# For those who claim the US hasn't the best team. . .



## alex

Okay now, many people here believe that the US has an inferior team to Greece, and, today they certainly did. But, is an elemination-style tournament the best way to prove valor? Wouldn't one understand the strength of a team via a longer competition, such as a best of five, or best of seven? Would any team in the world come close to the US? After the first few games, I imagine the US would understand their opponents weaknesses better, and be able to fully exploit them. For instance, the dreadful pick-and-roll defense wouldn't of happened by game three, same with the pathetically stagnant offense and horrible substitution patterns. The other teams would also benefit, but, in a longer series, the more talented, better teams usually prevail. And there's no doubt in my mind that the US is the best series team in the world.


----------



## Banjoriddim

alex said:


> Okay now, many people here believe that the US has an inferior team to Greece, and, today they certainly did. But, is an elemination-style tournament the best way to prove valor? Wouldn't one understand the strength of a team via a longer competition, such as a best of five, or best of seven? Would any team in the world come close to the US? After the first few games, I imagine the US would understand their opponents weaknesses better, and be able to fully exploit them. For instance, the dreadful pick-and-roll defense wouldn't of happened by game three, same with the pathetically stagnant offense and horrible substitution patterns. The other teams would also benefit, but, in a longer series, the more talented, better teams usually prevail. And there's no doubt in my mind that the US is the best series team in the world.


So? 

Witch you want: a)permanental gold medal/world championship titel b)kill Wade/Bron/any other star with best in seven tournament coz they may slip with one game... 

I guess they wouldn't agree with 30-40 game tournament... after NBA season and since they havent won any of 3 last tournaments others wouldn't give them the first option


----------



## bball2223

alex said:


> Okay now, many people here believe that the US has an inferior team to Greece, and, today they certainly did. But, is an elemination-style tournament the best way to prove valor? Wouldn't one understand the strength of a team via a longer competition, such as a best of five, or best of seven? Would any team in the world come close to the US? After the first few games, I imagine the US would understand their opponents weaknesses better, and be able to fully exploit them. For instance, the dreadful pick-and-roll defense wouldn't of happened by game three, same with the pathetically stagnant offense and horrible substitution patterns. The other teams would also benefit, but, in a longer series, the more talented, better teams usually prevail. And there's no doubt in my mind that the US is the best series team in the world.



No keep it the way it is, we lost because we don't play team basketball. This isn't the NBA and why would you want to make many players play 40-50 more games added onto their NBA total. That is a stupid idea just because the USA can't admit that Greece beat us in basketball because they play as a team and we don't end of story.


----------



## Darman

alex said:


> The other teams would also benefit, but, in a longer series, the more talented, better teams usually prevail. And there's no doubt in my mind that the US is the best series team in the world.


Your opinions.

My teams are Argentina, Spain and Greece. 

Italy had requested to fiba the change of the WC's formula, with no more "1 lose = you're out" but with another round after the preliminary (like it was in football Champions league some years ago). 2-3 more games in the WC but the direct elimination wuold be only after the second round (semifinals)


----------



## Matej

Darman said:


> Your opinions.
> 
> My teams are Argentina, Spain and Greece.
> 
> Italy had requested to fiba the change of the WC's formula, with no more "1 lose = you're out" but with another round after the preliminary (like it was in football Champions league some years ago). 2-3 more games in the WC but the direct elimination wuold be only after the second round (semifinals)


No... the way it is now is the best. And more interesting too. Imagine how teams would play if there was the nba type of playoff. We wouldn't have seen such a great matchups like these today


----------



## Darman

Matej said:


> No... the way it is now is the best. And more interesting too. Imagine how teams would play if there was the nba type of playoff. We wouldn't have seen such a great matchups like these today


Yes. you are right. :cheers:


----------



## Sad Mafioso

Team USA has individual better players, but Greece is a better TEAM. I accept the former as much as I accept the latter. But I see the other teams' successes beign demised every time the US lose in international tournaments that they are supposed to be dominating and I am fed up with it. World Basketball Championships, Olympic Games, the World Baseball Classic, need I go on?. It's always everybody else's fault: The tournament system, the officials, the other team's jerseys and I don't know what else. Why don't you admit for once, just once, that you have to adjust to the rest of the world and not expect the opposite every time just because it suits you. I'm not saying that the NBA should change, but when you go international, you have to PLAY international.


----------



## bball2223

Sad Mafioso said:


> Team USA has individual better players, but Greece is a better TEAM. I accept the former as much as I accept the latter. But I see the other teams' successes beign demised every time the US lose in international tournaments that they are supposed to be dominating and I am fed up with it. World Basketball Championships, Olympic Games, the World Baseball Classic, need I go on?. It's always everybody else's fault: The tournament system, the officials, the other team's jerseys and I don't know what else. Why don't you admit for once, just once, that you have to adjust to the rest of the world and not expect the opposite every time just because it suits you. I'm not saying that the NBA should change, but when you go international, you have to PLAY international.


As a fan of USA basketball I will admit that.


----------



## alex

I'm not calling on FIBA to change its format, I enjoy it the way it is. And I don't deny the fact that the US was beaten. . .again. . . but it's insane to say that team A is better then team B because they won ONE game against them. A similar logic applied to the NBA would be calling the Hawks a better team if they were to beat the Heat. Was Atlanta better that day? Yeah. Are they a better team? No. 

You could say that the US just doesn't play as a team (and the Greeks, Argentines, Spaniards, etc do), which to some extent is very true, so therefore they wouldn't beat the best TEAM in the world (this would make my Atlanta-Miami argumente invalid). However, in a seven game series, the disparity in talent and the "teambuilding" that such a series should provide would swing the pendulum in the US's favor.

ya know, I'm ticked that the US (or Italy for that matter) won't win, but international tournaments with intregue (sp?) are more fun than 80 point blowouts. I'm a basketball fan, and success in Europe, South America, Asia, and Africa equals success for the game and increases the likelyhood for the next "megastud" (a concensus top three-five player, Nowitzki is probably borderline), such as LBJ, DW, Bryant, Tim Duncan, to come from a foreign nation. The future is bright, but the immediate present for us USAns is painful.


----------



## Perseas

Sad Mafioso said:


> Team USA has individual better players, but Greece is a better TEAM. I accept the former as much as I accept the latter. But I see the other teams' successes beign demised every time the US lose in international tournaments that they are supposed to be dominating and I am fed up with it. World Basketball Championships, Olympic Games, the World Baseball Classic, need I go on?. It's always everybody else's fault: The tournament system, the officials, the other team's jerseys and I don't know what else. Why don't you admit for once, just once, that you have to adjust to the rest of the world and not expect the opposite every time just because it suits you. I'm not saying that the NBA should change, but when you go international, you have to PLAY international.



Ummm when you are copy-pasting my posts, I would appreciate it if you could at least quote me....
Check this out...


----------



## bball2223

alex said:


> After the first few games, I imagine the US would understand their opponents weaknesses better, and be able to fully exploit them. For instance, the dreadful pick-and-roll defense wouldn't of happened by game three, same with the pathetically stagnant offense and horrible substitution patterns.



The USA's opponents would have a better chance because of this, and I know you stated this but that isn't the point. The other team would find different zone defenses to run and would put in a good press breaker against the press so the USA would have almost zero transistion buckets.


----------



## alex

bball2223 said:


> The USA's opponents would have a better chance because of this, and I know you stated this but that isn't the point. The other team would find different zone defenses to run and would put in a good press breaker against the press so the USA would have almost zero transistion buckets.



The zone d didn't kill the US (after all, they did score 95 points. . .), it was their own "defense" that did em in. If Coach K is even a tiny bit competent, those pick n rolls from games two till whenever aren't on automatic. In synthesis, the US has more to gain by playing a series then do the Greeks, thus their cieling is a good deal higher.


----------



## Brandname

Perseas said:


> Ummm when you are copy-pasting my posts, I would appreciate it if you could at least quote me....
> Check this out...


My god, that's the most pathetic thing I've ever seen...


----------



## BG7

Maybe a double elimination tournament? That'd be cool, I'd like to see what kind of vengeance Team USA would have came out with if they came back and played Greece, imagine if Greece beat Spain, USA came out of the losers bracket, and had to play Greece TWICE to win it all, that would have been interested. I like double elimination tournaments, so I'd think it'd be good.


----------



## DuMa

i would like a 3 game series. in the medal rounds


----------



## Matej

DuMa said:


> i would like a 3 game series. in the medal rounds


No, that would be terrible. You have to have the element of surprise. That makes the tournament more interesting. And also, the team that deserves to win is the team that is more concetrated on the game.


----------



## Perseas

Brandname said:


> My god, that's the most pathetic thing I've ever seen...


Well I'm sorry if you find it pathetic, but I couldn't leave it unanswered...


----------



## PauloCatarino

alex said:


> Okay now, many people here believe that the US has an inferior team to Greece, and, today they certainly did. But, is an elemination-style tournament the best way to prove valor? Wouldn't one understand the strength of a team via a longer competition, such as a best of five, or best of seven? Would any team in the world come close to the US? After the first few games, I imagine the US would understand their opponents weaknesses better, and be able to fully exploit them. For instance, the dreadful pick-and-roll defense wouldn't of happened by game three, same with the pathetically stagnant offense and horrible substitution patterns. The other teams would also benefit, but, in a longer series, the more talented, better teams usually prevail. And there's no doubt in my mind that the US is the best series team in the world.


You just can't change the FIBA rules to appease (sp?) the USA team.

They knew what they were getting himselves into.

Leave it at rest.


----------



## Colby Briant

Perseas said:


> Well I'm sorry if you find it pathetic, but I couldn't leave it unanswered...


i think he was just saying that its pathetic that someone would copy your post like that without quoting you. sad mafioso is pathetic and needs a banning.


----------



## SheriffKilla

Remember this in 2001(or w/e year that was)
Sixers beat the Lakers in the first game of the finals....


----------



## alex

PauloCatarino said:


> You just can't change the FIBA rules to appease (sp?) the USA team.
> 
> They knew what they were getting himselves into.
> 
> Leave it at rest.



I'm not trying to change the rules, I'm just saying that the US would win a best of seven, a best of five, and probaly a best of three with each and every team in the world.


----------



## Brandname

Perseas said:


> Well I'm sorry if you find it pathetic, but I couldn't leave it unanswered...


No, not you. Him. 

Your original post was actually a good post. It's the fact that he blatantly copied it (and even took the time to change a word or two here and there) that's pathetic.


----------



## Brandname

In fact, I'm glad you pointed it out.

It only reinforces how much of a clown this Sad Mafioso guy is.


----------



## s a b a s 11

DuMa said:


> i would like a 3 game series. in the medal rounds


I wonder if there would be requests for three-game series in the medal round if the US had won the gold? Why is there always an excuse when the US loses in these tournaments... not enough real all-stars on the team, not enough preparation, Shaq, Kobe isn't there... now it's because it's a single elimination tournament?

You know it's really not about finding others weaknesses during a series; it's about preparing a team, perfecting a style and seeing which prevails in the tournament. The US needs to take the 3-year commitment set out by Coach K and Colangelo, find a system that emphasizes the strengths of all the US players, get them more familiar with each other and bring it in 2008 Olympics... which again, is a one-game elimination.

Stuart


----------



## futuristxen

s a b a s 11 said:


> I wonder if there would be requests for three-game series in the medal round if the US had won the gold? Why is there always an excuse when the US loses in these tournaments... not enough real all-stars on the team, not enough preparation, Shaq, Kobe isn't there... now it's because it's a single elimination tournament?
> 
> You know it's really not about finding others weaknesses during a series; it's about preparing a team, perfecting a style and seeing which prevails in the tournament. The US needs to take the 3-year commitment set out by Coach K and Colangelo, find a system that emphasizes the strengths of all the US players, get them more familiar with each other and bring it in 2008 Olympics... which again, is a one-game elimination.
> 
> Stuart


Excellent post.

And a 3 game series is a bad idea in my opinion. These guys already play too many games, I don't want to add more.

Americans just need to take this tournament seriously. Our team does, but the fans don't. You all think we are promised gold everytime we step on the court, and if we don't then there must be something wrong with how we are doing things. When really it's now just the nature of the growth of the game.

I don't know why the fact that we now have competitive games and that the rest of the world is now making brilliant players, is such a bad thing?

At the end of the day I'm about the NBA. And the better the world gets the better it is for the NBA.


----------



## Skydivedan

My rant...

Why would they move the a 3,5,7 games series?? The NCAA has single elimination in the "Tournament" and no one complains about that... some of the those games are classics.

I started watching basketball in the early 80s and I can say that the game has changed tremendously. Micheal Jordan was both the best thing FOR basketball and he was also the worst thing for basketball. What I mean is that Jordan is Jordan.. there will be no other. He did things that amazed everyone... and it rejunated the NBA and brought fans back because they wanted to see him soar through the air. Why was he bad then?? Because all the young people who watched him and idolized him wanted to be like him so they went into the gym and practiced their dunks instead of their 17 foot jumpers. And now as these kids are grown up and have come (and gone) into the NBA we are now seeing the results of Jordan's legacy. The result is the most athletic players ever in the history of the NBA but also the most selfish and least "skilled". Because these kids did nothing but work on their dunks, cross over dribbles, and no look passes they neglected the fundamentals. A whole new era of players emerged.

The NBA itself is also to blame for USA basketballs demise. What sells? What makes you watch NBA games? The Utah Jazz and their methodical approach to team basketball? Or the Jailblazers who can barely rack up 10 assists in one game amongst their entire team but fly up and down the court dunking over people. 2 points is 2 points.

A few of questions people should ask themselves is this... 

1. A few years ago why did the NBA move the 3 point line CLOSER??? Is it because they wanted to increase scoring or was it because NBA players simply don't have the skill anymore to shoot from so far away? 
2. Why has hand checking been completed eliminated? Is it because they want to increase scoring or was it because they wanted to the "stars" to have a cleared path to the basket for dunks and other nice plays? When you play ball in the park/gym do you call foul if buddy puts his hand on your hip as you drive??? 
3. Was the elimination of hand checking to increase scoring or to eliminate tough defence which in turn results in lower scoring?
4. Why have there been so many rule changes in recent years? Was it to increase scoring because as the NBA says, "today's player's are bigger and faster" they made the court smaller or have we all not been seeing what's going on and noticing that players just aren't that good anymore? And they just need as much help as they can get to score.
5. Why have scoring decreased steadily since the 80s? Watch the Celtics vs. Bulls in the 88 playoffs at Boston Garden where Jordan scored 63. Just watch the play under the basket... its brutal! Elbows, pushing, shoving, everything. But look at the score after regulation time. Look at all the scores from that era. Back then the game was actually quite rough yet teams routinely scored in the 100s in league with FEWER teams. Bottom line... the players were much more skilled then and could score from anywhere on the floor. 

The NBA has done a great job selling the NBA product. It's exciting and there is lots of one on one match ups that people like to watch. Let's face it we love to watch people get dunked on but guys like JR Rider dunked on alot of people but where is he now? He couldn't hit a 15 foot jumper to save his life. 

Also with the money that is to be made in the NBA most players don't even want to go to college but want to jump straight to the NBA for the money. Without that 4 years of seasoning and skill building GMs are signing them based on athleticsm and not alot of skill (Lebron James being an exception but for every 1 Lebron there have been countless failures).

I think the reason why the European teams have been smoking the Americans is because the players in Europe simply don't have the physical abilities of Lebron, Kobe, AI, and the like. *So without the physical ability to play above the rim the European have to learn the fundamentals*. You can't practice dunks if you can barely touch the net! Haha kidding... but the Europeans work on shooting, passing, setting picks, and team play.

Another reason why the Americans get skool'ed is because the refs don't play favorites and the game is called evenly. In the NBA you can't look at Kobe without fouling him. Just because an NBA "star" misses a shot doesn't mean he had to have been fouled to have missed... but the refs call fouls for stars so they can score more. 

*The NBA has become a "street" league full of athletic guys with no fundamentals*. The only reason why John Stockton played till he was so old is not only because he was durable but along with his slowing legs *the NBA decreased in skill*. So he was older and less athletic but with his basketball mind still made him better than most of the guards in the league. Quote a rookie Damon Stoudamire after his first match up with John Stockton in Toronto, "I ain't never been dun like dat in my who' life". Stockton owned him that whole game. Most times Charles Barkley is an idiot but it's true when the says the NBA skill level has gone down the toilet.

One on one, no one can beat the Americans. But get 5 Americans together and 5 Europeans together and make them play an actual game and things change completely. It seems like the Americans just want to out do each other and would rather be on a poster dunking on a European than actually beat them in the game. 

I still love basketball but no longer watch NBA games. I do catch the highlights but mostly watch NCAA ball. The NBA is made for TV, with lots of dunks and fancy plays... the NCAA and international ball is true team basketball. And that idiotic And 1 yo yo wut up dawg street ghetto league doesn't help either. Kids spend more time thinking up some stupid nickname for themselves than working on their jumpers or team play.


----------



## futuristxen

Get yer goddamn mind right. Did you just repaste that post from 1999? Nothing you said has any relevance to today's game. And your contetion that Europeans are genetically predisposed to better organization is racist. Instead of asking us questions, maybe you should ask yourself questions about why you feel some of the things you do.


----------



## futuristxen

Oh and anyone that contends that the US vs. the world is an athlete vs. non-athlete arguement is an idiot. Some of the best athletes in the world are from europe. Those eastern european mother****ers are athletes. And then you have the french. Boris Diaw, Tony Parker, Mikael Pietrus--these are not athletes? What?

Italians have always been exceptionally athletic. You are looking at these guys and seeing white, and thinking it's one thing, when it can sometimes be completely another.


----------



## Matej

futuristxen said:


> Oh and anyone that contends that the US vs. the world is an athlete vs. non-athlete arguement is an idiot. Some of the best athletes in the world are from europe. Those eastern european mother****ers are athletes. And then you have the french. Boris Diaw, Tony Parker, Mikael Pietrus--these are not athletes? What?
> 
> Italians have always been exceptionally athletic. You are looking at these guys and seeing white, and thinking it's one thing, when it can sometimes be completely another.


I think we all agree on that forum that France has the most athletic NT in Europe. And their play is much more similar to Americans than to any other Europe's, with all advantages and disadvantages. As for Italians, they are as athletic as Spaniards, Turks, Slovenians, etc. (a typical European NT)


----------



## Skydivedan

The Europeans are certainly athletic... but overall the Americans much more athletic than them. The style of game dictates that the NBA players need to be more athletic because for TV merchandising slam dunks sell. Where as the international game dictates players have solid fundamentals and must learn to play in a team atmosphere. In a team game atmosphere where skill and fundamentals come into play, the Europeans have been beating down the US for years. 

One of the best games I have ever seen was Pete Carill's Princeton Tigers versus the defending national champion UCLA Bruins in the first round of the "Tournament". Forget what year it was. Princeton, using the "Princeton Offence", dragged the game almost to a halt by never running and never letting the Bruins run them out of the gym. The entire game they used the whole shot clock running the same play over and over until someone got a good shot. This was also one of the most BORING games I have ever seen... but it was a beautiful thing to watch as fundamentals and team play completely neutralized a more athletic team. Princeton won that game... the score was in the 30s 

But back to the original thread... For those who claim the US hasn't the best team...

The US doesn't have the best team... not by a long shot. They may some of the best individual players though. But playing as a team with an evenly called game with tough defence allowed against the "stars"... international teams are better. Hands down.

But hey... at least the Americans medalled this time!


----------



## jordan0386

Skydivedan said:


> The Europeans are certainly athletic... but overall the Americans much more athletic than them. The style of game dictates that the NBA players need to be more athletic *because for TV merchandising slam dunks sell. * Where as the international game dictates players have solid fundamentals and must learn to play in a team atmosphere. In a team game atmosphere where skill and fundamentals come into play, the Europeans have been beating down the US for years.
> 
> One of the best games I have ever seen was Pete Carill's Princeton Tigers versus the defending national champion UCLA Bruins in the first round of the "Tournament". Forget what year it was. Princeton, using the "Princeton Offence", dragged the game almost to a halt by never running and never letting the Bruins run them out of the gym. The entire game they used the whole shot clock running the same play over and over until someone got a good shot. This was also one of the most BORING games I have ever seen... but it was a beautiful thing to watch as fundamentals and team play completely neutralized a more athletic team. Princeton won that game... the score was in the 30s
> 
> But back to the original thread... For those who claim the US hasn't the best team...
> 
> The US doesn't have the best team... not by a long shot. They may some of the best individual players though. But playing as a team with an evenly called game with tough defence allowed against the "stars"... international teams are better. Hands down.
> 
> But hey... at least the Americans medalled this time!


no, thats complete bull...stop spreading that in your mind, my goodness


----------



## Skydivedan

If it's bull why hasn't USA basketball senior men's team won a gold medal in 8-9 years?


----------



## Nuzzo

Skydivedan said:


> If it's bull why hasn't USA basketball senior men's team won a gold medal in 8-9 years?


2000 was before 6 years :clown:


----------



## futuristxen

Skydivedan said:


> If it's bull why hasn't USA basketball senior men's team won a gold medal in 8-9 years?


Yeah because Argentina and Spain are not athletic teams. You're saying Pau Gasol isn't athletic or doesn't dunk? Don't be dumb.


----------



## Skydivedan

Nuzzo said:


> 2000 was before 6 years :clown:


Ok... 6 years then... LOL


----------



## Skydivedan

futuristxen said:


> Yeah because Argentina and Spain are not athletic teams. You're saying Pau Gasol isn't athletic or doesn't dunk? Don't be dumb.





Skydivedan said:


> The Europeans are certainly athletic... but overall the Americans much more athletic than them.


YOU don't be dumb and read more carefully please. 

So like I said before... if they are the best team why haven't they won the gold medal in 6 years?


----------



## Skydivedan

futuristxen said:


> Get yer goddamn mind right. Did you just repaste that post from 1999? Nothing you said has any relevance to today's game. And your contetion that Europeans are genetically predisposed to better organization is racist. Instead of asking us questions, maybe you should ask yourself questions about why you feel some of the things you do.


Unless the very concept of 5 on 5 team basketball has changed then it is very relevant. The difference from the past and today is that the players from the past were more skilled and played in a league with fewer teams and tougher (hand checking/less "star" fouls) rules.

And you contention that I implied some kind of genetic advantage on the part of the Europeans is both arrogant and obtuse. If I came off sounding like that I apologize. What the international game is more of a pure version of basketball where team play and wins is put before the individual achievements of one player.


----------



## bball2223

futuristxen said:


> Get yer goddamn mind right. Did you just repaste that post from 1999? Nothing you said has any relevance to today's game. And your contetion that Europeans are genetically predisposed to better organization is racist. Instead of asking us questions, maybe you should ask yourself questions about why you feel some of the things you do.



Please quit dragging race into this, it's not needed. It's true the Europeans are better organized as a team, but it has nothing to do with race. It's just that they are used to being the man and they can't defer to team play. So Tony Parker, Boris Diaw, and Mickael Pietrus are white all of a sudden because there from Europe. Please get your facts staright before posting and quit dragging race into this argument, your just making yourself look like an idiot.


----------



## bball2223

futuristxen said:


> Yeah because Argentina and Spain are not athletic teams. You're saying Pau Gasol isn't athletic or doesn't dunk? Don't be dumb.


He is athletic, but they aren't near the athlete any of the American players are.


----------



## bball2223

Furturitken or however its spelled, listen Tony Parker, Boris Diaw, Schortinatias, all have a couple things in common. They all play in Europe and all 3 and even more are African-American. By your post you said he was being racist toward African-Americans because they rely too much on their athleticism and Europe is more structured. Well, your wrong he isn't being racist at all. Tony Parker plays in a structured system, Boris Diaw does. If anyone is racist it's you.


----------



## Skydivedan

bball2223 said:


> Furturitken or however its spelled, listen Tony Parker, Boris Diaw, Schortinatias, all have a couple things in common. They all play in Europe and all 3 and even more are African-American. By your post you said he was being racist toward African-Americans because they rely too much on their athleticism and Europe is more structured. Well, your wrong he isn't being racist at all. Tony Parker plays in a structured system, Boris Diaw does. If anyone is racist it's you.


Nice posts... that's what I meant to say


----------



## Pain5155

stop blaming the format as an excuse, the rest of the world has CAUGHT UP and US dominance is over in basketball. its time for ppl to face it.


----------



## futuristxen

Skydivedan said:


> Unless the very concept of 5 on 5 team basketball has changed then it is very relevant. The difference from the past and today is that the players from the past were more skilled and played in a league with fewer teams and tougher (hand checking/less "star" fouls) rules.


Um. Wrong. Who is more talented in NBA history than KG? Players of today are faaaar more versatile than their counterparts from before. Even scrubs like Ricky Davis can play 3 positions. Larry Hughes plays the one and two. He's more talented than saaay Doc Rivers was.




> And you contention that I implied some kind of genetic advantage on the part of the Europeans is both arrogant and obtuse. If I came off sounding like that I apologize. What the international game is more of a pure version of basketball where team play and wins is put before the individual achievements of one player.


Stop saying things like "pure version of basketball" then Adolph. You are building heirarchies where there are none. If what you said was true then the US would not have won the Bronze Medal, and teams like Lithuania and Slovenia would not have gone medalless. This isn't triumph of the will the basketball version, it's diffrent styles, but one is not better than the other. And the NBA proves that all styles can co-exist. I don't see the rush to eliminate one style in favor of another.


----------



## futuristxen

bball2223 said:


> Furturitken or however its spelled, listen Tony Parker, Boris Diaw, Schortinatias, all have a couple things in common. They all play in Europe and all 3 and even more are African-American. By your post you said he was being racist toward African-Americans because they rely too much on their athleticism and Europe is more structured. Well, your wrong he isn't being racist at all. Tony Parker plays in a structured system, Boris Diaw does. If anyone is racist it's you.


It's spelled Futuristxen. But I can see how that might be difficult for someone to read and then copy.

I guarantee you that there is a train of thought out there, that the reason France doesn't do well in european competitions is because of it being a predominantly afro-french team. 

The things you guys are saying are this:
1) that European players(and I have no idea if this just means european(what happened to the rest of the world here?) are athletically inferior to american players(and you're actually talking about african american players here, because I guess you aren't going to say Brad Miller is more athletic than Pau Gasol).
2) Americans(and by this you mean African Americans, because no one would dare say Kirk Hinrich or Adam Morrison don't know how to play in a system) don't know how to play in a system.

How is that not racist going in both directions?

My contention is thus:
1. People can be really athletic regardless of race, and geography.
2. With enough time, anyone can play in a system, regardless of race, or geography.

I'm saying race and nationality do not put limitations on the possibilities for human achievement. Where there is a will there is a way.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8UEYSdcyzJc"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8UEYSdcyzJc" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>


----------



## PauloCatarino

Skydivedan said:


> My rant...
> 
> Why would they move the a 3,5,7 games series?? The NCAA has single elimination in the "Tournament" and no one complains about that... some of the those games are classics.
> 
> I started watching basketball in the early 80s and I can say that the game has changed tremendously. Micheal Jordan was both the best thing FOR basketball and he was also the worst thing for basketball. What I mean is that Jordan is Jordan.. there will be no other. He did things that amazed everyone... and it rejunated the NBA and brought fans back because they wanted to see him soar through the air. Why was he bad then?? Because all the young people who watched him and idolized him wanted to be like him so they went into the gym and practiced their dunks instead of their 17 foot jumpers. And now as these kids are grown up and have come (and gone) into the NBA we are now seeing the results of Jordan's legacy. The result is the most athletic players ever in the history of the NBA but also the most selfish and least "skilled". Because these kids did nothing but work on their dunks, cross over dribbles, and no look passes they neglected the fundamentals. A whole new era of players emerged.
> 
> The NBA itself is also to blame for USA basketballs demise. What sells? What makes you watch NBA games? The Utah Jazz and their methodical approach to team basketball? Or the Jailblazers who can barely rack up 10 assists in one game amongst their entire team but fly up and down the court dunking over people. 2 points is 2 points.
> 
> A few of questions people should ask themselves is this...
> 
> 1. A few years ago why did the NBA move the 3 point line CLOSER??? Is it because they wanted to increase scoring or was it because NBA players simply don't have the skill anymore to shoot from so far away?
> 2. Why has hand checking been completed eliminated? Is it because they want to increase scoring or was it because they wanted to the "stars" to have a cleared path to the basket for dunks and other nice plays? When you play ball in the park/gym do you call foul if buddy puts his hand on your hip as you drive???
> 3. Was the elimination of hand checking to increase scoring or to eliminate tough defence which in turn results in lower scoring?
> 4. Why have there been so many rule changes in recent years? Was it to increase scoring because as the NBA says, "today's player's are bigger and faster" they made the court smaller or have we all not been seeing what's going on and noticing that players just aren't that good anymore? And they just need as much help as they can get to score.
> 5. Why have scoring decreased steadily since the 80s? Watch the Celtics vs. Bulls in the 88 playoffs at Boston Garden where Jordan scored 63. Just watch the play under the basket... its brutal! Elbows, pushing, shoving, everything. But look at the score after regulation time. Look at all the scores from that era. Back then the game was actually quite rough yet teams routinely scored in the 100s in league with FEWER teams. Bottom line... the players were much more skilled then and could score from anywhere on the floor.
> 
> The NBA has done a great job selling the NBA product. It's exciting and there is lots of one on one match ups that people like to watch. Let's face it we love to watch people get dunked on but guys like JR Rider dunked on alot of people but where is he now? He couldn't hit a 15 foot jumper to save his life.
> 
> Also with the money that is to be made in the NBA most players don't even want to go to college but want to jump straight to the NBA for the money. Without that 4 years of seasoning and skill building GMs are signing them based on athleticsm and not alot of skill (Lebron James being an exception but for every 1 Lebron there have been countless failures).
> 
> I think the reason why the European teams have been smoking the Americans is because the players in Europe simply don't have the physical abilities of Lebron, Kobe, AI, and the like. *So without the physical ability to play above the rim the European have to learn the fundamentals*. You can't practice dunks if you can barely touch the net! Haha kidding... but the Europeans work on shooting, passing, setting picks, and team play.
> 
> Another reason why the Americans get skool'ed is because the refs don't play favorites and the game is called evenly. In the NBA you can't look at Kobe without fouling him. Just because an NBA "star" misses a shot doesn't mean he had to have been fouled to have missed... but the refs call fouls for stars so they can score more.
> 
> *The NBA has become a "street" league full of athletic guys with no fundamentals*. The only reason why John Stockton played till he was so old is not only because he was durable but along with his slowing legs *the NBA decreased in skill*. So he was older and less athletic but with his basketball mind still made him better than most of the guards in the league. Quote a rookie Damon Stoudamire after his first match up with John Stockton in Toronto, "I ain't never been dun like dat in my who' life". Stockton owned him that whole game. Most times Charles Barkley is an idiot but it's true when the says the NBA skill level has gone down the toilet.
> 
> One on one, no one can beat the Americans. But get 5 Americans together and 5 Europeans together and make them play an actual game and things change completely. It seems like the Americans just want to out do each other and would rather be on a poster dunking on a European than actually beat them in the game.
> 
> I still love basketball but no longer watch NBA games. I do catch the highlights but mostly watch NCAA ball. The NBA is made for TV, with lots of dunks and fancy plays... the NCAA and international ball is true team basketball. And that idiotic And 1 yo yo wut up dawg street ghetto league doesn't help either. Kids spend more time thinking up some stupid nickname for themselves than working on their jumpers or team play.


This is an awesome post.

Off course, you will get in trouble for it, because peeps here:

a) will not admit Jordan did anything wrong;
b) will never admit there was nasty defense been played in the 80's;
c) believe that today's players are better than yesterday's (while avoiding adressing the stockton Equation);
d) believe that the USA team lost (or has been losing) due to (i) bad luck (ii) refs (iii) championship format (iv) whatever, but never (oh, never!) because they are (have been) an inferior TEAM;
e) can't (and don't care to) see the reasoning behind the constant rule changes;

So, good luckand preach on! :cheers:


----------



## jaja

bball2223 said:


> As a fan of USA basketball I will admit that.


since when did you become a fan of USA basketball


----------



## DKaiser

First of all, the best players in the planet are still in the US. Shaq's the best center, Kobe's the best guard, Amare's the best power forward, the small forward position is stocked....Carmelo's one of them....unfortunately, I think the best point guards, Steve Nash and Juan Carlos Navarro, are not from the US.

As a team, however, it depends who they pick (from coaching staffs down to the players). The team which finished bronze in this FIBA Worlds definitely isn't the best...if they were, they wouldn't end up 3rd place wouldn't they? There were some players who shone the brightest. That recognition goes to Carmelo Anthony.

The fact is some of the fundamental skills are lost in these new generation of American NBA "stars" (as opposed to the European/South American stars in the NBA). Fundamental skills like shooting, dribbling, free throw shooting, team defense, pick-and-roll execution, and patient shot selection are replaced with fancy one-on-one moves, hotdog dribble, fastbreaks, and highlight reel dunks.

However, there are still some (albeit rare ones) who can flat out shoot from waaay out. Think about the 11 3-pointers hoisted by Ray Allen in one game, at just about anywhere beyond 23 feet. Chris Kaman's excellent low-post play and outside shooting (a rarity in the NBA) is very similar to the Europeans'. Mike Bibby is a very cerebral (another rarity) point guard who combines excellent outside shooting, smart playmaking, and gutsy clutch plays...like the guards that are coming out of the new powerhouses in World Basketball like Spain, Greece, Italy, and Argentina. Carmelo Anthony's and Kobe Bryant's killer instincts similar to that of Juan Carlos Navarro and Manu Ginobilli. And Shaq is the wide-bodied, dominant player everyone wants to have or tries to imitate on their team. Remember the "Baby Shaq" from Greece who terrorized team USA's post players.

When you think about lost fundamentals, you think of players like Chris Bosh, Stephon Marbury, Baron Davis, Elton Brand, Ben Wallace, and plenty others like them...the masters of dribbling too much and leaving their teammates yawning and out-of-position...and the if-it's-not-a-dunk-it's-a-miss type of players.

With team USA's repeated failure (i.e. failure to win Gold) dating back 2002, USA basketball has been overtaken by the top international teams. The question now is how far behind is USA basketball and how long can it catch up....and more importantly, why did it end up behind?


----------



## Skydivedan

DKaiser said:


> When you think about lost fundamentals, you think of players like Chris Bosh, Stephon Marbury, Baron Davis, Elton Brand, Ben Wallace, and plenty others like them...the masters of dribbling too much and leaving their teammates yawning and out-of-position...and the if-it's-not-a-dunk-it's-a-miss type of players.


Don't forget Darius Miles, Stromile Swift, Jason Williams, Antoine Walker, and just about anyone who didn't play college ball.


----------



## bender

DKaiser said:


> First of all, the best players in the planet are still in the US. Shaq's the best center, Kobe's the best guard, Amare's the best power forward, the small forward position is stocked....Carmelo's one of them....unfortunately, I think the best point guards, Steve Nash and Juan Carlos Navarro, are not from the US.


First of all Navarro is a shooting guard, and calling him the 2nd best in the world behind Steve Nash is plain wrong. Even if you consider him a pg, there are more than a dozen players better than him (Billups, Kidd, or in FIBA game Jasikevicius, Arroyo, Parker, ...).

Navarro plays like Steve Nash w/out the playmaking skills, which means he's an undersized off-guard with mediocre scoring abilities.


----------



## jaja

DKaiser said:


> As a team, however, it depends who they pick (from coaching staffs down to the players). The team which finished bronze in this FIBA Worlds definitely isn't the best...if they were, they wouldn't end up 3rd place wouldn't they?


would you say spain's 6th place or so finish in athens accurately reflected the strenght of the team?


----------



## BucketDawg

You only need to know one thing about Team USA's loss to Greece- 14 missed free-throws. Period, end of story, we also missed 15 FT's in the bronze medal game but still won by 15, thats pretty impressive. Everybody wants to throw out the tired excuses about eroding fundamentals in every aspect of USA Basketball, (which for the most part are bogus, btw), but the one true fundamental that I will attest to being lackluster is free-throw shooting. You don't even have to be a good shooter to be a good FT shooter, truthfully, you just need to actually practise them and get timing and technique down. I can look at many players, both American and international, and tell that they don't even practice their FT's. Why the hell do you think they call them FT's?, because that is what they are, free points. But unfortunately most basketball players today don't realise this. I look at Shaq and can tell the guy doesn't even give FT's a second thought which is just dumb. If Team USA would have shot 80% from the stripe as a team then they probably would have had a 100% chance of earning gold, pure and simple. It has to be the most simple play next to a layup in basketball.


----------



## DKaiser

bender said:


> Navarro plays like Steve Nash w/out the playmaking skills, which means he's an undersized off-guard with mediocre scoring abilities.


Note that in international play, there's no real division between point guard and shooting guard. Most teams have guys that play both...and Navarro's that type of a guard. Don't judge him by the number of points he makes. I watched him play in this year's Worlds. He just played it right.


----------



## DKaiser

BucketDawg said:


> If Team USA would have shot 80% from the stripe as a team then they probably would have had a 100% chance of earning gold, pure and simple.


Agree with the IF...but that's a bigger IF actually. IF they hit their FTs, IF they can shoot their jumpers, IF they play better team defense, etc. Fundamental things that have given way to windmill dunks and other fancy stuffs.


----------



## DKaiser

jaja said:


> would you say spain's 6th place or so finish in athens accurately reflected the strenght of the team?


Would you say Spain's Gold Medal finish (and their Dream Team-like dominance...except for that nail-biter against another USA conqueror, Argentina) accurately reflected the strength of that team?


----------



## BucketDawg

USA conqueror? didn't Argentina get smacked by 15 points, Argentina went down with a whimper.


----------



## DKaiser

Skydivedan said:


> Don't forget Darius Miles, Stromile Swift, Jason Williams, Antoine Walker, and just about anyone who didn't play college ball.


Yes...and like the infomercials would say..."But wait! there's more...."

There's Lamar Odom, Emeka Okafor, JR Smith, (would you say Lebron James fall in this category?), plus many, many more.


----------



## DKaiser

BucketDawg said:


> USA conqueror? didn't Argentina get smacked by 15 points, Argentina went down with a whimper.


There's a category which I'd like to call "USA conqueror"...to refer to those international teams that have joined in the beat-an-NBA-team chorus. Pioneered by Argentina (which accomplished this feat twice), this list includes the then-Yugoslavia, Spain, Lithuania, Italy (in a tune-up match), Puerto Rico, and Greece. I think soon to join this club will perhaps be Brazil, France, and if they can build around Nowitzki, then maybe Germany. 

These teams went the cerebral approach to beating team USA. During Athens, one writer described how Lithuania outplayed team USA (in the game that spoiled USA's chance to advance to the Gold medal round): it went something like...Lithuania was like dangling a bone to a hungry pack of wolves and then taking it away when they come to bite.

To team USA's credit, they're still among the teams to beat in international tournaments...but not hands-down the best team they used to be. Those days are gone. In those days, the NBA need only send an NBA team to a McDonald's Open and the championship was like a tradition. Now, even with careful selection of "stars", they could only salvage Bronze.


----------



## BucketDawg

"USA Conquerors".......wow.....I'm sure it took you a couple of days to think of a title that clever. Funny but the US has defeated FIBA darlings Argentina by an average margin of 24 points 2 out of the last 3 times they have faced them, and also defeated olympic frontrunner Spain by 8 points in Athens but you don't see most Americans, at least informed ones, coming up with oh so clever titles like "Argentina dominators" or "Spain humiliators" when they defeat these darlings at their own game, (except when its to mock posters much like yourself). Since you like to insinuate that USA Basketball is so inferior to the suppossed "true" basketball being played outside of the US, wouldn't the US losing in international competition be considered mundane, therefor making such a title insignificant. I see much to be impressed about with this latest version of Team USA, they came together, played hard, didn't complain even after their tough loss to Greece, but of course there are always posters like yourself who come along to get in their cheapshots. They went 8-1 in the worlds, 13-1 if you count the exhibitions, not bad when you consider that FIBA is a fairly different game to the one they usually play. They still medaled in each of the last two international competitions, which no other country has done, very impressive considering that posters like you claim they can't shoot, can't pass, can't defend, or don't play with heart, and if FIBA darlings are losing to such inferior USA teams that is an indictment on them as much as us. 

Oh and by the way, I don't understand how Lithuania eliminated the US from the "gold medal round" when it was Argentina that kept us from facing Italy in Athens, but I do remember Team USA smacking a very strong Lithuanian team in the bronze medal game though 104-96. They did defeat Team USA 94-90 in the preliminary round, but I don't see how that kept them from the "gold medal round" as you put it.


----------



## DKaiser

Well, even statements from team USA would indicate some admission that they're no longer hands-down the best team in the world. Isn't it what the thread is all about? Coach K said they came into the tournament expecting it as a step in a journey. By journey, of course, he meant journey to Gold or to being number again. If he were proclaiming team USA as the best in the world, there'd be no journey to speak of, wouldn't it? 

Lebron, with his high school education, went on saying that he was proud of the bronze medal finish and that it showed the team's improvement (which, he continued, was what the objective was all about). Improvement? Bronze in Athens to Bronze in FIBA Worlds 06 is called status quo. Improvement should have been a Silver or Gold in FIBA Worlds.


----------



## DKaiser

BucketDawg said:


> They went 8-1 in the worlds, 13-1 if you count the exhibitions, not bad when you consider that FIBA is a fairly different game to the one they usually play. They still medaled in each of the last two international competitions, which no other country has done, very impressive considering that posters like you claim they can't shoot, can't pass, can't defend, or don't play with heart, and if FIBA darlings are losing to such inferior USA teams that is an indictment on them as much as us.


Let me put this in perspective. Team USA has the most talented players in the world (nobody questions that), but they don't have the best team. By that, I mean, the best team that can execute on both ends of the floor. Talking about it is one thing. That's why there's FIBA Worlds/Olympics to put this question to rest. That recognition now belongs to Spain. They may not be there for long. But, for now, you can't take that away from them. They're the best at present and they'll be defending that title in the near future.

Team USA is now just among the top contenders. Nobody said they were a bad team. They're still one of the teams to beat. But the best team?...the title drought dating back 2002 should be enough to bring down their rankings. Just like a boxer loses his no. 1 rankings after losing in consecutive title fights. It's kinda silly to proclaim the bronze medalist as the best, right? Might as well make bronze the top prize.


----------



## BucketDawg

Hmmm....last time I checked 8-1 is an improvement over 5-3, but you can count right? Its been fun punching holes through both your witty, clever titles and arithmetic. But you seem pretty narrow-minded so I don't know if my retorts are sinking in. Seriously, how is the US even medaling since they are playing such an "inferior" brand of basketball to your FIBA darlings? You know, the ones you alledge play a "true" brand of basketball. Explain that one to me, I would be delighted to hear it. 

"Lebron, with his high school education", wow it only took you about an hour to bring that up, better than the few days it took to claim the title of "USA Conquerors," maybe you're not as much of an imbecile as I thought. Why shouldn't he be proud of his bronze medals? they came in two of the most competitive international tournaments in recent memory. So they didn't have the best team, they still have the best individuals, which doesn't guarantee anything, but increases the US's chance and helps alleviate some of the advantages that other teams have in cohesive teamwork.


----------



## BucketDawg

Ok, any team that truly wants to be ranked number 1 in the world, imo, can't take that ranking until they have to accept the responsibility of winning that USA has to deal with. Where even if you win, you lose, whereas no victory is decisive enough, teamwork can't be crisp enough, and every game, even exhibitions, matter. Spain may soon take that title, you never know, but if they do, they have to accept that responsibility.


----------



## DKaiser

BucketDawg said:


> So *they didn't have the best team*, they still have the best individuals, which doesn't guarantee anything.


There you go! See. You do agree they don't have the best team. What can I say?


----------



## DKaiser

BucketDawg said:


> Hmmm....last time I checked 8-1 is an improvement over 5-3, but you can count right?


Well, look at the bigger picture, Bronze = Bronze and Bronze < Gold. I'm sure Spain's not going to trade Gold for Bronze.


----------



## BucketDawg

Never did I once claim that they did have the best team, I admitted that they have serious problems with their FT's, and other than that all I did was defend them against your silly titles. Greece beat them, period. All I'm trying to do is defend them against posters such as yourself who still feel the need to attack them in any way or shape, such as Lebrons' intelligence. You seem to basically want "to have your cake and eat it too" with Team USA. You pounce on them when they lose one game, yet downplay their accomplishments when they achieve medals, which is an accomplishment since you and I both know that international competitions today are vastly more competitive. I'm sure your posts would be even more vindictive and narrow-minded had they lost to Argentina for the bronze.


----------



## DKaiser

BucketDawg said:


> Why shouldn't he be proud of his bronze medals?


I didn't say he shouldn't be proud of it. My point is moving from Bronze to Bronze is not quite the improvement in my book. Team USA should hold itself to a higher standard if they hope for real improvements (like Silver or Gold). They can't adopt the if-you-can't-beat-them-lower-your-standard mentality.

By the way, is Bronze a traded commodity in the Securities and Exchange market? Just curious.


----------



## BucketDawg

They have improved, they have improved in just about every statistical category from Athens, and they basically did it with complete improvisation on the offense the entire tournament. Still getting a medal was a success, this was a completely revamped team from the one in Athens, and most of these guys didn't have any international experience, at least any significant. They also had the least amount of time to prepare. You aren't helping your arguments by attacking their intelligence(a la Lebron), it just makes you look petty and foolish.


----------



## DKaiser

BucketDawg said:


> other than that all I did was defend them against your silly titles. Greece beat them, period. All I'm trying to do is defend them against posters such as yourself who still feel the need to attack them in any way or shape, such as Lebrons' intelligence.


Silly titles? You mean the "USA conquerors" title? That wasn't for team USA. That was for you-know-which-countries-beat-them. That title in fact should be a tribute to NBA-powered team USA, as foreign teams are looking at them as a Mt. Everest of basketball.

Lebron's intelligence? The reference to his "high school education" was to highlight the level of maturity (in terms of learning the fundamentals of the game) that pervade in the NBA of today. Now don't pretend there's not deterioration in terms of basketball fundamentals in the NBA. Wouldn't you advocate college education for these kids before they jump into the NBA?

Cheers!
:biggrin:


----------



## DKaiser

BucketDawg said:


> Still getting a medal was a success


Like I said...team USA should hold themselves to a higher standard. For crying out loud, you're talking about the NBA! not NCAA, not NBDL...to call Bronze a success? For an NCAA-assembled team, yes. For a team of elite NBA players? Not good enough. It's called appropriate expectation.


----------



## BucketDawg

It is a success, like I have pointed out many times, they are playing a somewhat different game to the one they usually play. This isn't 1992 any more, basketball is being played at a high level throughout the entire world, not just the NBA, and FIBA basketball plays to the strengths of non-NBA leagues. Now if they were to win the bronze medal while they were playing by NBA rules, with and NBA court, and NBA ball, and so on... then that would be a colossal failure, but they aren't. They are trying to adapt to a somewhat different game to the one they usually play. And if our fundamental abilities were as eroded as you would claim, then we wouldn't even medal in a competition that prides itself fully on fundamentals. Lebron has some strong fundamentals, but like you said, he is young and willing to learn, his shot and FT's, and defense are still iffy, but he is yound and will have time to improve, much like his idol Jordan did.


----------



## DKaiser

BucketDawg said:


> It is a success, like I have pointed out many times


The continuum of reactions range from COLOSSAL FAILURE at one extreme to SUCCESS at the other. DISAPPOINTMENT is somewhere in the middle. I'd say DISAPPOINTMENT (with optimism) is right on money with regards to their Bronze finish. After all, they came in as the top seed in the tournament.


----------



## BucketDawg

Disappointment with optimism is a realistic determination of this tournament. They have their sights set on Beijing, hopefully with a healthy Kobe. I still view it as a success just based off the adversity that they face, they also tied Yugoslavia with the most amount of medals claimed in the Worlds, which is another positive. I just get tired of seeing both the American and International medias hammering Team USA and trashing them for no other reason being that it is the "in" thing to do. If these weren't somewhat fundamental players then they wouldn't medal in such competitions. If you want to trash the 2002 team, then thats fine, they acted arrogantly and with disrespect to themselves and others, but every team since then has acted much better, I'm just tired of ignorant knee-jerk reactions from everybody (mostly Europeans) towards Team USA which are probably just politically driven.


----------



## DKaiser

I still say the best team that can be formed is in the US. They just have to mix and match properly. The presence of Kobe alone sends jitters to any opposing team. I'm sure international coaches are already scrambling for new strategies when he comes on board. This guy will be on all night when he plays.

About criticisms and name-calling. That should serve as motivation for future challenges for team USA. Michael Jordan fed on criticisms early in his career. When he first came in, people were saying he was just a scorer and can't play defense. He proved them wrong. People then said scorers don't win NBA titles. He proved them wrong again...six times.


----------



## futuristxen

DKaiser said:


> Lebron's intelligence? The reference to his "high school education" was to highlight the level of maturity (in terms of learning the fundamentals of the game) that pervade in the NBA of today. Now don't pretend there's not deterioration in terms of basketball fundamentals in the NBA. Wouldn't you advocate college education for these kids before they jump into the NBA?
> 
> Cheers!
> :biggrin:


Ricky Davis played in college. Lebron didn't. Who do you think has better fundementals?

College basketball doesn't mean jack.


----------



## futuristxen

DKaiser said:


> Like I said...team USA should hold themselves to a higher standard. For crying out loud, you're talking about the NBA! not NCAA, not NBDL...to call Bronze a success? For an NCAA-assembled team, yes. For a team of elite NBA players? Not good enough. It's called appropriate expectation.


This team isn't judged on the WC. We're building for the olympics. This team was better than the team we sent to Athens, but the things that cause us to lose in Athens, were only partially addressed. We need the time to overhaul USA basketball. We're going to be something amazing in 08. This team, plus Kobe and Oden, and 3 years of international experience under the same system and coach? good stuff.


----------



## DKaiser

futuristxen said:


> Ricky Davis played in college. Lebron didn't. Who do you think has better fundementals?
> 
> College basketball doesn't mean jack.


Actually, both have deficiencies in that department.

It's not college basketball that I'm talking about. It's college education. The NBA should be promoting the Grant Hills and the Tim Duncans as role models. These guys will still be productive in other endeavours when their basketball careers are over.

It's a pity how young guys aspiring for the NBA are treating college as a waste of time. The odds for making it in the league are stacked up against them...especially with the influx of foreign talent.


----------



## Skydivedan

DKaiser said:


> Let me put this in perspective. Team USA has the most talented players in the world (nobody questions that), but they don't have the best team. By that, I mean, the best team that can execute on both ends of the floor. Talking about it is one thing. That's why there's FIBA Worlds/Olympics to put this question to rest. That recognition now belongs to Spain. They may not be there for long. But, for now, you can't take that away from them. They're the best at present and they'll be defending that title in the near future.
> 
> Team USA is now just among the top contenders. Nobody said they were a bad team. They're still one of the teams to beat. But the best team?...the title drought dating back 2002 should be enough to bring down their rankings. Just like a boxer loses his no. 1 rankings after losing in consecutive title fights. It's kinda silly to proclaim the bronze medalist as the best, right? Might as well make bronze the top prize.


Rock on brother... couldn't have said it better myself.


----------



## Skydivedan

DKaiser said:


> Actually, both have deficiencies in that department.
> 
> It's not college basketball that I'm talking about. It's college education. The NBA should be promoting the Grant Hills and the Tim Duncans as role models. These guys will still be productive in other endeavours when their basketball careers are over.
> 
> It's a pity how young guys aspiring for the NBA are treating college as a waste of time. The odds for making it in the league are stacked up against them...especially with the influx of foreign talent.


If it wasn't for the faint hope of playing basketball in the NBA most of them would be pumpin' gas somewhere or working at White Castle.


----------



## Karolis

USA is not the best anymore, get over it.. The best teams are : Argentina, Greece, Spain, Lithuania.. these teams win because they play like TEAMS they know how to share the ball. And they have good coaches, no offense but Mike Krzevski or whatever his name is, is terrible.. I mean in the Semi finals of the World Championship, when USA played against Greece, Howard was playing very well, after the 2nd quarter, K took him out. WTF?? And Lebron was playing Center or PF for a while. WTF?? Does he think that he think that it's circus?? I dont care if everybody will disagree with me, but it's true. Coach K is not a good coach for and Olympic basketball team. Maybe he knows how to work with youth, but not with proffesionals.. I could name like 20 european coaches who are better than Coach K.. Ettore Messina, Jonas Kazlauskas, David Blatt, Zmago Sagadin, Pepu Hernández, Panagiotis Giannakis, Carlo Recalcati, Sergio Hernandez, Pinhas Gershon, Zelimir Obradovic, Dusko Ivanovic, Bozidar Malkovic, Dusan Ivkovic, Jasmin Repesa, Johan Plaza, Dirk Bauermann, Neven Spahia, Dragan Sakota..


----------



## BucketDawg

Karolis said:


> USA is not the best anymore, get over it.. The best teams are : Argentina, Greece, Spain, Lithuania.. these teams win because they play like TEAMS they know how to share the ball. And they have good coaches, no offense but Mike Krzevski or whatever his name is, is terrible.. I mean in the Semi finals of the World Championship, when USA played against Greece, Howard was playing very well, after the 2nd quarter, K took him out. WTF?? And Lebron was playing Center or PF for a while. WTF?? Does he think that he think that it's circus?? I dont care if everybody will disagree with me, but it's true. Coach K is not a good coach for and Olympic basketball team. Maybe he knows how to work with youth, but not with proffesionals.. I could name like 20 european coaches who are better than Coach K.. Ettore Messina, Jonas Kazlauskas, David Blatt, Zmago Sagadin, Pepu Hernández, Panagiotis Giannakis, Carlo Recalcati, Sergio Hernandez, Pinhas Gershon, Zelimir Obradovic, Dusko Ivanovic, Bozidar Malkovic, Dusan Ivkovic, Jasmin Repesa, Johan Plaza, Dirk Bauermann, Neven Spahia, Dragan Sakota..



How can Argentina and Lithuania be considered better when they finished behind the US in the Worlds? Lithuania is a strong basketball country and will still create top talent, but Argentina is in a golden generation but I don't see any up and coming players who will keep them in the top tier. The US team actually finished first in assists at the worlds but the only reason these guys are considered selfish is that they run mostly iso's. The US still produces the best individual talent, but no country will win every international tournament anymore. That's just not plausable. 

The US is just in a lose lose situation. If they win, they don't get any admiration because that is suppossedly what they should always do, but if they lose then they have no fundamentals, no team play, or no desire or some other nonsense. People expect too much from them, int. basketball is too competitive now. Look at Serbia/Yugoslavia, they have had horrible finishes by their standards the past few competitions but nobody is critisizing them.


----------

