differently given another chance, and I respect that.

Obviously the Americas initial qualification is a bit of a cakewalk, but any thoughts on the group:

Pool B
Team W L PF PA %
1 United States 0 0 0 0 0.000
2 Bolivia 0 0 0 0 0.000
3 Ecuador 0 0 0 0 0.000
4 Paraguay 0 0 0 0 0.000
5 Brasil 0 0 0 0 0.000
6 Puerto Rico 0 0 0 0 0.000

If we don't advance past this group whoever is in charge should be shot.

We also play Brasil last, and for the 1st time not in Brasil.

9 candidates registered, 2 actually debating - where are the other 7?

you'd stand no chance of beating italy in a "win or go home" game, you know that… yet you're going to win, since italy will field third- and fourth-tier players who didn't make it to the world cup 18 (which actually were 20). don't mix usa vs italy with the other games, the other wins are worth much more.

Remember that our enthusiasm is going to be roughly .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001%

And if we played Italy in a real game, we'd be right in it.

And there's more to come.