This Team USA not like those that fell short

[duncan228]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/2007-08-30-team-usa-analysis_N.htm

Analysis: This Team USA not like those that fell short
By David DuPree, USA TODAY

LAS VEGAS — The USA entered Thursday's game at the Tournament of the Americas undefeated as it prepared for this weekend's medal round at the Olympic qualifier. The USA has dominated, winning by an average of 39.1 points. However, in the last three major international competitions when countries send top players, the USA has finished third twice and sixth in 2002.
Puerto Rico's Carlos Arroyo, a member of the Orlando Magic, says this U.S. team is different. He was a member of the Puerto Rican teams that beat the USA in the 2004 Olympics, lost to the Americans at the 2006 world championship and were blown out Tuesday 117-78 here. "This team is deeper, more experienced and more focused … and just better than those teams were," Arroyo said.

USA TODAY's David DuPree looks at what went wrong in previous major international competitions and why this squad is favored to not only win the event this weekend, but also the gold medal at the 2008 Beijing Olympics:

2002 world championship (Sixth place)

•What went wrong: The team lacked that singular dominant force, wasn't together long enough to have any chemistry and had trouble making outside shots against the international zone defenses. "I think that team was a bit surprised at how good the competition was," Kobe Bryant said. "We don't take anyone lightly and understand that everything starts at the defensive end."

•What is different: This team features Bryant and LeBron James, perhaps the two best perimeter players in the world, and they work extremely well together. Pure shooters Michael Redd and Mike Miller are zone-busters, and the team features more players who are reliable outside shooters.

2004 Olympics (Bronze medal)

•What went wrong: The players were resistant to coach Larry Brown's controlling style, Tim Duncan got into foul trouble in practically every game, and the frustrated USA often fell into just playing one-on-one basketball.

•What is different: Coach Mike Krzyzewski has given the players more freedom to play their natural games, and they have much more quality depth and versatility. "We have a completely different mind-set than that team," said James, who played sparingly on that team but is one of stars of this squad. "We all get along so well and have great chemistry."

2006 world championship (Bronze medal)

•What went wrong: The squad was relatively weak at point guard, had defensive breakdowns, especially against the pick-and-roll, and the outside shooting again was a negative. "We weren't quite ready to win a world championship," said Krzyzewski, the coach of that team, "but the groundwork was laid out."

•What is different: Jason Kidd and Chauncey Billups are the point guards in place of Kirk Hinrich and Chris Paul. Kidd and Billups are veterans. Both are like coaches on the floor and have the respect of everyone on the team.

[ArgSpursFan]

it will come short.as ussual.
too many smiles and circus plays.
I just hope that the day they face a real team and start choking they keep on having the same stupid smile on their faces and keep on throwing the fansy passes.

[ALVAREZ6]

it will come short.as ussual.
too many smiles and circus plays.
I just hope that the day they face a real team and start choking they keep on having the same stupid smile on their faces and keep on throwing the fansy passes.STFU already man.

[samikeyp]

it will come short.as ussual.
too many smiles and circus plays.
I just hope that the day they face a real team and start choking they keep on having the same stupid smile on their faces and keep on throwing the fansy passes.

So then Argentina is not a real team?


I guess you are guaranteeing that the US Team will not win Gold in Beijing.

[ArgSpursFan]

STFU already man.


:dramaquee

[ALVAREZ6]

mike, stop wasting your time with this guy

[ArgSpursFan]

mike, stop wasting your time with this guy

damn right.
you finally said something right.
It was about time Alvarez.

[samikeyp]

damn right.

:lol

[leemajors]

well we'll know that when the olympics roll around again.

[Mister Sinister]

:sleep Wake me up when the NBA starts.

[ducks]

This message is hidden because ArgSpursFan is on your ignore list. :smokin

[MmP]

To me, honestly, this national US team is all about individualities. They don't play like team, and I can't wait to see them against real teams in a close game. They might win it all next year, but it's gonna be a very different story.

[freedom&justice]

To me, honestly, this national US team is all about individualities. They don't play like team, and I can't wait to see them against real teams in a close game. They might win it all next year, but it's gonna be a very different story.

They started with team play, actually. They played very well as a unit in the first 3 or 4 games and only got flashy when wide open or set up by a good pass. The individualistic tendencies came out against Puerto Rico. It's why they seemed to have a difficult time adjusting to Puerto Rico's defensive schemes at the beginning. They still won, but you can see the cracks. I like to think they'll buckle down and just play when they get in a dogfight, but that remains to be seen with all these lopsided wins.

[samikeyp]

To me, honestly, this national US team is all about individualities. They don't play like team, and I can't wait to see them against real teams in a close game. They might win it all next year, but it's gonna be a very different story

So Argentina is not a real team?

I think the 2002 and 2004 teams could be accused of that, this team I don't agree.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

it will come short.as ussual.
too many smiles and circus plays.
I just hope that the day they face a real team and start choking they keep on having the same stupid smile on their faces and keep on throwing the fansy passes.
:lol

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

I think Jason Kidd is a key to this team being better.

Another key is not having Larry Brown as the coach.

[Cherry]

it will come short.as ussual.
too many smiles and circus plays.
I just hope that the day they face a real team and start choking they keep on having the same stupid smile on their faces and keep on throwing the fansy passes.

Shhhh.... this team is good...they still like circus plays. Other teams dont do that until the end of the game, but they do. Period.

[ChumpDumper]

I think Jason Kidd is a key to this team being better.

Another key is not having Larry Brown as the coach.Agreed.

The only thing that might sink this team is the defense of their small ball lineups.

[T Park]

This team is about as good as your gonna get americans wise.
The only one that could be added that aint there is Garnett for Chandler.

Other than that, I wouldn't add anoyone else.

[DOMINATOR]

Amare sucks ass with international rules.

[JMarkJohns]

Amare sucks ass with international rules.

Why? Because he had one bad game? He's the best big man on the roster! he's averaging 12 ppg, 5 rpg on great shooting in the lane, from the stripe and - yes -even from range...

And before you make a stink about his five rebounds, among the big men, only Howard, at like 5.1 rpg, averages more. They play roughly the same minutes.

[JMarkJohns]

I think it's pretty silly to be hyping these players for beating teams they should be beating. Argentina is their only real competition in this tourney, and they are without Ginobili and Nocioni, basically their two best perimeter scorers.

When the US squad defeats teams they are expected to merely compete with, then and only then should the hype be this strong. This team hasn't done jack yet, and by every US columnist filling their heads with notions of US basketball salvation, it may take the edge off their mentality (well, save for Kobe) and then next year, when the compeition is at its finest, they could fae an early and completely unexpected loss.

[Ariel]

I think it's pretty silly to be hyping these players for beating teams they should be beating. Argentina is their only real competition in this tourney, and they are without Ginobili and Nocioni, basically their two best perimeter scorers.
Argentina is missing their starting PG (Pepe Sánchez), SG (Manu), SF (Nocioni), and C (Oberto), not to mention other key players such as Walter Herrmann and Rubén Wolkowyski. Not only that, but Argentina doesn't have such depth to cover for most those absences, so what you get as a result is a severely degraded version instead. Hilariously enough, some of the same people that were complaining before that the 2002 and 2004 US team couldn't be considered legitimate representatives because they didn't feature their best players (with the likes of Duncan, Stoudemire and Boozer amongst them), don't seem to have much problem taking Roman González as our starting center. Newsflash, the difference between our starters and our third stringers is about the same as that between players NBA and those from the NBDL... scratch that... it's MUCH WORSE.

Now could this current US team beat a full Argentina team? Sure, of course they could. But whomever thinks the recent abysmal difference is primarily explained by the US team itself is setting themselves up for a pretty rude awakening. If the US is going to regain its supremacy, which eventually will happen, it'll have to be over the premier version of Spain, Greece, Argentina, and whomever may emerge in the near future (France?). Say what you want, but at the biggest stage, the games will be much, much different. The times where a team of NBA stars would have a field day against other FIBA teams are over. No matter who you field.

[JMarkJohns]

Argentina is missing their starting PG (Pepe Sánchez), SG (Manu), SF (Nocioni), and C (Oberto), not to mention other key players such as Walter Herrmann and Rubén Wolkowyski. Not only that, but Argentina doesn't have such depth to cover for most those absences, so what you get as a result is a severely degraded version instead. Hilariously enough, some of the same people that were complaining before that the 2002 and 2004 US team couldn't be considered legitimate representatives because they didn't feature their best players (with the likes of Duncan, Stoudemire and Boozer amongst them), don't seem to have much problem taking Roman González as our starting center. Newsflash, the difference between our starters and our third stringers is about the same as that between players NBA and those from the NBDL... scratch that... it's MUCH WORSE.

Now could this current US team beat a full Argentina team? Sure, of course they could. But whomever thinks the recent abysmal difference is primarily explained by the US team itself is setting themselves up for a pretty rude awakening. If the US is going to regain its supremacy, which eventually will happen, it'll have to be over the premier version of Spain, Greece, Argentina, and whomever may emerge in the near future (France?). Say what you want, but at the biggest stage, the games will be much, much different. The times where a team of NBA stars would have a field day against other FIBA teams are over. No matter who you field.

That's pretty much what I was saying, only you had more facts, details and they made your post much better than mine. Great job.

[Whisky Dog]

All this tourney means is that the US won't have to qualify before next year's Olympics. Who knows which one of these players (or players on any elite NT) will even be healthy come next year? It's far too early to say who will win come summer of 2008. That said, if this US team is healthy and has a healthy Wade and Bosh then it will be a very difficult team to beat. It's a well constructed team unlike the previous versions that didn't have a real distributing PG.

[Deimosfobos]

Argentina is missing their starting PG (Pepe Sánchez), SG (Manu), SF (Nocioni), and C (Oberto), not to mention other key players such as Walter Herrmann and Rubén Wolkowyski. Not only that, but Argentina doesn't have such depth to cover for most those absences, so what you get as a result is a severely degraded version instead. Hilariously enough, some of the same people that were complaining before that the 2002 and 2004 US team couldn't be considered legitimate representatives because they didn't feature their best players (with the likes of Duncan, Stoudemire and Boozer amongst them), don't seem to have much problem taking Roman González as our starting center. Newsflash, the difference between our starters and our third stringers is about the same as that between players NBA and those from the NBDL... scratch that... it's MUCH WORSE.

Now could this current US team beat a full Argentina team? Sure, of course they could. But whomever thinks the recent abysmal difference is primarily explained by the US team itself is setting themselves up for a pretty rude awakening. If the US is going to regain its supremacy, which eventually will happen, it'll have to be over the premier version of Spain, Greece, Argentina, and whomever may emerge in the near future (France?). Say what you want, but at the biggest stage, the games will be much, much different. The times where a team of NBA stars would have a field day against other FIBA teams are over. No matter who you field.

I second that...

[Manu Pacquiao]

If only team USA had the dedication of the elite international teams to perfect their freethrows, their no-dribble ball rotation, their quick release midrange jumpshots and their zone defense, they would be unbeatable in the WChampionships and the Olympics.

The USA already got the physical talent advantage. They only get beaten because of all the elite international team's high "team basketball IQ" and razor-sharp basketball fundamentals.

[ArgSpursFan]

Shhhh.... this team is good...they still like circus plays. Other teams dont do that until the end of the game, but they do. Period.

never said it wasn´t
you can be damn good,but that doesnt necesarly translate to the word winner.