OT Three-on-three in the Olympics?

Apparently it might happen.

Who would be the ideal US three? Ideally you 3 shooters, but maybe having a DeAndre Jordan type would also be a benefit. I think that other countries would have more of a shot at beating the US in 3-on-3 than in regular basketball just because the US's depth wouldn't be that much of an edge. If Yao Ming was still playing, he'd be a great asset because he's tall as fuck but also very skilled.

Spain could have had the two Gasols and maybe Navarro? That would be shitty on D but maybe they could make up for it in scoring. Now they're pretty much too old.

 

LBJ/Curry/Durant would beat any three on the planet I think.

 

I can't think of another trio that I'd put up over that one. Obviously, there would be plenty of really good teams you could come up with, but LBJ/Curry/Durant would cover the full range of basketball skills.

 

If they do this I hope they only allow non professional players to compete. Street ballers.

 

I'm no basketball or Olympics purist, but I don't like this.

Maybe as one of the events during AS weekend-- not during the Olympics. 3 players from each team in a single elimination tournament. First to 11 with 1s and 2s -- no FTs.

 

Full court 3-on-3? That's stupid! The only point of 3-on-3 is halfcourt.

 

The 3BA game I saw at the rose Garden was played on a short "full" court, with a short three point line.

 

Really? I find in 3-on-3 you can close out space more easily. Westbrook would more useful, I would think, than someone like Dirk Nowitzki.

So in essence you think that Dirk can move as quick as Westbrook? With less bodies on the court, wouldn't it be easier for Westbrook or any other fast PG to dribble side to side and get around a big like Dirk? But if 5 on 5, Dirk has help on side to side, making it harder to get around.

I am not following your rational at all as far as the court being more open making it easier for big guys. IT would make it easier for the little guys and the big guys would not be able to keep up.

 

Stockton, Bird, Sabonis.

 

First of all, my initial comment about Dirk was assuming half-court. In full-court, sure, the faster the better.
Second, I would never say "in essence" or otherwise that Dirk (and I'm talking about MVP Dirk, not lumbering old Dirk of now) is as fast as Westbrook. That would be obviously stupid.

All I mean is: in halfcourt 3-on-3 the usefulness of someone like Curry would lessen because there's just fewer places for him to hide, fewer teammates to set picks for him, and his defensive flaws would be more exposed. The ideal team is something like 3 Durants because if you have big guys who can shoot, there's nothing anyone can do to stop them. Curry can be bothered by a big guy on him, so long as he's not totally lead-footed.

 

No way Sabonis and Bird could keep up with LBJ and Durant and curry would run circle around Stockton. Stockton's gift was speed per say, but supreme passing and having one of the best PF ever to dish it off to.

In three on three, I think LBJ/Curry/Durant kills Stockton/Sabonis/Bird.

Now Stockton/MJ/Bird?

That might kill everything. from any era.

 

3-on-3 fullcourt would be pretty much unwatchable. I hate playing fullcourt in the gym not because I'm out of shape (although I am) but because it gets so ragged so quickly. It's ratball. Halfcourt would be ball movement and cutting and much better.

 

I think James's shaky shot would hurt him. You need three great shooters.

 

Okay, I understand what you mean, but still disagree. If it was 5 on 5 half court, then yes. But 3on 3 halfcourt will provide the same spacing as a full court. In full court once you pass the half court line, its half court ball with 5on5 and Curry finds open spaces that way. What makes you think he wont be even more open with 3 on 3?

 

LBJ would be the post up presence and put back guy. He wold be fine with Durant and Curry next to him.

 

They need to NBA Jam it and make it 2 on 2.

 

Howzabout 1 on 1?