Reply With Quoteyes
referred to as World Champion. With the losses in 2002 and 2004, can the NBA Champion still be called that? The Detroit Pistons are still referred to as World Champions. The Lakers were called World Champions in 2002, but Yugoslavia won the "world championship". The argument could've been made with NBA players still winning the gold in the Olympics, but this recent showing has to change that moniker, doesn't it?
I talked to a friend of mine this weekend (he's overseas right now) and he was asked this very same question by some European friends of his. So I ask this question to you guys.
yes
No.
No NBA Champion should be called the world champion. That just shows the arrogance of our country. They are the United States domestic league champion (the NBA). Nothing more, nothing less.
Good question.........
I say no.
There are two Canadian teams if you have forgotten.
2 Canadian teams?
Please remind us....
One Canadian team, bite me.
the hawks would smoke any team in the world
theres a reason the nba is the premiere league don't get caught up in the olympics.
I agree with Ice, last years Magic would have beaten just about any non-NBA team.
Yes, an NBA team would probably beat any other club team from around the world. But, until there is an official World Club Championship (is the McDonald's considered that!?), then you can't officially say that the NBA champion is automatically the world champion.
Going by that logic, the Lakers would be considered the NBA champion each season, without actually playing the games. (When Shaq was there)
I agree with Ice and adidas11, even though a lowly NBA team like the Hawks or Magic would beat most teams outside of the NBA, they can't be worldly known as the champs but, If the Hawks could beat mostly the number of teams outside the NBA, wouldn't the Champs blow them out? So it's like saying: "We're the champs of the NBA and we can beat any other team in the world."
i say yes, because many players who were from international leagues(manu, parker, darko even) are currently playing in the NBA, its not just purely made up of american players
Yes and No...
No because you didn't face a team from another country for the le.
Yes...you can be considered a world champion...of the NBA!
Just not of the world
World Series?
Probably the only way to have a "world champion" would be to have the winner of the "world championship" tournament go up against the NBA champion in a seven game series.
please
if this usa team played together one year they would go over there and kick butt and win by an average of 16 points
the pistons would destroy manu's team sorry
I don't the NBA calls the winner the "World Champions". They call them the NBA Champion, and NBA is the National Basketball Association. It's not called the World Basketball Association, and it's not FIBA either, thank God.
Yes we are the world champions...as I have heard this song at least 20 times ater the final game of the Finals, and as you can plainly see, it says WORLD CHAMPIONS.
I've paid my dues
Time after time
I've done my sentence
But committed no crime
And bad mistakes
I've made a few
I've had my share of sand
Kicked in my face
But I've come through
And I need to go on and on and on and on
We are the champions - my friend
And we'll keep on fighting till the end
We are the champions
We are the champions
No time for losers
'Cause we are the champions of the world
That right there is the issue... had this US squad had enough continuity (i.e. played together for more than 4 weeks) then there is absolutely no way anyone could have beaten team USA (I mean c'mon it was a team with 4 NBA franchise players Duncan, Iverson, LeBron, and Melo, maybe 5 if you count Marbury).if this usa team played together one year they would go over there and kick butt and win by an average of 16 points
The point is... NBA teams have that continuity... the time to build the required amount of chemistry that is needed for the team to excel.
Ginobili, Scola and Oberto have been playing together for the last 8 years.... if not longer...
The "World" Champions le is probably a little too arrogant... but I doubt Yugoslavia or Argentina could have beaten this year's Pistons, last year's Spurs (think video games for your brains to allow a Ginobili on each team... one on a Pop leash the other free to lead) or the three-peat Lakers...
Maybe in the near future we could have a "real" world championship tournament at the club level. But I assume the US is going to give the next world championship tournament (at the national level) more importance the next time around.
We'd just have to call them NBA champions. We all know that the Hawks can smoke any team outside the US but as of the moment that still hasn't been done -- I mean, every NBA team going up against every foreign team, thus it's not yet qualified. After the Olympics, "World Champions" in the NBA seems a little questionable, even if we all know Tim's been surrounded by scrubs in that tourney.
International basketball rules and playing styles are so different in every region. NBA players suck at a lot of fundamental basketball skills that others are brilliant at now, just as they're good at some things that the others really can't do (because of different reasons). "World Champions" isn't a qualified term to use at all. Personally, I've always been uncomfortable with it, but now it's almost sad that a portion of my doubts are actually true.
Good question.
Europe is in the Larry Bird era where fundamentals rule. Pretty soon they'll evolve to And 1 era with the Dunks and athelteiscm and crossovers, while that happens there countries like Zimbabwe and Afghanistan etc. will go to the Larry Bird era. This is my theory.
Interesting theory.... I guess the natural progression of the game is to degrade itself fundamentally and upgrade itself in "entertainmentship" (I know that's not a word so don't point it out).Europe is in the Larry Bird era where fundamentals rule. Pretty soon they'll evolve to And 1 era with the Dunks and athelteiscm and crossovers, while that happens there countries like Zimbabwe and Afghanistan etc. will go to the Larry Bird era. This is my theory.
Well, the fact that the NBA has been importing talent more and more these past few years is already a solid testament as to how everybody else is getting better and the American players just keep getting more mediocre. It's actually downright alarming.
I realize how bad we have it in the US whenever I marvel at how easily and confidently foreign teams can chuck up three's five times in a row, whether they make them or not (but they usually do), they're still comfortable with running those kinds of plays.
There is something to be learned about quan y and efficiency.... I still think SA should average more shots per game without necesarily letting down on their defense (in a dramatic way)...foreign teams can chuck up three's five times in a row, whether they make them or not (but they usually do), they're still comfortable with running those kinds of plays.
Wait... the Larry Bird era was also the 'Run 'n Gun' era for the Spurs when they had Gervin. Just a random thought though....
Do you believe that Oberto, Scola, Nocioni, etc., are the whole year in the National Team? They play for their clubs, as Manu does. They know each other because the coach did a great job. Some of the younger players were in the FIBA World Championship for Young players in 1999, but they had to be introduced to the system back in 2001. This was not made in a year, but about in a month each year, from 2001 to 2004.
About the NBA teams playing with other countries best...well, you never know, Tau Ceramica, Luis Scola's team, had Andrés Nocioni last season, and also Lithuanian sharshooter Macijauskas, plus Argentine prospect Pablo Prigioni at point, and Spain's Jose Luis Calderon, that was a pretty strong team.
Or Barcelona 2 seasons ago, they had Jasikevicius, Bodiroga, Navarro, Anderson Varejao, Dueñas, Femerling...a very good basketball team, too.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions