# How many teams have the guard play to beat the USA?



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

I really don't know the answer,but this seems to be the big question to me.If you can minimize your turnovers and control the tempo of the game you have a chance to beat the USA...otherwise we're going to destroy you with the fast break.Puerto Rico's guards are pretty good and if we had played worse they could have beaten us.Seems to me that if we play reasonably well there are only a handful of teams capable of beating us,but I don't know a great deal about the international squads.Spain and Argentina are obviously capable,but beyond that I really don't know.

Also it seems likely to me that you need at least 100 or 105 points to beat us tour defense hasn't been sparkling,but we have tremendous firepower and I really don't believe that anyone is going to be able to hold us down for an entire game.I haven't been a big fan of our perimeter defense,but on the other hand I can't see how anyone else is really going to stop a team with so many great offensive players working together as well as we have so far.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

This is going to sound crazy but unless a team is going off from 3 I'm not sure the coaching staff wants to put too much emphasis on guarding the 3 point line and sacrificing rebounding and stopping penetration. With D'Antoni on this team and the running firepower on this team: D'Antoni would love to get in a up and down game. Missed 3's hurt but just like Phoenix you can run off long misses and even makes but penetration which results in fouls and the like can slow the game down.

To me Argentina is a scary team because of Ginobili and his ability to penetrate. Same thing goes for Spain. Two other teams could be Brazil while underachieving so far have Barbaso and Italy who reportedly have an excellent guard rotation


----------



## maradro (Aug 2, 2003)

most complete is probably argentina:

you have a former US college guard, NBA drifter and spanish league champ at PG and the all-spanish league first PG backing him up, then you've got 4 NBA players at SG and SF: manu/delfino, nocioni/hermann.

The spanish backcourt is good but I dont know if they matchup as well, Im pretty sure they are all smaller and not as aggressive. They are better shooters though.

But there are more teams with good enough guard play. I think there are only a couple glaring examples of teams that just need better guards to become contenders, germany and china, which are both one man teams (as of now).


----------



## Sad Mafioso (Nov 7, 2004)

I don't think any team could make the claim that they're more naturally talented than the US guards, but there are sum who could make things difficult for them. Chris Paul so far in this tourney hasn't really shown much of anything, and if you take out that game against China the same goes for Wade. 

Anyways:

Diamantidis/Spanoulis: Tall, phsyical guards. Both Diamantidis and Papaloukas are very cerebral, control tempo of the game and not let things get out of hand.

With Bulleri(Italy) and Jacikevicius(Lithuania) out USA shouldn't worry about deep threats that much as in the past.

Calderon/Navarro/Rudy: Calderon's leadership so far has been the most impressive for Spain, he plays well under control and doesn't try to do anything out of his reach. Navarro i've never liked to be honest, and Rudy is still to young.

Pepe/Ginobili/Prigioni: Sanchez is again more methodical, half court pace kind of point guard, he's a fetish type of player in Europe, some people love his pace and others don't. Prigioni is more like an NBA point guard without the body.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Sad Mafioso said:


> I don't think any team could make the claim that they're more naturally talented than the US guards, but there are sum who could make things difficult for them.* Chris Paul so far in this tourney hasn't really shown much of anything*, and if you take out that game against China the same goes for Wade.
> 
> Anyways:
> 
> ...


Chris Paul per game averages:12 points,8.5 assists(1st in WC),3.5 steals(2nd in WC) 0.5 turnovers....

He really hasn't shown anything I suppose


----------



## Lebbron (Nov 20, 2005)

Sad Mafioso said:


> I don't think any team could make the claim that they're more naturally talented than the US guards, but there are sum who could make things difficult for them. Chris Paul so far in this tourney hasn't really shown much of anything, and if you take out that game against China the same goes for Wade.
> 
> Anyways:
> 
> ...


I like the Argentina guards and Greece but I don't think Spain is going to be effective. 

On another note I think Paul has been playing very well doing his role exactly like he's supposed to.


----------



## Sad Mafioso (Nov 7, 2004)

Stats don't really matter much in the preliminary round. I preffer to judge players from what I see them do on the court. Chris Paul is probably one of my favorite guards but I understand his job in the USA and what he's asked for limits his "talent" or hinders it. Move the ball around the perimeter, shuffle passes to the wing. His jumper in my opinion has been very "iffy", but that's where the Hinrich substitution comes into play?

Now as far as the post your post goes, USA's concern is A. Dribble penetration and breaking down the defense one on one? Reviewing the game against Puerto Rico they did a horrible job. There's no way around it. Not only did Arroyo abuse anyone who was put in front of him, but Hinrich also was very nonchalant for someone who's supposedly a great perimeter defender. Take one play, Dalmau has the ball a top of the key, Hinrich is pressing him and trying to cut him at angles, Dalmau crosses the ball behind the back, dribbles through the middle. Result=floater + 1. Another play Lebronze is guarding Arroyo on the right wing, and just gives him the lane. Result=uncontested layup.

I could go on forver but i'll stop there. The scouting isn't even that hard. USA fishing for steals=not good defense. 

B. Defending against teams which rely on shooting. This is one is very tough to judge because PR just seem to be drilling everything including contested shots. From what I've seen so far, nothing has changed. Italy will live and die by the jumper(Basile is the kind of player who either makes 7 or misses them). And surprisingly african sides have adopted the "do or die" by the jumper(see Angola/Senegal)


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Italy will be a good test of the emergency broadcast system. If we can roll Italy, probably nobody but Argentina or Spain stands a chance, and even then....


----------



## Sad Mafioso (Nov 7, 2004)

That's faulty logic on your part futurist. This isn't the same team the azzuri suited 2 years ago.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Some views on the US pressure defense and opposing guards:

Con:


> A few days ago, Dwight Jaynes and I had an e-mail skirmish about whether or not it made sense for the U.S. to do a lot of trapping and pressuring on defense. I won't rehash the whole thing here, but I think it's fair to say that Dwight feels it would be more effective to play honest man-to-man, whereas I am open to the idea that all the pressure is a way to press our advantage in athleticism and depth, while also getting these players to play really hard on D in what is, after all, an off-season competition.
> 
> I would have left it at that, but then TrueHoop reader Ben made me aware that practically the same debate is going on, with a much more academic feel, over at the APBRmetrics Forum. Dan Rosenbaum kicked it off like this:
> 
> ...


Pro:


> As a follow-up to this discussion about Team USA's pressure defense, David Thorpe offers a series of reasons why Coach Krzyzewski's approach makes sense (some highlights of his argument: more possessions are more opportunities to benefit from the disparity in talent, everyone feels involved and gets touches, all that shooting makes more opportunities for US players to get hot):
> 
> 
> Sure, the team can play better fundamental defense. They can slow down their offense and only take the highest % shots. They can limit their rotation to 7-8 players. In short, they can play an NBA style. Just like they do all year. And like they have in the last 2 international tournaments, featuring NBA coaches’ Brown and Karl. But Team USA’s governing body did not want a repeat of those 2 events, and Coach K didn’t either. So it’s off to the races-better tighten up your laces and your handle, ‘cause this team is sprinting for Gold.​One other idea, that I have heard from a few different people: several of these US players simply aren't lock-down defenders. Shane Battier is the best, but then there is a big gap. Thorpe, by the way, believes Battier deserves consideration as MVP of this team


http://www.truehoop.com/


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I agree with the non-Dan point. Even though our pressure defense doesn't translate into good defense statistically, I think it speeds the game up, and at the end of the day, no one else in the world has the overall fire power 1-8(or 12). Yes Coach K is the official head coach, but Mike D'Antoni's hands are all over this team, and I firmly believe he is the most brilliant basketball mind in the last 15 years. More possessions=Advantage USA. If we make it so Argentina has to score 120 points to beat us, I like our chances. If you give up those layups, it suckers the other team into playing our pace. And there's nobody who can run with us.


----------



## Sad Mafioso (Nov 7, 2004)

Tactically it would be failure on America's part to show the same hand on every play. That is to go into full court pressure against EVERY team.

1. You have to be aware of the situation, the score, if you're losing going with traps to breakup the tempo and flow of the other team is a good measure. They can afford that from the fact they can afford deep rotations, aside from Greece no one could probably sustain a high level of play without their "stars". 

2. Depending on the ball handler and the team's ability to break out. There are teams like Puerto Rico who depend alot on their PG's play, so doubling him up once they cross mid-court, anihilates their offense.

3. The Refs: How much contact are they allowing. Are they the kind who want to take protagonism from the game and just whistle at the slightest contact. Or do they let the game flow.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Yeah and today against Italy you saw the US ability to make adjustments. It's nice to see a coaching staff that is actually coaching. Last time Brown was pretty stubborn.

Also I think Coach K has masterfully settled into a rotation. I think anything that USA can do to turn the game into an uptempo game the better. Whether that is running out of the net or off rebounds, or pressing. Even if the other team scores on the pressure, so long as you are running, it suckers the other team into playing a pace they can't play.

Italy was very disciplined and unwilling to get into a running game against the US, so we had to adjust accordingly. But Slovenia got completely suckered into it.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

(I'll ignore China, as they were just plain bad.) 

in the first half of many of these games the opponent is running up small leads on us because of all the trapping/gambling. Slovenia, Puerto Rico and Italy all took advantage of "bad" gambles early on, and it makes us look worse statistically. 

a funny thing happens in the third quarter and fourth quarter, though. 

the monster block Howard crams in your face in the second quarter starts to make you wonder if you are really open for that midrange jumper. 

after getting picked by Carmello twice, you wonder if you really should execute the right pass for the offensive set. 

you're kind of tired from all that running in the first half, and you've racked up more fouls than you're used to trying to stop the break, so maybe you let Wade go for the dunk this time. 

there's no statistic for "getting in your head," but that's exactly what this kind of playing style does over 40 minutes. it makes teams doubt themselves, second guess themselves. it's like a 100 yard rushing full back--in the first quarter it's annoying, by the fourth quarter you just want to take a break for a few minutes. 

it also has the benefit of luring the other team into playing the same style, but to me that's a little overrated. these are mostly experienced teams who play like they want to play. 

this team is so much fun to watch because nearly every game is a rope-a-dope, where the other guy starts off well but soon realizes it's not as confident as it thinks it is. every game so far (except Brazil) you can see the US team break the will of their opponent with their playing style. 

will it work against a team like Argentina? I don't know. I can't wait to find out, though.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Really good post mook. That's exactly how I feel watching Team USA right now. Rope-a-dope is dead on. It's just watching to see when the moment occurs where the other team breaks down. It only takes five minutes. 

And I like how our guys have sportsmanship, but they also aren't afraid to mix it up and using that as motovation for themselves. Today you could see DWade using the poor italian players as a tool to kick himself into the next gear.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

I think Argentina is the only team with enough talent to beat us.


----------



## Benedict_Boozer (Jul 16, 2004)

Great post mook!


----------

