BuzzerBeater Forums

The US NT has been on a cycle for sometime. Do okay in Americas, completely sick at worlds. Rinse wash and repeat(what ever that means)
I'm voting for the guy who is most likely to change that cycle, outside factors be damned.

I'm not sure there's a question in here, but I'll give it a go. First, I think we've done better than "okay" at America's.
S19 - America's gold
S21 - America's gold
S23 - America's silver (lost by 1 point to Chile, who had HCA)
Canada has HCA this season, so they'll be a bit more difficult this season. And Chile is always a contender.

You're right, however, that we've pretty much sucked at Worlds. While I would have done some things differently than Sleet, I think better players will make a much larger difference than any tactical changes we can make.

1. I wouldn't ask anything.

2. Tim Tebow.

3. Probably not.

4. Succeeded.

5. No.

6. So blind people can use an ATM. They just get a friend to drive them, and then use the ATM. Also, ATM's are now prepared for when Google makes their self-driving car.

Both of you (Isaiah and magiker) have admitted that we do not currently have the players we need to win in Worlds and that the focus of your term will be player development.

With the term being only 2 seasons, how much of an effect, if any, will that translate into for the mid-twenties guys that are almost NT ready?

If you propose any long term changes to our training plans how can you be confident you can convince USA managers to stick with your plans well past your term? (As an example, SB. If you believe the SB changes were effective and would like a SB beast you will likely not have one to play during your term. How do you plan to get managers to buy into your idea and follow new training practices when by the time their guy is NT ready there will be a different manager and their player may never get a callup and opportunity to prove or disprove the effectiveness of the build?)

Neither of you are claiming to bring home gold immediately and with some USA managers dead set on a "trophy-or-we-failed" attitude, how will you gage the success of your term?

Great questions Hunterz.

I'm first going to answer your last question. While our team may not be ready for a gold trophy,I feel we could definitely make strides towards a silver at least. Here's the problem we face. We have consistently been a LI team and rarely run anything else. The unwillingness to try anything else could be what has kept us from these possibilities. I'm one to take chances and you can see that with my own teams history. It is never good to be one dimenshional and that may mean you switch it up some games to keep the competition on their toes. This also means having the guts to maybe run an outside offense during big games if we think the opponent might run a 2-3 defense. This is how we at least stand a chance at winning a potential gold. I'm not going to sit there and know we are outmatched using LI but still use it. Same goes for defenses. If I know our M2M is outmatched I will do whatever it takes to compete.

For development, that is a tricky question but I think one thing we need to do is allow for some flexibility in training. The first thing to do is see the path am owner wants to take and then keep continuous contact with those managers. I will specifically be the one to contact these owners over the course of two seasons and continue beyond too. Many special builds are beneficial to the teams they are on as well so it's important to not just tell them they are useful builds but show them why they are useful. With the potential change in the salary formulas that just happened, this makes these types of builds we may need even more possible.

For SBing, that will be completely up to the manager. I'm creating a SB build right now with the hopes to show people the importance, so we will see how that goes. However, I'm confident that more people will be willing to train it as time goes on.

In regards to building a team with multiple tactic options, do you mean forming a team that in one season can run multiple tactics? What I mean is, with a limited amount of allowed call ups, do you see a challenge with our current player builds to have one roster that can an inside offense one week, and then an outside offense the next week? Is this something we can accomplish during this term, or is this a longer term plan?

Also, if we form players who can each run multiple tactics, is it a danger to potentially create a bunch of tweeners who have no weaknesses, but no real strengths on the national stage either?

With running multiple tactics, many of our guys are already built to be able to run inside and outside tactics, as long as they are used appropriately. So, this would not necessarily require call ups all the time. Also, I understand what our strength is and I'm not saying we constantly change tactics, what I'm saying is that I will have my mind on the matchups and if the situation calls for different tactics to be able to compete then I will do it. I will answer more specific questions to this if you have them, but in general, different tactics won't require call ups all the time.

For the second part, the goal isn't to make a whole bunch tweeners but I can see where you might think that. Players would have an identity to them specifically made for a purpose. Example: Defensive SFs, Outside bigs, inside guards, pure SGs, offensive oriented bigs, etc. They have an identity and will be different from each other. At the same time, we will still need types of player builds we have now. It'll be the combination of the two that will help us move forward.

Just a quick example of the past:

We knew we were outmatched and the opponent had gone 2-3 in the past, but instead of taking the chance going outside we would hear everyone say "stick to our bread and butter," ala go LI and M2M despite being outmatched an low chance of winning. Then, what do you know, the opposition would go 2-3 and we lose. The losing isn't necessarily avoidable, but we can take actions to raise our chances of winning.

Of, the guys that are 23-25, only a couple are probably good enough to end up on the team in the next two seasons. The goal is to develop better players, with the hope that someone other than me in 4-6 seasons can give it a real shot at worlds. The 23-25 year old guys don't have much more than 2 seasons of training left, so I think these next 2 are crucial.

You've also hit the nail on the head as to why the NT manager can't go rogue and propose large training changes. Any significant training changes have to be agreed on by most people involved in the NT. I'm not proposing any long term training changes. But I think theres a huge role for the NT coach to encourage managers to train players that can be useful for the NT and sustainable in D1 leagues. Also note I dealt with this as U21 coach. Some of it is going to be personal preference, no way around it. But there shouldn't be any large scale changes.

On the offsite forum, we'll have a thread of current players that are 22+ and what builds their manager is projecting for them. We'll talk about what builds we think will be useful and sustainable, and we'll communicate that with the manager. Everyone is encouraged to contribute or dissent. I think it's better to have a consistent long term plan for the NT, with minor changes every two seasons, rather than constant wholesale changes.

Obviously people who have the "trophy or bust" attitude don't really understand all the work that's been done over the past several seasons, and how much better our team is now than our semifinal team in S16. I'm really not worried about what they think. My goal is to develop better players, and I'll be successful if the next manager has a better team to work with than I do.

All really good questions, thanks.

Here's the problem we face. We have consistently been a LI team and rarely run anything else.

I don't think that's the problem at all. I can't find a team that's been successful because they've "kept people on their toes" with tactics, or because they had the "guts" to play outside offenses once in a while. I can, however, find teams with a lot of great players that are "one dimensional," and can run LI better than everyone else. Those teams win gold a lot. They've been successful being one dimensional because they have a lot of players built for the same offense, and therefore have a lot of depth each week. They can dress the guys with the best GS each week.

However, with the SB change and BB's apparent commitment to being able to successfully run different tactics, this may need to change. It's something we should at least consider in building players for the future. But let's not act like this has been a major, or even minor problem in the past.

Right they have many guys for the offense, but they also have those bigs with big salaries that many people do not want to hold. If nobody wants to hold them then how do we do that? And here's another thing I have to say about that....if you look on the TL you will see that lots of players that we once believed were important for the LI offense are becoming cheap on the TL These are the same players that would always sell for a lot even when the market was down, but not now. What that tells me is that the value of these players is going down and managers are moving to other builds. What happens then for the NT if the owners want different players?

I have said it in previous elections and will say it again....we will never be a Golds team if we continue to be like everyone else. So you are saying " there are team that are constant gold contenders who use LI" but they are already, and have been for awhile, ahead of us in the production of different players. In fact, we are trying to play catch up by creating similar players. Then what happens when we catch up and they are already ahead of us in other types of players and tactics? We can't keep saying "well they did so we can to." We need get ahead of these teams and that means we need to start developing with our mind on other ways. I compare this to a basketball player whose shooting motion is bad. He may shoot decently and can score lots of points but he will reach a point where he won't get better because of his flaws. The same goes for us, we will never get better if we keep doing what we are doing, which is trying to be like everyone else, because there will come a time where we can't get better and we will be behind everyone else.

I will agree with you though that we can't make huge changes right away because people will resist so it will take gradual changes, but I do believe we need to desperate ourselves instead of being like everyone else.

First off, I’d like to say I love your mentality with regards to tactics and player development, it’s refreshing.

My question is twofold.

Short term:
Our results from worlds were disheartening to say the least, and we won’t see significant changes to our core group in two seasons. The quickest way to improve this team would be through a stamina training regime, but we’ll still be at a disadvantage.

Knowing that we don’t have the best talent to draw from, what can we do strategically to maximize our success?

Long Term:
Simply, how can we develop the best players in the world?

Obviously people who have the "trophy or bust" attitude don't really understand all the work that's been done over the past several seasons, and how much better our team is now than our semifinal team in S16.

In season 16, I made the NBBA playoffs starting a SG with 12 OD, and won the cup with a team that would struggle not to be relegated today. In season 16, guards with strong ID could completely shutdown opponents running LI, today I’m up against guards with marvelous IS. There’s been a massive shift towards inside offenses in recent seasons, and the USA has followed that trend.

Our NT is no doubt a better LI team than it was the last time we made the semis, but I’d argue that our player growth as a whole hasn’t kept with the rest of the world, and in some areas we’ve regressed.

Can we expect to be a contender for gold in season 26, and if not, what should our goal be? When could we expect our talent to develop to a point that we can be a perennial favorite on the world stage? Today’s 27 year olds were 18 the last time we made the semis.