PDA

View Full Version : Gold Medal Game: USA 107, ESP 100



hurleyfor3
08-10-2012, 05:45 PM
Discuss here. Figure out the time yourself; no good deed around here goes unpunished.

COYS
08-10-2012, 06:02 PM
I'm not even going to attempt to figure out the game time =). I'll wait until someone tells me.

Anyway, you have to like how the USA has played during the Olympics. I'd say that the team has been playing better than even the '08 team. They have great chemistry. The maturation of the returnees from '08 is obvious and has made up for the absence of Howard or Bosh. Meanwhile, it's been great to watch Love buy-in to the team and perform at such a high level. We'd be in trouble without his size. Between Love and Chandler and the versatility of Lebron and Melo, our post play has actually been an advantage over most teams, not a weakness. Combine that with the torrid three point shooting and the ability of Lebron and Paul to handle zone defenses and you've got to like the USA's chances.

Spain is still dangerous, though, as the Gasols are bigger than anyone else when they're on the court together. They've got enough NBA talent to make the USA sweat. However, they don't have the perimeter defenders to hang with James, Durant, Paul, and Kobe. And, as good as Marc and Pau are, they're not particularly great rim-protectors. The USA will only lose if they are ice cold from three point range, refuse to attack the zone, fail to make the Spanish perimeter work on both ends of the court, AND Spain is hot really, really hot from three, makes a number of tough shots, and forces the USA into a few uncharacteristic errors. The way K is coaching and the way Lebron is leading on the court, I don't see the USA failing to attack the zone and play hard on D even if the thees aren't falling. The USA wore Argentina down the last two times they've met. They ran away from Spain late, in the friendly, too. The depth, talent, and composure of Team USA will wear down Spain, again. The only question is whether or not it wears them down late in the 4th, in which case the USA squeaks out a close win, or the USA is able to pull away from the start of the 4th or even earlier.

That being said, the Gold Medal game in '08 was closer than I would have predicted and included Spain being really hot from three and the USA not valuing some of their possessions and settling for jumpers. I think '12 Spain is worse than '08 Spain while '12 USA is better than '08 USA, but that same scenario could present itself again. Will Kobe step up to bail the USA out or will James/Durant/Anthony be able to lead the way if it's close and late? Also, what lineup will K use if it's close? I think the best lineup is actually Paul, Durant, James, Anthony and Love/Chandler, although if Kobe is in for Anthony, it is still one of our best lineups. In either case, Coach K has to choose to sit either the leading scorer from '06 and '08 and one of the best scorers on the current roster in Anthony, the 5-time champ and unquestioned big shot hitter in Kobe . . . or he could even choose to sit Durant, the leading scorer and leader of the '10 World Team and NBA scoring champ. These are good problems, though, and I'm hopeful it won't be that close.

Duvall
08-10-2012, 06:30 PM
Game's at 10:00 AM ET, unless it isn't.

g-money
08-10-2012, 06:32 PM
Thanks for all the updates COYS. I'll go out on a limb and say the gold medal game will be at 10 am EST, 7 am PST on Sunday.

Great win over Argentina today. If I'm Coach K I'm emphasizing one word in the post-game locker room tonight: FINISH.

I hope all of my fellow Duke fans will be setting aside time to tune into the game on Sunday. IMO, a second gold medal with the men's team would cement Coach K's legacy as much as a fourth national championship did.

GO USA!

blazindw
08-10-2012, 07:29 PM
NBCOlympics.com is showing the game will be played Sunday at 10am Eastern, and they also mentioned that time during the broadcast of the game. I would stick with that time...worst case, you'll be an hour early for the game. :)

Indoor66
08-10-2012, 07:44 PM
NBCOlympics.com is showing the game will be played Sunday at 10am Eastern, and they also mentioned that time during the broadcast of the game. I would stick with that time...worst case, you'll be an hour early for the game. :)

My Cable schedule shows the Gold Medal game at 10:00 A.M. Sunday. (Comcast out of Pompano Beach, FL)

blazindw
08-10-2012, 07:52 PM
My Cable schedule shows the Gold Medal game at 10:00 A.M. Sunday. (Comcast out of Pompano Beach, FL)

I'm at my parents' house in DFW and their guide is showing the game on at 9:00am Sunday Central , which of course would be 10:00am Eastern. My TiVo back home in DC is also showing a 10AM Eastern start.

-bdbd
08-10-2012, 08:12 PM
I'm not even going to attempt to figure out the game time =). I'll wait until someone tells me.

Anyway, you have to like how the USA has played during the Olympics. I'd say that the team has been playing better than even the '08 team. They have great chemistry. The maturation of the returnees from '08 is obvious and has made up for the absence of Howard or Bosh. Meanwhile, it's been great to watch Love buy-in to the team and perform at such a high level. We'd be in trouble without his size. Between Love and Chandler and the versatility of Lebron and Melo, our post play has actually been an advantage over most teams, not a weakness. Combine that with the torrid three point shooting and the ability of Lebron and Paul to handle zone defenses and you've got to like the USA's chances.

Spain is still dangerous, though, as the Gasols are bigger than anyone else when they're on the court together. They've got enough NBA talent to make the USA sweat. However, they don't have the perimeter defenders to hang with James, Durant, Paul, and Kobe. And, as good as Marc and Pau are, they're not particularly great rim-protectors. The USA will only lose if they are ice cold from three point range, refuse to attack the zone, fail to make the Spanish perimeter work on both ends of the court, AND Spain is hot really, really hot from three, makes a number of tough shots, and forces the USA into a few uncharacteristic errors. The way K is coaching and the way Lebron is leading on the court, I don't see the USA failing to attack the zone and play hard on D even if the thees aren't falling. The USA wore Argentina down the last two times they've met. They ran away from Spain late, in the friendly, too. The depth, talent, and composure of Team USA will wear down Spain, again. The only question is whether or not it wears them down late in the 4th, in which case the USA squeaks out a close win, or the USA is able to pull away from the start of the 4th or even earlier.

That being said, the Gold Medal game in '08 was closer than I would have predicted and included Spain being really hot from three and the USA not valuing some of their possessions and settling for jumpers. I think '12 Spain is worse than '08 Spain while '12 USA is better than '08 USA, but that same scenario could present itself again. Will Kobe step up to bail the USA out or will James/Durant/Anthony be able to lead the way if it's close and late? Also, what lineup will K use if it's close? I think the best lineup is actually Paul, Durant, James, Anthony and Love/Chandler, although if Kobe is in for Anthony, it is still one of our best lineups. In either case, Coach K has to choose to sit either the leading scorer from '06 and '08 and one of the best scorers on the current roster in Anthony, the 5-time champ and unquestioned big shot hitter in Kobe . . . or he could even choose to sit Durant, the leading scorer and leader of the '10 World Team and NBA scoring champ. These are good problems, though, and I'm hopeful it won't be that close.

Thanks COYS. Great summation. Though I might be inclined to think Spain has more of a shot than that. The announcers on today's game pronounced Spain's front line as "the best in this tournament." While Spain's perimeter has essentially underperformed expectations a bit, they still do have some quality there, which can always choose this moment to get hot. All we need is for Chandler to get into early foul trouble, and this could quickly turn into a perimeter (US) vs. interior (Spain) contest. If we are even a little off, then I am quite worried. We are, of course, not a bad rebounding team, but we will NOT be blowing away the Gasol's on the boards (and doesn't Spain have another big who is kinda imposing defensively?). That truly compounds the problem if our shots aren't falling...

Can't wait for 10AM eastern on Sunday. Will be interesting to see how K straegizes to hamper the Spanish interior/board edge.
I agree with the post saying that a second Gold, plus the refurbished national program overall, should really cement K's legacy at this level as well.

I'm predicting a competitive game into the 3rd quarter, whereupon the US depth starts to wear down the Spaniards. Looking for a 10-15 point margin at end. Fingers crossed.

USA! USA! USA! USA!
:D

MChambers
08-10-2012, 08:27 PM
I'm at my parents' house in DFW and their guide is showing the game on at 9:00am Sunday Central , which of course would be 10:00am Eastern. My TiVo back home in DC is also showing a 10AM Eastern start.

My teenage kids say the game is at 10 a.m. In Washington, DC, so I'm going with that.

I actually am not very worried. The U.S. team is very confident and explosive. I don't think Spain has the backcourt depth to stay with the U.S., although I wonder how effective Westbrook will be. I'd certainly take the U.S. giving 10 points.

Have to say that is so cool to see these NBA superstars really caring about winning Olympic gold. Coach K is an amazing coach.

gep
08-10-2012, 09:38 PM
Have to say that is so cool to see these NBA superstars really caring about winning Olympic gold. Coach K is an amazing coach.

Not only caring about winning the gold, but the enthusiasm and support they apparently have for each other. In the Argentina game, when Melo was draining those 3's, the guys on the bench were totally cheering. And when Melo walked off the court, Durant jumped on him with much joy. Very cool :cool:

msdukie
08-10-2012, 09:47 PM
10:00 AM ET, National Broadcasting Corporation's over the air broadcast television network.

COYS
08-10-2012, 10:59 PM
Thanks COYS. Great summation. Though I might be inclined to think Spain has more of a shot than that. The announcers on today's game pronounced Spain's front line as "the best in this tournament." While Spain's perimeter has essentially underperformed expectations a bit, they still do have some quality there, which can always choose this moment to get hot. All we need is for Chandler to get into early foul trouble, and this could quickly turn into a perimeter (US) vs. interior (Spain) contest. If we are even a little off, then I am quite worried. We are, of course, not a bad rebounding team, but we will NOT be blowing away the Gasol's on the boards (and doesn't Spain have another big who is kinda imposing defensively?). That truly compounds the problem if our shots aren't falling...

Can't wait for 10AM eastern on Sunday. Will be interesting to see how K straegizes to hamper the Spanish interior/board edge.
I agree with the post saying that a second Gold, plus the refurbished national program overall, should really cement K's legacy at this level as well.

I'm predicting a competitive game into the 3rd quarter, whereupon the US depth starts to wear down the Spaniards. Looking for a 10-15 point margin at end. Fingers crossed.

USA! USA! USA! USA!
:D

All good points, to be sure. I would argue, though, that if you count Lebron and Melo as forwards, since they split time at the PF position and Lebron even played some Center, that the USA equals or even bests Spain in the frontcourt. Love has played excellently and Chandler is rock solid. A frontline of Love/Chandler/Lebron/Melo is formidable in its own right and has its own advantages. Neither Pau nor Marc is equipped to handle Lebron or Melo on defense. Also, the USA rebounds excellently despite their size disadvantage in the post. In the most recent encounter between the USA and Spain back in July, the USA out-rebounded Spain 37-26. Now, I fully recognize that Marc Gasol didn't play in that game, but the Team USA is an excellent rebounding team. Love is probably one of the top 3 or even top 2 rebounders on the planet. Lebron is a sensational rebounder from the SF spot in the NBA and has been great in international play, especially when he plays PF. Melo is also an excellent rebounder from the SF spot who has been pretty good as a PF in international play. So I'm not disagreeing with you, per se. Marc and Pau Gasol could really hurt the USA. But I'm not so sure that the Spanish really have an advantage, other than having two more traditional post players that can play together while the USA generally only as one on the court at a time. I would bet that the combo of Melo/Chandler/Lebron/Love is more likely to out-produces the Spanish frontline than the other way around. Of course, in a single game, anything can happen. But quite frankly, the Team USA really shouldn't give too much up in the paint . . . and what they give up there they should make it up with the outside-in play of Melo and Lebron.

Reilly
08-10-2012, 11:02 PM
... I think the best lineup is actually Paul, Durant, James, Anthony and Love/Chandler, although if Kobe is in for Anthony, it is still one of our best lineups. ....

Anthony runs hot and cold for me. I cussed him a lot today. Kobe's been the same way, but trending warmer. Lebron is unreal: his self-effacing play, and then periodic outbursts, have been wonderful. Paul's lobs today, and overall game mgmt, were very nice.

Atlanta Duke
08-11-2012, 09:35 AM
I agree with the post saying that a second Gold, plus the refurbished national program overall, should really cement K's legacy at this level as well.


Except for K's drinking problem now being a matter of public record:)

The only memorable mistake -- which will be remembered by most of the reporters there -- was made by Krzyzewski, who after the game was asked if any coaching was needed for such an explosive team of players. "None. None,'' answered Krzyzewski sarcastically with a grin. "Absolutely none. I'm out every night with my family and drunk as a skunk. Wait till you see me tonight. I'll be home at 6 [a.m.], and you're all welcome to join me.''

A few minutes later, after Durant had joined his coach at the postgame news conference, a non-American journalist asked him about the pressure of having to win every game. The journalist began his question to Durant by saying, "Coach K said he's going out every other night drinking and -- ''

"Hold on,'' said Krzyzewski. "I was joking.''

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/olympics/2012/writers/ian_thomsen/08/10/us-argentina-basketball-semifinals/index.html?eref=sihp&sct=hp_t12_a0

miramar
08-11-2012, 10:31 AM
I was in Spain for most of July so I saw a number of their exhibition games on TV (France, Tunisia, Australia, Argentina, USA). They surprisingly started out looking like guys who didn't even know each other, although they naturally improved over time. Nevertheless, after going undefeated against all the other teams, they lost to Team USA at home by 22, although Carmelo's 23 first-half points certainly were a huge factor.

Their big advantage over the US is naturally their front line of Gasol 1, Gasol 2, and Ibaka, and sure enough Tyson Chandler got into foul problems early in Barcelona. Fortunately, when Carmelo came in for Chandler, Spain had no answer and the rout was on. Ibaka started out looking great inside but he quickly faded, which was a surprise considering that the US had a much smaller team on the floor when he disappeared.

While everybody in Spain was expecting an Olympic rematch with the US, this Spanish team looks worse than the one in Beijing. After beating China and Australia handily in pool play, they beat England by only 1 and then lost to Russia and Brazil. They regrouped and beat France by 7 (although France won the fights) and Russia by 8 to get to the championship game, but scored only 66 and 67 points in the process.

Obviously they can't beat the US by scoring in the sixties, but the American defense is a lot better than France's and Russia's, so that's a huge problem for them. Spain is also not very athletic, so if the US moves the ball around they should get open threes all game long (Carmelo had nothing but open shots). Spain needs to get the ball inside to their bigs, but their guard play is not great without Ricky Rubio, so that's easier said than done.

I'm looking forward to a good game, but at the end the US will be lifting the trophy just as they did in the first image of this slide show from Barcelona:

http://www.feb.es/galeria.aspx?idg=28144

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
08-11-2012, 01:02 PM
If there were any confusion, Yahoo is reporting that tomorrow will be Coach K's final game as coach for Team USA. Let's hope he goes out with another gold; what a great cherry on the top of his legacy that could be.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/krzyzewski-gold-medal-game-last-152828956--oly.html

Dukehky
08-11-2012, 02:52 PM
Thanks for all the updates COYS. I'll go out on a limb and say the gold medal game will be at 10 am EST, 7 am PST on Sunday.

Great win over Argentina today. If I'm Coach K I'm emphasizing one word in the post-game locker room tonight: FINISH.

I hope all of my fellow Duke fans will be setting aside time to tune into the game on Sunday. IMO, a second gold medal with the men's team would cement Coach K's legacy as much as a fourth national championship did.

GO USA!

I want to start off by saying that I could not be more proud and impressed with Coach K's dedication to both his country and team USA and their performances over the last 6 years; however, I strongly disagree with your premise. 2 Gold Medals (knock on wood) certainly boosts K's resume, but I don't think it cements his legacy anywhere near the accomplishment of a National Championship.

Team USA's resurgence after the 2004 debacle, is something that I attribute far more to the players that chose to make it a goal of theirs to make sure everyone knows that USA Basketball is number one. The fact that the best players in the NBA wanted to play in 2008 and again in 2012 has a lot more to do with the USA Basketball than the coach. In addition to wanting to play, their willingness to defer for the betterment of the team in addition to taking coaching is something special. Coach K has said from the start that he doesn't really DO all that much. He lets them go on offense as long as they play hard on defense. Granted, that realization that he doesn't have to do much is a great coaching perspective with players of this level, but I find that the players themselves are what make USA Basketball what it is. Maybe we're splitting hairs here, but there's a reason the Coach doesn't get a gold medal.

Reilly
08-11-2012, 04:03 PM
Per wikipedia, how his teams have fared ...

Year - Site - Competition - Role - Result

1979 - Puerto Rico - Pan Am Games - assistant coach - GOLD
1984 - Los Angeles - Olympics - assistant coach - GOLD
1987 - Zagreb - World University Games - head coach - Silver
1990 - Seattle - Goodwill Games - head coach - Silver
1990 - Argentina - FIBA World Cup - head coach - bronze
1992 - Portland - FIBA Americas - assistant coach - GOLD
1992 - Barcelona - Olympics - assistant coach - GOLD
2006 - Japan - FIBA World Cup - head coach - bronze
2007 - Las Vegas - FIBA Americas - head coach - GOLD
2008 - Bejing - Olympics - head coach - GOLD
2010 - Turkey - FIBA World Cup - head coach - GOLD
2012 - London - Olympics - head coach - xxxx

Assistant Coach: 4 Gold
Head Coach: 3 Gold, 2 Silver, 2 bronze (pattern: Silver, Silver, bronze, bronze, GOLD, GOLD, GOLD, xxxx)
Total: 7 Gold, 2 Silver, 2 bronze

If the USA Team wins the GOLD tomorrow, K finishes his 8 head coaching stints with 4 straight Gold medals.

licc85
08-11-2012, 11:54 PM
I don't think Coach K has ever had more pressure to win a basketball game in his career than tonight's game vs. Spain. It's pretty much the game that will define his career and legacy in international basketball. Go USA.

http://espn.go.com/olympics/summer/2012/basketball/story/_/id/8259943/2012-olympics-it-coach-k-going-style

roywhite
08-12-2012, 06:44 AM
I don't think Coach K has ever had more pressure to win a basketball game in his career than tonight's game vs. Spain. It's pretty much the game that will define his career and legacy in international basketball. Go USA.

http://espn.go.com/olympics/summer/2012/basketball/story/_/id/8259943/2012-olympics-it-coach-k-going-style

Really good piece. Thanks for posting.


Colangelo, whose own loose timetable calls for resolving the coaching situation by the start of 2013, said Saturday that he still remembers the meeting back in 2005 in which North Carolina coaching legend Dean Smith, surveying all the various names on Colangelo's blackboard from every segment of the coaching population as a USAB consultant, said there was only one man in the college game who could handle all those NBA millionaires.

"This was [Krzyzewski's] big rival," Colangelo reminded. "That was one of those [unforgettable] moments."

Reilly
08-12-2012, 06:49 AM
K's quoted as saying a win today gives the USA 3 gold in a row in major (Olympic, FIBA World) competition.

Only been done before in 1952-56 and in 1992-96.

US finish in Olympics and FIBA World's, in chronological order:

1936 - gold
1948 - gold
1950 - silver
1952 - gold
1954 - gold
1956 - gold
1959 - silver
1960 - gold
1963 - 4th place
1964 - gold
1967 - 4th place
1968 - gold
1970 - 5th place
1972 - silver
1974 - bronze
1976 - gold
1978 - 5th place
1980 - boycott
1982 - silver
1984 - gold
1986 - gold
1988 - bronze
1990 - bronze
1992 - gold
1994 - gold
1996 - gold
1998 - bronze
2000 - gold
2002 - 6th place
2004 - bronze
2006 - bronze
2008 - gold
2010 - gold
2012 - ____

Reilly
08-12-2012, 07:01 AM
As to the next coach speculation in the espn article, it's interesting that Doug Collins is doing color commentary, and Doc Rivers is providing studio analysis. Both are "around" the scene. Collins would make a compelling story given 1972.

As to Dean being quoted, he was actually on my mind before reading that piece. 1976 and Mitch Kupchak and Dean are my first memory of Olympic basketball ... and I had a wave of sadness this morning thinking of Dean, who was always so in control and involved in everything, and how I guess he may not even be aware of today's game.

BD80
08-12-2012, 09:42 AM
As to the next coach speculation in the espn article, it's interesting that Doug Collins is doing color commentary, and Doc Rivers is providing studio analysis. Both are "around" the scene. Collins would make a compelling story given 1972.

As to Dean being quoted, he was actually on my mind before reading that piece. 1976 and Mitch Kupchak and Dean are my first memory of Olympic basketball ... and I had a wave of sadness this morning thinking of Dean, who was always so in control and involved in everything, and how I guess he may not even be aware of today's game.

Deano can still outcoach ol' roy

moonpie23
08-12-2012, 09:58 AM
time to rock!!! LET'S GO USA!!!

moonpie23
08-12-2012, 10:23 AM
i may have to lay off my westbrook hatin........on the bench, HE's the guy soaking up every syllable outta K's mouth....

subzero02
08-12-2012, 11:10 AM
Westbrook needs to attend Chris Paul's point guard skills camp... His ball handling leaves a bit to be desired

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
08-12-2012, 11:26 AM
Am I crazy or is the reffing in this game completely different from the entire rest of the tournament? US needs to adjust QUICK or they will be in big trouble.

moonpie23
08-12-2012, 11:34 AM
i don't like how easily gasol is owning the middle....

Atlanta Duke
08-12-2012, 11:34 AM
Am I crazy or is the reffing in this game completely different from the entire rest of the tournament? US needs to adjust QUICK or they will be in big trouble.

K having flashbacks to the 2004 UConn national semi final?

Up 1 point - 10 minutes to go for the gold - yikes

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
08-12-2012, 11:35 AM
K having flashbacks to the 2004 UConn national semi final?

Up 1 point - 10 minutes to go for the gold - yikes

Every time Spain shoots and we don't get whistled for a foul, I'm surprised.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
08-12-2012, 11:39 AM
This could get chippy real fast. They are playing really physical.

MulletMan
08-12-2012, 11:44 AM
Rudy Fernandez is garbage.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
08-12-2012, 11:46 AM
They called a foul on one of our threes? Must have been a mistake.

How awesome is Durant/Lebron going to be over the next eight years?

subzero02
08-12-2012, 11:51 AM
K having flashbacks to the 2004 UConn national semi final?

Up 1 point - 10 minutes to go for the gold - yikes

I was thinking the same thing... Especially at the 3 minute mark up by 6

g-money
08-12-2012, 11:54 AM
Lebron!

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
08-12-2012, 11:56 AM
Nasty moving pick by Pau on Paul...

RoyalBlue08
08-12-2012, 11:56 AM
Our game...clap,clap....our game.....clap,clap....

uh_no
08-12-2012, 12:03 PM
Our game...clap,clap....our game.....clap,clap....

fly home safely....

moonpie23
08-12-2012, 12:05 PM
golden!!!! congrats guys.......

moonpie23
08-12-2012, 12:06 PM
i'll be revving me up some fernandez hate for the rest of the year...

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
08-12-2012, 12:07 PM
Impressive win. Sketchy officiating at best, very different style than we had encountered previously, got socked in the mouth and walked away with gold.

Exceptional job - proud of our guys and of Coach K.

NSDukeFan
08-12-2012, 12:37 PM
Impressive win. Sketchy officiating at best, very different style than we had encountered previously, got socked in the mouth and walked away with gold.

Exceptional job - proud of our guys and of Coach K.

I thought it classy of the guys to acknowledge Doug Collins when they had won. Great to see the joy from the players and coaches. Well earned victory. Why did Spain hide Ibaka the whole tournament until the final when he was clearly their third best big? The Gasols are awesome and that was key that Spain allowed Marc to pick up his fourth. I am very excited to be able to see great players playing tough team basketball. Great to see and congratulations!

grossbus
08-12-2012, 12:39 PM
K collecting a lot of props on the tube and also a shower and hug from LaBron.


doug collins: Coach K defines winning.

roywhite
08-12-2012, 12:39 PM
Congratulations to a terrific USA team and their great head coach Mike Krzyzewski!

That was a hard-earned win over a very good opponent.
Great team effort to get the gold.

alteran
08-12-2012, 12:45 PM
Westbrook needs to attend Chris Paul's point guard skills camp... His ball handling leaves a bit to be desired

Julius Hodge could certainly give Chris Paul a reference there, if needed.

CoachJ10
08-12-2012, 01:01 PM
thinks the FIBA referees were trying to "bail-out" Spain.

Kevin Durant is made to shoot against zones. No better spot shooter in recent memory. And LBJ is a one man zone buster. Slices and dices them to pieces.

Great all around effort by Team USA in this tournament. Bringing home the Gold is a great accomplishment for these young men, and we should be proud of how they played.

Billy Dat
08-12-2012, 01:08 PM
Going into the game, I really thought Team USA was going to blow Spain out. I thought the same thing in 2008, which should have given me pause this year.

The first half was awful because of all the fouls. Navarro was playing out of his mind. Our defense was really suspect...about halfway through the third, I accepted that it was going to be close and tried to stay calm.

The 4th Quarter was really exciting. Team USA got the stops they needed, Durant was huge, and Lebron and CP3 made the big plays down the stretch. The Lebron 3, which I screamed, "NO!" as he was shooting it, was destined to go in to cap his amazing year. I couldn't believe that K emptied the bench so early, that got a little more hairy then it needed to be. Whatever, Team USA won.

They really were a great team. I think they were better than 2008 because they had such lethal scoring ability. Had they proven to be a better defensive unit, I think you could have made some better 1992 arguments but they really were just average defensively, mostly because their offense was so superior that they really didn't need to lock down. Bottom line, they got stops when they needed to.

I think Lebron, Durant, Melo, Paul, Deron Williams and Kevin Love were the real impact players for the team. Harden and Davis were mop up guys, Iggy wound up in that role, and Westbrook was left holding the short end of the Paul/Williams/Westbrook rotation. Kobe had a significant impact, but was more of a senior leader. Chandler did what he was supposed to do. They were a really exciting team to follow for a month and a half.

As for K, it was a great end to an amazing Team USA run. I still think he'll ultimately wind up in Colangelo's job. As for the next Coach...Pop or Doc Rivers are my guesses. I always love Team USA summers, it made the overall hoops season run from October - August. Now the real offseason begins and I'll be happy that it's that much shorter!

sagegrouse
08-12-2012, 01:19 PM
Doug Collins saying, "I had a son play for Coach K; Doc had a son play for Coach K. I'll tell you this: he is not about X's and O's, he is about building relationships among the players and with the team as a whole."

Wow! What praise! It also rubs in how Duke is so central to the Olympic team -- with K at the helm and two NBA coaches with sons at Duke providing the commentary. Plus, of course, Chris and Wojo on the coaching staff.

sagegrouse
'At least, I think it was Doug, not Doc, who said that. I'd appreciate anyone who could retrieve the exact quote'

weezie
08-12-2012, 01:21 PM
Haha, took the words out ma' mouth.

Actually experienced a few milliseconds of appreciation for "our Karl", as in, wowser!

BD80
08-12-2012, 01:48 PM
Julius Hodge could certainly give Chris Paul a reference there, if needed.

Knuckles ≠ handling

Kobe did not look like one of the best players in the world. He certainly is no longer one of the best defenders in the world.

Pau Gasol looked like one of the best players in the world, far better than he looks in NBA playoff games.

I now like Lebron James.

So when does Coach K get back to recruiting???? You don't mean to say all of this success and attention could have a beneficial effect?

Which recruit gets his 1st call? Or is it a multi-recipient text?

uh_no
08-12-2012, 02:14 PM
Knuckles ≠ handling

Kobe did not look like one of the best players in the world. He certainly is no longer one of the best defenders in the world.

Pau Gasol looked like one of the best players in the world, far better than he looks in NBA playoff games.

I now like Lebron James.

So when does Coach K get back to recruiting???? You don't mean to say all of this success and attention could have a beneficial effect?

Which recruit gets his 1st call? Or is it a multi-recipient text?

what can you say...the guy wins when you surround him with other all stars /sarcasm

my lebron hate aside, he was very classy in his demeanor and interviews

Indoor66
08-12-2012, 02:19 PM
what can you say...the guy wins when you surround him with other all stars /sarcasm


No one wins championships without being surrounded with star talent. That is a rediculous criticism of LaBron - even with the sarcasm tag.

Acymetric
08-12-2012, 02:27 PM
Can anyone tell me what that gold stuffed animal looking thing was? The players were carrying it around during the celebration.

pfrduke
08-12-2012, 02:51 PM
Can anyone tell me what that gold stuffed animal looking thing was? The players were carrying it around during the celebration.

One of the Olympic mascots.

Lord Ash
08-12-2012, 03:00 PM
Doug Collins saying, "I had a son play for Coach K; Doc had a son play for Coach K. I'll tell you this: he is not about X's and O's, he is about building relationships among the players and with the team as a whole."

Wow! What praise! It also rubs in how Duke is so central to the Olympic team -- with K at the helm and two NBA coaches with sons at Duke providing the commentary. Plus, of course, Chris and Wojo on the coaching staff.

sagegrouse
'At least, I think it was Doug, not Doc, who said that. I'd appreciate anyone who could retrieve the exact quote'

Yep, it was Doug. I loved that quote.

Wheat/"/"/"
08-12-2012, 03:53 PM
Certainly glad to see the U.S. team take the gold, but count me on the side that thinks this "team" was not that impressive as a unit. ( I have high standards for our best players).

We saw great individual play at times from Labron, Durant, Paul and Carmello, but I thought the poor offensive play in particular was bailed out time and again by an individual hot shooter from outside, or an individual clear out for a dribble attack. That's a recipe for failure as the world talent level catches up.

The post play was pretty weak on both ends, I thought, for a championship team.

Defense was not as good as I had hoped either. They were quick and aggressive but Spain made the extra pass and broke the U.S. down for much of the game. Three point shooting bailed the US out, not defense.

They did play hard and seemed to embrace the whole USA basketball experience, and that's a credit to Coangelo and coach K.

Still too much talent on the floor for the rest of the world to challenge, for now.

And no way this team would beat the dream team...

roywhite
08-12-2012, 04:27 PM
Certainly glad to see the U.S. team take the gold, but count me on the side that thinks this "team" was not that impressive as a unit. ( I have high standards for our best players).

We saw great individual play at times from Labron, Durant, Paul and Carmello, but I thought the poor offensive play in particular was bailed out time and again by an individual hot shooter from outside, or an individual clear out for a dribble attack. That's a recipe for failure as the world talent level catches up.

The post play was pretty weak on both ends, I thought, for a championship team.

Defense was not as good as I had hoped either. They were quick and aggressive but Spain made the extra pass and broke the U.S. down for much of the game. Three point shooting bailed the US out, not defense.

They did play hard and seemed to embrace the whole USA basketball experience, and that's a credit to Coangelo and coach K.

Still too much talent on the floor for the rest of the world to challenge, for now.

And no way this team would beat the dream team...

Yikes, Wheat, that was a little sour. Did you actually use quotes for "team"?

The offense featured some great individual play yet not very good (you actually used the word poor) overall offensive play?

Don't agree with that; yes, this team shot a lot of 3's, but they produced good quality looks from 3-points, and had an incredible arsenal of shooters (greater than any team I've ever seen, NBA or international). The USA got very good play from the PG position in Chris Paul and backup Deron Williams.

Weakness in the post? Yes, probably so, but we saw that coming with an unfortunate rash of injuries before and during the trials.

Weaknesses on defense? Vulnerable inside as noted in post play, but plenty of quickness on the perimeter and that caused big problems for the opponents. In a tough gold medal game, the US did use good perimeter defense in the second half, and especially the 4th quarter, to get the win.

Seems to me there is a reluctance for some observers to give much credit to a team that makes liberal use of 3-point shooting, that it somehow doesn't constitute what we think of as a great team. This team shot a ton of 3's and was a great team. Period.

sagegrouse
08-12-2012, 04:52 PM
Certainly glad to see the U.S. team take the gold, but count me on the side that thinks this "team" was not that impressive as a unit. ( I have high standards for our best players).

We saw great individual play at times from Labron, Durant, Paul and Carmello, but I thought the poor offensive play in particular was bailed out time and again by an individual hot shooter from outside, or an individual clear out for a dribble attack. That's a recipe for failure as the world talent level catches up.

...


Yikes, Wheat, that was a little sour. Did you actually use quotes for "team"?

The offense featured some great individual play yet not very good (you actually used the word poor) overall offensive play?

Don't agree with that; yes, this team shot a lot of 3's, but they produced good quality looks from 3-points, and had an incredible arsenal of shooters (greater than any team I've ever seen, NBA or international). The USA got very good play from the PG position in Chris Paul and backup Deron Williams.
.................................................. ..
Seems to me there is a reluctance for some observers to give much credit to a team that makes liberal use of 3-point shooting, that it somehow doesn't constitute what we think of as a great team. This team shot a ton of 3's and was a great team. Period.

For the record, I think a major component of the offensive strategy was several "hot shooter[s] from outside." The USA shot 129 of 293 from three for a stat of 0.440, which is high productivity. The "team" was selected, at least in part, based on shooting and scoring capability, as one would surely expect. And, given the results, it is hard to argue with that selection criteria.

sagegrouse

COYS
08-12-2012, 04:57 PM
Certainly glad to see the U.S. team take the gold, but count me on the side that thinks this "team" was not that impressive as a unit. ( I have high standards for our best players).

We saw great individual play at times from Labron, Durant, Paul and Carmello, but I thought the poor offensive play in particular was bailed out time and again by an individual hot shooter from outside, or an individual clear out for a dribble attack. That's a recipe for failure as the world talent level catches up.

The post play was pretty weak on both ends, I thought, for a championship team.

Defense was not as good as I had hoped either. They were quick and aggressive but Spain made the extra pass and broke the U.S. down for much of the game. Three point shooting bailed the US out, not defense.

They did play hard and seemed to embrace the whole USA basketball experience, and that's a credit to Coangelo and coach K.

Still too much talent on the floor for the rest of the world to challenge, for now.

And no way this team would beat the dream team...


Wheat, I usually consider you pretty reasonable, but this seems more like you didn't watch more than the gold medal game AND it seems that you didn't pay much attention at the details even during the game. The USA's assist rate on offense was FANTASTIC the entire tournament. The gold medal game was the worst, and that was at least partially due to Spain's insistence on fouling at every fast-break opportunity. That being said, the USA kept their offensive efficiency very high the entire game and Lebron and Paul were fantastic creating for others off the dribble. The way the USA attacked the zone was picture perfect most of the time. In fact, Melo and Durant scored most of their points without even having to dribble, and when the Spanish zone managed to cover the shooters, Lebron and Paul were able to score at the rim. Wide open corner threes created off of good ball movement = good offense. Getting inside the zone = good offense. The occasional awesome shot by Kobe after one on one play = what you need from time to time when the offense stalls. They definitely played as a "team" even if you didn't like the way they played (still, as I said, their offensive efficiency and assist rates were absolutely phenomenal . . . what more do you want from the offense to make it more like a "team?" one on one post ups?).

I'll agree that the team was never a defensive juggernaut, and this was the area where I have the biggest problem with the team. Too many lapses and not enough consistency. But they weren't bad.

Also, realize that Spain is just very good. The Gasols are All Stars in the NBA. The Spanish guards have always been much better in international play and some of them are pretty dang good in the NBA, too. The USA is more talented than Spain, yes, but I'd bet the USA's win percentage over 100 games with the Spanish would only be 80-90%. The days are gone when the best USA teams are truly incapable of losing.

Wheat/"/"/"
08-12-2012, 05:01 PM
Yikes, Wheat, that was a little sour. Did you actually use quotes for "team"?.

I did, because I did not see a single set play in the second half that involved screens/multiple passes to break Spain down in the half court. It was all one on one moves, quick long range jumpers. I think we will need to see better team play and ball movement in the future as the world gets better.

And yea, I know injuries limited our choices for bigs, but bottom line is we didn't do as good a job inside on either end of the court as my expectations are for our best.

I'm happy and proud we won the gold, everyone involved did a great job. Including coach K setting the leadership tone.

But its my opinion we could have played much better.

Tom B.
08-12-2012, 05:13 PM
The 4th Quarter was really exciting. Team USA got the stops they needed, Durant was huge, and Lebron and CP3 made the big plays down the stretch.






How about K jumping up and down on the sideline after Paul hit that driving reverse layup as the shot clock expired to put the game out of reach? Not bad for a guy with two artificial hips. I bet he got a good six inches of air on those leaps.

CajunDevil
08-12-2012, 06:22 PM
If only we could have run more set plays, or perhaps been coached by a UNC alum... maybe George Karl or Larry Brown, then, who knows - maybe we would have won the gold. Oh wait, we WON the gold???

Wheat, your hatred of all things Duke basketball has colored your view of Team USA... unfortunate.

fgb
08-12-2012, 06:27 PM
I thought the poor offensive play in particular was bailed out time and again by an individual hot shooter from outside, or an individual clear out for a dribble attack.

this is imo an odd criticism. any well-coached team knows that on offense, you take what the defense gives you. they gave us open looks from the outside. so, not really a hot shooter bailing us out, but rather both the team recognizing where the weak points in the defense were, and recognizing who had the hot hand.

Greg_Newton
08-12-2012, 06:31 PM
I did, because I did not see a single set play in the second half that involved screens/multiple passes to break Spain down in the half court. It was all one on one moves, quick long range jumpers. I think we will need to see better team play and ball movement in the future as the world gets better.

If you watched that game and thought offense was the problem, frankly, you're insane. The US scored an astronomical 1.53 points per shot.

The problem was on defense, where we game up a similarly absurd 1.49 PPS, gave up 27 points on FTs, and forced only 11 TOs (only a couple of which we capitalized on).

Pretty simple.

Wheat/"/"/"
08-12-2012, 06:52 PM
Not sure why so many seem to think my criticism of the O team is an attack on coach K, I'd have made the same comments no matter who was coaching.

He didn't have the bigs to play the way I think we will need to play in the future. I don't blame him for anything negative, he got it done with what he had.

I also think the players were very impatient on offense. They are great players and think they can make every shot, any coach would have a hard time getting these guys to pass up shots for better ones.

I'd be happy to respond to you guys that are leaving snotty, unsigned comments, just as soon as you find a spine to sign them.

It's the worst thing about the board and shouldn't be tolerated by moderators.

Wheat/"/"/"
08-12-2012, 07:04 PM
If you watched that game and thought offense was the problem, frankly, you're insane. The US scored an astronomical 1.53 points per shot.

The problem was on defense, where we game up a similarly absurd 1.49 PPS, gave up 27 points on FTs, and forced only 11 TOs (only a couple of which we capitalized on).

Pretty simple.

All looks good when the 3's fall. My concern is what happens when the competition gets better, or it's an off shooting day?

Duvall
08-12-2012, 07:18 PM
Not sure why so many seem to think my criticism of the O team is an attack on coach K, I'd have made the same comments no matter who was coaching.

He didn't have the bigs to play the way I think we will need to play in the future. I don't blame him for anything negative, he got it done with what he had.

I also think the players were very impatient on offense. They are great players and think they can make every shot, any coach would have a hard time getting these guys to pass up shots for better ones.

I think people had more of a problem with the fact that you described a team that scored 1.29 points per possession in the gold medal game and 1.36 points per possession in the Olympic tournament as having "poor offensive play." That's not just efficient scoring, that's unbelievably efficient scoring - so good that it is difficult to imagine any other approach being any more effective. You may not respect an offensive approach that relies on penetration and perimeter shooting, but any reasonable person should acknowledge the fact that it worked brilliantly for the entire fortnight.

roywhite
08-12-2012, 07:25 PM
All looks good when the 3's fall. My concern is what happens when the competition gets better, or it's an off shooting day?

A tournament with a single loss format is inherently dangerous; we regularly see it in the NCAA Tournament, and there are surprising results in the Olympics, also. So seems to me that this USA team, or any team for that matter, needed to play the style that best suited their strengths. Which they did.

As to the tone of discourse here, I haven't left any unsigned pitchfork comments for you, but I did think your characterization of this Olympic championship group as a "team" was really unjustified.

Wheat/"/"/"
08-12-2012, 07:37 PM
As to the tone of discourse here, I haven't left any unsigned pitchfork comments for you, but I did think your characterization of this Olympic championship group as a "team" was really unjustified.

I'm happy to defend my comments in a respectful manner, and I appreciate those here who do the same.

Maybe the use of the quotes was not necessary, My thoughts were to make the point that they didn't share the ball and move in the half court as well as I thought they could have.

Wander
08-12-2012, 07:39 PM
I think people had more of a problem with the fact that you described a team that scored 1.29 points per possession in the gold medal game and 1.36 points per possession in the Olympic tournament as having "poor offensive play."

Exactly. For comparison's sake, the top offensive team of the last ten years in college basketball (2005 UNC), scored only 1.27 points per possession. Obviously that's a different level of play, but in theory that's adjusted for level of competition already. Any criticism of the offense of this team is at best nitpicking and at worst ignorant of how the team performed. There are legit things to bring up about the defense, though.

COYS
08-12-2012, 07:47 PM
I'm happy to defend my comments in a respectful manner, and I appreciate those here who do the same.

Maybe the use of the quotes was not necessary, My thoughts were to make the point that they didn't share the ball and move in the half court as well as I thought they could have.

I apologize for those who left you the anonymous negatives. I was certainly not one of them, but I understand how that gets under your skin and it happens to brave souls like yourself who venture over here despite the hostile surroundings.

That being said, as I said in my original response to your post, it seems like you didn't watch any of the other games. Maybe I'm wrong. You asked "what happens when the threes stop falling?" The answer is what the USA did against the zone that Argentina used. The USA was cold from outside. Lebron and Chris Paul were MASTERFUL at penetrating the zone and hitting guys for layups, short jumpers, or even creating for themselves. Any team needs good outside shooting to win the championship. UNC 2005 and 2009 broke through in large part because they shot EXCELLENTLY from outside (2009 especially with both Ellington and Lawson going crazy from downtown during the tourney run). Team USA had that, but they made adjustments when they weren't hitting while at the same time they didn't lose confidence in their shooting, knowing that it was one of their best weapons.

I'll agree that there were a few instances in the 4th quarter where the USA was impatient, but I actually thought there were more instances of the team being too patient in which the ball handler (whether it was Lebron, Kobe, or Paul) waited too long to make a move and therefore had to shoot themselves rather than pass the ball. However, for the most part, it was impressive how they worked for and got (most of the time) shots that were high quality for the people taking them.

Now, any criticism of the defense is fine, in my opinion, because it was lacking, especially in the Gold Medal game. But I really think that your picture of the Team USA offense is mostly off base and based on a number assumptions that I don't think are true, the most obvious being that an open three point shot is not a reliable shot for guys like Durant and Melo in international play. I mean, those guys were seriously wide open on most of their attempts.

Wheat/"/"/"
08-12-2012, 07:55 PM
You may not respect an offensive approach that relies on penetration and perimeter shooting, but any reasonable person should acknowledge the fact that it worked brilliantly for the entire fortnight.

I thought I did acknowledge that it was the perimeter shooting and penetration got it done?

I will have to stop short of saying it worked brilliantly when the game was in doubt in the final minutes, but hey, they did get it done.

Bluedog
08-12-2012, 08:03 PM
Place Team Games Wins Losses Point Differential
1 United States 8 8 0 +257
2 Spain 8 5 3 +28
3 Russia 8 6 2 +46
4 Argentina 8 4 4 −1

Seems like a pretty dominant tournament for a "team" to me...Was the gold medal game close? Yes, but anything can happen in a single game. Spain happened to hit a lot of 3s and played their best game in a long time. If it was 4 out of 7, I'd expect the series wouldn't be even close. The U.S. showed that they're the best team in the world and it's not close, especially if you consider consistency. Certainly, they can lose a single game, but, in the end, they demonstrated that they are a great team. Spain can play a single great game, but no way can they show the ability to just obliterate teams fairly routinely like the U.S. did.

Duvall
08-12-2012, 08:06 PM
I will have to stop short of saying it worked brilliantly when the game was in doubt in the final minutes, but hey, they did get it done.

And as has been noted earlier, there are two ends of the floor.

But thanks for the faint praise.

mo.st.dukie
08-12-2012, 08:09 PM
I thought I did acknowledge that it was the perimeter shooting and penetration got it done?

I will have to stop short of saying it worked brilliantly when the game was in doubt in the final minutes, but hey, they did get it done.

Could it possibly be the fact that Spain is pretty darn good? That's a big reason why the game was close, the other team and a little something to do with it. Having two veteran NBA All-Star big men and a total of 9 guys who have played or still are playing in the NBA can have an impact.

If your criticism of the offense is due to the fact that the game was close then you are missing the fact that international competition has become insanely good. Nevermind the fact that Spain was much bigger than the U.S. Those guys playing for Spain can flat out play the game of basketball. I think there are still a lot of American basketball fans who think that the U.S should win every game by 20+ because the international simply can't keep up. Anybody surprised by a close game today hasn't been paying very close attentional to international competition over the last 10+ years. Even if we had Dwight Howard it still would've been a close game as seen in 08.And anybody who thinks this group didn't display good ball movement or team play didn't watch every single game of the competition. They've even had many times where they were too unselfish and tried to make too many passes.

chrishoke
08-12-2012, 08:15 PM
The defense was not very good the whole tournament - the offense was very strong - we just outscored teams - we had incredible runs.

Wheat/"/"/"
08-12-2012, 08:17 PM
Seems like a pretty dominant tournament for a "team" to me...Was the gold medal game close? Yes, but anything can happen in a single game. Spain happened to hit a lot of 3s and played their best game in a long time. If it was 4 out of 7, I'd expect the series wouldn't be even close. The U.S. showed that they're the best team in the world and it's not close, especially if you consider consistency. Certainly, they can lose a single game, but, in the end, they demonstrated that they are a great team. Spain can play a single great game, but no way can they show the ability to just obliterate teams fairly routinely like the U.S. did.

There is no doubt that we have a big talent advantage against the majority of the world and easily beat most teams like the proverbial "red headed step child" no matter what style we attempt.

dcdevil2009
08-12-2012, 08:17 PM
I keep reading that Lebron is the only player other than Jordan to win an Olympic gold medal, an NBA championship, and an NBA MVP, but it's often overlooked that Laettner and Davis had won NCAA championships and NCAA player of the year awards in their Olympic years. That's quite the year.

Wheat/"/"/"
08-12-2012, 08:19 PM
Could it possibly be the fact that Spain is pretty darn good? That's a big reason why the game was close, the other team and a little something to do with it. Having two veteran NBA All-Star big men and a total of 9 guys who have played or still are playing in the NBA can have an impact.

If your criticism of the offense is due to the fact that the game was close then you are missing the fact that international competition has become insanely good. Nevermind the fact that Spain was much bigger than the U.S. Those guys playing for Spain can flat out play the game of basketball. I think there are still a lot of American basketball fans who think that the U.S should win every game by 20+ because the international simply can't keep up. Anybody surprised by a close game today hasn't been paying very close attentional to international competition over the last 10+ years. Even if we had Dwight Howard it still would've been a close game as seen in 08.

We agree, Spain is very good.

dcdevil2009
08-12-2012, 08:30 PM
There is no doubt that we have a big talent advantage against the majority of the world and easily beat most teams like the proverbial "red headed step child" no matter what style we attempt.

Maybe that's where we disagree. Even though we have a big talent advantage over the majority of the world, Spain is the minority of the world who had more talent in the post than the US. Given Spain's advantage down low, it made sense for the US to play to its advantage on the perimeter.

COYS
08-12-2012, 08:30 PM
There is no doubt that we have a big talent advantage against the majority of the world and easily beat most teams like the proverbial "red headed step child" no matter what style we attempt.

Except this is not true, as 2002-2006 demonstrated. The margin for error is much smaller than it used to be. Team USA has to maximize its capabilities to win in dominant fashion and, come the medal rounds, must play darn good basketball to advance.

Honestly, I think you and I would agree that the defense needs to improve for team USA to win in the future. I just think it's hard to argue against the offensive approach, which on one of its bottom of the barrel days today against Spain still managed to score almost 1.3 points per possession.

killerleft
08-12-2012, 08:37 PM
I'm just happy that the best coach in the world led his country to another Gold Medal. He accepted a rather large challenge because he loves his country. USA Basketball is undisputed as best in the world again, and nobody wanted it more or deserves higher praise than Coach K.

I hope he feels as good as he deserves to today. He was the glue guy, the unquestioned patriot, willing to give his all to see us succeed.

Go USA! Go Duke!

roywhite
08-12-2012, 08:46 PM
I'm just happy that the best coach in the world led his country to another Gold Medal. He accepted a rather large challenge because he loves his country. USA Basketball is undisputed as best in the world again, and nobody wanted it more or deserves higher praise than Coach K.

I hope he feels as good as he deserves to today. He was the glue guy, the unquestioned patriot, willing to give his all to see us succeed.

Go USA! Go Duke!

Yes, huge props to Coach K. He built a culture and a solid program.
He helped make being part of the USA national team something that the best players treasured.

Frankly, I think the US Olympic committee has a task as tough as Duke University does -- how do we find someone to succeed this guy?

moonpie23
08-12-2012, 08:46 PM
i think one of the reasons folks are a bit irritated about your comments is that you praise the team, but all the criticisms are of a coaching nature......you mention how much talent is on the team, yet suggest somehow, that talent is being mis-managed....

come on out and say it with us, wheat......k handled this team masterfully as well as the 08 and world games......he's simply the best.....EVER....


to admit that, as a baby blue fan seems to somehow take something away from unc........it doesn't


oh....btw....i despise the anonymous comment feature on this board,,,,,

gumbomoop
08-12-2012, 08:52 PM
They are great players and think they can make every shot, any coach would have a hard time getting these guys to pass up shots for better ones.

I'd be happy to respond to you guys that are leaving snotty, unsigned comments, just as soon as you find a spine to sign them.

Re your first paragraph here, I agree that more than a few times one of the U.S. players took an ill-advised shot, often a 3-bomb that fizzled. But what struck me more - and seems not to have struck you at all - is how often guys did "pass up shots for better ones." I think I noticed several times that Melo and Durant looked for each other with really quick think-ahead passes to each other. And I think I remember that Williams and Paul were either passers or recipients of quick passes, too.

Re your second paragraph, it's precisely because I have not much spine that, so far, I haven't made any snotty comments, at least in the "leave a snotty comment" option. But if ever I man-up, I'm gonna "fart in your general direction" [to be read with a faux-French accent....], in a well-intentioned, laughing-with-not-at-you, "keepin' it real" way.

Wheat/"/"/"
08-12-2012, 09:58 PM
Re your first paragraph here, I agree that more than a few times one of the U.S. players took an ill-advised shot, often a 3-bomb that fizzled. But what struck me more - and seems not to have struck you at all - is how often guys did "pass up shots for better ones." I think I noticed several times that Melo and Durant looked for each other with really quick think-ahead passes to each other. And I think I remember that Williams and Paul were either passers or recipients of quick passes, too.

Re your second paragraph, it's precisely because I have not much spine that, so far, I haven't made any snotty comments, at least in the "leave a snotty comment" option. But if ever I man-up, I'm gonna "fart in your general direction" [to be read with a faux-French accent....], in a well-intentioned, laughing-with-not-at-you, "keepin' it real" way.

My issue was with the half court offense. I just though it could have been better. I did not get into any blame game.

I look forward to your best effort to pass wind, just remember to sign your name so I don't confuse you with any other, ...um, posters.

Wheat/"/"/"
08-12-2012, 10:15 PM
i think one of the reasons folks are a bit irritated about your comments is that you praise the team, but all the criticisms are of a coaching nature......you mention how much talent is on the team, yet suggest somehow, that talent is being mis-managed....

come on out and say it with us, wheat......k handled this team masterfully as well as the 08 and world games......he's simply the best.....EVER....


to admit that, as a baby blue fan seems to somehow take something away from unc........it doesn't


oh....btw....i despise the anonymous comment feature on this board,,,,,

"I'm happy and proud we won the gold, everyone involved did a great job. Including coach K setting the leadership tone."

"They did play hard and seemed to embrace the whole USA basketball experience, and that's a credit to Coangelo and coach K."

Both are quotes I have already made in this thread. The coaching was fine, no complaint from me on the coaching. Congrats to everyone involved, winning gold is a great accomplishment.

They could have played better, that's my point. If you guys are satisfied, it's all good. We won and I understand that, but I want to see more from the USA's best.

jimsumner
08-12-2012, 10:28 PM
"I'm happy and proud we won the gold, everyone involved did a great job. Including coach K setting the leadership tone."

"They did play hard and seemed to embrace the whole USA basketball experience, and that's a credit to Coangelo and coach K."

Both are quotes I have already made in this thread. The coaching was fine, no complaint from me on the coaching. Congrats to everyone involved, winning gold is a great accomplishment.

They could have played better, that's my point. If you guys are satisfied, it's all good. We won and I understand that, but I want to see more from the USA's best.


I do not think it unrealistic to wonder if the criticism of an offense that by any rational standard was a juggernaut might perhaps, just maybe ,suggest an agenda.

Or to put it in other terms, in what universe is scoring 107 points in winning a 40-minute Olympic Gold Medal game somehow not good enough?

fgb
08-12-2012, 10:36 PM
i'm just glad, for the usa's sake, that ol' roy wasn't coaching.

allenmurray
08-12-2012, 10:45 PM
I do not think it unrealistic to wonder if the criticism of an offense that by any rational standard was a juggernaut might perhaps, just maybe ,suggest an agenda.

Or to put it in other terms, in what universe is scoring 107 points in winning a 40-minute Olympic Gold Medal game somehow not good enough?

I don't think your question is in what universe, but in who's universe? And I think you already know the answer. That there might be an agenda is a given.

mapei
08-12-2012, 10:48 PM
I would add that (1) shooting 3s is a valid half-court offense, especially when you have Kevin Durant on your team, and (2) slashing is a valid half-court offense when you have LeBron James, at his peak the best basketball player I have ever seen, on your team. Most of the 3s were set up by great passing and screens, which qualifies as team play in my book. Some of the slashes were set up by screens forcing switches. I honestly don't think they could have played much better with the personnel they had; with more offensively-powerful bigs, yeah, then maybe they could have. But they went with their strengths, given the makeup of the team.

Defense is a different story, as others have pointed out. We had no answer for Pau in the second half without fouling. He was magnificent. And Navarro in the first half was insane. We did manage to shut down the 3 in the second half, I'm not sure how, and we got some steals. But defense clearly wasn't the strength of this team.

Did anyone else think Chandler was pretty much a non-factor throughout the tournament? Likewise Westbrook. Those surprised me.

gep
08-12-2012, 11:19 PM
I would add that (1) shooting 3s is a valid half-court offense, especially when you have Kevin Durant on your team, and (2) slashing is a valid half-court offense when you have LeBron James, at his peak the best basketball player I have ever seen, on your team. Most of the 3s were set up by great passing and screens, which qualifies as team play in my book. Some of the slashes were set up by screens forcing switches. I honestly don't think they could have played much better with the personnel they had; with more offensively-powerful bigs, yeah, then maybe they could have. But they went with their strengths, given the makeup of the team.

Defense is a different story, as others have pointed out. We had no answer for Pau in the second half without fouling. He was magnificent. And Navarro in the first half was insane. We did manage to shut down the 3 in the second half, I'm not sure how, and we got some steals. But defense clearly wasn't the strength of this team.

Did anyone else think Chandler was pretty much a non-factor throughout the tournament? Likewise Westbrook. Those surprised me.

Offense (first paragraph): In my opinion, offense was as good as it could have been. I think the "knock" on Wheat's comments it that, it just might be implied to be a coaching thing... which is where it hits a nerve here. Sure the offense could be better, as Wheat suggests, but USA found enough to win. That's good enough for this day, for me.

Defense (second paragraph): I also don't recall how the 3's in the 2nd half were limited, but the defense, overall, just couldn't keep Spain from scoring. I say give all the credit to Spain. But USA has to try/learn to do better... I think we all agree. Now, is the defensive "problems" also a "knock" on coaching too? :confused: If Spain could have been held to 90 or less (their average in the Olympics was 80, I believe), this game wouldn't have seemed as close.

I also thought Westbrook, and Williams, somewhat, got lost in the game. But as Coach K always, says, he always plays his "best" players (on the team) down the stretch.

Wheat/"/"/"
08-12-2012, 11:21 PM
I do not think it unrealistic to wonder if the criticism of an offense that by any rational standard was a juggernaut might perhaps, just maybe ,suggest an agenda.

Or to put it in other terms, in what universe is scoring 107 points in winning a 40-minute Olympic Gold Medal game somehow not good enough?

Any post I make somebody thinks there is some hidden agenda. How about, just maybe, give me the benefit of the doubt that I just think they could have played better. No agenda.

The offense was obviously good enough, but barely. Except for the other "little sisters of the poor" teams they played,... there I'll grant the juggernaut label.

Do you guys really think the team looked that good? Or is the animosity towards me in this thread coming from some ill-conceived perception that I am disrespecting coach K, which just ain't so.

Chicago 1995
08-12-2012, 11:48 PM
The reason the offense was just "barely" good enough, Wheat, as has been pointed out repeatedly in this thread had nothin to do with the offense, actually. It was that we gave up 100 points, 1.3 points per possession to Spain.

The offense was by every measure other than your undefined metric, otherworldly.

The real irony to me is that we won this game the exact same way Roy has won two titles and a buch of games at UNC - superior fire power making up for average at best D. ThatThe criticism comes here and now, in the face of stats posted that you've ignored is curious.

And you wonder why people think you have an agenda.

dcdevil2009
08-12-2012, 11:59 PM
Any post I make somebody thinks there is some hidden agenda. How about, just maybe, give me the benefit of the doubt that I just think they could have played better. No agenda.

The offense was obviously good enough, but barely. Except for the other "little sisters of the poor" teams they played,... there I'll grant the juggernaut label.

Do you guys really think the team looked that good? Or is the animosity towards me in this thread coming from some ill-conceived perception that I am disrespecting coach K, which just ain't so.

I'll bite. Yes, the team could have played better and at times tended to lose focus...kind of like how Usain Bolt only runs hard for 90-95 meters. Carmelo admitted as much after one of the earlier games. 1.3-1.5 points per possession is excellent, enough to win gold and certainly better than we've seen in any team since '92, but there were at least 5-10 bad possessions per game where guys reverted to one-on-one hero ball or tried to make a highlight play that didn't work out. I looked at it glass half full, where guys are playing within the Team USA concept 85-90 percent of the time, especially compared to 2000-2004 where the individual game dominated and wins were taken for granted. On the other hand, at some point in the next 20 years, that might not be enough and being content with their performance is what led to the 2004 debacle in the first place. While Team USA was dominant in winning the gold, there is certainly room for improvement; Coach K has done a masterful job these last 6 or so years, but his and Colangelo's lasting legacy will hopefully be that they built a USA program that is always looking for ways to get better, no matter how good they might look in any given game or tournament.

gumbomoop
08-13-2012, 12:11 AM
The offense was obviously good enough, but barely. Except for the other "little sisters of the poor" teams they played,... there I'll grant the juggernaut label.

Do you guys really think the team looked that good?

I'm not sure how important to my own impressions is the current state of the game in the NBA and, say, the various EuroLeagues and super-EuroLeagues [see awhom111 for details, seriously]. I don't watch much NBA and don't get to see much Euroball at all.

That said, given all the differences between FIBA and NBA rules, which mostly [except for the 3-pt line] advantage FIBA-experienced teams, I was pretty impressed with the U.S. team all tourney long. Not with their inconsistency and occasional poor shot selection, but in most aspects, they were indeed a juggernaut, and not just against the little sisters. Thinking, as I do, that the rest of the world is catching up, I thought at the beginning of the tourney that the U.S. would have at least a couple of tough games. But, except for today, whenever they had a mediocre quarter, they snapped out of it the next quarter, and just dominated at both ends of the court.

So, did they "look that good" today? Hardly their most dominating performance in toto, but against a talented and very experienced team, their several strengths were sufficient to outweigh the acknowledged deficiencies inside. They weren't as relentless as I'd have preferred, but they hit lots of clutch, clutch shots. I suppose it would redound much more to their, and to K's, credit had they won the gold by 30, but I'm glad this final was such an exciting game. I'm glad Spain played so well, exploiting their own advantages inside as much as the U.S. played to its "identity," which, as K said repeatedly, definitely included shooting lots of 3s. "That's who we are."

Outside the confines of the turn this thread has taken, it should be possible to have an informed discussion about how well the U.S. team did or did not, overall [not just today], accommodate to the really rough play, to knocking the ball off the rim, to the smaller court, to time-out rules, to the ball itself, to aggressive-foul rules, etc.

Wheat/"/"/"
08-13-2012, 12:29 AM
The real irony to me is that we won this game the exact same way Roy has won two titles and a buch of games at UNC - superior fire power making up for average at best D. ThatThe criticism comes here and now, in the face of stats posted that you've ignored is curious.

And you wonder why people think you have an agenda.

Geez....I don't want to make this a Duke/UNC thing, it didn't start out that way, and I didn't participate in this thread to play that game.

The USA team could have played much better.

Disagree with that statement if you want to, but lets leave college rivalry nonsense out of it.

OZ
08-13-2012, 12:42 AM
Athens 2004

USA 5-3 and won bronze medal

Losses to Puerto Rico (-19), Lithuania and Argentina

Head Coach - Larry Brown

Asst. Coach - Roy Williams

Moral of the story: Having a talented, all-pro, all NBA team doth not automatically equal gold!

Spain had a talented and deep team. By all accounts, they played their best game of the Olympics today. It seems to me to be a fool's argument to become locked in a debate as to whether or not the USA should have won by a larger margin and/or could have played better. The fact is, they won GOLD! By the looks of those millionaires jumping up and down, they were relieved and thrilled to get it. When the ONLY measure of your success is GOLD; that is a lot of pressure.

I still recall riding the bus away from the 1992 Duke-Kentucky game... now known as the "best college game ever played".... and one of our fans remarked... "Kentucky had nowhere near our talent. We should have blown them out." It seems for some people, winning is never enough.

Coach was jumping around today because two of his loves were winners... basketball and country. He knew how hard they had worked and how difficult the road to Gold is. He knew that having talented, all-pro, NBA players doth not a Gold make. Someone has to help them become a team. That is his speciality. I can't express with words how proud I was of Coach K and the USA today.

mo.st.dukie
08-13-2012, 01:16 AM
The USA team could have played much better.



And why exactly does that matter? It was a CHAMPIONSHIP. There is no tomorrow. There is no more "we are building towards an ultimate goal." They just achieved the ultimate goal. Think about it, would you really be upset if UNC could've played better in a National Championship game that they won? Of course not, you wouldn't care how it looked all that would matter is the W and you get to raise another banner. And it's pointless to say that we'll need to be better in the future. We don't even know who is going to be on the team in 2014 let alone 2016. We don't know who will be coaching and we don't know who the opponents will be or what their rosters will look like. Think about 2008 compared to 2012. Different teams but the exact same outcome. Even the gold medal game was very similar and that's even when the U.S. had Dwight Howard.

PaIronDuke
08-13-2012, 01:26 AM
[QUOTE=Wheat/"/"/";588968]Certainly glad to see the U.S. team take the gold, but count me on the side that thinks this "team" was not that impressive as a unit. ( I have high standards for our best players).

We saw great individual play at times from Labron, Durant, Paul and Carmello, but I thought the poor offensive play in particular was bailed out time and again by an individual hot shooter from outside, or an individual clear out for a dribble attack. That's a recipe for failure as the world talent level catches up.

The post play was pretty weak on both ends, I thought, for a championship team.

Defense was not as good as I had hoped either. They were quick and aggressive but Spain made the extra pass and broke the U.S. down for much of the game. Three point shooting bailed the US out, not defense.

They did play hard and seemed to embrace the whole USA basketball experience, and that's a credit to Coangelo and coach K.

Still too much talent on the floor for the rest of the world to challenge, for now.

And no way this team would beat the dream team...[/QUOTE



Wheat:

In spite of your Columbia Blue bias, your comments are usually quite perceptive. However, these just reek of envy and are undeserving of you........

I looked around and couldn't find ANY Carolina influence, coaching or player-wise........

Duvall
08-13-2012, 02:18 AM
Any post I make somebody thinks there is some hidden agenda. How about, just maybe, give me the benefit of the doubt that I just think they could have played better. No agenda.

Wheat, the reason people are suggesting that you might have an agenda is because you are saying things that don't make any sense. Between thinking that you are offering a not-so-subtle slight to Coach Krzyzewski and the national team and thinking that you actually believe that a team that scored over 115 points per game in 40-minute games was failed to live up to its offensive potential, the agenda is by far the more flattering option.


The offense was obviously good enough, but barely. Except for the other "little sisters of the poor" teams they played,... there I'll grant the juggernaut label.

Please note that six of the eight U.S. games were played against teams rated in he top eight in the world (http://london2012.fiba.com/pages/eng/fe/12/olym/p/sid/6232/ranking.html), with most of those games resulting in sound beatings. But I guess those games don't count if they weren't won through SUPERIOR POST PLAY.

oldnavy
08-13-2012, 06:54 AM
I'll take a shot at what Wheat may be trying to say....(Wheat if I get it wrong feel free to say so). The game looked sloppy.... The US did "seem" to be a little choppy in their offense...BUT, and this HAS TO BE CONSIDERED..imho, the officiating of this game in particular would have made ANY team look out of sorts, because they were out of sorts...if a team that scores 107 can be called out of sorts?

How can you possibly expect any team to have a smoothly run offense when the refs are blowing the whistle at a 2 fouls per minute pace??? It was not the US's offense that was a "problem" it was how the game was being managed that was making our team look less than smooth.

Saying that, this team was not built around a power house inside game, we had a ton of shooters to make up for the fact that some very talented BIGS were left at home... I have no problem with the way the US compensated for that. I believe had Dwight Howard or Chris Bosh played we would have seen a slighty different style of play...

But the point of my post is do not overlook the effect that the officiating had on the games....

BD80
08-13-2012, 08:30 AM
i'm just glad, for the usa's sake, that ol' roy wasn't coaching.

I REALLY don't think ol' roy would have been able to handle going out drinking every night until 4:00 AM ...

A point that appears to be overlooked in the Wheat pillorying, is that it was not a coaching decision to leave Dwight Howard and Chris Bosh off the roster! There simply are not a lot of post scorers in the American system: the most talented 7' on the team was the best 3-point shooter, not a post player.

The teams that the US competed against were VERY well coached (except for Spain's staff losing track of Marc Gasol's foul total - but that was like trying to count participants in the running of the bulls from a street-side cafe). The other teams have played together and practiced together far more than team US, and have played the international "style" and under international rules and with the international ball far longer.

Dr. Rosenrosen
08-13-2012, 08:35 AM
Here's what I think is the most amazing thing in all of this. If I heard it correctly at the end of the game yesterday, the 2012 team was together for a total of just 38 days. In that time, you had a roster marred by injuries to bigs and a constant shuffling of the eventual lineup -- which means not only that some of the personnel were in doubt but also the style of game that could/would be played in London. This team literally came together at the last minute and on the fly. That doesn't happen (and with Gold as a result) by chance or luck. It's the result of masterful leadership over many years and having established a culture of excellence with deference to the success of the team over that of individual players. That's what put this team in a position to be successful in the moment when the situation was in flux. To me, that is the greatest evidence of K's impact and this team's success -- not some useless measure of efficiency, scoring margin, or what have you.

moonpie23
08-13-2012, 08:48 AM
I looked around and couldn't find ANY Carolina influence, coaching or player-wise........

and herein lies the rub with the entire baby blue world..........ZERO fingerprint.......

roywhite
08-13-2012, 09:02 AM
Here's what I think is the most amazing thing in all of this. If I heard it correctly at the end of the game yesterday, the 2012 team was together for a total of just 38 days. In that time, you had a roster marred by injuries to bigs and a constant shuffling of the eventual lineup -- which means not only that some of the personnel were in doubt but also the style of game that could/would be played in London. This team literally came together at the last minute and on the fly. That doesn't happen (and with Gold as a result) by chance or luck. It's the result of masterful leadership over many years and having established a culture of excellence with deference to the success of the team over that of individual players. That's what put this team in a position to be successful in the moment when the situation was in flux. To me, that is the greatest evidence of K's impact and this team's success -- not some useless measure of efficiency, scoring margin, or what have you.

It was a great achievement, though I differ a bit with your description of how it came together. K and his staff built a great foundation with the 2008 Olympic team and the 2010 FIBA world championship team. He had coached 10 of the 12 players already and they had international experience. He knew what some of the strengths of this team would be and planned accordingly. The Olympic team in 2004 came together "on the fly", but this one did not.

CDu
08-13-2012, 10:13 AM
Geez....I don't want to make this a Duke/UNC thing, it didn't start out that way, and I didn't participate in this thread to play that game.

The USA team could have played much better.

Disagree with that statement if you want to, but lets leave college rivalry nonsense out of it.

If you think the offense could have played "much" better, then I think you are guilty of either not really paying attention or not really understanding basketball. The same applies on the defensive end. Teams can make shots. The US played the best offense and the best defense in the tournament. Hard to expect much better than that.

roywhite
08-13-2012, 11:29 AM
If you think the offense could have played "much" better, then I think you are guilty of either not really paying attention or not really understanding basketball. The same applies on the defensive end. Teams can make shots. The US played the best offense and the best defense in the tournament. Hard to expect much better than that.

Agree, the win was significant, and is better observed with celebration than nit-picking.

Some Olympic events are decided on style points; this was not one of them.
If we really want to evaluate style from the gold medal game, I'd start with the officiating, which deserved very low scores.

jimsumner
08-13-2012, 12:13 PM
Geez....I don't want to make this a Duke/UNC thing, it didn't start out that way, and I didn't participate in this thread to play that game.

The USA team could have played much better.

Disagree with that statement if you want to, but lets leave college rivalry nonsense out of it.

What an absurd, straw-man argument. Of course, they could have played better. So could the Dream Team, the 1960 Olympic Team, the '27 Yankees, the '72 Dolphins. Usain Bolt could have run faster in London. , Mo Farrah didn't have to wait so long to surge to the lead.

If you had said that the U.S. showed some defensive indifference, no one would have disagreed. No one.

But the offense? Superb. Magnificient. I could use other adjectives but those should suffice for now. In any measurable, ppg, efficiency, shooting percentage, WINNING GAMES, your criticism just doesn't hold up.

And what's with the kvetching about the post play? For one reason or another, the US team was without Dwight Howard, Andrew Bynum, Tim Duncan, LaMarcus Aldridge, Brook Lopez, Blake Griffin and others. What post player should have been on the team? Should the U.S. have run its offense through Tyson Chandler?

Or maybe used mobile forwards like LeBron James or Kevin Durant in the post, exploiting mismatches?

Oh, wait, they did that.

And I'm just perplexed by this quote "All looks good when the 3's fall. My concern is what happens when the competition gets better, or it's an off shooting day? "

Say what? This team isn't playing again. They've already beaten the best teams in the world and the 3s always seemed to fall. So, your concerns cannot possibly happen. The next time the U.S. plays internationally, it will be with a different coach and a different roster.

Dr. Rosenrosen
08-13-2012, 12:38 PM
What an absurd, straw-man argument. Of course, they could have played better. So could the Dream Team, the 1960 Olympic Team, the '27 Yankees, the '72 Dolphins. Usain Bolt could have run faster in London. , Mo Farrah didn't have to wait so long to surge to the lead.

If you had said that the U.S. showed some defensive indifference, no one would have disagreed. No one.

But the offense? Superb. Magnificient. I could use other adjectives but those should suffice for now. In any measurable, ppg, efficiency, shooting percentage, WINNING GAMES, your criticism just doesn't hold up.

And what's with the kvetching about the post play? For one reason or another, the US team was without Dwight Howard, Andrew Bynum, Tim Duncan, LaMarcus Aldridge, Brook Lopez, Blake Griffin and others. What post player should have been on the team? Should the U.S. have run its offense through Tyson Chandler?

Or maybe used mobile forwards like LeBron James or Kevin Durant in the post, exploiting mismatches?

Oh, wait, they did that.

And I'm just perplexed by this quote "All looks good when the 3's fall. My concern is what happens when the competition gets better, or it's an off shooting day? "

Say what? This team isn't playing again. They've already beaten the best teams in the world and the 3s always seemed to fall. So, your concerns cannot possibly happen. The next time the U.S. plays internationally, it will be with a different coach and a different roster.

Funny... these are the same criticisms of Duke and arguments you hear from the baby blue crowd in general. The post play criticism in particular is Wheat's "go to" move.

The claim can be made all day that there is no anti-Duke bias here but that's just the pot trying to convince itself it's not black. Maybe if we had won by 20 instead of 7, it would have been a "real" win.

In the meantime, all us Dukies can give thanks to heaven above that Lebron was sent to deliver victory and help conceal the truth that Coach K can't actually coach. :rolleyes:

roywhite
08-13-2012, 12:42 PM
U.S. men’s basketball team restores pride in gold-medal win against Spain
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/us-mens-basketball-team-savors-gold-medal-win-over-spain/2012/08/12/9611b902-e4b6-11e1-8f62-58260e3940a0_story.html)

Nice piece by Barry Svrluga in the Washington Post.


The choice wasn’t widely praised at the time. Colangelo can tick off the reasons, then and now, why he believed Krzyzewski would work.

“He’s a leader,” Colangelo said. “He’s one of the great communicators you’ll find in terms of any level or manner of sport, certainly basketball. He’s committed, and he’s passionate, and he bled red, white and blue. . . . I could go on and on for a half-hour about all the reasons why.”

Wheat/"/"/"
08-13-2012, 12:56 PM
Can't imagine how the board would have blown up if some of those bail out 3's hadn't fallen in the fourth and Spain had pulled out a win.

This thread is over for me. I've tried to respectfully answer all comments, but it's become overwhelming trying to defend my thoughts with all these left field allegations that somehow I am only saying they could have played better because I'm a Duke hater, (which I am not).

For the last time. They are the best in the world and they deserve everyones respect for winning the gold. Coaches included.

And they could have played better, particularly in the half court offense and defensively.

Chicago 1995
08-13-2012, 01:12 PM
Can't imagine how the board would have blown up if some of those bail out 3's hadn't fallen in the fourth and Spain had pulled out a win.

This thread is over for me. I've tried to respectfully answer all comments, but it's become overwhelming trying to defend my thoughts with all these left field allegations that somehow I am only saying they could have played better because I'm a Duke hater, (which I am not).

For the last time. They are the best in the world and they deserve everyones respect for winning the gold. Coaches included.

And they could have played better, particularly in the half court offense and defensively.

Bail out threes? Other than LeBron's dagger over Marc Gasol -- which actually wasn't a bail out three either -- I didn't think we made many "bail out threes" in the fourth quarter. Here's part of the disconnect, I guess, but an open three for Kevin Durant or Carmelo Anthony is a good shot at the international distance. It's *always* a good shot. These aren't three's being jacked by Ryan Kelly or Seth Curry or Kendall Marshall or Harrison Barnes. They are open shots being taken the best scorer in the world in Durant, and a guy who is probably in the top five in Anthony. Was it possible to have a disasterously bad day shooting? Sure. That could happen with any offensive scheme. Ibaka and the Gasols could have made post scoring offense with the (absent) post threats of Howard, Griffin and Aldridge just as potentially disasterous. The reason we got pushed yesterday and the reason we got pushed vs. Lithuania wasn't offense. It was that we couldn't get stops defensively. Even against Lithuania where we actually had that nightmare shooting day, the offense was still plenty good to win. The game was close because we didn't get stops.

Here's the larger problem I've got.

You say you've tried to "respectfully answer all comments" but you haven't addressed any of the legion of posts that show how off bases your criticism of the offense is. You're just falling back on an old axe -- one that jimsummer points out has strong echos in the typical Carolina criticism of Duke and Coach K and the argument that the Carolina Way is better -- that the US shot too many threes and didn't post enough. That's it. You haven't actually answered the comments. You've just said the same thing over and over.

When the argument walks and talks like a Duke-UNC thing, comes from a poster known to prefer that awful shade of light blue, and doesn't appear to have any actual basis in fact, how are people supposed to take it other than as a rivalry thing?

CDu
08-13-2012, 01:18 PM
Can't imagine how the board would have blown up if some of those bail out 3's hadn't fallen in the fourth and Spain had pulled out a win.

This thread is over for me. I've tried to respectfully answer all comments, but it's become overwhelming trying to defend my thoughts with all these left field allegations that somehow I am only saying they could have played better because I'm a Duke hater, (which I am not).

For the last time. They are the best in the world and they deserve everyones respect for winning the gold. Coaches included.

And they could have played better, particularly in the half court offense and defensively.

And again, I think you're making it VERY clear that you don't understand the international basketball game. We continually got WIDE OPEN looks from 3 point range. Considering that the 3 point line is closer than the NBA line (by as much as ~2 feet), that's a good shot for the US. Considering that, and the fact every team in the tournament plays a sagging defense to protect the lane, AND the fact that the officials allow more hand checking on dribble penetration, and we arrive at the realization that a wide open 3pt shot (created by initial dribble penetration) is a VERY good offense.

I honestly don't understand what we should have done differently. We didn't have any great post players on the team (due to injuries). And given that zone defenses allow extra help inside, your standard "feed the post" argument doesn't work in international play.

So, again, I'm left with one of three conclusions to your posts here:
1. You didn't really watch the games;
2. You don't understand basketball (especially international basketball), and are relying on pre-conceived notions of "what a good offense is supposed to look like"; or
3. You are just letting your Carolina glasses cloud your judgement.

I was being kind in leaving out option #3 earlier, but I suspect it's a combination of #1 and #2 in reality.

Kedsy
08-13-2012, 01:24 PM
These aren't three's being jacked by Ryan Kelly or Seth Curry or Kendall Marshall or Harrison Barnes.

You don't think an open three by Ryan Kelly or Seth Curry or Harrison Barnes is a good shot?

Chicago 1995
08-13-2012, 01:32 PM
You don't think an open three by Ryan Kelly or Seth Curry or Harrison Barnes is a good shot?

Not in the same way they are for Kevin Durant or Carmelo Anthony.

Kedsy
08-13-2012, 02:33 PM
Not in the same way they are for Kevin Durant or Carmelo Anthony.

I agree these guys couldn't seem to miss during the Olympics, and I understand the NBA line, the international line, and the college line are all different distances, but in the last three NBA seasons, here are Carmelo's and KD's three-point percentages:

Carmelo: 33.5%, 37.8%, 31.6%
KD: 38.7%, 35.0%, 36.5%

Last season, Seth shot 38.3% from three and Ryan shot 40.8%. Over the course of a season, they are just as automatic from the college line as Carmelo and KD from the NBA line.

Again, I understand in the Olympics Carmelo and KD were shooting from the FIBA line and that makes a difference. But I don't believe the true difference in those guys shooting (from the longer line) vs. our guys shooting (from the college line) is as large as you seem to think.

roywhite
08-13-2012, 02:39 PM
I agree these guys couldn't seem to miss during the Olympics, and I understand the NBA line, the international line, and the college line are all different distances, but in the last three NBA seasons, here are Carmelo's and KD's three-point percentages:

Carmelo: 33.5%, 37.8%, 31.6%
KD: 38.7%, 35.0%, 36.5%

Last season, Seth shot 38.3% from three and Ryan shot 40.8%. Over the course of a season, they are just as automatic from the college line as Carmelo and KD from the NBA line.

Again, I understand in the Olympics Carmelo and KD were shooting from the FIBA line and that makes a difference. But I don't believe the true difference in those guys shooting (from the longer line) vs. our guys shooting (from the college line) is as large as you seem to think.

Also, as noted occasionally by Doug Collins in commentary, these shooters were getting MUCH BETTER looks on their 3-point attempts than they did during the regular season or playoffs.

The reasons for that are probably a combination of weaker defenses they went up against, very good USA point guard play, and the presence of other good shooting threats on the floor at the same time.
Certainly for Durant, for example, he must have loved the type of shots he was getting vs what was avaialble when opposing defenses tried to stop OKC.

NSDukeFan
08-13-2012, 02:46 PM
And again, I think you're making it VERY clear that you don't understand the international basketball game. We continually got WIDE OPEN looks from 3 point range. Considering that the 3 point line is closer than the NBA line (by as much as ~2 feet), that's a good shot for the US. Considering that, and the fact every team in the tournament plays a sagging defense to protect the lane, AND the fact that the officials allow more hand checking on dribble penetration, and we arrive at the realization that a wide open 3pt shot (created by initial dribble penetration) is a VERY good offense.

I honestly don't understand what we should have done differently. We didn't have any great post players on the team (due to injuries). And given that zone defenses allow extra help inside, your standard "feed the post" argument doesn't work in international play.

So, again, I'm left with one of three conclusions to your posts here:
1. You didn't really watch the games;
2. You don't understand basketball (especially international basketball), and are relying on pre-conceived notions of "what a good offense is supposed to look like"; or
3. You are just letting your Carolina glasses cloud your judgement.

I was being kind in leaving out option #3 earlier, but I suspect it's a combination of #1 and #2 in reality.

The other interesting thing about the number of 3-point shots taken is that when the US lost and/or struggled, one thing that was always pointed to was that the team needed to have a good amount of outside shooters to succeed in the international game. The 2004 team had very good players (not as strong as this team's, but perhaps comparable to the 2010 team), but no great outside shooters. It looks like Colangelo, coach K and the staff have learned a lot from being involved in FIBA basketball for awhile, had an excellent shooting team and maximized this ability. Because of the factors listed in CDu's post and others, a team has to use the 3-pointer as a weapon if it wants to win. It would be easy to die by the 3-pointer in international play if you didn't shoot it and the other team made a bunch, especially in a one game knockout format.

dcdevil2009
08-13-2012, 03:05 PM
Again, I understand in the Olympics Carmelo and KD were shooting from the FIBA line and that makes a difference. But I don't believe the true difference in those guys shooting (from the longer line) vs. our guys shooting (from the college line) is as large as you seem to think.

I'm not so sure the distance is the issue, but rather who's playing defense. KD and Melo put up those percentages(NBA numbers) being guarded by some of the best basketball players in the world, so in addition to taking longer threes in the NBA, they're often less open threes than in international ball. I suspect that the difference between their FIBA shooting and NBA shooting has as much to do with being more open as it does to being a foot or two closer. If you put our guys against NBA defenders from the college line, I'm sure you'd see their percentages drop much more dramatically than if the college line was extended to NBA range.

Chicago 1995
08-13-2012, 03:41 PM
I agree these guys couldn't seem to miss during the Olympics, and I understand the NBA line, the international line, and the college line are all different distances, but in the last three NBA seasons, here are Carmelo's and KD's three-point percentages:

Carmelo: 33.5%, 37.8%, 31.6%
KD: 38.7%, 35.0%, 36.5%

Last season, Seth shot 38.3% from three and Ryan shot 40.8%. Over the course of a season, they are just as automatic from the college line as Carmelo and KD from the NBA line.

Again, I understand in the Olympics Carmelo and KD were shooting from the FIBA line and that makes a difference. But I don't believe the true difference in those guys shooting (from the longer line) vs. our guys shooting (from the college line) is as large as you seem to think.

I'll just say I fundamentally disagree and move on.

If our season's on the line, I'll take a contested look from Kevin Durant or Melo every day and twice on Sunday over an open look from Seth or Ryan or frankly, any collegian. And if KD or Melo is open? Come on. And if you don't agree, well, those are some really, really nice dark blue glasses you are wearing

Kedsy
08-13-2012, 08:15 PM
I'll just say I fundamentally disagree and move on.

If our season's on the line, I'll take a contested look from Kevin Durant or Melo every day and twice on Sunday over an open look from Seth or Ryan or frankly, any collegian. And if KD or Melo is open? Come on. And if you don't agree, well, those are some really, really nice dark blue glasses you are wearing

You are misinterpreting me. I'm not saying any of our guys are better shooters than Melo or KD. I'm not saying our guys could shoot as well as them if our guys were guarded by NBA defenders and/or from the NBA line or if their guys were shooting against college defenders and/or from the college line.

What I am saying is that when Seth and Ryan take three-point shots from the college 3-point line against college competition, they make roughly the same percentage as when Melo and KD take three-point shots from the NBA line against NBA competition (our guys actually shoot a little better). So if you think Melo or KD taking a three-point shot is good offense in the NBA, then Seth or Ryan taking a three-point shot in the ACC is good offense, too. That's not looking through Duke-blue glasses; it's looking at the stat sheet. Even twice on Sunday.

Newton_14
08-13-2012, 11:07 PM
And again, I think you're making it VERY clear that you don't understand the international basketball game. We continually got WIDE OPEN looks from 3 point range. Considering that the 3 point line is closer than the NBA line (by as much as ~2 feet), that's a good shot for the US. Considering that, and the fact every team in the tournament plays a sagging defense to protect the lane, AND the fact that the officials allow more hand checking on dribble penetration, and we arrive at the realization that a wide open 3pt shot (created by initial dribble penetration) is a VERY good offense.

I honestly don't understand what we should have done differently. We didn't have any great post players on the team (due to injuries). And given that zone defenses allow extra help inside, your standard "feed the post" argument doesn't work in international play.

So, again, I'm left with one of three conclusions to your posts here:
1. You didn't really watch the games;
2. You don't understand basketball (especially international basketball), and are relying on pre-conceived notions of "what a good offense is supposed to look like"; or
3. You are just letting your Carolina glasses cloud your judgement.

I was being kind in leaving out option #3 earlier, but I suspect it's a combination of #1 and #2 in reality.

Fine post. One other thing to add. Throughout the entire tourney including pool play and medal play, any time we went cold from 3, K called timeouts, and instructed Lebron to stop being distributor, and go get on the block. Each and everytime it worked. As mentioned by others, we posted Lebron, Durant, and Anthony over and over again throughout the tourney. Not sure why post play does not count unless it is a tall, heavy, center doing it. (those days are gone by the way)

We also attacked the basket with both dribble penetration, and brilliant passing. Teams would then pack the defense in even tighter, opening the 3 Ball looks up even more. We are talking about world class shooters, taking aim from a "kiddie line" as Bird would refer to it. The chances of all of Durant, Melo, Kobe, Paul, Deron, Lebron, Harden, and Westbrook all being cold from 3 in the same game, are slim to none.

K structured the offense to be successful using the players at hand, and for the rules of the International game. The result was an offense that could not be stopped. 44% clip from 3 for the tourney. What's that equate to, like 66%+ or something in 2 point %. I'll let the math guru's on the board tell us the accurate equation. I just know it is high.

The offense was outstanding. No other way to describe it.

Reilly
08-14-2012, 12:11 AM
NBA 2011-2012: 22.5% of shots were threes
Duke 2011-12 opponents: 24% of shots were threes
Team USA opponents 2012 Olympics: 34% of shots were threes
Duke 2011-2012: 38% of shots were threes
Team USA 2012 Olympics: 46% of shots were threes

Duvall
08-14-2012, 12:15 AM
NBA 2011-2012: 22.5% of shots were threes
Duke 2011-12 opponents: 24% of shots were threes
Team USA opponents 2012 Olympics: 34% of shots were threes
Duke 2011-2012: 38% of shots were threes
Team USA 2012 Olympics: 46% of shots were threes

Honestly, if you are hitting 44% of your threes as a team, it's probably a sign that you aren't taking enough. As a team!

juise
08-14-2012, 01:02 AM
NBA 2011-2012: 22.5% of shots were threes
Duke 2011-12 opponents: 24% of shots were threes
Team USA opponents 2012 Olympics: 34% of shots were threes
Duke 2011-2012: 38% of shots were threes
Team USA 2012 Olympics: 46% of shots were threes

I'd be interested to see an equivalent eFG% list.

mkirsh
08-14-2012, 09:16 AM
NBA 2011-2012: 22.5% of shots were threes
Duke 2011-12 opponents: 24% of shots were threes
Team USA opponents 2012 Olympics: 34% of shots were threes
Duke 2011-2012: 38% of shots were threes
Team USA 2012 Olympics: 46% of shots were threes

Interesting. Do you have the 2011-12 NCAA average and 2012 Olympic average (ie not just Duke and USA opponents)? I suspect they would be slightly higher, given that Coach K, keenly aware of the value of the shot, usually instructs his D to take it away.

pfrduke
08-14-2012, 11:21 AM
Interesting. Do you have the 2011-12 NCAA average and 2012 Olympic average (ie not just Duke and USA opponents)? I suspect they would be slightly higher, given that Coach K, keenly aware of the value of the shot, usually instructs his D to take it away.

The NCAA average was 32.9% of attempts.

UrinalCake
09-04-2012, 10:44 PM
All of the games are now available on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9wUr-CK1Y4), along with a ton of other Olympic events. I just watched the gold medal game for the first time. Marc Gasol's fourth foul really hurt them. We did shoot a lot of threes. And the commentators were absolutely clueless.

hq2
09-06-2012, 07:54 PM
Our three point shooting has been the difference the last two Olympics. Both teams that lost in the past
25 years ('88 and '04) were bad 3 point shooting teams. The '88 team was a John Thompson Georgetown
creation; almost all streetball and no shooting; I think Hersey Hawkins was the only decent shooter on the
whole team. The '04 team wasn't much better; as I recall, in one of the blowout losses America shot something
like 3 for 21 from downtown, which is just pitiful. These days, we can let 'em fly with just about anyone. Now
that we understand the international game better, we seem to have adapted the way we play to it in recent years.

roywhite
09-06-2012, 08:39 PM
Our three point shooting has been the difference the last two Olympics. Both teams that lost in the past
25 years ('88 and '04) were bad 3 point shooting teams. The '88 team was a John Thompson Georgetown
creation; almost all streetball and no shooting; I think Hersey Hawkins was the only decent shooter on the
whole team. The '04 team wasn't much better; as I recall, in one of the blowout losses America shot something
like 3 for 21 from downtown, which is just pitiful. These days, we can let 'em fly with just about anyone. Now
that we understand the international game better, we seem to have adapted the way we play to it in recent years.

Turns out shooting is important? ;)
Who knew?
Thankfully, Coach K did.

UrinalCake
09-06-2012, 10:09 PM
I think one of the reasons why we have this sense that we shoot too many threes is that we had a lot of guys who aren't three-point specialists. If we'd had Ray Allen and Stephen Curry chucking up open threes it would seem like good game planning, but we're not accustomed to seeing guys like Durant and Anthony who can shoot really well and also do a lot of other things. So it feels like it would be a higher percentage play to have them take the ball to the hole, even though in reality it might not be.

And of course, if Howard and Bosh had been on the team then we would have seen a much different offense.