BuzzerBeater Forums

Question #2, I'd like to hear everyone's opinions on what we should be expecting performance(record/success) wise in the next 2 seasons under your leadership.

A d.II team with a properly constructed arena and properly managed staff/scouting expenses can sustain 400-500k salary even before accounting for merchandise bonuses, which would mean they could sustain a NT guard/SF without massively crippling their team (see: Harper with Ritter, Curry when he cared with Lundy).

Yes, the hope is that someone will rise through the ranks and be able to ride the coattails of their NT trainee to the NBBA. Yes, not every team will be able to do so, and some teams will be faced with a choice to sell or wreck their club team. My primary goal is to minimize the pressure on trainers to "NT or bust" with their trainees, and thus to avoid more "Owens situations", which wind up being negative all around and can potentially cost us good trainers.

P.S. 1-2 levels in each primary is huge for a big man (secondaries being equal). Two big men with 18-18-18 will completely own two big men with 16-17-16 and it's not even close. I think you're seriously underestimating this difference.

$35k-70k salary is 1-2 levels in ALL PRIMARIES COMBINED (17-17-18 compared to 18-18-18), not in each primary.

I have the time to follow through and I have the ideas to get teams more interested in the NT.

Expand on this?

I dont think these next two seasons need to be judged on performance of the team rather it needs to be judged on how well the new coach does to get community involvment as well as how he sets up the team for future success. Could we win worlds in two seasons? well, if we have a lot of luck but we would first have to qualify by performing well this season. I dont feel like we are at a top comptitive level though and we need to work on preparing the team for a future run which i am prepared to do that as well as take all the heat from parts of the communit thats wants to win now.

Tapia was just on the TL earlier this week, 20/18/18 and pretty much flat naked otherwise. So, Maples +XXXXX

Garcia, their #2 guy, last we had skills... 19/19/16 with 10 JS and pretty much naked otherwise. So, Jairo (our #3) XXX and XXX (on a 70k salary gap, suggests to me that Jario's sublevels are better than Garcia's), or Bland XXX XXX, and Bland had much better PA/HN.

We're just not in the mystical 16/16/16 vs 18/18/18 hole against Chile. So what's with the insistence on the strawman?

Last edited by jfarb at 2/9/2012 4:27:00 PM

But the training system you advocate isn't "carry[ing] these players in the NBBA". It's having a farm team build the players for you so that you don't have to break out of your comfortable little mold to actually get the players built. Which is what leads to situations like the Owens transfer (or Bronson's serial transfers, where everyone gets to feel good that they would have bought him if only some foreign manager hadn't paid more than he was worth, and they can just bitch about overpriced US players on the transfer list without actually being expected to fix the problem).

If we are going to expect NBBA teams is going to "carry" a major big man, then we should expect that they actually make use of the fact that they're going to throw 1 game a week any way in order to acquire a high potential trainee and get him trained. It's unreasonable to expect and demand that a lower division team is going to spend millions of dollars on an 18yo trainee (or forgo those dollars to keep their own draftee), spend four seasons training him up to the point where he breaks their payroll, and then sell him on to an NBBA team who will now finish out his training. There's a lot of long term proof that it doesn't pencil out financially unless your team is developing and promoting because of the trainee(s), and teams are going to be much more interested in participating if they're presented with a viable way to have a piece of the NT, instead of just going down as "that guy who trained XXX before he became Coco's player".

It's almost a certainty that Tapia's guard skills are the result of him being "born that way", so I think it's fair to consider him "flat naked". By contrast, some of our newer prospects (and I'm sure some of Chile's up and comers, or maybe even some of the ones in the top 4 now) are clearly not "flat naked", as their guard skills are at levels that can't occur in the wild. They might have started at all 7s, I really don't know, but there was some effort put into getting them to where they are now. Ultimately, it's a moot point how Tapia's guard skills got to where they are. The 6 PA is obviously significantly better than Maples' contribution, but I certainly wouldn't argue that his other skills make an earth-shattering difference to his performance compared to Maples.

But, rather than put words in your mouth... is it your position that Maples in similar game shape is unable to match up with Tapia? If someone gave him 1 more IS and 1 more ID pop, would your position change? (I'll grant that training Maples probably isn't actually a GOOD idea, but the question remains.) Could Bland or one of our other top centers match up with Tapia with 2 pops or less?