USA loses to France in FIBA Quarterfinals
- Thread starter boilerzz
- Start date
I think its goes to show how significant the tiers of NBA players there are.
I know it being sarcastic but pop is the coach now. And we deserve to lose when the top 10 or more American born players chose not to play but guys like gobert and Giannis chose to play.
Even the American scrubs should be able to smoke an all-star team from any other country.
I've always loved this comment that Durant made a few years back. It's kind of funny, but I also sense that K wants to utilize the strengths of his players and he doesn't want them to feel restricted in any way
"But once I got to play [for] him, I was like, 'Wow, I should have looked at Duke a little bit more than I did.' ... He literally told me one time, I think it was 2010 [at the Worlds in Turkey], he was like, 'Don't pass the ball.' And I was like, 'All right, cool, that's the way I want to play.'"
Australia is in the semifinals with three starters that played at Saint Mary's. Let that sink in for a moment.
So do players just not want to play for Popovich like they did for Krzyzewski? Shouldn't we still have a better roster than France?
I think there is a roster full of wildly overpaid basketball players on team USA playing against teams of guys that barely make shit---and get beat by GD Serbia. Every player should be publicly shamed!!!!!!!!!!!
Also---as good as pop is, and respected as he is.....he is not Coack K
I used to think this way but I’m not sure if our 4th or 5th team can do it anymore. I miss the days watching our top 15 players all gang bang the rest of the world
I think it’s more to do with other countries for the most part the main sport is soccer. And the ultimate prize in soccer is the World Cup. So when they started doing the fiba World Cup, I think it means more to foreign countries than is does which is why u see players like gianis and jokic playing for their country when our probly top 10-15 American players decided not to play. We/the American players value the olympics more than the World Cup.
If our World Cup roster was an nba team I doubt they could even make the conference championship in either conference. I mean we had guys on the roster that have never even played in the nba all star game.
If our World Cup roster was an nba team I doubt they could even make the conference championship in either conference. I mean we had guys on the roster that have never even played in the nba all star game.
1. The US beat France in 2016 by 3 points, WITH Durant, Kyrie, etc...
2. "Load Management" is the new buzz word; players want to rest
3. World Cup is not the Olympics. I expect to see a better roster then
4. France has NBA talent too.
The 2004 team had D-Wade, LeBron, Carmelo - plus Tim Duncan and Allen Iverson in their prime. And that team lost 3 games. I'll concede that it was a poorly constructed team with limited outside shooting - and Stephon Marbury played too much. But on paper, you'd think the 04 team would have won without too much difficulty. The reality is, you need your A team, or at least your B team to win this thing. What really helps international teams, in comparison to Team USA, is they have continuity. The majority of the international guys have been playing together since they were teenagers.
All true. Our 2012 Olympic team was the best basketball team I’ve ever seen. I wasn’t around to watch the 92 team, but 12 might be the best basketball team of all time
Probably the best team this century. But, I'd still take 92 and 96 over them. The 96 team had 11 Hall of Famers on the team.
All 12 members of the '96 Olympic team made one of the 3 All-NBA Teams from 1996.
1995-96
FIRST TEAM
F: Scottie Pippen
F: Karl Malone
C: David Robinson
G: Michael Jordan
G: Anfernee Hardaway
SECOND TEAM
F: Grant Hill
F: Shawn Kemp
C: Hakeem Olajuwon
G: Gary Payton
G: John Stockton
THIRD TEAM
F: Charles Barkley
F: Juwan Howard
C: Shaquille O'Neal
G: Reggie Miller
G: Mitch Richmond
1995-96
FIRST TEAM
F: Scottie Pippen
F: Karl Malone
C: David Robinson
G: Michael Jordan
G: Anfernee Hardaway
SECOND TEAM
F: Grant Hill
F: Shawn Kemp
C: Hakeem Olajuwon
G: Gary Payton
G: John Stockton
THIRD TEAM
F: Charles Barkley
F: Juwan Howard
C: Shaquille O'Neal
G: Reggie Miller
G: Mitch Richmond
I didn’t know much about 96 but I would take 12 over that team. Lebron, Kobe, and KD alone are better than anyone on that team not named Michael
Why in the world should we shame the players that actually decided to represent their country? Taking a bunch of mid-tier NBA players and putting them together for a few weeks to play the national team of other countries that have (mostly) played as a unit for years is typically not going to end well for the USA.
Think it’s more about playing for Trump to be honest. It’s already a challenge to get them to play when they don’t get paid for it.
It's a legitimate argument. I could see it both ways. I just think the 96 team was more balanced. If you look at this ranking made by SLAM last year, you'll find the 96 team has 8 players in the top 50, meanwhile the 2012 has 5 guys in the top 50. And certainly guys like James Harden and Anthony Davis will inevitably climb into the the top 50, but those guys were #11 and #12 on the team in minutes.
I would agree that the 2012 team probably had more star-power with LeBron and KD. Kobe was still really good, too. But he was slightly on the decline, being almost 34. And USA Basketball has never really been dominated by just a few players the way many NBA teams are constructed. LeBron-KD-Kobe scoring output represented less than 40% of the team's total points. The 2012 team had 7 of the 15 players on the All-NBA teams - meanwhile the 1996 team had 12 of the 15 All-NBA players. On top of that, the 96 team won every game by 20+ points - conversely, the '2012 team had two single-digit victories (Lithuania and Spain).
Fair points and good stuff. I guess I’m looking at it in the sense that, what made 12 great was their ball movement and outright talent/athletic advantage. Any given game, you have 3 or 4 guys that can get you 30 a game. Just from looking at the 96 roster, it seems they are more big oriented. Guys that need to be set up and can’t get their own shot as easily.
The eras obviously have a lot to do with it. 12 would easily win the shooting battle and 96 would probably win rebounding and paint scoring. I would just have a hard time betting against Kobe, KD, and LBJ.
Your sarcasm was so evident in your font.
Hakeem, Malone, Barkley, and Stockton were all 33 of 34.
8 of the guys on the 1996 team were 30 or older. Only 4 were under 30.
I don't know if the ball movement was necessarily better. The '96 team actually averaged more assists per game. I would agree that the spacing was probably better with the '12 team, though. Certainly the game has evolved and players/coaches have figured out that there is a higher ceiling for winning if you surround yourself with good shooters. The '96 team, however, did have Reggie Miller and Mitch Richmond, who both have a higher career 3-pt shooting percentage than anyone on the 2012 team. The '12 team undoubtedly had more/better athletes, but the '96 wouldn't be overwhelmed, IMO. Penny, Grant Hill, and Pippen could all run the floor really well. Robinson and Olajuwon were incredible athletes for their size. But yes, overall, the 96 team was more big-oriented. It would be an interesting to see how the matchup would play out with the contrasting styles. I could see it going either way, but I'd still give the edge to '96.
If you wanna be fair Hakeem, and Stockton were top 50 on the SLAM list but 11th, and 12th in scoring on that team (I cant find minutes from them).
And all 12 of the guys on the 96 team made one of the All-NBA teams.
Kobe Bryant had a PER of 21.9 in 2012. Between the seasons of 2001-2009, he was never below 23. So yes, he was still very good, but like I said, slightly in the decline. And Karl Malone won the MVP in 97 and 99.
Yes, but all three of those guys also started some games. It was pretty obvious that the '96 team had balanced scoring and minutes. Harden/Davis combined for less than 17 minutes a game. Stockton was getting close to 2 steals per game.
Who started for those two teams? Based on numbers it look like:
Gary Payton
Reggie Miller
Scottie Pippen
Charles Barkley
David Robinson
Chris Paul
Kobe Bryant
Kevin Durant
LeBron James
Kevin Love
Gary Payton
Reggie Miller
Scottie Pippen
Charles Barkley
David Robinson
Chris Paul
Kobe Bryant
Kevin Durant
LeBron James
Kevin Love
I’m just saying it’s not as saying “xxx were career top 50” and just knocking Kobe for being past his prime. It’s not like 33 and 34 year old Hakeem and Stockton were in their prime.
Go back to the original argument.
I'm not knocking him based on his age, just pointing out that he was declining a little bit. I agreed with Jimbo that the 2012 team had more star power. I just don't agree that the 2012 version of Kobe is better than everyone on the 1996 team. He was still a heckuva of a player at almost 34. But, his productivity had gone down a little bit.
Bringing up top 50 players is a separate argument. The 1996 had better balance on the team, that was my point. The 96 team had 11 Hall of Famers, and it probably would have been 12 had Penny not been set back by injuries. All 12 of the guys on the roster were among the 15 best players in the world at the time, if you give any credence to the 3 All-NBA Teams. The 2012 USA Team only had 7 guys make one of the All NBA Teams. 96 had more balance - and 2012 had more star power.
The top 50 all time rankings are based on full careers and you’re not being fair if you aren’t at least acknowledging that a handful of those players were already on the decline in their careers.
But were they really on the decline? Sure, 1996 may not have been the best or second best season for many. But, these guys were still stars. 12 of the 12 guys on the roster made an All-NBA Team (the 2012 team only had 7 guys make the All-NBA Teams). There were no ho-hum players on the 96 team. Penny Hardaway was the only non-Hall of Famer and he was a 1st Team All-NBA selection in 1996.
So let's look at the old guy on the team in 2012, Kobe Bryant.
Kobe Bryant
Career Player Efficiency Rating Average: 22.9
2012 PER: 21.9 (-1.0)
He had a slight decline in 2012 from his career average, just as I mentioned. Yes, he was still very, very good. But, the 2012 Kobe wasn't quite in the same class as LeBron or KD, IMO. And like I said before, 2012 had more star-power with LBJ and KD, but I think 96 had better balance and better overall players. Now, here are the 4 older guys that you pointed out:
Charles Barkley
Career Player Efficiency Rating Average: 24.6
1996 PER: 24.8 (+0.2)
3rd Team All-NBA
Karl Malone
Career Player Efficiency Rating Average: 23.9
1996 PER: 26.0 (+2.1)
1st Team All-NBA
Hakeem Olajuwon
Career Player Efficiency Rating Average: 23.6
1996 PER: 25.5 (+1.9)
2nd Team All-NBA
John Stockton
Career Player Efficiency Rating Average: 21.8
1996 PER: 21.9 (+0.1)
3rd Team All-NBA
On top of that, remember who made it to the 1997 Western Conference Finals. That's right, Houston and Utah, led by Barkley/Olajuwon and Malone/Stockton, respectively... Olajuwon was one year removed from winning two ships, he won the MVP in 94. Barkley was the most productive player on the 96 team. Malone and Stockton went to the NBA Finals in back-to-back seasons (and gave the Bulls a run for their money) following the 96 Olympics. And Malone went on to win 2 MVPs in 97 and 99. Yes, these guys were all still very, very talented. If we're talking about the same players four years later then certainly this is a different story. But in 1996, there was little to no drop-off in terms of production.
