PDA

View Full Version : NBA Champions



Shelly
08-27-2004, 05:06 PM
Dick Vitale on tv saying that the U.S. should send the NBA champions to the Olympics. Obviously substituting foreign players.

Thoughts?

IcemanCometh
08-27-2004, 05:07 PM
Dick Vitale is a moron

adidas11
08-27-2004, 05:08 PM
Completely disagree. That is the worst idea ever.

The whole idea of national teams, is that we're supposed to send our best players. The reason they aren't playing well, is because our system for choosing and integrating the players is complete ass.

You don't send club teams to play in international competitions.

Shelly
08-27-2004, 05:09 PM
Well, I guess his reasoning is because it is a club and not a bunch of great players trying to play as a team in 3 weeks.

KoriEllis
08-27-2004, 05:09 PM
Many others have proposed the same thing. I don't think NBA owners would go for it because they wouldn't want the injuries. And I don't think the players for the most would go for it because they wouldn't want to give their time.

Some things definitely need to change though.

adidas11
08-27-2004, 05:12 PM
Shelly, the whole concept of a national team, is that you're supposed to send your best players, and integrate them into a true team concept.

You don't send club teams. Other countries don't send their club teams. And what are you going to do if you have international players on your club team? What does Dallas do if they are the NBA champs, but they have to go without Dirk Nowitzki?

Shelly
08-27-2004, 05:15 PM
Well, obviously it hasn't worked in the past few years, adidas.

And outside of the few international players that play in the NBA, haven't most of the teams played together for years unlike the USA?

Oh, and I'm not trying to pick a fight, so don't take it that way :)

Aggie Hoopsfan
08-27-2004, 05:21 PM
If you want to send a champion, send a college team.

They'll know how to beat a zone at least.

timvp
08-27-2004, 05:24 PM
The US isn't going to win any more gold medals. These are other teams are too good and they are only getting better. The US would have to get all their best players to go ... and it's not going to happen, especially how the country gave up on this team after the first game.

Let the college kids go and pray for a miracle. That's the best the US can do. Winning with NBA players can't happen anymore.

adidas11
08-27-2004, 05:24 PM
Shelly, the reason it hasn't worked in the past several years is due to our process. We don't have a full time coach, who devotes his job to evaluating and selecting players for the team. And the team almost never gets together for training and games.

And sending college players is even a worse idea. They would get stomped by the foreign professional players.

Shelly
08-27-2004, 05:32 PM
Per Pop's quote in the Post Game quotes thread.

On Argentina:
"Their execution showed the many years the played together. They shot the ball particularly well and that helped them to get the victory".

I think that means something.

timvp
08-27-2004, 05:32 PM
The rest of the world has caught up. Deal with it. They are only going to get better ... this is just the tip of the iceburg.

I don't know if the original Dream Team would have taken gold here. They probably would but I doubt they'd go undefeated.

KoriEllis
08-27-2004, 05:36 PM
I don't think the rest of the world has caught up to the NBA elite. But I don't think the elite players will ever go unless they have something stipulating in their contracts that they have to go if asked. Though who would want players who don't want to be there?

adidas11
08-27-2004, 05:38 PM
Quote: "I don't know if the original Dream Team would have taken gold here. They probably would but I doubt they'd go undefeated."

Exactly TimVP. Team USA hasn't gotten worse since 1992. Other teams have just gotten better. People forget that when the original Dream Team played in the Olympics, the other teams were just happy to be on the same floor, to get autographs, and to have their pictures taken with them.

If the original Dream Team played against this caliber of competition, with the same amount of training that they had together, I surmise that they would lose as well.

It's time for our country to start taking international basketball competition more seriously (although I doubt that will happen).

Shelly
08-27-2004, 05:40 PM
If anything, I think and/or hope that this is a very humbling experience for some of the *stars* who are more interested in becoming a name and getting endorsement deals.

adidas11
08-27-2004, 05:43 PM
If anything, I hope this is a humbling experience for Team USA managment, and the NBA, for leaving our star players out to hang and dry, due to an inefficient process for our national team.

WriterNum934
08-27-2004, 05:43 PM
So what if they did do this... and what if the Spurs had won the title this past season instead of Detroit. We'd of gone to Athens without Manu, Tony, Hedo, Marks, etc.

Yeah, that makes sense.

The way it is now is fine... the only problem is certain players saying "no."

You can't fix that.

They should just go back to college players and let the pros who are making money, rest!

timvp
08-27-2004, 05:44 PM
It's time for our country to start taking international basketball competition more seriously

Why?

The original intention for the Dream Team was to introduce high-caliber basketball to the rest of the world. Winning gold wasn't the main reason David Stern and FIBA wanted it to happen. Now basketball is a global sport and has grown faster than anyone could have imagined ... in large part to the Dream Team.

Hypothetically, winning golds and dominating the world in the Olympics would be great. But it ain't going to happen anymore. The NBA is too big of a business to risk losing its main stars in international competition. The US should just bite the bullet and send a mix of castoffs and college players that are trained for a couple months.

It'd would be hard to win with such a team, but the gold would be that much sweeter.

Bandit2981
08-27-2004, 05:45 PM
Dick Vitale on tv saying that the U.S. should send the NBA champions to the Olympics. Obviously substituting foreign players.
eh, sounds good in theory, but a bad idea. under this plan, if the spurs had won the championship this past season, they would have been sent to athens to play without parker, ginobili, rasho, hedo, sean marks, and alex garcia. subbing in new players, however that would even be determined as well, would still create a chemistry problem and wouldnt even be sening the true champion team...i still like the idea of letting college juniors and seniors go as a reward for staying in school and learning. we may not win as often, but most college ballers would kill for that opportunity. however, changing anything now makes the US look like sore losers since the rest of the world finally caught up

adidas11
08-27-2004, 05:47 PM
You ask why TimVP?

Because it's better for basketball globally.

The reason why the Olympic committee pushed for the Team USA to start sending pros, was to help in the development of international basketball for other countries. And that has worked like a charm.

But you are right, as long as our country places more importance on our domestic league than we do international competition, then we will continue to suffer. And it also hurts the rest of the world, by us not sending our best players, in the best selection and preparation process that we can provide.

Soccer does it, and they play FAR more demanding schedules for their domestic leagues than the NBA does.

Solid D
08-27-2004, 05:47 PM
Dick Vitale on tv saying that the U.S. should send the NBA champions to the Olympics. Obviously substituting foreign players.

Thoughts?

Teams like the Spurs would have to add several at-large NBA players, since three starters (Gino, Rasho, Tony) and three bench players (Marks, Beno, Sato) would not be able to represent the USA.

timvp
08-27-2004, 05:49 PM
The reason why the Olympic committee pushed for the Team USA to start sending pros, was to help in the development of international basketball for other countries. And that has worked like a charm.

Yeah, that's what I said.

I'm not the soccer expert but it doesn't seem like they put too much into the Olympics. If Iraq is getting 4th place, something isn't right.

Explain that for me.

From Way Downtown
08-27-2004, 05:52 PM
I think there's a significant practical difficulty in uprooting the NBA champion and sending that team to the Olympics, not only because there are issues with substituting for foreign players, but also because there are team-building issues that most franchises wouldn't want to deal with.

Take this year for example -- you send the Pistons. Obviously, Mehmet and Darko can't play. You substitute for those guys with, say (for argument's sake) Tim Duncan and Allen Iverson. If you're Larry Brown and you've suddenly been given Tim Duncan, are you going to sit him on the bench to keep the Wallaces on the floor and happy? Are you going to risk developing strife within your club team (which may arise from displacing a starter) or are you going to do what's best for the national team? It's just a question, but I'm not sure there's any easy answer.

And what do you do about players who have been traded or who have departed/arrived in free agency? If you send the Pistons this year, do you take Corliss Williamson or do you take Derrick Coleman? Assuming you have some guy who has been shipped out against his wishes, how does the coach of the team handle a situation like that?

What if you have a guy who was a key part of winning the championship but, for whatever reason, wasn't tendered an offer as a free agent and has been replaced (say something akin to a Stephen Jackson/Hedo Turkoglu situation -- obviously, that's a bad specific example, given Hedo's nationality, but use a comparable American in Hedo's place and you get to the same point).

I think there are too many dynamics in existence to make sending a club team over a feasible alternative. Maybe it's just time to face the fact that we've wrought what David Stern and others have sown -- we've made the world so interested in basketball that they've learned to play our game at our level (or better).

adidas11
08-27-2004, 05:55 PM
I will.

Soccer doesn't place much importance on the Olympics. They only allow Under-23 players (with the exception of adding 3 overage players) for the competiton. The reason why? FIFA doesn't want a competition to rival the World Cup. Plus, a lot of the strong countries play in other competitions besides the World Cup and the Olympics (for example, Euro 2004, CONCAF, South American Championships, Asian Championships, etc). In essence, the national teams still play in a lot of high priority competitions. They just don't value the Olympics that much.

Aggie Hoopsfan
08-27-2004, 05:58 PM
If anything, I hope this is a humbling experience for Team USA managment, and the NBA, for leaving our star players out to hang and dry, due to an inefficient process for our national team.

That about covers it.

And the closest Jefferson should ever come to being around Team USA again is buying a jersey at Foot Locker.

timvp
08-27-2004, 06:05 PM
Soccer doesn't place much importance on the Olympics.

Well then. What's wrong with the US not valuing men's basketball in the Olympics? I had a grandfather who played on the Argentinean national soccer team and all he ever talked about was the World Cup. What he did between the World Cups (making big money playing in the Euro leagues) wasn't nearly as important.

That's what the difference is. The NBA is the end-all for basketball players. You play basketball, you want to make it into the NBA. You play soccer, you want to play in the World Cup. It's two different things.

Basketball is now a global sport. The US has done it's job. Sending a competitive team to play in the Olympics won't do anything to help them improve. They have the coaches, players and know how to grow on their own accord.

adidas11
08-27-2004, 06:12 PM
Quote: "That's what the difference is. The NBA is the end-all for basketball players. You play basketball, you want to make it into the NBA. You play soccer, you want to play in the World Cup. It's two different things.

Basketball is now a global sport. The US has done it's job. Sending a competitive team to play in the Olympics won't do anything to help them improve. They have the coaches, players and know how to grow on their own accord."

Well TimVP, FIFA made the decision on the Olympics, not an individual country. And that rule applies to ALL countries that wish to participate in the Olympics. For myself, I wouldn't have a problem if FIBA set an age limit for basketball, so to place more importance on the World Basketball Championships. (which is the equivalent to the World Cup for soccer)

I understand that in the USA, the NBA is the end-all for up and coming players. And I hope that as basketball continues to become more of a global sport, that will change. Because for soccer, players also dream to play for their favorite club teams, but they also dream to play for the national team as well.

I guess overall, my dissatisfaction is with Team USA and how they approach international basketball in general. Not just the Olympics. For me, the World Basketball Championships are more important, and that is the attitude that all of the other countries take as well. Why do you think players like Vlade Divac and Peja chose not to play (well, besides Vlade being an old fart)? They come out in DROVES for the World Basketball Championships. I remember a quote from Antonio Davis back in 2002, when he was shocked at how seriously the foreign teams took the tournament. It was MUCH more important to them than the Olympics.

adidas11
08-27-2004, 09:19 PM
And TimVP, make no mistake, big time players were present at the Olympics this summer for soccer. Cristiano Renaldo and Gabriele Heinz (Portugal and Argentina, respectively) were there. Both players play with Manchester United, and Six Alex Ferguson was pissed when they both got selected, since they are two penciled starters on Man U. But there was nothing Sir Alex could do about that, because FIFA mandates that international competition for individual players takes precedence over domestic competition, and if the country calls those players, they go.

smeagol
08-27-2004, 10:04 PM
Addidas, dude, I have gained a lot of respect for you. Your takes on Team USA have been right on for the last two months (before they lost their first friendly against Italy).

Even more, your analogy with Soccer could not be more precise: Soccer players kill themselves to reach their Mecca, which is European soccer (Italy, Spain and England and to a lesser degree Germany, France and Portugal). To be able to play in Europe, for soccer players, is like playing in the NBA for b-ball players. Soccer players in Europe make huge amounts of money (+$5MM per year).

But despite the fact that soccer players play year round (they might rest 20 days per year, not more), they also kill themselves to play for their national teams, not only in the World Cup, the largest sporting event in the world (outside the US), but also in the Olympics, the Eurocup, the Copa America and the international championships they play with their clubs.

Timvp, I understand that applying this to the NBA and the way the US picks the players for Team USA is very difficult, but there is no other way to go if you guys want your team to stay competitive.

adidas11
08-28-2004, 03:53 AM
Smeagol, the point I'm trying to make to TimVP, and others, is that we shouldn't settle for mediocrity when it comes to international competition. Why can't we we have a great domestic league (the NBA) and a great international team? Now I realize, that it probably isn't realistic, given our current climate of basketball in our country. And I also realize why a lot of the top players chose not to play in Greece this summer. They had very valid reasons. I just hope (and it's a long hope) that we change how we view and run basketball in our country overall, to allow greater importance for international basketball.