Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="RF2044, post: 5369938, member: 40"]
According to this article, posted earlier in this very same thread [U]returning players should ideally account for 50% of your team's playing time[/U].  Additionally, "...there is a clear positive trend between teams that rely more heavily on returning players and better team success."

Here are the two fundamental tenets provided in the article:
[ATTACH type="full" alt="xxx.jpg"]250151[/ATTACH]

Here is the article:

[URL unfurl="true"]https://blog.evanmiya.com/p/how-to-build-a-roster-in-the-modern[/URL]

Now, people can debate this -- but the data-driven point is that the foundation / returning nucleus is IMPORTANT, and that NIL is best used to supplement that core [whether by adding a star to catapult things to the next level, or adding depth pieces] and add balance.

Having to go out and recruit 4 to 5 starters might be the situation that we're in, but it isn't an ideal approach, per the article.

The article also looks at teams on either end of that scale -- the teams that return the highest percentage of player contributions [not surprisingly] tended to do better, and the teams at the low end of returning player contributions were generally worse, performed more poorly, and didn't qualify for the tournament.

There will always be exceptions, but if we take some of these data-driven insights as being accurate, our approach is out of whack.  Especially if we lose 7-11 players from this year's squad.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?