# L.A. Lakers: Team USA?



## Sean (Jun 7, 2002)

Some highlights:

Phil Jackson says he is thinking seriously about coaching the U.S. Olympic team. And there's one factor that might make his decision easier: being able to coach his Lakers in next summer's qualifying tournament and then in the 2004 Olympics.

Jackson said Lakers general manager Mitch Kupchak has talked with him about it before, and the topic came up at the NBA coaches meeting in Chicago last month. Jackson said he had always declined in the past because of the lack of time to work in his system.

"But with the loss [in the world championships] last month, a couple of coaches asked me if I would be willing," Jackson said. "They said, 'You should.' And Kobe [Bryant] and Shaq [O'Neal] came to me and said if I coached the team in the Olympics, they'd play. That sent another obligation along with it. But I said, 'What, you're not going to play if I don't coach?'

"Coaching in the Olympics has more interest to me now. Especially after those incentives by colleagues and my players, who should be playing on the international team because they are terrific players who would make our chances better."

Asked about coaching if his three-time NBA champion Lakers were the U.S. representative, Jackson brightened.

"That interests me a lot," he said. "Now we have this Dream Team concept where we get the greatest individuals and they play one-on-one rather than team basketball. That's not the way basketball is played. New Zealand played the triangle. Argentina was passing and cutting all connected to each other. They were playing better basketball as a team than our team, though they weren't as talented. Yes, there's a way to do it, and I would do it if we were asked."

The U.S. sent AAU or military teams to the world championships in the 1950s, and in 1978 sent the Athletes in Action team. Sending the NBA champions would settle one issue that has confounded USA Basketball: how to put together a team on short notice. The pro league champion would also be an appropriate representative of American basketball.

With a qualifying tournament next summer, it would be appropriate to name the Lakers now because they are defending champions and they could then move on to the 2004 Olympics. 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...smith,0,5291427.column?coll=cs-home-headlines


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

They should let Fisher play on the team as well, I think he would do better than a second-tier star PG that doesn't know Phil or his system.


----------



## Sean (Jun 7, 2002)

I think that was the point of the article; the entire Lakers squad (or Recent NBA Champion team) would be the representative for the USA. It really does make the title of "World Champions" more correct. But it's just an idea, nothing is happening right now.


----------



## JGKoblenz (Jul 19, 2002)

They would have won the World Championship.
That's for sure. :yes:


----------



## JYD (Sep 3, 2002)

I think it would be great but reality is, it's not going to happen.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

Just another way for the Lakers to show thier arrogance.


----------



## JGKoblenz (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> Just another way for the Lakers to show thier arrogance.


Hey, I think the Team USA should be the NBA Champions not necessarily the Lakers! It's not arrogant, it's only a way to make a more powerfull team. Or you think USA should send the same team that lost the World Championship to the Olympics?


----------



## <<<D>>> (Jul 15, 2002)

That would be good and I'm sure they'll get the job done :yes:


----------



## Wiggum (Jul 29, 2002)

I'm in favor of sending the championship team to the Olympics. It's pretty arrogant that people are still calling the Lakers the World Champions, even though the U.S. came in sixth place in the World Championships. Think about it. How arrogant is that? The idea of "U.S. champions = World Champions" is based on the assumption that U.S. basketball is so far above everything else that it really doesn't matter that there was no tournament. But when the U.S. comes in SIXTH PLACE, it's time to stop calling ourselves the world champions, guys! If the NBA champions (whoever they will be) go to the Olympics and win, THEN we can start calling them the world champions again. So, yeah, I support that.


----------



## CelticsRule (Jul 22, 2002)

wiggum we should still call ourselves world champions if we send a group of second tier nba players (they all were except pierce and marion) then what should we expect if we sent a team with our best players shaq kobe tmac pierce duncan etc. then we would win, every other country sends their best and they practice together if we had a group of our best players who knew each other well and had played together (the LAKERS) then we could win the olympics or world championship


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wiggum</b>!
> I'm in favor of sending the championship team to the Olympics. It's pretty arrogant that people are still calling the Lakers the World Champions, even though the U.S. came in sixth place in the World Championships.



You've got to be kidding me. The NBA champions would mop up any team from any country in the world. If you think otherwise then it has more to do with your distaste for the Lakers than anything else. I bet if the Kings were to represent the NBA you would crown them the world champions wouldn't you? Don't answer that, I already know you will deny it.




> Think about it. How arrogant is that? The idea of "U.S. champions = World Champions" is based on the assumption that U.S. basketball is so far above everything else that it really doesn't matter that there was no tournament.




It's not arrogance, it's the truth. U.S. team ball is THAT FAR ahead of the rest of the world. You take the top ten teams in the NBA and they run the table at the Olympics. PERIOD!





> But when the U.S. comes in SIXTH PLACE, it's time to stop calling ourselves the world champions, guys! If the NBA champions (whoever they will be) go to the Olympics and win, THEN we can start calling them the world champions again. So, yeah, I support that.



You can stop calling the U.S. the world champions, but considered yourself laughed out of any real discussions regarding world bball.

NBA=Real world champions.

Olympics=The rest of the world


----------



## Wiggum (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>celticsrule0873</b>!
> wiggum we should still call ourselves world champions if we send a group of second tier nba players (they all were except pierce and marion) then what should we expect if we sent a team with our best players shaq kobe tmac pierce duncan etc. then we would win, every other country sends their best and they practice together if we had a group of our best players who knew each other well and had played together (the LAKERS) then we could win the olympics or world championship


Well, you can speculate about that all you want, but the fact is, the U.S. made a team, sent it off to play against other national teams, and came in sixth place. And even if that weren't the case, have the Lakers (or whoever the NBA champions are) played against any national teams? No. If they haven't played against any other national teams, they aren't the world champions. That will still be true of the Kings if they win the NBA championship in 2003. It's really no more complicated than that. You can say "Oh, well, we WOULD win if we played" but the fact still remains. They DIDN'T play, they DIDN'T beat international teams, they're NOT the world champions. I say we start sending our NBA champions if we want to call them the world champions, too.


----------



## Wiggum (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>buduan</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ALL of that is speculation. Granted, it's *PROBABLY* true, but the fact is, WE DON'T KNOW WHO WILL WIN A GAME BEFORE IT'S PLAYED. Based on that idea, the NBA shouldn't even play the Lakers vs. Bulls games next season. They're the better team, so they'll win, right? Well, it just so happens the Bulls went 2-0 against the Lakers in '01-'02. Those are FACTS, not SPECULATIONS. You have to play the games before you start handing out titles, guys...I realize that we Americans are incredibly arrogant, self-congratulatory people, but come on...how classless can we possibly be?


----------



## hogey11 (Aug 30, 2002)

I agree Wiggum

Buduan, whose to say that the team we sent to the WBC wouldnt destroy the lakers themselves? In an NBA setting, i think it could happen. The americans lost because of arrogance. Not because of talent. They put together a team last minute, yes. They felt no one could touch them, yes. But bare with me for just a moment: Is it possible that some of these players play BETTER basketball than nba players do? Is it possible that they have a better concept of the team and therefore play as a whole better?

If you just dismissed the argument above then you have just committed the same crime that you persecuted others of. Please, tell me, how is US team ball SO MUCH farther ahead than International team ball. I actually remember a post a while back that commented on Hanno Mottola's introduction to european ball. He said it was much faster, much more team oriented. I think the comments you made were completely arrogant (i'm sorry but thats my opinion) and that the Lakers would walk into the tournament with the exact same attitude that the americans we did send had. and because of that, i think they would be just as vulnerable as the US team was. PERIOD.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Come on man now I know of your bias against the Lakers but you gotta give the Lakers that much credit, They'd DESTROY any of the teams at the World Championships, The Lakers are an actual team that has years of playing together so yes I'm saying I can guarantee that before they play the game, Arrogance are you serious the two best players Arguably in the league, they'd hammer any team in the World, we sent a 2nd rate team of pros to play we send our A Team being the Lakers case closed. I'd take the Kings minus Divac, Peja and Hedo and they'd win the Worlds. 

How can it be classless to suggest the Lakers would win the World Champiomships, losing to the Bulls in a meaningless regular season game wouldn't hardly have the impact nor the importance of playing in the Worlds, thats why the Lakers don't struggle in the playoffs when the sense of urgency is there the Lakers mop up they did beat the higher seeded Kings and Spurs in the Playoffs right, so the importance of playing the lowly Bulls isn't even a solid point to make thats why that rational is ridiculous. Whats with the throwing around of the word arrogant is that a new word some of you have just learned, the didn't lose the Worlds because of ARROGANCE as you suggest not talent alone that comment in it self is ARROGANT, we lost the worlds because we lost to a better team plain and simple, why does everybody associate with being a champion with being the most talented, if that was the case then the Kings or Mavericks would have been champions, we lost the Worlds to a talented team who had a lot of experience PLAYING TOGETHER AS A UNIT, thats why we lost our talent wasn't so overwhelming as to beat a team that plays with good talent and chemistry, I'd bet the Lakers could beat an allstar team of the rest of the players in the NBA just based on their teams chemistry and ability to know each others role. OUR only arrogance as a country was to think a team of Allstars could beat a team that collectively that was more cohesive and more experience playing together. 

I'm American and I know alot of Americans who aren't arrogant, or self congratulatory, that may be the perception of others outside of this country but that comes from an uninformed perspective, I guess Canadians are Arrogant because they feel confident that they have the Worlds best Hockey team, confidence isn't arrogance when in basketball with the pro's we suffered our 1st defeat ,just our 1st why shouldn't we be confident that we can beat the rest of the World,its like calling the Kings a Laker rival when they've yet to beat the Lakers, when the World shows they can consistently beat our best guys I guess most of us will be arrogant as you call it, even the teams who beat us acknowledge if we sent our very best they wouldn't stand a chance, so the arrogance continues.


----------



## MightyReds2020 (Jul 19, 2002)

IMO, it is just a shame to call the first-place team in a regional competition a "world champion", no matter how dominant the country is in the world scheme and no matter how many international players the leauge has. It is a total disrespect to other countries, that's part of the reason why so many people hate US I guess. NBA Champ = World Champ? MLB Finals = World Series? What the hell...


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Probably a shame to call the NBA the best league in the world probably better to say the Italian Pro League is the best league in the World thats why all the players whom are drafted from other countries say the NBA is the best league in the world it'd be totally arrogant to deduce that if this is the best league then this is where the best team plays how foolish, MLB I guess is second to the Japanese as well as the Mexican independant leagues, wow just think of us Americans arrogance.


----------



## Wiggum (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> Come on man now I know of your bias against the Lakers but you gotta give the Lakers that much credit, They'd DESTROY any of the teams at the World Championships, The Lakers are an actual team that has years of playing together so yes I'm saying I can guarantee that before they play the game, Arrogance are you serious the two best players Arguably in the league, they'd hammer any team in the World, we sent a 2nd rate team of pros to play we send our A Team being the Lakers case closed. I'd take the Kings minus Divac, Peja and Hedo and they'd win the Worlds.
> 
> How can it be classless to suggest the Lakers would win the World Champiomships, losing to the Bulls in a meaningless regular season game wouldn't hardly have the impact nor the importance of playing in the Worlds, thats why the Lakers don't struggle in the playoffs when the sense of urgency is there the Lakers mop up they did beat the higher seeded Kings and Spurs in the Playoffs right, so the importance of playing the lowly Bulls isn't even a solid point to make thats why that rational is ridiculous. Whats with the throwing around of the word arrogant is that a new word some of you have just learned, the didn't lose the Worlds because of ARROGANCE as you suggest not talent alone that comment in it self is ARROGANT, we lost the worlds because we lost to a better team plain and simple, why does everybody associate with being a champion with being the most talented, if that was the case then the Kings or Mavericks would have been champions, we lost the Worlds to a talented team who had a lot of experience PLAYING TOGETHER AS A UNIT, thats why we lost our talent wasn't so overwhelming as to beat a team that plays with good talent and chemistry, I'd bet the Lakers could beat an allstar team of the rest of the players in the NBA just based on their teams chemistry and ability to know each others role. OUR only arrogance as a country was to think a team of Allstars could beat a team that collectively that was more cohesive and more experience playing together.
> ...


You've *completely* missed my point.

Guys, I'm not saying the Lakers wouldn't win. Odds are, they would. But YOU CAN'T DECLARE A WINNER BEFORE THE GAME HAPPENS. It doesn't matter how good Team A is and how bad Team B is. That's why the games are played in the first place. I brought up the Bulls vs. Lakers games to cite an example of why you have to play the games; SOMETIMES the unexpected happens. You people keep bringing up what *would* happen if the Lakers played in the Olympics, not realizing THAT DOESN'T MATTER. What matters is that the Lakers HAVEN'T played in the Olympics, so they're NOT the world champions! End of story! You're not the world champion if you haven't won the world championship! I don't care how good you are! The same thing goes for Jordan's Bulls, Bird's Celtics, Thomas' Pistons, etc.


----------



## JGKoblenz (Jul 19, 2002)

I suport you 100% Wiggum!!!

I always thought that americans are arrogants! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

Bottom line Wiggum, the U.S. team lost because of poor coaching. Plain and simple. They had the superior talent and athletes. Their coach did not prepare them properly, they didn't seem aware of international rules, and the substitutions were horrible.


A team that has played and won together on the highest level of competition the last 3 years running would not suffer the from the same issues. One of the 2 greatest coaches would have his team prepared to play international rules, and his team would be prepared to play at a championship level.

A team that has lost only 5 times in the playoffs in the last years would lose in the WBC? You would have us believe there is a possibility that they would lose not once but twice? Even three times?

You honestly think there is a even remote possibility that they would get knocked out of gold medal contention?

I can't argue with apparent [strike]ignorance[/strike]. You win. 

The topic of this thread is just an idea. It's not ignorance to have differing OPINIONS. Wiggum made his point, you made yours. Move on.


----------



## Wink (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JGKoblenz</b>!
> 
> 
> Hey, I think the Team USA should be the NBA Champions not necessarily the Lakers! It's not arrogant, it's only a way to make a more powerfull team. Or you think USA should send the same team that lost the World Championship to the Olympics?


What do you do then say if Dallas or Sacramento win the championship this year...and you have a good portion of your team who are not american...Sacramento would not be able to send, Peja, Hedo, or Vlade...all key players on there team...Dallas would be a bottom of the barrel team without the likes of Nash, Dirk, Najera etc. the only non american of any importance to the Lakers is Fox...who can easily be replaced by someone who knows Phil and the Triangle...even Scottie Pippin would be a decent sub for fox to replace Fox if the Lakers were sent to the olympics. But if you lose a quarter of your team how do you go about selecting there replacements? drop Drink pick up KG? Drop Nash pick up Baron Davis or Steve Francis, drop Najera pick up someone say the likes of a Ron Artest? drop Vlade pick up maybe Brad Miller? drop Pega pick up someone like Allan Houston, drop Hedo pick up Bender or Harrington....how would you guys go about this selection process?


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Come on Wiggum I didn't miss your point lets gain some perspective about this the WBC as you call it , You acknowledge I'm probably right then you say NO the Lakers aren't the World Champs, answer this where's the best competiton the WBC or the NBA if you answer this question we can cut through the rhetoric, if the NBA is the best league and the Lakers are the best team in the best league, than why is it crazy to deduce that the Lakers are the World CHAMPS, do you really consider the winner of the Olympic gold medal in basketball the best basketball team in the world. If you do than you really don't know much about basketball sad to say, if you're just saying for titles sake and not actual playing sake that the WBC or Olympics should wear that official crown irregardless if there's a better team in the world that most all of the players competing acknowlege as the best, then I'll concede your point that technically you're right but literally you're wrong. 

I guess its like boxing most people consider Lennox Lewis the heavyweight champ but John Ruis technically has a belt that says he is the champ, wow what arrogance by Lewis, The Lakers have World Champs on their rings but Yugoslavia has a trophy that says World Champs, how arrogant of the Lakers. 

As for your point about the Bulls does anybody consider the Bulls a better team than the Lakers Hell No so using a meaningless regular season game against an inferior opponent is silly I guess for arguments sake the next time I see the lakers play the Nuggets another team they lost to, I'll sit on pins and needle's waiting to find out who's the better team, something I already know. And thats the crux of my point while not technically done practically I know the Lakers are the worlds best.


----------



## Wiggum (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>buduan</b>!
> Bottom line Wiggum, the U.S. team lost because of poor coaching. Plain and simple. They had the superior talent and athletes. Their coach did not prepare them properly, they didn't seem aware of international rules, and the substitutions were horrible.
> 
> 
> ...


No, you know what? It's even plainer and simpler than bad coaching. The U.S. Team didn't win, PERIOD. NO EXCUSES. The Kings were without Peja Stojakovic for the Western Conference Finals, but that's not a reason to complain. The Kings didn't win, PERIOD. NO EXCUSES. It's that simple. It's about PLAYING THE GAMES, NOT WHO IS BEST ON PAPER. Isn't that what you Lakers fans have been saying all off-season?


----------



## Wiggum (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> Come on Wiggum I didn't miss your point lets gain some perspective about this the WBC as you call it , You acknowledge I'm probably right then you say NO the Lakers aren't the World Champs, answer this where's the best competiton the WBC or the NBA if you answer this question we can cut through the rhetoric, if the NBA is the best league and the Lakers are the best team in the best league, than *1.) why is it crazy to deduce that the Lakers are the World CHAMPS, do you really consider the winner of the Olympic gold medal in basketball the best basketball team in the world.* If you do than you really don't know much about basketball sad to say, if you're just saying for titles sake and not actual playing sake that the WBC or Olympics should wear that official crown irregardless if there's a better team in the world that most all of the players competing acknowlege as the best, then *2.) I'll concede your point that technically you're right but literally you're wrong.*
> 
> I guess its like boxing most people consider Lennox Lewis the heavyweight champ but John Ruis technically has a belt that says he is the champ, wow what arrogance by Lewis, *3.) The Lakers have World Champs on their rings but Yugoslavia has a trophy that says World Champs, how arrogant of the Lakers.*
> ...


1.) No, I don't think the Olympic champions are the best team in basketball; the NBA champions probably are. I've already said that multiple times, so don't cling to that argument. It has absolutely nothing to do with who is best; it has to do with who won the WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP.

2.) Yes, I *am* right. I'm not "literally wrong"...the Lakers haven't won the world championship, so they're not the world champions. It's a pretty simple point.

3.) To make myself more clear, I'm not saying the Lakers are arrogant any moreso than the people calling the Lakers the world champions (that applies to any NBA champions in the past, as well). Americans assume that they are the best at everything. In the case of basketball, they are probably right. But we can't call ourselves the World Champions if the championship wasn't won by the U.S. That's just basic logic.

4.) Yes, you did miss my point about the Bulls. I'm using the Bulls as an example of WHY you have to play the games. SOMETIMES (albeit, not often) the unexpected happens. I'm NOT saying the NBA champions would lose. I'M NOT SAYING THE NBA CHAMPIONS WOULD LOSE. I'M NOT SAYING THE NBA CHAMPIONS WOULD LOSE. Get that into your heads. I'm saying you MUST play the games before you hand out titles.

5.) World's best maybe. Not world champions.


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

Any way you want to look at it, NBA champs=world champs.

Very few people will agree with you, if any at all.

And what does Peja not playing have anything to do with what I said? Fox would have shut him down anyway. Proven fact.

The best ball in the world is played in the NBA? Would you agree? Agreed.

The Lakers are the best team in the NBA. Agreed? Agreed.

Therefore they are the WORLD CHAMPIONS.

End of story.

Just like if the Kings, Mavs, or Spurs were NBA champions, they would be the World Champs.


----------



## Wiggum (Jul 29, 2002)

I cannot believe this. You people are not reading what I am saying.

OK, just to make this VERY CLEAR, I have here the www.dictionary.com definition of "champion"...

cham·pi·on
n. 
1. One that wins first place or first prize in a competition. 
2. One that is clearly superior or has the attributes of a winner: a champion at teaching. 
3. An ardent defender or supporter of a cause or another person: a champion of the homeless. 
4. One who fights; a warrior.

Definitions #3 and #4 don't apply here, so they're out, and #2 is too broad to apply in a phrase as specific as "the world champions" so it's out too. That leaves only #1: "One that wins first place or first prize in a competition." Well, they have two world basketball competitions; the WBC, and the Olympics. Did the Lakers win either of those? No. Therefore, they're not the World Champions. END OF DISCUSSION.


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

And YOU aren't listening. Where is the best ball played Wiggum? Nba, Olympics, or Worlds? Your first definition fits the Lakers perfectly. They are the champions of the highest level of competitive ball.

Give it up. You lost this conversation a long time ago.


----------



## Wiggum (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>buduan</b>!
> And YOU aren't listening. Where is the best ball played Wiggum? Nba, Olympics, or Worlds? Your first definition fits the Lakers perfectly. They are the champions of the highest level of competitive ball.


I've made my arguments; you've just decided not to read them. They make sense; read them through and you'll eventually understand them. But, if you don't, I'll lay out my point very simply and plainly.

The NBA champions are not the World Champions because they are not the product of an international championship tournament.

That's all I'm saying. Really, that's it.


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

Ahh, I see. I can hold a tournament without the best talent in the world, call it International competition, and the winner is declared the world champ.

Is the reason you haven't answered the question "where is the best ball played, NBA, Worlds, or Olympics" because you know it shatters your argument?


----------



## Scuall (Jul 25, 2002)

Buduan -

Your points are argumentative and not "factual". Wiggum makes a good point that the NBA champs are just that - NBA champs, and not world champs. The only athletic forum in which basketball is played as a world championship, i.e. Soccer's World Cup, is the World Championships.

That being said, here is my take on the issue. I believe that any NBA team, not just the Lakers or the top 10 teams, could dethrone Yugoslavia as the "World Champs." The key is not necessarily the players (as proven by many countries), but rather teamplay and knowledge of the international game is what is crucial.


----------



## Wiggum (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>buduan</b>!
> Is the reason you haven't answered the question "where is the best ball played, NBA, Worlds, or Olympics" because you know it shatters your argument?


I have answered that question several times over before you even asked it. To quote myself...



> Guys, I'm not saying the Lakers wouldn't win. Odds are, they would.





> No, I don't think the Olympic champions are the best team in basketball; the NBA champions probably are. I've already said that multiple times, so don't cling to that argument.





> I'm NOT saying the NBA champions would lose. I'M NOT SAYING THE NBA CHAMPIONS WOULD LOSE. I'M NOT SAYING THE NBA CHAMPIONS WOULD LOSE. Get that into your heads.


Have you even read my posts...? 

Whether or not the NBA champions WOULD win is a moot point. It's whether or not they HAVE won. In this case, the NBA champions have not won an world-wide championship, so they're not the world-wide champions. I really don't understand why this is still an argument.


----------



## JYD (Sep 3, 2002)

What does FIBA stand for? Is it like the international competition?

F= ?
I= International?
B= Basketball?
A= Association?


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Scuall</b>!
> Buduan -
> 
> Your points are argumentative and not "factual".



Here what is factual, the NBA champs are the world champs. Which means no team in the world can beat them. Has a NBA team that travels overseas in the preseason ever lost to a foreign country? No.

There is a reason that the worlds best international players come over hear to play. They can get paid the same or more in their own country. THEY know that the best ball is played here. If they want to be considered world class, they come here.

Anybody that thinks that the WBC champion is the world champion is kidding themselves. Or is blinded by their own hate for the current champ. Judging by Wiggums avatar I will classify him as the latter.


----------



## Wiggum (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>buduan</b>!
> Anybody that thinks that the WBC champion is the world champion is kidding themselves. Or is blinded by their own hate for the current champ. Judging by Wiggums avatar I will classify him as the latter.


What do the Cincinnati Royals have to do with this...? :laugh:


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>buduan</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wow, you're really underestimating other countries. It's because of attitudes like this that the US came in sixth place in WBC. Get a reality check guys. There's more in the basketball world than just the NBA. NBA championship does not equal world championship.


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

If the Lakers are sent over for the next Olympics (or even Shaq, Kobe and Phil for that matter) please come back for your helping of crow. There will be plenty for everybody.:yes:


----------



## Wiggum (Jul 29, 2002)

Buduan, I'm starting to lose patience with you. You're not listening to what I'm saying, and it's hard for me to have an intelligent conversation with someone who isn't listening. If you were paying attention, you would have read the post that started this whole thing, in which I said I *supported* sending the NBA champions to the Olympics because if we did and they won, we could legitimately call them the world champions.

And I still want to know what the Cincinnati Royals have to do with this.


----------



## Scuall (Jul 25, 2002)

"Here what is factual, the NBA champs are the world champs. Which means no team in the world can beat them."

I don't remember my favorite team going 82-0 and undefeated in the playoffs.

"Has a NBA team that travels overseas in the preseason ever lost to a foreign country? No."

No, but I know of an NBA-represented team that recently played in the USA, and lost several games to some pretty overwhelmed countries. No team is unbeatable.


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wiggum</b>!
> Buduan, I'm starting to lose patience with you. You're not listening to what I'm saying, and it's hard for me to have an intelligent conversation with someone who isn't listening.



I'm not listening to what you are saying, because you aren't saying anything.

And I would think you would have a hard time having a intelligent conversation with anyone using your logic.

My only problem with your argument is that you proclaim the WBC champ the world champ. When even my 7 year old knows that the NBA champ is recognized as the world champ. Just because you slap the title "World Basketball Champs" on a tourney doesn't make the winner the "World Champs."

I can't believe a true basketball fan would believe for a second that the WBC champ is the world champ.

But YOU ARE a Kings fan. So excuses are pretty common up there. Anyway to discredit the Lakers, and you guys are all over it. Very sad. Give credit where credit is due.

The Lakers are world champs. End of discussion


----------



## buduan (Jun 10, 2002)

> I don't remember my favorite team going 82-0 and undefeated in the playoffs.


Either you are being sarcastic or you aren't the brightest light bulb. I'll assume the latter and explain I was referring to the rest of the world not including the NBA.




> No, but I know of an NBA-represented team that recently played in the USA, and lost several games to some pretty overwhelmed countries. No team is unbeatable.


3


True. They beat us. I can't argue that. I won't make excuses. Send the Lakers or the current world champ at the time of the 2004 Olympics and it will be a thorough whooping.

As a matter of fact, just send over our best players and it will be the return of the 20-30 pt. blowouts.

The world champ is the best team in the world, right?

That's the Lakers, right?

I can't believe I'm having to explain this to you guys.


----------



## Sean (Jun 7, 2002)

I'm sorry I even started this thread.

Everyone's made their points. Pm me if you feel there is more to add. For now, it's done.


----------

