# USA relies too much on athleticism



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

And I blame it on the NBA's set of rules that reward athleticism so much. It has built an era of very exciting players, but also players with way too many bad habits. Everything is about being quicker, faster, stronger and jumping higher.

Honestly, some of these teams have made Team USA look real elementary from a skills and understanding viewpoint. I really don't think Team USA is going to look any better in 2008 because all these players are going to back to the NBA for 2 more years and will have all the same bad habits reinforced. The same habits that other teams expose and take advantage of in international competition.


----------



## Banjoriddim (Aug 14, 2004)

Sir Patchwork said:


> And I blame it on the NBA's set of rules that reward athleticism so much. It has built an era of very exciting players, but also players with way too many bad habits. Everything is about being quicker, faster, stronger and jumping higher.
> 
> Honestly, some of these teams have made Team USA look real elementary from a skills and understanding viewpoint. I really don't think Team USA is going to look any better in 2008 because all these players are going to back to the NBA for 2 more years and will have all the same bad habits reinforced. The same habits that other teams expose and take advantage of in international competition.


Outstanding post though they will improve but I belive you are pointing at possible risk that at times (when game plan collapses/you are behind) 2-3 players start takeing offense on their houlders (rater than work as unit) and screw it up. I felt that USA players were forceing moments (by being so much quicker stronger... ect.) rater constantly creating within team consept and reasonable ball movement. Shooting was still concern and most astonishing was the fact that though at times USA can kill on D they can get burned by smaller, shorter, less athletic guys with pick and roll. I don't know who is stupid (I'd pick coach) but this is just idiotic. 
As good as they are they still aren team and I don't see strong first unit... I mean if you can't decide who is the main PG then well atleast don't sub best candidates all the time. 
I don't know how you can break this "me I am the star" thing when you are in trouble (from Wade/Melo/Bron..) coz it usually works and is in players blod but the result dosn't just look like basketball. 
And I was suprised that zone still works against USA and even if doesn't then it encorage someone take game over and kill last bits of any gameplan.
btw what kind of offense where USA running? It just didn't look like basketball in traditional meaning.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

What's wrong with athleticism? Everyone says that like it's code word for bad. It is a sport, why shouldn't the most athletic be successfull?

International basketball tries to cut the athleticism out of the sport--but is that the right course of action? What makes basketball exciting is the combination of skills and athletic ability. If we are too slanted to athletic they are too slanted to skill. When we play over there we struggle, and when they play over here they struggle.

Which is the more exciting brand of basketball? I think the NBA is more entertaining honestly. I've watched some of the top level euroleague games on NBA TV, and it's like watching a poorly officiated college game.

I love NBA Brand Basketball. 

I think Argentina is the pinacle of what I want to see. Very athletic, very stylized, both individually and as a unit. To me they are the ideal balance of both. But if I had to pick between the two, I'd pick the NBA over Euro-style ball. And I'm sure most people in the world feel the same way.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

The reality is their are several factors as to why the US lost again. 

- an over reliance on athleticism,
- to a lack of chemistry 
- going against teams who have been playing with each other for years
- the Olympic games being tailor-made for the international system of developing players vs. the US's system
- to a lack of fundamentals being taught on the highschool and college level 
- a generation in love with the big dunk or 3 point shot 
- a feeling of superiority.

There is no one reason as to why the US hasn’t had the success it has been use to having. Not to mention. International teams are simply better due to a host of other reasons.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

ralaw said:


> - to a lack of fundamentals being taught on the highschool and college level
> - a generation in love with the big dunk or 3 point shot
> - a feeling of superiority.


Welcome to 1999. I don't agree that these things are currently true. I don't see anything wrong with USA's fundementals. Would you like to be specific? Because the core of our team are some of the most well rounded players on the planet. Today's American player can do everything on the court and is personified in the players from KG onward.

I think American basketball is in the process of reinventing the game. D'Antoni is changing the way the game is being played, and is finally starting to show us the way to utilize all of these 6-8 uber-players, who do every single thing on the court well. The future of american basketball is 5 guys who can play every single position on the court, operating interchangibly, each knowing every role on the court and how to do it.

And the whole generation in love with the big dunk thing, doesn't really show either. Lebron and DWade the poster children of this generation have yet to participate in a dunk contest or 3 point shootout. That's kind of fishy for players that value the 3 pointer and dunk. And Lebron lays the ball up more than he dunks it. And very rarely is flashy in his dunks.

These are all cliches that applied ten years ago, but don't now. American basketball is in transition right now. These are just growing pains. I believe this is the youngest group of professionals we've sent over. The team is basically the class of 03. This with Howard and Oden is our golden generation. When they are in their primes then let's talk about the state of american basketball.


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

futuristxen said:


> I love NBA Brand Basketball.


Agreed!

This is knock out basketball. The most talented, or the best (and I'm not stating the US is either, it's just a point of reference), team rarely wins. We're not talking about 7 games series, an 82 game season. Most of us have witnessed the NCAA tournament, the wonders it produces. International Basketball is much the same, (nearly) any team can win on a given night. The US Basketball team lost, and they'll lose again. 1 game knock out basketball is for teams that perform, that can give it their all and exceed one game at a time.

The #1 ranked NCAA team doesn't always win the NCAA Championship. This is much the same.


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

Great post Sir Patchwork, I have said this all along.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Lachlanwood32 said:


> Agreed!
> 
> This is knock out basketball. The most talented, or the best (and I'm not stating the US is either, it's just a point of reference), team rarely wins. We're not talking about 7 games series, an 82 game season. Most of us have witnessed the NCAA tournament, the wonders it produces. International Basketball is much the same, (nearly) any team can win on a given night. The US Basketball team lost, and they'll lose again. 1 game knock out basketball is for teams that perform, that can give it their all and exceed one game at a time.
> 
> The #1 ranked NCAA team doesn't always win the NCAA Championship. This is much the same.


Excellent post.

People want to talk like there is some way that we can "fix" USA basketball where it will be 100 percent guaranteed that we'll win every game by a bunch. But as you say, this is one and done basketball. The best team doesn't always win in these tournaments. Heck, even in the NBA when we had the best of four series, the best team didn't always win in the playoffs. Teams can get hot for just long enough to win these whole tournaments. It's a nice feather in your cap, but winning an NBA championship means more than a world championship, simply because you have to demonstrate more conclusively that you are the best.

Things are close enough, and they'll never get far enough apart by the way, no matter what you do, but things are close enough that on any given day anyone in the world can beat anyone. FIBA basketball by making the games shorter in addition to the format of the tournament favors teams that get hot, over teams that are just better.

Greece was on fire today. We were not. The margin is close enough that that sort of thing decides it.


----------



## Banjoriddim (Aug 14, 2004)

I belive lack of fundamental as it comes outside of individual skills... damn, what I mean is that lack of fundamental are in sense when your team has 2-3 attacks in row where about 2 guys touch the ball or when slow short guys burn you with pick and roll (someone doesn't know where to stand) or this constant forceing thing...

NBA is best to watch currently but I would claim that if we had league with most of FIBA rules and NBA players it would be even better. If you think that superstar calls constant walking with ball and iso are thing what make NBA fun to watch then I wish you best but I don't think so and claims that FIBA means less athletic can **** our favourite guys due to rules then watch more games I'd say to market individuals you have some new rules like "Wade does't have to bounce the ball as much as others" or "you are rookie you get fouls easyer"....

I watch Suns and feel that FIBA and Europe has given you something to watch and learn.

...as I feel Greece coach could give you new half zone half man to man defense what is fun to watch and is effective at the same time... ect. I'd be more open minded but since since Bron got burned some of you are pissed 

also athletism is not bad but b-ball is firstly game based on skills and team work.


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

Exactly futuristxen. 

Sure, we can get down into the nitty gritty stuff. We need more shooters, some bigger guys, etc., etc.. But really, it means nothing. We have the most talented team in the world. That doesn't mean we'll win. Kobe, McGrady, Duncan, Shaq, they don't change the format of the tournament.

It's like the World Cup. The NCAA tourney. NFL playoffs. It's a one and done deal. Don't play well? Go home. Over an 82 game season, the most talented team will win. The best team will win. Same in the NBA format playoffs. International basketball is not designed that way, which is what makes it exciting. It's what makes it close.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

futuristxen said:


> Welcome to 1999. I don't agree that these things are currently true. I don't see anything wrong with USA's fundementals. Would you like to be specific? Because the core of our team are some of the most well rounded players on the planet. Today's American player can do everything on the court and is personified in the players from KG onward.


I disagree. The USA's fundamentals still have a long way to go. Our players with the exception of a few have no understanding of team defense, perimeter defense, mid-range shooting, shot selection, basic ball handling techniques, floor spacing etc....



futuristxen said:


> I think American basketball is in the process of reinventing the game. D'Antoni is changing the way the game is being played, and is finally starting to show us the way to utilize all of these 6-8 uber-players, who do every single thing on the court well. The future of american basketball is 5 guys who can play every single position on the court, operating interchangibly, each knowing every role on the court and how to do it.


I disagree here as well, as the D' Antoni system is actually a European system and this system is not being taught on the basic levels of basketball such as in rec-leagues, highschool or college. The future of American basketball doesn't rest on one particular system such as, D'Antoni's, but is more relegated to the personal a coach has. American basketball is predicated on a superstar system and this isn't going to change.



futuristxen said:


> And the whole generation in love with the big dunk thing, doesn't really show either. Lebron and DWade the poster children of this generation have yet to participate in a dunk contest or 3 point shootout. That's kind of fishy for players that value the 3 pointer and dunk. And Lebron lays the ball up more than he dunks it. And very rarely is flashy in his dunks.


LeBron and Wade aren't the poster children for this generation. The both of them are great players, but this goes beyond them to the media and how they present basketball to the masses.



futuristxen said:


> These are all cliches that applied ten years ago, but don't now. American basketball is in transition right now. These are just growing pains. I believe this is the youngest group of professionals we've sent over. The team is basically the class of 03. This with Howard and Oden is our golden generation. When they are in their primes then let's talk about the state of american basketball.


It's not about these players being in their primes and this is what American need to understand. The US can no longer throw a group of individually talented guys together for a few months and expect a gold medal. These teams we are playing have been playing together for years and have talent to match. Until the US understands that, yes, we do have the best individually talented player, but we aren't sending the best teams and does something about it, we will continue to lose. It will be interesting to see the what happens with this team in 08', because with this loss changes will have to come.


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

FIBA rules are not perfect. I've played under FIBA rules. Some of the rules are pathetic. How about a moving screen? Does it exist? Spain-Argentina, a classic example of poor officiating of the screen. I saw more shuffling of feet in that game than i can ever recall. There were some legit picks, a lot of solid ones, but a lot that had movement. I was paying close attention, I don't recall it being so lenient when I played (mind you, it wasn't the same level).

For the most part, I don't mind FIBA rules. It creates better ball movement, but I wouldn't change entirely to the system. I'd mix and match. It's not designed for the bigman. The lane is smaller, the 3 point line is closer. The big man is no longer Shaq, he doesn't get the same amount of looks. I'd re-introduce the zone. I wouldn't move the 3 point line, I wouldn't narrow the lane, I might allow the ball to be touched on the rim. but that might create a problem in a more athletic league.


----------



## Banjoriddim (Aug 14, 2004)

futuristxen said:


> Excellent post.
> 
> People want to talk like there is some way that we can "fix" USA basketball where it will be 100 percent guaranteed that we'll win every game by a bunch. But as you say, this is one and done basketball. The best team doesn't always win in these tournaments. Heck, even in the NBA when we had the best of four series, the best team didn't always win in the playoffs. Teams can get hot for just long enough to win these whole tournaments. It's a nice feather in your cap, but winning an NBA championship means more than a world championship, simply because you have to demonstrate more conclusively that you are the best.
> 
> ...


So? Lets just give USA gold? Give sprinters 5 runs to determin best guy?

I like upsets and interesting games (like this years playoffs) are something that make sports fun to watch.

If you suggest Greece won was accident or fluke then well you are ignorant... or you just don't know them since they don't play in NBA? they are good and young team with great coach, pride and detremination... oh and they are European Champion... btw.


----------



## lw32 (May 24, 2003)

Banjoriddim said:


> So? Lets just give USA gold? Give sprinters 5 runs to determin best guy?
> 
> I like upsets and interesting games (like this years playoffs) are something that make sports fun to watch.
> 
> If you suggest Greece won was accident or fluke then well you are ignorant... or you just don't know them since they don't play in NBA? they are good and young team with great coach, pride and detremination... oh and they are European Champion... btw.


I don't think you understood his post at all. Take another read of it. You make a whole lot of assumptions which are grabbing at air. You're manipulating his words and missing the main idea behind his post.

The argument was more along the lines of agreeing with my original point, the US can't be expected to win every game. It's a knock out tournament.


----------



## Banjoriddim (Aug 14, 2004)

Lachlanwood32 said:


> FIBA rules are not perfect. I've played under FIBA rules. Some of the rules are pathetic. How about a moving screen? Does it exist? Spain-Argentina, a classic example of poor officiating of the screen. I saw more shuffling of feet in that game than i can ever recall. There were some legit picks, a lot of solid ones, but a lot that had movement. I was paying close attention, I don't recall it being so lenient when I played (mind you, it wasn't the same level).
> 
> For the most part, I don't mind FIBA rules. It creates better ball movement, but I wouldn't change entirely to the system. I'd mix and match. It's not designed for the bigman. The lane is smaller, the 3 point line is closer. The big man is no longer Shaq, he doesn't get the same amount of looks. I'd re-introduce the zone. I wouldn't move the 3 point line, I wouldn't narrow the lane, I might allow the ball to be touched on the rim. but that might create a problem in a more athletic league.


One example and I like what these "missed call" did to the game I think it contributed to intensity of that game... also that wasn't that bad after all...

I agree some rules are great but I also wouldnt touch NBA 3-point line and and such things.


----------



## Banjoriddim (Aug 14, 2004)

Lachlanwood32 said:


> I don't think you understood his post at all. Take another read of it. You make a whole lot of assumptions which are grabbing at air. You're manipulating his words and missing the main idea behind his post.
> 
> The argument was more along the lines of agreeing with my original point, the US can't be expected to win every game. It's a knock out tournament.


Fair enough though sad reality is that it shouldn't be expected but it still is expected...


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> And I blame it on the NBA's set of rules that reward athleticism so much. It has built an era of very exciting players, but also players with way too many bad habits. Everything is about being quicker, faster, stronger and jumping higher.
> 
> Honestly, some of these teams have made Team USA look real elementary from a skills and understanding viewpoint. I really don't think Team USA is going to look any better in 2008 because all these players are going to back to the NBA for 2 more years and will have all the same bad habits reinforced. The same habits that other teams expose and take advantage of in international competition.



This is just wrong. So why didn't we require international teams to be more athletic the 100 some odd years we were dominating them? WHy are we required to adjust our game to play against them? Why don't we just send amateurs who can/will spend more time preparing for international competition.

Why does the US need to over haul and not Argentina? Argentina lost to a less talented team. Argentina was athletically superior to Spain. Maybe Argentina is lacking in the fundamentals. Argentina was favored coming into the tourney and are in the same position as the USA. However, for some reason, the USA losing is some indictment on NBA players as a whole.


----------



## ArrǒУǒ (Aug 28, 2006)

ralaw said:


> The reality is their are several factors as to why the US lost again.
> - to a lack of fundamentals being taught on the highschool and college level
> - a generation in love with the big dunk or 3 point shot


I can't agree with that,exactly,this saying based on nothing,they did have recieving intensive training on fundamentals during their schooltime not only college but also highschool.
Big dunk and 3 point shot made match more wonderful, this is why NBA is most popular in the world,I think they just want to made this WC a US style,that is valuable...when coming to the lost,the average age of the team is just 22,I think it's just a preparition for 2008 Beijing,thank for their performance and just wait,blaming is not a gift for their back...


----------



## Zalgirinis (Feb 18, 2003)

futuristxen said:


> Which is the more exciting brand of basketball? I think the NBA is more entertaining honestly. I've watched some of the top level euroleague games on NBA TV, and it's like watching a poorly officiated college game.
> 
> I love NBA Brand Basketball.


Havent read the rest of the thread, dont have much time now. Anyway wanted to say that like in most fields of life every person can have different taste. For me Euroleague and European basketball for sure is more exciting than NBA. Lithuania is known as a basketball country (probably the one in Europe where basketball is clearely the top sport and not soccer) and people here understand and love basketball. Most of them would watch Euroleague over NBA, except NBA Finals which still has the hype. I really dont get what is exciting in some superstars getting all the calls with nobody touching them. Basketball is about figting, team spirit and victory here, dunks are only the background. While in NBA dunks, crossovers, 81 points, 1on1 game is main thing for the most of the season, while victory mostly stays in the background (until playoffs). I think we share not a same view about excitment. But as I said every person can have different taste, so its not a knock on you or anything, just IMHO you shouldnt generalise like that.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

This team is good, but the US can no longer just put a group of guys together for a few months and expect them to win gold. Most of these international teams have been playing together for years, and simply interchange younger players into the system when the older players get too old. The Olympic game is tailor-made for the international system of developing players when their 15 years old, and this is why the gap between the US and International teams has been closed so rapidly. 

As of now, the US is in an awkward situation where developing a team who has the time to create the necessary chemistry may mean taking semi-pro players; as college and pro players have other obligations; however, those semi-pro players probably wouldn't have the best overall talent.


----------



## Banjoriddim (Aug 14, 2004)

Zalgirinis said:


> Havent read the rest of the thread, dont have much time now. Anyway wanted to say that like in most fields of life every person can have different taste. For me Euroleague and European basketball for sure is more exciting than NBA. Lithuania is known as a basketball country (probably the one in Europe where basketball is clearely the top sport and not soccer) and people here understand and love basketball. Most of them would watch Euroleague over NBA, except NBA Finals which still has the hype. I really dont get what is exciting in some superstars getting all the calls with nobody touching them. Basketball is about figting, team spirit and victory here, dunks are only the background. While in NBA dunks, crossovers, 81 points, 1on1 game is main thing for the most of the season, while victory mostly stays in the background (until playoffs). I think we share not a same view about excitment. But as I said every person can have different taste, so its not a knock on you or anything, just IMHO you shouldnt generalise like that.


I totally agree.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Zalgirinis said:


> Havent read the rest of the thread, dont have much time now. Anyway wanted to say that like in most fields of life every person can have different taste. For me Euroleague and European basketball for sure is more exciting than NBA. Lithuania is known as a basketball country (probably the one in Europe where basketball is clearely the top sport and not soccer) and people here understand and love basketball. Most of them would watch Euroleague over NBA, except NBA Finals which still has the hype. I really dont get what is exciting in some superstars getting all the calls with nobody touching them. Basketball is about figting, team spirit and victory here, dunks are only the background. *While in NBA dunks, crossovers, 81 points, 1on1 game is main thing for the most of the season, while victory mostly stays in the background (until playoffs).* I think we share not a same view about excitment. But as I said every person can have different taste, so its not a knock on you or anything, just IMHO* you shouldnt generalise like that.*




So is Lithuania overhauling their basketball? I mean they couldn't even make the semifinals. Oviously they didn't care enough about winning, team spirit, and fighting...correct? Maybe victory was in the background for them also, eh?


----------



## jordan0386 (Jul 4, 2006)

hold that...


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

futuristxen said:


> Welcome to 1999. I don't agree that these things are currently true. I don't see anything wrong with USA's fundementals. Would you like to be specific? Because the core of our team are some of the most well rounded players on the planet. Today's American player can do everything on the court and is personified in the players from KG onward.
> 
> I think American basketball is in the process of reinventing the game. D'Antoni is changing the way the game is being played, and is finally starting to show us the way to utilize all of these 6-8 uber-players, who do every single thing on the court well. The future of american basketball is 5 guys who can play every single position on the court, operating interchangibly, each knowing every role on the court and how to do it.
> 
> ...


Ralaw is 100% right about everything except the fundamentals. We don't know how to use them in a team game. The NBA emphazises one on one play not team play. Even when this group is in it's prime we won't win it unless the NBA makes their game more team oriented. Just face it everyone else in the world has caught up to us in everything but athleticism. Argentina and Spain and Greece are all as fundamentally sound as we are, but the difference is they know how to use it in team play.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

ralaw said:


> I disagree. The USA's fundamentals still have a long way to go. Our players with the exception of a few have no understanding of team defense, perimeter defense, mid-range shooting, shot selection, basic ball handling techniques, floor spacing etc....


No understanding of team defense? That wouldn't be exaccerbated by the fact that they have had 3 weeks to learn a new defense now would it? It seemed to me reading the post game comments that the players understood what was going on, but they didn't have a system to switch to. The teams are thrown together so fast that you can't implement anything more complex than a fullcourt press.

*Defense:*
But you won't convince me there aren't defensive players on this team. Kirk Hinrich may be the best defensive point guard in the world. Shane Battier is a very good defender. In the post Elton Brand when he plays for the Clippers is an excellent help defender and man on man defender. Dwight Howard is a good help defender as well. After that everyone is passable. But you don't need a team of defensive stoppers. Most international players can't play much defense either, it is usually about playing a good zone defense. I mean...what's the one thing european players struggle with the most when they come to the US? It's defense. Specifically man to man defense. Most do not have the footwork to stay in front of their man. A good example of this is Sasha Pavlovic for the Cavs, who is very athletic, but can't keep from fouling out of games because he can't move his feet correctly on defense.

Think about it. Who are the best defensive teams in the NBA? Detroit, Chicago, San Antonio, Houston. It's not about the players that are there, as much as it is about the system they play. Most of those teams are built around 2 or 3 good defenders on that end, and the rest just fill in by knowing the system. But 3 weeks is not enough time to have a nuanced defensive system. So I vehemently dispute saying we lack defensive fundementals.

In fact, if you go past Team USA and look at American basketball as a whole, I would assert we are the best defenders in the entire world, in particular perimeter defense. Artest, Bowen, Patterson, Prince--these aren't foreign based players. Hinrich. Is there are better wing defender than Ron Artest in the entire world.

So yeah. The ground you have to stand on in this respect is fishy at best.

*Mid-Range Shooting:*
That's all DWade's game is, is mid-range shooting. Same with Melo. And then outside of the team, you've got a guy like Rip Hamilton, and before him Reggie Miller. It's a cliche and a myth to say midrange shooting is dead in america.

*shot selection*
Lebron and DWade averaged close around 30 ppg while shooting close to 50 percent from the field on winning teams. Kobe Bryant averaged nearly 40 on 45 percent. What do you mean by shot selection? I would say if a perimeter player is making 50 percent of the shots he is taking while averaging that many shots and his team is winning, then their shot selection is fine. We haven't seen two more unselfish and wise young stars than DWade and Lebron, at least in awhile. Even here in the world's people were taking open shots. Wide open shots. They were attacking the hoop. Their shot selection is no worse than the rest of the world.

*basic ball handling techniques*
Who has trouble handling the ball on team USA? What do you mean by "basic" ball handling techniques? You mean like how Manu Ginobilli will crossover one handed through two players, spin, give the euro-two-step, and lay it in? You mean basic like that? Have you watched Tony Parker handle the rock? What's diffrent from him and Chris Paul? Have you seen Spain's little point guard? Little Spanish Jason Williams. Jason Kidd vs. Steve Nash--Steve Nash puts on a goddamn And1 show with the ball. Jason Kidd just goes from point A to point B. This point is crap. It's an over generalization that Americans are all And1, and Euro guards are all John Stockton(gasp! An American player!) You want to see a point guard who isn't flashy? Go watch Eric Snow. I call shenanigans!

*floor spacing*
Again. That's a system related thing. In terms of recongizing spatial relations on the floor, Lebron may be the best in the world given the trajectory of his vision, combined with his understanding of where everyone is/should be on the floor. Greg Popovich said the same thing last go around as I am saying. You put these guys in a system that spreads the floor, they will spread the floor. And honestly at times USA ball movement in this tournament has been ridiculously good.

Got any others?





> I disagree here as well, as the D' Antoni system is actually a European system and this system is not being taught on the basic levels of basketball such as in rec-leagues, highschool or college. The future of American basketball doesn't rest on one particular system such as, D'Antoni's, but is more relegated to the personal a coach has. American basketball is predicated on a superstar system and this isn't going to change.


The system isn't specifically D'Antoni's that I'm getting at. I'm getting at a complete opening up of the positions. You don't need to do it in the rec leagues. The Suns are proving you can do it with pros if you give them training camp and half a season. It's a continuation of Don Nelson's Billy Owens train of thought. The answer to america's problems is the frenchman Boris Diaw. Teach all the multitasking mother****ers like Lamar Odom, Shaun Livingston, Lebron James, KG etc, to be seamless, and formless. When I see Diaw I see an exciting new philosophy for basketball that could be used for the US given our propensity to develop small forwards.



> It's not about these players being in their primes and this is what American need to understand. The US can no longer throw a group of individually talented guys together for a few months and expect a gold medal. These teams we are playing have been playing together for years and have talent to match. Until the US understands that, yes, we do have the best individually talented player, but we aren't sending the best teams and does something about it, we will continue to lose. It will be interesting to see the what happens with this team in 08', because with this loss changes will have to come.


Thus the 3 year committment. We can't bail on the 3 year plan 1 month in.


----------



## Zalgirinis (Feb 18, 2003)

MemphisX said:


> So is Lithuania overhauling their basketball? I mean they couldn't even make the semifinals. Oviously they didn't care enough about winning, team spirit, and fighting...correct? Maybe victory was in the background for them also, eh?


I think you misunderstood my point. I answered futuristxen post basing on "what is more exciting brand of basketball" (obviously for people who watch it) and how tastes can differ. It wasnt meant about one or other team being stronger or anything.


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

Zalgirinis said:


> Havent read the rest of the thread, dont have much time now. Anyway wanted to say that like in most fields of life every person can have different taste. For me Euroleague and European basketball for sure is more exciting than NBA. Lithuania is known as a basketball country (probably the one in Europe where basketball is clearely the top sport and not soccer) and people here understand and love basketball. Most of them would watch Euroleague over NBA, except NBA Finals which still has the hype. I really dont get what is exciting in some superstars getting all the calls with nobody touching them. Basketball is about figting, team spirit and victory here, dunks are only the background. While in NBA dunks, crossovers, 81 points, 1on1 game is main thing for the most of the season, while victory mostly stays in the background (until playoffs). I think we share not a same view about excitment. But as I said every person can have different taste, so its not a knock on you or anything, just IMHO you shouldnt generalise like that.


Excellent post, why don't they televise Euroleague games over here besides the fact only a few loyal fans would watch them? Ralaw said it best our day and age is too enamored with the dunk and 3-point shot. Dunk gets you the same amount of points as a mid-range jumper and a layup which are both eaiser to get. Why not work on those instead of trying to do windmills and all that stuff. Because it's not flashy, we need to focus more on fundamentals and aspects of team basketball not fundamentals of dunking. We need to take a few notes of euroleague ball and see that they play the right game of basketball, and what the NBA plays isn't really basketball but a Mano e mano competition.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

ralaw said:


> As of now, the US is in an awkward situation where developing a team who has the time to create the necessary chemistry may mean taking semi-pro players; as college and pro players have other obligations; however, those semi-pro players probably wouldn't have the best overall talent.


You don't need to do that. Argentina doesn't have these guys sleeping together. They are all professionals with jobs.

The diffrence is they keep the coach and system constant, and the players constant and build up over the years. That's what we are doing.

Do you people not pay attention? Colangelo outlined all of this before we even had tryouts. We haven't even touched the surface of what we are currently doing to build a better national team, and you people are going nuts.

Deep breath. Bejiing is the goal people. Not the World Championships.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

bball2223 said:


> Excellent post, why don't they televise Euroleague games over here ?


Uhhhh...they do. All the time. On NBA TV. They even have a weekly TV show on NBA TV dedicated to Euro basketball.

But I guess if the people who actually want to watch the games don't bother to watch them, then what chance do they have against the people who don't?


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Zalgirinis said:


> I think you misunderstood my point. I answered futuristxen post basing on "what is more exciting brand of basketball" (obviously for people who watch it) and how tastes can differ. It wasnt meant about one or other team being stronger or anything.


Yeah it's totally a taste thing. There are people over here who will only watch College Basketball, which is similiar to Euroleague basketball, but not as polished, and who always badmouth the NBA. I'm the other way. I bad mouth college basketball and big up the NBA. I appreciate individual brilliance over that of collective achievement. So I obviously slant to the NBA.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

futuristxen said:


> No understanding of team defense? That wouldn't be exaccerbated by the fact that they have had 3 weeks to learn a new defense now would it? It seemed to me reading the post game comments that the players understood what was going on, but they didn't have a system to switch to. The teams are thrown together so fast that you can't implement anything more complex than a fullcourt press.
> 
> *Defense:*
> But you won't convince me there aren't defensive players on this team. Kirk Hinrich may be the best defensive point guard in the world. Shane Battier is a very good defender. In the post Elton Brand when he plays for the Clippers is an excellent help defender and man on man defender. Dwight Howard is a good help defender as well. After that everyone is passable. But you don't need a team of defensive stoppers. Most international players can't play much defense either, it is usually about playing a good zone defense. I mean...what's the one thing european players struggle with the most when they come to the US? It's defense. Specifically man to man defense. Most do not have the footwork to stay in front of their man. A good example of this is Sasha Pavlovic for the Cavs, who is very athletic, but can't keep from fouling out of games because he can't move his feet correctly on defense.
> ...



I don't see a need in going through every single piece of your post. You seem to not be understanding my point in that I am talking about American Basketball as a whole, not these particular players. Nonetheless, even with these players having these particular abilities that you pointed out WE STILL LOST. You shouldn't ignore that fact that the US has lost twice in as many tournaments. This shouldn't passed off as, well these guys are young, or whatever other reason you want to point to. The Olympic style of play is in favor of the International game and it's development process. 

There is no guarantee that these players will return in 08, so you can't assume that either. I hope they stay together and more importantly mature and develop together; however, with our system and these players being the property of their respective teams first, this probably won't be possible. The reality is these players after this tournament won't be together until next summer (an entire year) and this will work against any chemistry they may have developed this summer.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Ralaw. The reason these players are here is because they committed to the entire 3 years process. World Championships. Qualifying. And Olympics.

You don't seem to be understanding that point. That's the big change between this team and past ones. We're doing our best to send a TEAM. But you have to give us time. You can't be wanting to change the team every time until we get lucky and win one.

I am not the one dismissing the losses. I think you are. You think we can just send a diffrent group over there and have it work. We need these players, which are close to our very best. And we need them to develop as a team.

If we don't send our best, even if we develop them as a team, they WILL LOSE. Because the rest of the world is talented enough to take advantage of that.

And if we just send our best, but don't develop a team...well it's a crap shoot like this.

And if you are talking about American Basketball as a whole and not just these specific players your points have even less merit, as we are the largest basketball player producing country in the world. The diversity of types of players we have in our country is unparralled anywhere else in the world. It's quite a diffrence between Ray Allen and Darius Miles. Ron Artest and Ben Gordon. Or even Adam Morrison vs. Jason Williams. The spectrum is too wide to just say as a blanket statement that USA players don't know their fundementals.


----------



## Banjoriddim (Aug 14, 2004)

futuristxen said:


> Yeah it's totally a taste thing. There are people over here who will only watch College Basketball, which is similiar to Euroleague basketball, but not as polished, and who always badmouth the NBA. I'm the other way. I bad mouth college basketball and big up the NBA. I appreciate individual brilliance over that of collective achievement. So I obviously slant to the NBA.


I'd say individual brilliance is situation when you as weaker slower player find ways to beat better athlets... this one on one thing is getting boring esp. if it pushed in loseing effort. I just don't like to watch one brilliant individual holding th ball and 4 sad guys standing around.
One think is skills another is playing smart and they aren't allways connected (like some talented NBA playes walking slowly over court wasting waluable time - this is just stupid in)... and I guess you would like to see more team spirit and reckless effort in your own favorite team.


----------



## Banjoriddim (Aug 14, 2004)

futuristxen said:


> Ralaw. The reason these players are here is because they committed to the entire 3 years process. World Championships. Qualifying. And Olympics.
> 
> You don't seem to be understanding that point. That's the big change between this team and past ones. We're doing our best to send a TEAM. But you have to give us time. You can't be wanting to change the team every time until we get lucky and win one.
> 
> ...


Good post!


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Banjoriddim said:


> I'd say individual brilliance is situation when you as weaker slower player find ways to beat better athlets... this one on one thing is getting boring esp. if it pushed in loseing effort. I just don't like to watch one brilliant individual holding th ball and 4 sad guys standing around.
> One think is skills another is playing smart and they aren't allways connected (like some talented NBA playes walking slowly over court wasting waluable time - this is just stupid in)... and I guess you would like to see more team spirit and reckless effort in your own favorite team.


One on One? What brilliant player do you know that plays one on one? Most superstars are playing at BEST 3 on 1. The team game doesn't allow for individual brilliance and creativity as much. It doesn't display what is great about the individual. What's brilliant is to see someone like Tim Duncan toying with an entire defense. 

At it's best NBA basketball is like Jazz. A series of blindingly brilliant solos, each one after the other, trying to top the last. When Lebron says to DWade "Let's Go" and they procede to match each other pass for pass, shot for shot, rebound for rebound, floor burn for freaking floor burn! That's when I stand up as an NBA fan and applaud. Because of the length of games, the talent level, and the anti-superstar attitude on many european teams(not all) you won't see something like that on that level. And if you do, you won't see it for very long.

Or how about a few years back in the playoffs AI and VC trading 50 point games?

Which is more exciting--seeing Kobe Bryant score 81 points or seeing Maccabi Tel Aviv score 81? I'm going to say it is Kobe.

I feel soccer is similiar in this respect, in that it also leaves room for individual expression, and I watch both sports for that same brilliance. The same reason I will listen to Miles Davis or John Coltrane, over some symphony. It's about the spontaneous genius of humanity. Anti-Superstar basketball is so cold to me. I like eccentrics, geniuses--the wild west--legends, outlaws.

When basketball becomes a faceless drone of jersey's I'll stop watching. You guys want drones, I want shooting stars. You're all engineers, probably ha.


----------



## Sad Mafioso (Nov 7, 2004)

Jazz is Dead. Frank Zappa said so himself, you should know better.

Fundamental skills are more akin to understanding the game of basketball than just dribbling, shooting and the likes. As a side note, I believe PER FIBA Rules that the US travels about 15 times per game. See in FIBA you can't take two dribbles without putting the ball in the floor. Remember in the preparatory games before the Olympics when the refs where calling those plays like crazy. Well they didn't in this tourney. Not that it matters anyways since the US has failed again.

Most of those superstars are clueless when it comes to team play, they have been so used to being THE MAN that when they're placed in another environment they fail. They're so used to catching the ball, holding it, and than be the player to make the play. They have no concept of ball movement against a zone or the fact that they must drive the seam and actually pass.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. No way I would be playing for these scumbags that call themselves Americans. It wouldn't be worth my time.

If Kobe was playing, we would have won.


----------



## Sad Mafioso (Nov 7, 2004)

If Jesus Christ existed there wouldn't be wars.

Whatever fits your agenda. Kobe wouldn't make a difference.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Sad Mafioso said:


> If Jesus Christ existed there wouldn't be wars.
> 
> Whatever fits your agenda. Kobe wouldn't make a difference.


I don't care if you're celebrating in the streets of Greece right now. I have no agenda. I didn't watch any of these games because I am an "NBA" fan. I don't watch International games for the most part. Never have, never will.

Why do I need to go to the store for milk, when I have the cow right here?


----------



## Sad Mafioso (Nov 7, 2004)

I'm spaniard not Greek. You know Spain, the team that beat Argentina and will play Greece in the final. Nevermind you're not watching the games, why even comment on them.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Sad Mafioso said:


> I'm spaniard not Greek. You know Spain, the team that beat Argentina and will play Greece in the final. Nevermind you're not watching the games, why even comment on them.


Because it's a message board. Umm... you know that little url thing at the top of the browser?


----------



## Sad Mafioso (Nov 7, 2004)

Yet you don't have any interest in the games themselves which would leave me to believe that you wouldn't have any interest to converse on them. It is as if I were posting on a forum about religion and there was a post about agnocticism. I'm not agnosticm(sp) so why would I even comment on it.


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

futuristxen said:


> *shot selection*
> Lebron and DWade averaged close around 30 ppg while shooting close to 50 percent from the field on winning teams. Kobe Bryant averaged nearly 40 on 45 percent. What do you mean by shot selection? I would say if a perimeter player is making 50 percent of the shots he is taking while averaging that many shots and his team is winning, then their shot selection is fine. We haven't seen two more unselfish and wise young stars than DWade and Lebron, at least in awhile. Even here in the world's people were taking open shots. Wide open shots. They were attacking the hoop. Their shot selection is no worse than the rest of the world.
> 
> *basic ball handling techniques*
> ...



Shot Selection: The reason LeBron and Wade shot 50% is because 60% of their shots are layups and the other shots are wide open shots. Anyone who played College basketball could shot 50% on layups and wide open 12 footers. It has nothing to do with shot selection but the style the NBA plays. They are both great players but neither has the greatest shot selection.


Basic Ball-Handing: Ralaw didn't mean and-1 type moves, basic ball-handling is getting the ball past half-court driving and dishing. We are more flashy ball-handlers but every other team is more basic and that helps out a team concept more than And-1 type ball-handling. 

Floor Spacing: We didn't have great floor spacing in this tournament at all, zero nada none. Greece, Spain, Argentina, Italy are great examples of floor spacing. We would have had great floor spacing if Coach K would have run the motion offense but he was scared of the players so he didn't bother using it. The NBA doesn' promote floor spacing other than clearing out so Kobe, or Dwayne Wade can go one on one.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

futuristxen said:


> Ralaw. The reason these players are here is because they committed to the entire 3 years process. World Championships. Qualifying. And Olympics.
> 
> You don't seem to be understanding that point. That's the big change between this team and past ones. We're doing our best to send a TEAM. But you have to give us time. You can't be wanting to change the team every time until we get lucky and win one.


I've already addressed this in my previous post. 

_There is no guarantee that these players will return in 08, so you can't assume that either. I hope they stay together and more importantly mature and develop together; however, with our system and these players being the property of their respective teams first, this probably won't be possible. The reality is these players after this tournament won't be together until next summer (an entire year) and this will work against any chemistry they may have developed this summer._



futuristxen said:


> I am not the one dismissing the losses. I think you are. You think we can just send a diffrent group over there and have it work. We need these players, which are close to our very best. And we need them to develop as a team.
> 
> If we don't send our best, even if we develop them as a team, they WILL LOSE. Because the rest of the world is talented enough to take advantage of that.
> 
> And if we just send our best, but don't develop a team...well it's a crap shoot like this.


How am I dismissing the loses? Every single one of my post have been addressing the loses and how to overcome them. I never said we should send a different group, so stop putting words in my mouth. I only said we can't send our best players and assume we'll dominate like in years past. That is it! I agree that we need to develop a team, but when each one of those players is thrown together and put on the court, we won't have he same success as teams who have been playing together for years and years. I fully understand this is a 3 year process, but that means nothing if these players are only playing together from July to September for the next 3 years. If you haven't realized, that is a total of 9 months together, now compare that to the years and years of the other teams. Not to mention, the likes of adding Kobe and other players who would have made the team had they not been injured. Adding Kobe alone will change the dynamics of this team by himself. 

Most of the players on international teams have been playing together, growing together and learning together since they were 15 years old coming up through their pro system and this is my point. We will never have the chemistry that these teams have because our system doesn't lend itself to this type of development. This Greece team has been playing together for years and couple that with the shorter regular season (which means more time to play together) the advantage clearly goes to Greece and the same can be said for a lot of the top teams in International ball. 



futuristxen said:


> And if you are talking about American Basketball as a whole and not just these specific players your points have even less merit, as we are the largest basketball player producing country in the world. The diversity of types of players we have in our country is unparralled anywhere else in the world. It's quite a diffrence between Ray Allen and Darius Miles. Ron Artest and Ben Gordon. Or even Adam Morrison vs. Jason Williams. The spectrum is too wide to just say as a blanket statement that USA players don't know their fundementals.


Again you are putting words in my mouth, as I never said every American doesn't have fundamentals. However, it is widely known and has been discussed that this is a major issue in American basketball whether you want to admit it or not. Americans producing a wide range of players means nothing in this discussion as other countries produce the same type of players. It has been discussed numerous times how international players are more skilled basketball players, while Americans generally have more raw ability and athleticism.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Sad Mafioso said:


> Jazz is Dead. Frank Zappa said so himself, you should know better.
> 
> Fundamental skills are more akin to understanding the game of basketball than just dribbling, shooting and the likes. .


Actually that's not what Fundemental SKills means at all. It's not some nebulous definition that you can murk into some vague undefinable thing. Fundementals of basketball are like...the bounce pass, give and go, pick and roll, two handed chest pass, guarding your dribble with your off arm...things like that. The things you get taught when you first start learning the game. Posting up.

It's why it's stupid to say the most talented players on the planet don't know how to do the basics. If they didn't know the basics they wouldn't be able to do the more advanced stuff.

As for your whole not understanding team play, that can be safely filed under 3 weeks to get a team up and going. The fact that we look better than an all-star team is a testament to the fact that there is a progression, it's just not far enough because we haven't had the time. But it's silly to say American players don't understand the team game. Some do, some don't. Just like everywhere else. But it's not something you can judge after 3 weeks.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

bball2223 said:


> Shot Selection: The reason LeBron and Wade shot 50% is because 60% of their shots are layups and the other shots are wide open shots. Anyone who played College basketball could shot 50% on layups and wide open 12 footers. It has nothing to do with shot selection but the style the NBA plays. They are both great players but neither has the greatest shot selection.


So layups and open 12 footers are not shots you should try and take? You're going to have to define shot selection for me then a little bit. Neither player comes down at the top of the shot clock jacking. Both involve their teammates, and shoot based on time, score, what the rest of the team is doing. I would posit their shot selection takes into account more factors than you are giving them credit for. It's not like all of international players have good shot selection either. Sarunas Jacekeviscus will just raise up and shoot from wherever, whenever. One of the best euro guards ever, yet most NBA coaches would rather play Anthony Johnson.




> Basic Ball-Handing: Ralaw didn't mean and-1 type moves, basic ball-handling is getting the ball past half-court driving and dishing. We are more flashy ball-handlers but every other team is more basic and that helps out a team concept more than And-1 type ball-handling.


Do Lebron, Chris Paul, Jason Kidd, Luke Ridnour, Kirk Hinrich, TJ Ford--do they not do these things? Eric Snow, Anthony Johnson...few are the american guards who don't do these things. If you watched any Cavs games at all--hell did you watch the world championships? Lebron is constantly driving and dishing. Either to guys for layups, or guys for open 3 pointers. I didn't see Chris Paul having problems getting the ball up the court. I did see several starting european guards struggle against pressure to bring the ball up, becaues they have trouble dribbling under intense pressure. How many turnovers did we force these "fundementally sound" bozos into? How about not throwing passes directly to your opposition? That has to be a fundemental. And how many times did we see euro players under pressure force passes and end up passing right into the waiting arms of some american. 



> Floor Spacing: We didn't have great floor spacing in this tournament at all, zero nada none. Greece, Spain, Argentina, Italy are great examples of floor spacing. We would have had great floor spacing if Coach K would have run the motion offense but he was scared of the players so he didn't bother using it. The NBA doesn' promote floor spacing other than clearing out so Kobe, or Dwayne Wade can go one on one.


There was nothing wrong with our spacing. We had the court spaced every time down. Many times we had the post empty when the ball was on the wing to create more space for the guy with the ball. We always had someone on the weakside prepared to punish if the other team cheated.

We just got cold from the field, but Johnson, Battier, Hinrich all did an excellent job of spacing the floor and living off the penetration of Paul, Wade, and Lebron.


----------



## TwiBlueG35 (Jan 24, 2006)

After reading three pages or so of this thread, I feel like you guys make basketball way too technical. You guys could group together and write a book on basketball. To me basketball is a game. You win or you lose, no excuse. You lose this time, try to find what went wrong and fix the problems and try next time. You have to adapt to different systems/rules, if you don't, you lose or don't participate at all next time. This "one and all" tournament is good because you have no second chance after these 40 minutes, a better team advances. If you find not enough time to create chemistry, well directly send the NBA champion team(Miami Heat or Detroit Pistons or whatever, for example) to play the international games, there should be enough chemistry after 100+ games in a season. Long time ago you are not allowed to send NBA players, you lost. Now you send the best NBA players, you still lose. There are always some reasons for a team to lose. But the bottom line reason is "you are not good enough". Make sure Kobe Bryant plays in 08 Olympics. Because Camelo Anthony and D Wade are not reliable when facing the best international teams, it has been proven twice.


----------



## 1 Penny (Jul 11, 2003)

Sir Patchwork said:


> And I blame it on the NBA's set of rules that reward athleticism so much. It has built an era of very exciting players, but also players with way too many bad habits. Everything is about being quicker, faster, stronger and jumping higher.
> 
> Honestly, some of these teams have made Team USA look real elementary from a skills and understanding viewpoint. I really don't think Team USA is going to look any better in 2008 because all these players are going to back to the NBA for 2 more years and will have all the same bad habits reinforced. The same habits that other teams expose and take advantage of in international competition.



I've always stated this... everytime people here hype up the current USA Team, in comparison to the original Dream Team.

People say that the original Dream Team was against weaker teams... Thats true. But they won by an average of 30-40 in most games. No other team even came into sniffing a competition.

Recently, team USA has been represented by the NBA's best and most popular players, yet they tend to finish outside the top 2-3 teams in the world. Thats unacceptable for the amount of money and hype these "kids" get. And I agree with Pathwork, that the NBA style caters more for the flashy moves and super athletes... basketball skills/understanding is second tier these days.
Today you draft players who have size, quickness and "potential". Slower players with polished basketball skills and brilliant basketball minds are moving overseas... dominating.

Looking at the current USA team, one excuse would be the lack of chemistry and time played with each other... viable point. But thats shouldnt be an issue too much if you have a bunch of players with high basketball understanding. The team consists of super freaky athletes who dominate primarily by their atheletic abilities, rather than their basketball understanding... too much emphasis on one on one moves, too much dependent on one player's advantage over his opponent.. no one is helping each other out, no one is making an impact without the ball in their hands.... 

It wouldnt be too bad if these players are basketball-smart too.. along with their super freaky athletism... the FIBA international rules.. especially the real zone defense neutralizes most of the advantage of atheletic players... so if they were able to play well with that in mind it wouldnt be too bad.. but this isnt the case.


----------



## One on One (Dec 12, 2004)

Fundamentals is why US lost. It's not hard. I saw some of the replay this afternoon and I was entertaining myself counting how many times US picked up the dribble with nowhere to go, how many times US drives the lane with no plan in mind (other than juking, jumping, or running someone over). The foreign teams never do this. They play so much more crisp and they are much smoother than any NBA basketball. It's not going to change overnight though. Just go to the playground and you'll see the same ****. Some badass kid juking, dribbling, and jumping straight into the D...if he makes it he's a hero, if he misses........well.....BALL!!!


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

1 Penny said:


> The team consists of super freaky athletes who dominate primarily by their atheletic abilities, rather than their basketball understanding... too much emphasis on one on one moves, too much dependent on one player's advantage over his opponent.. no one is helping each other out, no one is making an impact without the ball in their hands....


That's just offensively. There are a lot of terrible defensive habits too. The tendency to not cut off driving lanes and to play for the block or steal. Most of our guys will consistently leave the driving lanes open, leave the angles open, only because they think they will recover to block or steal the ball. Today they got burned, and in 2004 they got burned by the same thing. 

My boy Elton Brand was definitely no exception to that today, and everyone else on the roster too, except Kirk Hinrich and Shane Battier. They are the only ones who cut off driving lanes right away, that's why they are the two best perimeter defenders on the team despite being the worst athletes on the team. The discipline isn't there defensively from the other guys, and it's not a "we'll get it right in 2008" thing because that's how they play defense in the NBA. It's an individual defense thing. How can we be a good defensive *team* and build chemistry, if almost every one of the players on the team has those bad defensive habits individually?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=300111

I wrote it all on my post in another thread. 

Like I said, let Team USA play together all year, and they wouldnt be able to find a decent opponent.


----------



## One on One (Dec 12, 2004)

Sir Patchwork said:


> That's just offensively. There are a lot of terrible defensive habits too. The tendency to not cut off driving lanes and to play for the block or steal. Most of our guys will consistently leave the driving lanes open, leave the angles open, only because they think they will recover to block or steal the ball. Today they got burned, and in 2004 they got burned by the same thing.
> 
> My boy Elton Brand was definitely no exception to that today, and everyone else on the roster too, except Kirk Hinrich and Shane Battier. They are the only ones who cut off driving lanes right away, that's why they are the two best perimeter defenders on the team despite being the worst athletes on the team. The discipline isn't there defensively from the other guys, and it's not a "we'll get it right in 2008" thing because that's how they play defense in the NBA. It's an individual defense thing. How can we be a good defensive *team* and build chemistry, if almost every one of the players on the team has those bad defensive habits individually?


100% correct. I don't think the team should be re-built, but really it is guys like Hinrich and Battier who are the best fit. It's the whole culture of basketball....heck blame SportsCenter...all you see are crossovers, dunks, blocks, steals, etc. Our whole team grew up on that culture. It's not going to change easily.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

1 Penny said:


> Looking at the current USA team, one excuse would be the lack of chemistry and time played with each other... viable point. But thats shouldnt be an issue too much if you have a bunch of players with high basketball understanding. The team consists of super freaky athletes who dominate primarily by their atheletic abilities, rather than their basketball understanding... too much emphasis on one on one moves, too much dependent on one player's advantage over his opponent.. no one is helping each other out, no one is making an impact without the ball in their hands....


USA doesn't have high basketball understanding? Kirk Hinrich is a freaking coach's son. Shane Battier is like the uber-role player. DWade learned his game through the college game. Lebron James is/was highly touted, not because he could run fast or jump higher, Josh Smith can do both a little better--it's because his basketball instincts are profound. He's on the same level as Jason Kidd and Steve Nash in terms of how he sees the floor. He's still learning how to assert himself in situations like this, he can become too passive, but when he shifts gears and just starts playing, there's few players with his imagination on the court. Nobody was complaining about Joe Johnson's basketball understanding when he was Steve Nash's backup in Phoenix. Carmelo Anthony won a freaking national championship, the only one Jim Boheim will ever win. Elton Brand is regarded as a smart basketball player.

The only american player who relies solely on his athletic ability is Dwight Howard and he is a beast.

But this assertion that these fantastic players don't have basketball understanding...is just ridiculous. I don't see a startling diffrence between how Manu Ginobilli plays vs. a Dwayne Wade in terms of the type of plays they try to make. Have you watched the Spurs? Ginobilli is one of the guys who makes the least amount of fundemental plays on the team. He's as high risk a player as they come.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Sir Patchwork said:


> That's just offensively. There are a lot of terrible defensive habits too. The tendency to not cut off driving lanes and to play for the block or steal. Most of our guys will consistently leave the driving lanes open, leave the angles open, only because they think they will recover to block or steal the ball. Today they got burned, and in 2004 they got burned by the same thing.
> 
> My boy Elton Brand was definitely no exception to that today, and everyone else on the roster too, except Kirk Hinrich and Shane Battier. They are the only ones who cut off driving lanes right away, that's why they are the two best perimeter defenders on the team despite being the worst athletes on the team. The discipline isn't there defensively from the other guys, and it's not a "we'll get it right in 2008" thing because that's how they play defense in the NBA. It's an individual defense thing. How can we be a good defensive *team* and build chemistry, if almost every one of the players on the team has those bad defensive habits individually?



Remember, a lot of these guys are very young. Lebron, Melo, and Wade have all improved dramatically defensively since where they were when they came into the league. Lebron plays for a coach who only cares about defense. Specifically the Spurs style of defense. If nothing else in 3 years he'll pick up good habits by osmosis. I mean, you saw Lebron play amazing D on Dirk. Maybe his future is defending fours internationally? When he was guarding Dirk he was like a diffrent player from when he was guarding saaaay Ayuso. He stayed in front of dirk, didn't gamble, and challenged the shot. Didn't let Dirk get the ball where he wanted and challenged Dirk's dribble. So the ideas are there. It's just applying them consistently to opponents who aren't superstars. These guys all have the potential to be fantastic defenders, but it's going to take time.

You also have to remember that Coach K was actually coaching a gambling style of defense. Coach K doesn't coach Spurs style defense. He teaches pressure, turn you over, home run style defense.

The one huge improvement I saw on this team vs. Larry Browns team is that everyone was at least pressuring on defense. Even though we were gambling, at least we were trying. In Athens we let teams do what they wanted to do, with no pressure. We also always walked the ball up the court. This time we ran it up the court.

There is improvement going on. You guys just need to be patient. We've got a young team, and we're just on the ground floor of this thing. Talk to me in 3 years if we're still making the same mistakes.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

futuristxen said:


> USA doesn't have high basketball understanding? Kirk Hinrich is a freaking coach's son. Shane Battier is like the uber-role player. DWade learned his game through the college game. Lebron James is/was highly touted, not because he could run fast or jump higher, Josh Smith can do both a little better--it's because his basketball instincts are profound. He's on the same level as Jason Kidd and Steve Nash in terms of how he sees the floor. He's still learning how to assert himself in situations like this, he can become too passive, but when he shifts gears and just starts playing, there's few players with his imagination on the court. Nobody was complaining about Joe Johnson's basketball understanding when he was Steve Nash's backup in Phoenix. Carmelo Anthony won a freaking national championship, the only one Jim Boheim will ever win. Elton Brand is regarded as a smart basketball player.
> 
> The only american player who relies solely on his athletic ability is Dwight Howard and he is a beast.
> 
> But this assertion that these fantastic players don't have basketball understanding...is just ridiculous. I don't see a startling diffrence between how Manu Ginobilli plays vs. a Dwayne Wade in terms of the type of plays they try to make. Have you watched the Spurs? Ginobilli is one of the guys who makes the least amount of fundemental plays on the team. He's as high risk a player as they come.


I get it. The USA players are out-of-this-world great.

Why weren't they good enough, then?


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

PauloCatarino said:


> I get it. The USA players are out-of-this-world great.
> 
> Why weren't they good enough, then?


Nah. The point was that they aren't run and dunk monkeys who don't know how to play the game. Which is the picture that a lot are trying to paint. 

Why doesn't Duke win the NCAA title every year? In a one and done tournament anything can happen. Don't know why this is so hard for people to understand. Today Greece played better than we did. But it doesn't mean anything as dramatic as our players don't know how to play the game.

Greece, US, Argentina, Spain may be the most talented final four in world championship history by the by. It's going to be work to beat Argentina tomorrow.

Which reminds me, where is the thread talking about how to fix Argentine basketball? Considering how many people picked Argentina to win the title, instead of the US, isn't their loss just as disapointing fundementally?


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

futuristxen said:


> Nah. The point was that they aren't run and dunk monkeys who don't know how to play the game. Which is the picture that a lot are trying to paint.


The picture most people are trying to paint is that of the US team being unnable to defend. The coach being scared of the players. The players being ubber-cocky. Etc., etc.



> Which reminds me, where is the thread talking about how to fix Argentine basketball? Considering how many people picked Argentina to win the title, instead of the US, isn't their loss just as disapointing fundementally?


You make me laugh, Fruity.

In some threads you go around boasting that the US have "the best basketball players in the world". Well, guess what? Only if you play NBA ball. If you are playing international ball, US players are just not good enough. That's right: not good enough.

USA lost to Greece. Greece.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Greece, the Euro Champ, who is probably going to end up trouncing Spain tomorrow...yeah what a shame.

Lebron said it best in the post game:
"
We get another year of FIBA basketball. We can always build off of that because it is a different kind of basketball. We have two more summers of growth. This is the beginning. We’ve improved since 2004, we’ve improved since training camp began. This is a three-year commitment. We just have to keep getting better."

Our guys know this is a journey not a short trip. By the end of it we'll all be better for it.


----------



## Zalgirinis (Feb 18, 2003)

R-Star said:


> http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=300111
> 
> I wrote it all on my post in another thread.
> 
> Like I said, let Team USA play together all year, and they wouldnt be able to find a decent opponent.


You simply showed pure ignorance there. You make it sound like all teams in Europe practice all year long, which is totally untrue as all players play in their respective proffesional clubs. They gather together only in summers before tournaments, like team USA did this summer.


----------



## Chef (Nov 24, 2002)

Zalgirinis said:


> You simply showed pure ignorance there. You make it sound like all teams in Europe practice all year long, which is totally untrue as all players play in their respective proffesional clubs. They gather together only in summers before tournaments, like team USA did this summer.


True. He keeps reafirming himself though.

Double the post, double the ignorance.


----------



## Banjoriddim (Aug 14, 2004)

futuristxen said:


> Remember, a lot of these guys are very young. Lebron, Melo, and Wade have all improved dramatically defensively since where they were when they came into the league. Lebron plays for a coach who only cares about defense. Specifically the Spurs style of defense. If nothing else in 3 years he'll pick up good habits by osmosis. I mean, you saw Lebron play amazing D on Dirk. Maybe his future is defending fours internationally? When he was guarding Dirk he was like a diffrent player from when he was guarding saaaay Ayuso. He stayed in front of dirk, didn't gamble, and challenged the shot. Didn't let Dirk get the ball where he wanted and challenged Dirk's dribble. So the ideas are there. It's just applying them consistently to opponents who aren't superstars. These guys all have the potential to be fantastic defenders, but it's going to take time.
> 
> You also have to remember that Coach K was actually coaching a gambling style of defense. Coach K doesn't coach Spurs style defense. He teaches pressure, turn you over, home run style defense.
> 
> ...



Just one remark what I find intresting though your team is young so is for ex. Greece to be exact they are considerably younger avarage age in team that beat USA was 25 compered to 25,7 in team USA thogh your main stars are younger (Greece pg is near 30 I belive Kill Bill is around 25) but it's not in that big margin I mean they all theire guys were under 30. So it's not like you were beaten by guys who don't play pro ball practice last 10 years thougheter and have insane experience level... Though USA will probobly improve much more than any other young team but is it enough? only time will tell.


----------



## Hoopla (Jun 1, 2004)

Sir Patchwork said:


> There are a lot of terrible defensive habits too. The tendency to not cut off driving lanes and to play for the block or steal. Most of our guys will consistently leave the driving lanes open, leave the angles open, only because they think they will recover to block or steal the ball. Today they got burned, and in 2004 they got burned by the same thing.





ralaw said:


> Our players with the exception of a few have no understanding of team defense, perimeter defense


Absolutely correct. The international offensive game renders individual defense much less important than it is in the NBA, and conversely heightens the value of team defense. Our defense of the pick and roll against Greece was pitiful. And throughout the past several weeks, we had glaring holes evident in team defense. The reason for this largely is due to the relative lack of time together this team had, as defensive chemistry can't be developed within a handful of practices, especially when consistent rotations still haven't been set.

As for the comparisons to the 1992 Dream Team, remember that that team not only had great talent, but it was almost perfectly balanced. Magic/Jordan in the backcourt. Mullin went on a great shooting run. Ewing/Robinson manned the center slot and Barkley/Malone were terrors offensively. Pippen filled in all the gaps and more. Now fast forward to this team, whose talent is centered at the wing spots - LeBron, Wade, Anthony. The frontcourt reads Brand, Bosh, Howard, Miller - nice group, but it pales in comparison to 1992. This team's result will never approach the sum of parts, because the best parts have too much overlap. The decline in the level of play of US teams between 1992 and 2006 may equal the rise in the level of play in international ball during that stretch.

All that said, this team still had enough to win. Offensively, they may not be as pretty to watch as the Phoenix Suns, but they were still productive. Defense is where they can and need to make up ground. This was a very disappointing loss and we didn't succeed, but this team is a work in progress and the grand prize is still a few years away.


----------



## jordan0386 (Jul 4, 2006)

Hoopla said:


> The decline in the level of play of US teams between 1992 and 2006 may equal the rise in the level of play in international ball during that stretch.


dont do it.dont do it.dont do it...do not **** on American ball like that

92-02...53 wins, 0 losses

02-06...29 wins, 7 losses

we havent declined any...the world has gotten better at basketball, on its own...the USA is not "worse" than what it once was...back "in the day"...everyone else stunk

the rest of the planet has 7 wins, in the last 5 years, 7 over the last 15 plus...and now we stink

they win a few games, now its a steady decline over 15 years, and a steady rise for them over 15

dont do it.


----------



## scooter (Oct 22, 2003)

Sir Patchwork said:


> And I blame it on the NBA's set of rules that reward athleticism so much.


Oh I guess you love the FIBA rules that allow 3 moving screens on each offensive possession. The rules that allow to you have slow 6'7" guys be your point guard. Sure they are too slow to beat anyone straight up, but you just keep setting moving screens to get them shots. Yea, that's so superior. How about the FIBA officials who consistently let players push rebounders under the basket and hold their jerseys. Those rules neutralize more athletic players. 

Is that what you want? Dirty and cynical play to even the playing field and neutralize superior athletes? Not to mention short games on a smaller court to also give inferior athletes more of a chance. We need that just to give slow shooters more of a chance to play? You really want to see more of Scott Padgett and Brian Cardinal and Vo Lenard and Casey Jacobsen and Michael Doleac?

FIBA basketball is decent. But the NBA game is superior.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

scooter said:


> Oh I guess you love the FIBA rules that allow 3 moving screens on each offensive possession.


The NBA lets you set the same moving screens. 



scooter said:


> Dirty and cynical play to even the playing field and neutralize superior athletes?


The same way the NBA rules nuetralize superior basketball players. Bigger courts and more space give great run and jump athletes with absolutely no basketball talent a chance to play. We need NBA rules just to give guys with no skills, but can jump out of the gym, a chance to play? 



scooter said:


> FIBA basketball is decent. But the NBA game is superior.


The NBA has better athletes, but it cannot say it has better basketball players. That's the problem with creating a league favoring a run and jump athlete so much. Athleticism is not a basketball skill. It can make for exciting basketball, and even effective basketball under the right set of rules, but it's not a basketball skill.


----------



## ChiBron (Jun 24, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> The NBA lets you set the same moving screens.


Not to the extent it's allowed in FIBA. It's a joke, really.



> The same way the NBA rules nuetralize superior basketball players.


Like who?


----------



## Hoopla (Jun 1, 2004)

jordan0386 said:


> dont do it.dont do it.dont do it...do not **** on American ball like that
> 
> 92-02...53 wins, 0 losses
> 
> ...


I'm not really sure what you're talking about. Of course the world has gotten better, but that doesn't mean that the teams the US has fielded have all been of equal quality. I didn't say that the quality of NBA players overall is worse, but that the 2006 team is not close to the ability of the 1992 team. Duncan, Garnett, and Kobe didn't play on this year's version.


----------

