BuzzerBeater Forums

Rik Smits' Clogs has no future whatsoever. He has some nice trainees in but 2-4 seasons his team is done unless he trains, of course.

I ain't go no future or family tree but I know what a prince and lover ought to be.

Big 😂

I ain't go no future or family tree but I know what a prince and lover ought to be.

If I knew you were going to quote a Spin Doctors song, I would've guessed "Little Miss Can't Be Wrong ".

I ain't go no future or family tree but I know what a prince and lover ought to be.

If I knew you were going to quote a Spin Doctors song, I would've guessed "Little Miss Can't Be Wrong ".

If I had heard that one in the car that day, I might have. Or not. I'd have to go back in this thread to see what the context was, and then evaluate what I would have thought at the time, and that's way too much rewind for this fast forward life.

Who needs a future when you can dominate in the present? Rik Smits Clogs seem to be crushing everyone they play by an average of 28 points, and is the only undefeated team in our league. All this with a league leader in points or assists. You have a leading rebounder, but only the eighth best. How are you doing this?

Who needs a future when you can dominate in the present? Rik Smits Clogs seem to be crushing everyone they play by an average of 28 points, and is the only undefeated team in our league. All this with a league leader in points or assists. You have a leading rebounder, but only the eighth best. How are you doing this?

I'm not entirely sure. I know when my team was good, it thrived because it played extremely good defense, was competitive on the boards, hit free throws and usually led the league in turnovers forced and had the fewest turnovers caused. My long-time guards are still pretty good despite their age, and my trainees are getting to be fun, but I know there are still holes that probably should be costing me more games while I work on training my three exchange students. Since this has been a hectic time at work (and I was out of town for the past week at a conference), I really haven't been able to watch the games to get a better feel for things.

I'm not sure if jeremynh reads the boards or not, but I salute him on having been the better manager in the Finals; he took advantage of my lazy management and pretty predictable lineups based on my training needs and put together a strategy that took game one and HCA from me, and very nearly took game 2 despite me putting just about every bit of effort and strategy that I am capable of. Usually, the cliche is that the best team wins, but I think this is one of those exceptions.

The one free advice I will give for future reference is that if you're going against an outside shooting team, a zone defense is only as good as the weakest link; a 3-2 with two good outside defending guards and a SF with relatively poor defense will see a lot of shots taken against that guard. A 1-3-1 is even more so - you'd better have everyone be good outside defenders because four of them will defend the three point line (I think the PF usually doesn't), and the big men will also defend a lot of mid-range jumpers.

So basically, you're saying make sure your starters can defend the perimeter decently? Is it a big deal if your bench players aren't as strong in that area, except for maybe power forward?

Well, at some point you might have to make compromises - very few people are equipped to have crazy OD all over the floor, and sometimes even then that bit about the big men guarding (and constantly fouling) the guard might kick in. My textbook example is this game, where my starting lineup had crazy OD (I think this lineup was something like 16 - 14 - 17 - 14- 10 OD, with defensive switches, and 16, 11, 14 and 14 on the guys I planned on playing from the bench). (65823062) Unfortunately, his foul drawing PG and my extremely fouly C played slapass all game, or at least until the C fouled out and then someone else got to continue fouling.

But, yeah I've run enough outside offense at high enough levels to actually be excited to face zones in most cases. If you have a SF that doesn't have great OD, you can be sure that he'll be the guy reported to be defending the most threes, because the guy he's guarding on a particular play is closer to "open".