Printable View
Yeah, I could see a younger team being used and membership in that younger team being required for consideration for 2014 and 2016. But Gordon, Blake, Rose and Love are a nice core going forward, assuming all four make it in 2012. Kevin Durant should be around as long as he wants. He's only 23.Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy Dat
Yeah, my bad. I wrote that before I saw Dwight Howard's name on the list.Quote:
Originally Posted by jipops
Probably vs another "Select Team"Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy Dat
Such a team could definitely include Kyrie, though I wonder if the 'Roos will come after him.
I think Carmelo's in. He might be the best pure scorer in the league, and he was fourth on the 2008 team in scoring. For the record, he did score 13 points (in 17 minutes) in the title game.
Here's my suggested roster:
G -- Wade, Rose, Paul, Westbrook,
F -- Durant, James, Love, Bosh, Anthony, Griffin
C -- Howard, Chandler
Starting lineup of Paul, Wade, Durant, James and Howard. It really doesn't matter. If I recall, Kidd started in '08 as a formality and a show of respect, then would abdicate to Paul and Deron, who'd play the lion's share of the minutes.
I omitted Bryant. Obviously, he loves Krzyzewski and is a fierce competitor, and he loves the limelight. I don't know anything you don't know, it's just a hunch. He currently gets a painkilling shot in his wrist before every game, and it looks like a balloon after each game. More so than his knees, I just figure he's going to want to rest and heal that wrist for the NBA season, and maybe even get surgery on it. It'd be a very tough decision, but Kobe's won his medal, which might factor in. (In addition, between now and then, he has about 60 chances for someone to knock him over or something and completely ruin the wrist regardless.)
Paul is iffy, too. His knees have a shelf life, and if I'm him, I try to avoid a Brandon Roy situation and don't play. But I can't see him just not playing if he's feeling reasonably okay at the end of the season. I took out Deron thinking whatever team signs him probably won't want him to play in the first year he's under contract.
I thought Bosh played pretty well in '08. Love is the perfect international 4. I think Chandler is a must because of his defensive superiority. I'd actually be surprised if he didn't make it. I might consider Gordon (the only pure shooter on the prelim roster) over Westbrook -- for that reason -- but for health reasons, I'm not counting on him being there either.
Know why I'm not crazy about Griffin? The free throws. You already have one guy like that in Howard. But Krzyzewski may want to lay the groundwork for future teams to have Griffin involved, and he just has the feel of an Olympian.
The team I put forth up there would need Love and Durant to stretch the floor, which isn't out of the question, but presents new challenges. They're likely to want Gordon on the team, but unlike the world championships, I'm not convinced he sees major run. Redd really didn't play at all in 2008.
One thing I'm sure of: I can't wait to watch this team play.
While Lamarcus wasn't on either the 08 or the 10 team, he was invited to the 10 tryouts. USA basketball website confirmsQuote:
Originally Posted by CPDUKEGUY24
I seem to recall he couldn't participate, although it may have been he just got cut...
There's a pretty good chance this will sound combative, but please trust that I do not mean it to be so: What does "pure scorer" mean to you? I never understand how "pure scorer" (or, in baseball, "pure hitter") is supposed to differ from "scorer." And, in this particular case, I have difficulty imagining a definition of "pure scorer" under which Carmelo would rate higher than, say, Kevin Durant or Lebron James, both of whom score at greater volume and efficiency.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Kyrie would need authorization of "exception circumstances" to play for Australia since he played for the USA Team when he was a senior in high school, which makes him ineligible to play for another country.Quote:
Originally Posted by roywhite
Here is the rule:
http://www.backpagelead.com.au/baske...omer-heres-howQuote:
Item 23 - A player who has played in a main official competition of FIBA (see article -1) after having reached his seventeenth (17) birthday may not play for a national team of another country. However, in exceptional circumstances the Secretary General may authorise such a player to play for the national team of his country of origin if he is ineligible to play for such country according to this article -23 and if this is in the interest of the development of basketball in this country.
Sounds like both USA Basketball and FIBA would have to okay the switch. Last June, Kyrie himself said he's like to play for Australia:
http://www.foxsports.com.au/other-sp...-1226078424875
I just saw this thread and greatly enjoyed reading it. Thanks to all who contributed. But...The unfortunate side-effect for me is that I now can't wait for the 2012 games to begin.
I want to add a highly technical observation: Isn't this an amazing bunch of talent?! Wow. When we are wondering whether to go with Griffin, Howard or Love; Paul, Westbrook or Williams; whether Melo makes the cut -- what anguishing dilemmas! Not to mention the coaching staff. We have a real treat in store.
Ok, feel free to rebut. :)
What's interesting to me is that from 1992 (original and "only" Dream Team) to 1996, there was excitement. Then 2000, if I recall, had much less interest. Then, the 2002 and 2004 meltdowns. Finally, in 2006, there was interest again, and especially in 2008. In 2010, all the "young ones" wanted IN, which I don't think happened before. I think the progression of the national teams (from senior down to the under-xx teams) having a lot of interest is great. Now, in 2012, there is much excitement again. I can't wait:cool: (of course, I like to think that Coach K had a big part of USA Basketball resurgence)
Do you watch the NBA? Because Blake will not even sniff top 5 prob not even top 10:Quote:
Originally Posted by superdave
Chris Paul, Lebron, Melo, KD, Rose, Wade, Kobe, and Dwight are significantly better than Blake. The next tier is all so close it would be tough to choose between them.
Blake is around Love, Aldridge, Westbrook, Gordon, Bosh. Not to mention he will never and I mean NEVER pass Lebron. Lebron can play pg, sg, sf and pf no problem and C if they are small enough.
Anyway I think we wont see 4 bigs considering Melo and Bron take some of the mins at the 4. If health is not an issue I think the sure fire locks are:
PG: Paul, Rose
Wings: Wade, Kobe, Melo, Bron, KD
Bigs: Howard, Love, Blake
Well I must say I agree that Melo is the best pure scorer in the NBA (Actually tied with Durant). I define a good scorer from a pure scorer as someone who has the complete well rounded most balanced offensive game. Durant and Melo offensively are the greatest players in the NBA and can get their shots whenever and wherever on the court in a multitude of ways. Lebron will enter this group if he improves his post game a bit more and and gets a little more reliable as a jump shooter.Quote:
Originally Posted by FellowTraveler
Just to clarify a pure scorer is not always the best at everything but merely great at everything offensively with not to much left to improve on that side of the ball. Both KD and Melo lack solid defense and KD lacks weight and strength and Melo could stand to become a better distributor. Also one last thing and I also do not mean to sound combative but Lebron only scores at that high of an efficiency because of how often he is around the rim and he scores as much because of his physical abilities. Once Lebron learns to expand his offensive game as a shooter and post guy he would truly be unstoppable.
If Blake continues to develope, I'd agree that he's a lock for a spot, but I think Andrew Bynum is actually a better up and coming (if healthy) player. I doubt he plays, but his talent should dictate a spot in my mind. I think Steph curry and Deron Williams will compete for a spot. Williams is probably the better overall player, but curry fits better with the team's needs. That leaves one more spot, probably for a big, but a glue guy might be more important. Bosh? Chandler? Westbrook?Quote:
Originally Posted by JNort
Something I don't see on this proposed roster is a spot-up three-point shooter, which is so valuable in the international game. The guards and wings that we've got are more slashers than pure shooters. For this reason I could see Curry having a role, even though he wasn't on the original list.
At first I thought you underestimated the shooting ability of the players shortlisted, but then I looked up their career 3-point percentages:Quote:
Originally Posted by UrinalCake
Billups: 39%
Love: 38%
Gordon: 37%
Paul: 36%
Durant: 36%
Deron: 35%
Kobe: 34%
Lebron: 33%
Iguodala: 33%
Anthony: 32%
Odom: 32%
Rose: 31%
Wade: 29%
Bosh: 29%
Westbrook: 27%
By comparison, JJ's career percentage is 39% and Curry's is 44% (wow). The numbers do make me wonder whether Chauncey is a better pick than Deron who is shooting horribly this season, and the two are roughly the same size at 6'3 and ~210 pounds. I like Love and Paul even more now, and Gordon could probably make it on the strength of his shooting.
That said, the 3-point line in the international game is closer and for some players it could make a substantial difference -- Carmelo being the primary example. Moreover, a lot of these guys are players who have to carry their teams, and thus probably shoot while more closely guarded than they would have to in the Olympics. Overall, I'm guessing they'd be better shots in the international game with their All-Star teammates creating plays for them than their NBA career percentages would suggest.
Westbrook is a freak athlete and would fit in perfectly in Coach K's aggressive perimeter, fastbreak-after-turnover defence, but he's the odd man out offensively. His jump shot isn't great and he's more of a scorer than playmaker (and the Olympic team will have the former in spades). Also, in the Thunder games I've watched, he doesn't always seem to make the best decisions. I think it's Paul and Rose and either Billups or Williams as the insurance policy.
Not combative at all, those are good questions. If you get it to Carmelo on the blocks one on one, there's a real good chance he'll score. Simple as that. Durant is probably the only guy in the league you could put up against him in that regard, but late in a game, I'd take Carmelo by a hair because he's done it SO many times. (Scratch that, Kobe gives him a run for his money, with advanced age the only detraction. And Wade may actually be Carmelo's equal, when he's not banged up.) James can score big too, obviously, but it's obvious by this point it's not really his modus operandi.Quote:
Originally Posted by FellowTraveler
Note, by the way, I am a Knicks fan, but I hate the current iteration of the team. I'm fine with Carmelo, not expecting a leopard to change his spots, but I enjoyed the prior Knicks team that had actual depth last season before the trade.
By the way, as a guy who actually makes a living in baseball, pure hitter is way different than pure scorer. I'd say the baseball equivalent to "pure scorer" would be "raw power." Think Ryan Howard. A pure hitter would be Pujols or Josh Hamilton, someone who can hit it to all fields with power and has plate selection to boot. The best pure hitter I've ever seen was Bonds, for the record.Quote:
Originally Posted by FellowTraveler
I think he did--along with Jerry Colangelo. What they brought to the table was the true team concept--that players would make a multi-year commitment to participate in tryouts, camps, etc. (subject to the demands of the NBA, injuries, etc.), and that they would make a commitment to team-focused play and strategy. In the meltdown years, US teams that were essentially pickup teams struggled against international teams that had experience playing together under international rules. The Colangelo-Coach K strategy was designed to counter that problem, and it succeeded admirably. That success has helped to make playing for the US seem like a special honor once again, and the feeling has filtered down to the youth teams fielded by USA Basketball, which in turn gives up-and-coming players a taste of the excitement of international competition.Quote:
Originally Posted by gep
The NBA? What's that?Quote:
Originally Posted by JNort
Blake will be starting for the West in the All-Star game and will probably be 2nd team All-NBA this year. Could sneak into the 1st team. I'd also go so far as to say he wont choke every 4th quarter the way Lebron does. Being the best player in the league the first 3 quarters is great, but leaves a little to be desired.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcdevil2009
As someone else pointed out, Curry is not currently listed on the 19-man roster.Quote:
Originally Posted by UrinalCake
Gordon and Curry filled the spot-up shooter role (aka Michael Redd role) on the 2010 team. But honestly, Redd didn't really play that much in 2008. He was used situationally at best, and in the later games hardly played. He only averaged 3.1 ppg.
Curry could fill that role well, but Gordon outplayed him in 2010 and shot well from 3 (19-42) and was the 4th leading scorer at 8.6ppg (though about 6 guys averaged between 7-10ppg as Durant mainly filled it up). Not to mention Gordon's size helps him in the int'l game where handchecking, physical play on the perimeter is the norm. (The 3 pt line is about 1.5 feet shorter than the NBA line too, so that helps Gordon).
Interesting. I've heard the term "pure hitter" most often applied to guys like Wade Boggs & Tony Gwynn who hit for high average and don't strike out much and may or may not have power. See also Posnanski. FWIW I like your definition better; any usage of "pure hitter" that would rank Paul Molitor ahead of Barry Bonds is pretty flawed in my book. Though, to complete the circle, I wouldn't say "pure hitter," I'd just say "hitter," both to avoid confusion and because I don't think the word "pure" adds anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Similarly, if I read you correctly, you seem to define "pure scorer" as "guy who is most difficult to stop in his favored position." ("If you get it to Carmelo on the blocks one on one, there's a real good chance he'll score. Simple as that.") Meanwhile, JNort agrees Melo is the best pure scorer because "I define a good scorer from a pure scorer as someone who has the complete well rounded most balanced offensive game." (I assume by "offensive game" he means "scoring game.") Those are nearly opposite definitions -- well-rounded vs. possessing a dominent go-to move.