<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Umair15:</div><div class="quote_post">Wow just because U.S. loses a game, everone is mad. Its not like they can't lose a game just because they are U.S. The rest of the world has caught up, and its time U.S. realizes that they need to step up their game and stop taking it easily. Dont get mad just because U.S. lost. They will come home with Gold in 2008. Having Kobe on Team U.S.A wouldnt affect the team much in my opinion.</div>Im not mad that the USA lost, I just think its kinda ridiculous. The rest of the world has caught up in the sense that they are now able to beat us, but that shouldnt be the case. The other olympic teams play more as a team, plain and simple. There is no other team that is as tallented and skilled as the US team. The USA should not be losing these games, IMO.
Thats true. But how do you know other teams are not talented as Team USA? They may not be as talented, but the play better as a team. Which IMO U.S. doesnt. And yes, the rest of the world has caught up. Now its more challenging to U.S. And also, U.S. needs to remember that they lost last year, and can't risk losing this year, especially with a combination of young and upcoming all-stars on that team. They also have a lot of pressure this year, being the favorites. Some people may not think they are the favorites losing last year, but they are to me.
I agree with Fresh Prince, adding to the USA roster another elite player (even if he is better than the best SG on team USA (which is debateable)) is not fixing what the true problem is. The American team with its current players at SG (Wade/Hinrich/Joe Johnson depending on who is on the floor) are probably better individual players already than their European counterparts. Bringing in Kobe, is like saying Team USA didn't have enough talent at SG (which it did). The weakest area talent-wise was Center, but even with its current roster it had more than enough to beat every team. Saying Team USA needed Kobe, is ignoring the fact that Team USA had good enough tools already, it just needed all the parts to come together nicely and play team offense and team defence. I think Team USA will improve by the Olympics, just a question of how much.
Dirk Nowitzki: Kobe's presence alone would have been enough to win the tournament http://www.sport1.de/de/sport/artikel_346488.html <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Sport1: What did the Americans lack? Nowitzki: It was bitter that Kobe Bryant got injured. His presence alone would have been enough to win the tournament. That's the level I see him on. To me he is the best player in the world right now. That guy doesn't know fear at all. He doesn't care. He would have won it for the Americans single-handedly. </div>
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting azn_iverson:</div><div class="quote_post">Regardless of if we need Kobe or not, what we DO need is a better coach.</div>And might I ask, but who do you suggest? Whether you like it or not, Coach K is one of the best minds in basketball, and in my opinion, might be the best coach in all of basketball, even though he coaches on the collegiate level. The man is a genius, how do you think he manages to keep winning every year, even when they keep losing great players to the NBA. No matter how much Duke loses, they always win, and you have to give Coach K some of that credit.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting shapecity:</div><div class="quote_post">Iron Shiek, do you think Team USA would be more successful running halfcourt sets? In the NBA teams who execute in the halfcourt have won the last ten or so NBA titles. I'm not sure how well the strategy would translate into FIBA rules, but I'd love to hear your insight on it.</div> I think that the U.S. would benefit from concentrating more on keeping their opponents from getting high percentage looks and securing the defensive rebounds than they would anticipating getting the majority of their looks on transition baskets. Do I think that the U.S. has the continuity to run effective half court sets consistently? No. But we are talented enough as individual players to be able to run plays that will utilize the penetrating and post up skills of our players -- so we won't have to rely on outside jump shots to win games. I was looking at most of the scores from this tournament and it seemed as if only the U.S. was giving up 90+ points a game on a consistent basis. The final of the WC had only 117 points combined. Argentina and Spain had the best game in the tournament and Spain was able to prevail by scoring only 75 points. Now I understand if you are going to be a running team you are going to give up points on the other end (either in transition, broken plays, or your opponent's offensive rebounds when the guards are trying to get out on the break) but at some point in time solid defensive play should take precedence over attempting to increase tempo. We are too long and athletic to be relegated to being freelance defenders. Effective offense to me means to reverse the ball quickly and look for avenues for penetration. It doesn't mean give it to someone and expect them to generate their own offense on the perimeter w/ 20 seconds to go on the shot clock. Effective offense to me means to have enough floor spacing to enable your primary post players to get position on the block and attempt to get some points in the paint. It doesn't mean to use your post players as simply screeners and offensive rebounders. I think that Elton Brand has established himself in the post enough in his career that he can get an occasional touch in the paint. I think that there are other scoring options in the post on this team besides Carmelo (who played exceptionally well in that role). Kobe is good enough that he can score all over the court and defend all positions on the perimeter. But will his versatility be so encompassing that it hides the flaws that the team has already shown? I don't believe so. The question is are we an All-Star team or a team that is built to win a championship? Championship teams have balance and championship teams defend. In this case we were a team constructed of perimeter stars and role players in the post. Everyone was committed to being unselfish but at the end of the day if you are not committed to defense than you won't win -- that is why I do not anticipate the U.S. getting the gold in Beijing as well. And I don't anticipate Melo, LeBron, Dwyane, and Kobe all being on the team in 2008 either. At some point in time I guarantee that the commitment that the US is expecting from its players will be viewed as too demanding for these superstars each summer. These players need rest and considering that their is little reward for those players involved I imagine you will begin to see some of them renig on their 3 year commitment. Not everyone can be a star but at the same time I expect that in 2008 we have an offense that consists of more than just swinging the ball around the perimeter until one person feels like going one on one or a defense that consists of more than hounding the ball handler and hoping that if the defender on the ball gets beat that there is a big who is quick enough to contest/block the shot.
Hard to build the team around Kobe when he's not on the WC roster. You neglect that he had surgery I guess, which kept him out of the Worlds.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">And might I ask, but who do you suggest? Whether you like it or not, Coach K is one of the best minds in basketball, and in my opinion, might be the best coach in all of basketball, even though he coaches on the collegiate level. The man is a genius, how do you think he manages to keep winning every year, even when they keep losing great players to the NBA. No matter how much Duke loses, they always win, and you have to give Coach K some of that credit.</div> In international play, he seemed to be a pretty simplistic coach. He didn't coach proper team defense, but only a pressure defense that was easily negated by a team with solid guards. He did a horrible job of scouting his future opponents and was either arrogant or ignorant enough to assume that with his team's superior talent, he could force his style of play on the competition. He completely misused his bigs and his distribution of minutes was questionable at times. I don't think this tournament was a good reflection of what type of coach Krzyzewski is. However, Mike D'Antoni was an assistant for the US and I think he'd be a much better head coach. He's had experience coaching European players under international rules, while still having coached NBA players. He'd be the best person to prepare American players for international competition.
I disagree with D'Antoni. He can't coach defense, and that was one of our issues. The only reason you make D'Antoni the coach is if you want to run and gun, and quite frankly, they were doing that just fine under Coach K.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">I disagree with D'Antoni. He can't coach defense, and that was one of our issues. The only reason you make D'Antoni the coach is if you want to run and gun, and quite frankly, they were doing that just fine under Coach K.</div> That's a rather simplistic assessment. The defense part is a legitimate concern, but I wouldn't go so far as to say he can't coach it. He's never really had a chance, coaching a team like Phoenix. But, while he coached in Europe, he was very good employing a zone defense. And you could always bring in an assistant to help him with that aspect. He definitely is a boost on offense, though. Phoenix might run and gun, but the way he has them moving the ball and passing is what is needed on this team. His half-court offense definitely wouldn't be as predictable as Coach K's was this tournament. And you ignored the biggest advantage he brings to the team: his experience with international basketball.
Actually, he really can't coach defense from the looks of it. They built the team around his coaching philosophy, and that is to get out, run, and score. It may be a simplistic assessment on my part, but it's true. If he could coach it, don't you think he'd at least put some emphasis on it? Become a team like the Mavs, a team that scores 100 but holds teams to 95. I think he'd do that if he could. However, he doesn't. He puts no emphasis on the defensive side of the ball, otherwise, they'd be giving up a lot less than 102ppg out in Phoenix.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Umair15:</div><div class="quote_post">They may not be as talented, but the play better as a team. </div>That was my point. The USA are so talented that maybe it ends up hurting them because they seem not to rely on their teamates as much as other, less tallented teams.
Like everything else in life, there needs to be balance (team and star players). I like how Johnny Depp solved the little problem of 'balance' in "Once Upon a Time in Mexico" when he discovered pork chops that were too delicious for their own good.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting anteloni:</div><div class="quote_post">I don?t think kobe would change anything. The problem is the way american plays. Americans plays an indivial basketball, and not team play, you need team play to win. It doesn?t change anything if you bring this or that player. If the USA doesn?t make a real TEAM and start playing as it it would continue loosing. Today, in international basketball the best team is cwith no doubt SPAIN. The played as a real team. all players. It was funny to listen the people say that without Gasol SPAIN will loose, and then they make a great game and beat Greece for 70-47. before greece won USA 105-95. Anyway USA some of the best players of the world, and that helps to win. But without real team is very difficult to win at top level.</div> That is exactly my perspective on team USA's loss. Sure the players want to represent their country but they are self-centered at times. No matter what they do, some players in the team will ALWAYS be like that. They want to score, they want to do flashy moves. They haven't realized that it takes team games to beat European teams like Greece and Spain. And... I dont think adding Kobe would've helped much, if any. He's not a team player or atleast not the type of player Team USA could use.
I think one of US problems was trying to be a running team, it allowed the other teams to get some easy baskets when US didn't score, allowed the other teams to at times basically rest on defense because of quick shots, and it doesn't allow your defense to be set. This is not to say they shouldn't run when the oppurtunity is there, but when it wasn't they shouldn't have been taking quick shots. US needs to use more zone, this is international ball, because of the shorter three point line, the court space is smaller and zones are more effective. Fundamental defense should be the focus, not turnover causing defense. Defense where you funnell guys into shot blockers, and play straight up.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Rock4life:</div><div class="quote_post">You can say what you want, but the USA team was too young to handle the pressure of competing for they're country. The same players that the media and little teenage kids overhype simply aren't at the level some might think yet. What the team needed was a veteran playmaker that would hit bigshots in crucial situations (and wouldn't be afraid to take it). With Kobe, the team wouldn't have lost. The real problem was that the players got rattled and started playing scary when Greece had them down. Being the best player in the league, Kobe NEVER gets rattled and would've bailed out Team USA just like he bailed out the Lakers with Shaq. Next time around, hopefull he'll play.</div> Hey, I thought I was the biggest kobe fan on this board!!!!!!! Naw, but even though I agree with some of the things you said. Unless kobe could have magically taught all of the other players how to play some D and stop the pick N roll. I don't think he would have made a huge difference like you think!! But hey, he might have made that open three pointer that carmelo air-balled when they were down by 4 with less that a minute to go!!
