USA MBB: USA 99 Lithuania 94 Post Game Thread

[superdave]

USA was flat today. You could see the point guards and wings trying to generate energy by pressuring the ball and jumping the passing lanes. It did not work well as Lithuania was patient and made pretty good passes. USA never could speed Lithuania up and we eventually started playing Lithuania's tempo. The other things they did well were clogging up the lane with their zone and spreading out the US to open driving lanes. Great prep and coaching.

This was one of those game where we really missed having a dominant big man. Dwight Howard could have controlled this game by himself today. Coach K even went with Melo/Durant/Lebron as the frontcourt. No true 4 or 5.

I think the key was Lithuania controlling the tempo. Good for them, good lesson for us.

[dukelifer]

Count me among those who always thought Pocius could play, and who wonder what would have happened with those Redick teams had he had more of a chance to do that at Duke despite his perceived defensive inadequacies. Glad he had the opportunity to show out a bit in a game that probably meant a decent amount to him, to say the least. Without LeBron doing his thing, Team USA would have lost.

Without Pocius doing his thing, USA would have won easily. Pocius played great today - particularly passing the ball- although he was caught in separate one-on-one situations defending Lebron, Kobe and Carmelo - where he was not able to do much. This was a very good game to watch. On any given night - a team of decent basketball players has a chance to win against a great team- they just need to shoot well and hope the other team does not. Team USA failed on the defensive end and somehow could not create any separation on the 23 turnovers they forced with 17 steals! The idea that original dream team was unbeatable simply because of who was on it is just silly. Even great players have off games. On any given night- any team can be beaten- but certain things have to happen. We have seen that play out too many times. Lithuania is a good team that played as a unit. In the end - Team USA made the plays to win. And if not Lebron it could have been Durant. Personally, I thought K should have tried using Davis in this game. Davis is a innate shot blocker and Lithuania was abusing USA on the inside. He may be young but I think he brings more to the game than Chandler as he is much quicker and has great timing.

[devildeac]

Marty and Coach K. Sweet photo here.

Especially cool considering my son tutored Marty for a year while he was as Duke. In Swahili (jk). Marty was his student in Russian. And no, he did not write any papers or pay any parking tickets for him. Marty's girlfriend even hired my son's a cappella group to sing at Marty's birthday party one year. He was really excited when he saw/heard Marty was playing in the Olympics.

[Reilly]

... also Jesse Cabbages.

I believe you mean Jessica Savitch-us ...

[greybeard]

I thought that Lithuania put on an extraordinary display, showing the Game at its very best. I do not recell anything as impressive, both offensively and defensely up through the last few minutes. I'd say that they put on c clinic offensively but frankly, the number of scores at the baskets from all sorts of directions, the number of drives to the basket that resulted in easy finishes, the number of mid range jump shots taken and made, well, they made the USA look completely outclassed.

I do not think that the USA settled for outside shots but rather that is all Lithuania allowed them. They presented as a 1 2 2 zone whenever Lebron, Kobe, Mellow, or Williams had the ball, there was no where to go off the bounce, or, for the most part, anything resembling a penetrating pass. Then, when a scorer gave it up on the outside, the defense seemlessly reset into man, but always with two guys backing up left and right the guy who was on the ball. The ball moved again, same thing. Lithuana did a remarkably effective job on the defensive boards; their bigs displayed soft hands, a deft ability to orient themselves for a catch inside that presented a shot, and had the poise to make the defense commit when necessary to get a clear shot. In other cases it was a catch/shoot just that quickly. The exterior guys were passing off the standstill or dribble deep into the interior of the defense at a pace and in a spot that made receptions easy--great vision and execution. These guys knew when the exterior defense was in attack mode and made them pay, especially when the ball was being overplayed. When that happened the other exterior players spreed the floor, moved in some kind of synergistic fashion, and gave the guy with the ball to play Nash-like with the defender.

What happended in the last few minutes was a credit to the US team. I thought Paul and Kobe were exceptional on defense, shooting lanes, getting the ball, and two plays stood out. One was when it was still real close, the guy from Maryland drove left to right along the baseline and I think it was Anthony who pushed him in the back and sent him straight towards the out of bounds line. This was a clear foul; Collins said as much about 10 seconds later when he allowed that I think it was Melo pushed him in the back. That push, and J's decision to throw it over his head instead of eat it, I think resulted in the basket by LeBron that for me ended it. The ball went to Paul, LeBron was on the right side it seemed like 3-5 yeard behind him off to the right, and just took off. His speed and control running the court was breath taking, Paul dropped it off nice and LeBron had me bug eyed. I think that he had everyone on the court bug eyed as well.

That play I thought ended the contest. Whatever work there was left that might have needed to be done, it was clear that LeBron was going to get it done.

Lithuania has produced some truly spectacular ball players in the last 25 or so years, one, Sabonos, might well have been the best all around center the game has ever seen. It is difficult to say because by the time he got to play in the states he was well, well past his prime. His ability to move the ball and create synergy seems to have been passed on to other generations. I pay to watch those guys play. To me, that team was the show, the entire show. In the end, Kobe, Paul, and the Man did what makes them unbelieveable, so the USA won. The USA on its best day could not come close to playing the game on a level I saw from Lithuania last night.

[Billy Dat]

Perfect game for Team USA. After the absurd beatdown in their last game, they got that nice come-back-to-earth moment against tough competition.

Playing for the USA is like playing for Duke: You always get the other teams best game.

Without Pocius doing his thing, USA would have won easily. Pocius played great today

Agree heartily with all 3 thoughts.

Team USA failed on the defensive end and somehow could not create any separation on the 23 turnovers they forced with 17 steals!

USA was flat today. You could see the point guards and wings trying to generate energy by pressuring the ball and jumping the passing lanes. It did not work well as Lithuania was patient and made pretty good passes. USA never could speed Lithuania up and we eventually started playing Lithuania's tempo.

A lot of people are talking about how Lithuania forced us to play their pace...a 40 minute game ended 99-94, that's a pretty fast pace! I think it has more to do with how well Lithuania played quickly, as K said, "[Lithuania] played magnificently and there is quickness that an individual has, but when a team has quickness together that’s what makes our game so beautiful and they were quick as a unit." Also, I think it's hard to say they failed defensively when the did force 23 turnovers including 17 steals. What they failed to do was leverage all of those opportunities, again, back to K, "We had 17 steals that didn’t translate to the number of points that they should. Usually we get some momentum but today we got steals but not the points." I noticed that throughout the game, and part of it was missing foul shots.

I thought that Lithuania put on an extraordinary display, showing the Game at its very best. I do not recell anything as impressive, both offensively and defensely up through the last few minutes. I'd say that they put on c clinic offensively but frankly, the number of scores at the baskets from all sorts of directions, the number of drives to the basket that resulted in easy finishes, the number of mid range jump shots taken and made, well, they made the USA look completely outclassed. The USA on its best day could not come close to playing the game on a level I saw from Lithuania last night.

I agree with the first part, the praise of Lithuania, but why does it have to be paired with a trashing of our team? Coach K never runs continuity sets, our offense is always based on reads and dynamic action. I agree that a continuity offense, when clicking on all cylinders, looks great. Lithuania played out of their minds, you think they'd be 1-3 if they'd played against France and Argentina they way they played against Team USA? It's just funny to me that every time the team plays a close game, it's pile on time...the game was no sooner over then media pundit tweets galore were pulling out the "let's put the 1992 comparisons to rest, please!" Funny that none of those tweets were flying when the team destroyed Nigeria.

Whatever, it was a great win and we have nothing but great games ahead. Does anyone know if there are seeing implications for Argentina that would potentially compel them to tank?

[subzero02]

I thought I was watching an ACC vs Dream Team game, with not only Marty and Songaila but also Jesse Cabbages.

Ok, that is going to have me laughing for a few days

[Starter]

It's just funny to me that every time the team plays a close game, it's pile on time...the game was no sooner over then media pundit tweets galore were pulling out the "let's put the 1992 comparisons to rest, please!" Funny that none of those tweets were flying when the team destroyed Nigeria.

Kobe kind of brought that on himself, by being cocksure that this team could beat what many believe to be the best basketball team ever assembled. Then some of the media followed suit, like Chris Palmer, if I recall? So for the sake of nostalgia and staking a claim in message-board debates, people are eager to see them proven wrong, which is of course impossible in a tangible sense, but if this team loses or even doesn't prove totally dominant at any point in time, they run with it. You're right in that it's kind of a no-win situation here: They can't lose a game -- all hell would break loose -- but when they beat Nigeria by 258 points, that's what they're supposed to do. (Which, I mean, it is.)

Basically, they're going to be just fine if they simply win every game, which I have to believe they will. Provided they get to stand on the podium with their gold medals with no taint of having been upset in preliminary rounds, that's what people will remember, and the micro-analyzing will long have since ended. The '08 team beat Spain by the skin of their teeth, but the lasting memory I have is all those guys putting their medals on Krzyzewski. That, and Rudy Fernandez cramming it on Dwight Howard, which was totally awesome.

[Billy Dat]

That, and Rudy Fernandez cramming it on Dwight Howard, which was totally awesome.

You mean
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XV5ThivipM

The best thing about this moment was that neither he nor his teammates knew how to properly go berserk at such a face job. Note their confused reaction, like, hey, aren't we supposed to be going nuts right now?

[Starter]

You mean
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XV5ThivipM

The best thing about this moment was that neither he nor his teammates knew how to properly go berserk at such a face job. Note their confused reaction, like, hey, aren't we supposed to be going nuts right now?

Haha, I know. I remember watching this live -- I worked nights at the time, so I was still up when they played this game at like 3 a.m. or whatever -- and sitting there after the dunk like...

...

...

...

Whoa.

[greybeard]

I agree with the first part, the praise of Lithuania, but why does it have to be paired with a trashing of our team? Coach K never runs continuity sets, our offense is always based on reads and dynamic action. I agree that a continuity offense, when clicking on all cylinders, looks great. Lithuania played out of their minds, you think they'd be 1-3 if they'd played against France and Argentina they way they played against Team USA? It's just funny to me that every time the team plays a close game, it's pile on time...the game was no sooner over then media pundit tweets galore were pulling out the "let's put the 1992 comparisons to rest, please!" Funny that none of those tweets were flying when the team destroyed Nigeria.

Whatever, it was a great win and we have nothing but great games ahead. Does anyone know if there are seeing implications for Argentina that would potentially compel them to tank?

Lithuania played better basketball than I've seen, maybe ever. They have a long history of playing great basketball, highly creative, terrific inside out play, terrific scores off pass penetration, terrific passing by inside guys, scoring on their own terms, you name it. This display was, to me extraordianry. The Dream Team no doubt would have beaten them, but they wouldn't have played more masterfully, in my opinion, they would not have displayed the spacing, the catches inside with bigs taking their time and finishing the old fashioned way, with the backboard creating angles, the rim a shield, timing being everything, and getting the ball up quickly or slowly as they wished from angles the defense could not anticipate. Lanes were cleared for drives--that is one thing. Having space cleared when a defender closed to pressure a ball handler, with the ball handler's reversing in simple but unexpected ways to a wide open floor, and then, depending on clock, shooting a jump shot, penetrating often all the way to the rim, or starting a one-two, one-two passing sequence that left the defense helpless.

Everyone thinks that basketball is America's game that we play it best, or have in the past. That is not what I say. That is not what I saw when Sabonus, the Lithaunian, was in his prime playing for the good old USSR; when that lefty guard was playing for Russia. and when both came to the US in the twilight of their careers. Pocius, I am sorry, with that team the way they played with him as an integral piece, well, if that was not better basketball than anything anyone saw at Duke the years Marty, admittedly injured, was there, we were watching different games. Shengalla, untilo he tired, was the forward he was at Wake Forest only with the wiles of a veteran that made chumps of the forwards for the US who were trying to guard him. Maybe somebody disagrees. But, I saw a guy who was dictating.

I also saw a defense that stopped penetration. Some head, a pretty one, asked LeBron whether he should have started earlier to take over the scoring load in the game. He couldn't, that's why he didn't, that's how good Lithauana's defense was designed and executed. Everytime LeBron touched the ball there was one guy who was guarding him who was built in a way that gave him the ability to make LeBron bow a tinge on his drives, to give up a straight line fullback kind of charge, and then had two other defenders on either side waiting. The ability of the defense to reconfigure as the ball moved was as quick as it was marvelous. The point guys on the ball on the exterior played extremely well, had three shooters rushing from a step or two off their spots, and Lithaunia's rebounders were where they needed to be to keep LeBron et al off of the boards and went and did it themselves.

No one is putting the US down. They just do not play the level of ball that the Lithaunians. Now, maybe the Lithaunians can not and do not put it together against all their competitors. Maybe they do not play their best game all the time. Maybe they were all eyeballing the prize, that would be the US, and let things slip a bit. I did not see those other games. I did see the US Lithaunia game and to me the better, more entertaining, more skilled team lost.

I thought that the push no-call was crucial, that LeBron's sprint and finish was completely breathtaking, and that those two plays gave the US the win. Kobe and Paul played terrific D the last quarter of the game, the US turned Lithaunia over a few times towards the end were the product of great defense, and Lithaunia had a few loose possessions. With all that, they were in it until that call and LeBron's ungodly play.

The US invests a prodigious amount of money on developing basketball players and training amny of them to be superior physical specimens, with muscle mass, strength, and explosiveness, to match the thousands of hours of high end coaching kids receive from grade school. But, they should send these kids to Lithaunia for a few years if they want them to figure out how to ball.

[throatybeard]

the lasting memory I have is all those guys putting their medals on Krzyzewski.

Wyyyrrrrdd.

That was such a huge moment for his already huge legacy. I think it shut up a lot of the "can't coach NBA players" mess. But as You said, Spain was real tough until the last two minutes. We should be grateful.

[ice-9]

This should put to rest this nonsense about this team being the equal of the original Dream Team. Hopefully, they'll
get it done and win the gold, but it isn't by any means guaranteed. Shows that these days, we always have to play
our best to win.

I don't know why people keep bringing this up as evidence the Dream Team is superior.

Was there a team of Lithuania's calibre back in 1992? Or Spain? Or Brazil?

No, back in 1992 all the international teams were more like Nigeria, which this year's team pummelled by a larger margin than the Dream Team did to Angola.

Don't get met wrong, I do think the Dream Team IS better, but this is hardly proof.

It's not that the US is much worse, it's that the competition is simply far better, and THAT'S why the US has to play its best to win.

[Billy Dat]

The US invests a prodigious amount of money on developing basketball players and training amny of them to be superior physical specimens, with muscle mass, strength, and explosiveness, to match the thousands of hours of high end coaching kids receive from grade school. But, they should send these kids to Lithaunia for a few years if they want them to figure out how to ball.

I appreciate your thoughtful response, and it makes me ponder a larger issue, which may threaten to derail the thread but I think it's worth doing. The type of basketball the Lithuanians played was the dominant model in the United States up until, probably, the 1970s. Much has be written about the influence of the ABA style of ball on the NBA, and obviously the AAU industry will be blamed for the destruction of fundamental basketball. However, using Coach K as the prime example, why have many of the best college basketball minds gone away from Lithuanian-style continuity/set-driven offense to offense that gives its players more freedom to read and react? Kentucky, with its dribble-drive, is another example of a free flowing offense where players read and react. Is it because that's the style that the fundamentally-poor American youth can most easily adapt to, or is it because gurus like K and Cal think it's an advanced, more evolved form of offense? Is it because in the era of the one-and-done player, a coach doesn't have years for a player to learn such an intricate system? The Princeton offense, or Bo Ryan's Swing, are a lot like Lithuania's offense, but those systems seem to be adopted by coaches with inferior athletes as some kind of mechanism to level the playing field, slow down the pace, hang in until the end and play the percentages. Surely, a Coach like K has the time and practices to institute an offensive system like Lithuania, is there a reason other than the ones I have cited why he doesn't?

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I appreciate your thoughtful response, and it makes me ponder a larger issue, which may threaten to derail the thread but I think it's worth doing. The type of basketball the Lithuanians played was the dominant model in the United States up until, probably, the 1970s. Much has be written about the influence of the ABA style of ball on the NBA, and obviously the AAU industry will be blamed for the destruction of fundamental basketball. However, using Coach K as the prime example, why have many of the best college basketball minds gone away from Lithuanian-style continuity/set-driven offense to offense that gives its players more freedom to read and react? Kentucky, with its dribble-drive, is another example of a free flowing offense where players read and react. Is it because that's the style that the fundamentally-poor American youth can most easily adapt to, or is it because gurus like K and Cal think it's an advanced, more evolved form of offense? Is it because in the era of the one-and-done player, a coach doesn't have years for a player to learn such an intricate system? The Princeton offense, or Bo Ryan's Swing, are a lot like Lithuania's offense, but those systems seem to be adopted by coaches with inferior athletes as some kind of mechanism to level the playing field, slow down the pace, hang in until the end and play the percentages. Surely, a Coach like K has the time and practices to institute an offensive system like Lithuania, is there a reason other than the ones I have cited why he doesn't?

Seems to me that this newer model puts more of an emphasis on the players' ability to both create on offense and react on defense. The main advantage I see to this sort of game-plan is it would be incredibly difficult to prepare for as the opposing team. If you are watching game tape and can see predictable switches, picks, etc, you can look for them in the game and counter. If you are watching game tape and every time down the floor you see something different, how do you get ready?

It takes a shrewd team of intelligent individuals who can read the situation and react properly though. Not a perfect fit for every group of players.

Might be my own limited perspective, but the first time I remember seeing this employed and hearing it articulated as such was Battier in 2001. I remember in the Final Four - big comeback against Maryland? - him saying in an interview that the Coach basically "let's them play" and that he let them call the shots on the floor. Easier to do when you have such a talented group and so many weapons.

With the NBA stars roster of the Olympics it certainly makes sense. Being able to pick top-level players with a head for the game makes it much easier. Also, how much sense does it make to impose a rigid gameplan and have them learn a new system to use for two weeks, once every two years?

/two cents
//I'm sure the freestyle offense pre-dates 2001, it's just when I noticed it for the first time

[Starter]

I don't know why people keep bringing this up as evidence the Dream Team is superior.

Was there a team of Lithuania's calibre back in 1992? Or Spain? Or Brazil?

No, back in 1992 all the international teams were more like Nigeria, which this year's team pummelled by a larger margin than the Dream Team did to Angola.

Don't get met wrong, I do think the Dream Team IS better, but this is hardly proof.

It's not that the US is much worse, it's that the competition is simply far better, and THAT'S why the US has to play its best to win.

Decent points, though I'd only add that Croatia was pretty legit in '92, and Team USA took them apart twice. Were they on the level of Spain? I'm not sure, probably not, but they were a really good team. I still wonder often what Petrovic would have been had he not passed away. Past them, you're right, the level of talent has gone up a whole lot over the years.

I also think Lithuania of 1992 might compare favorably to Lithuania now, though I'd have to watch them again. I can't wait to watch that documentary at some point. I love that the Grateful Dead sent them shirts.

[ohiodukefan]

Former Blue Devil, Marty Pocius, who has played very well in the European Pro League's the last couple years, is playing for Lithuania in the 2012 London Olympics and against Team USA Sunday, scored 14 pts, had a team leading 7 rebounds, and a team leading 6 assists in the Lithuanians scare of Team USA 99-94. Marty drove into the lane at will, a couple times taking US star Kobe Byrant to the rim. He had a break away against LeBron James and when James went for the block, double pumped and layed the ball into the basket from the other side of the rim. He was not at all overwhelmed playing against all the talent on Team USA and even forced Coach K to take James Harden out of the game because he was getting abused by Marty.

Also, Duke's Luol Deng is 4th in the whole Olympics in scoring, averaging 25 PPG for Great Britian.

It is truly becoming a world game.

[CDu]

Decent points, though I'd only add that Croatia was pretty legit in '92, and Team USA took them apart twice. Were they on the level of Spain? I'm not sure, probably not, but they were a really good team. I still wonder often what Petrovic would have been had he not passed away. Past them, you're right, the level of talent has gone up a whole lot over the years.

I also think Lithuania of 1992 might compare favorably to Lithuania now, though I'd have to watch them again. I can't wait to watch that documentary at some point. I love that the Grateful Dead sent them shirts.

That Croatian team wasn't as good as this Spain team (or arguably this Argentina team). They had two NBA-quality players (Kukoc and Petrovic). A few others (Vrankovic and Tabak) got some bench time in the League, but that's about it. I actually think the 1992 Lithuanian team (with Sabonis and Marciulionis) that lost to the US in the semis might have even been better. The breakup of the Soviet Union (which took the Lithuanians away from a solid, veteran Russian team) and the dissolution of Yugoslavia (splitting Divac from Kukoc and Petrovic) weakened both squads dramatically. The Dream Team would have still won the gold, but it would have made for a much more interesting tournament. Imagine a semifinal of USSR vs Yugoslavia to determine who would face the US. That would have been exciting.

The Lithuanians and Croatians of 1992 were good teams, but I think the level of play from the best international teams is far greater now than it was then. In those early years, only the best of the foreign teams had more than 1 or 2 players of NBA quality. Today, there is so much more depth of talent. Teams like Spain, Argentina, Brazil, and even France all have multiple NBA-quality players.

[Starter]

That Croatian team wasn't as good as this Spain team (or arguably this Argentina team). They had two NBA-quality players (Kukoc and Petrovic). A few others (Vrankovic and Tabak) got some bench time in the League, but that's about it. I actually think the 1992 Lithuanian team (with Sabonis and Marciulionis) that lost to the US in the semis might have even been better. The breakup of the Soviet Union (which took the Lithuanians away from a solid, veteran Russian team) and the dissolution of Yugoslavia (splitting Divac from Kukoc and Petrovic) weakened both squads dramatically. The Dream Team would have still won the gold, but it would have made for a much more interesting tournament. Imagine a semifinal of USSR vs Yugoslavia to determine who would face the US. That would have been exciting.

The Lithuanians and Croatians of 1992 were good teams, but I think the level of play from the best international teams is far greater now than it was then. In those early years, only the best of the foreign teams had more than 1 or 2 players of NBA quality. Today, there is so much more depth of talent. Teams like Spain, Argentina, Brazil, and even France all have multiple NBA-quality players.

Good historical perspective on the split. Thank you for your thoughts, though I still tend to think the '92 versions of Croatia (and Lithuania) could have stacked up pretty well to the better international teams of today. I don't think you can simply use number of NBA players as a benchmark of whether players were NBA quality, considering far more international players started making the jump around the turn of the century. Kukoc, for example, wasn't even yet an NBA player, and Sabonis wouldn't be there for a few more years. (Petrovic was, of course, totally awesome.) But yeah, we absolutely agree that the overall level of play internationally has definitely come closer to the level Team USA is on, especially as more players come from overseas to familiarize themselves with the American game.

[CDu]

Good historical perspective on the split. Thank you for your thoughts, though I still tend to think the '92 versions of Croatia (and Lithuania) could have stacked up pretty well to the better international teams of today. I don't think you can simply use number of NBA players as a benchmark of whether players were NBA quality, considering far more international players started making the jump around the turn of the century. Kukoc, for example, wasn't even yet an NBA player, and Sabonis wouldn't be there for a few more years. (Petrovic was, of course, totally awesome.) But yeah, we absolutely agree that the overall level of play internationally has definitely come closer to the level Team USA is on, especially as more players come from overseas to familiarize themselves with the American game.

It's definitely hard to say how many NBA-quality players there were on those teams because of the rarity of imports at that time (only a handful had made the jump). But my sense is that there was a reason so few had come over. Kukoc, for example, was considered the best player in Europe, the Magic Johnson of Croatia. He came over and just turned out to be decent, not great in the NBA. Sabonis would have been a star had he come over sooner, but he didn't arrive until his 30s and after several injuries robbed him of his athleticism. Marciuliunis was a pretty good player in his prime, but not an All-Star. Divac was a superb role player, but he wasn't really an All-Star type player. Petrovic was the only NBA star (essentially the foreign Chris Mullin - definitely a star). But he was the only one. I think there was a reason that so few guys came over, and it's because so few of them were of NBA quality. Dino Radja was pretty good, too (I forgot him from the Croatia squad), but again was more role player than star in the NBA.

Remember - those 6 players (Sabonis, Petrovic, Divac, Marciulionis, Radja, and Kukoc) were the absolute best of their sport in Europe. And only two (Sabonis and Petrovic) could realistically be called NBA stars (I'm giving Sabonis credit for what he might have been had he come over in his prime). A few others were competitive, but we're talking about 2-3 players per team who would start on an NBA team.

I think the Dream Team did wonders for the international game. It illustrated just how great the disparity was between the US and the world in terms of basketball. And now we're seeing the fruit of that result with so many countries having multiple NBA-quality players. Today, I think there are a number of foreign players who could legitimately make an impact in the NBA that aren't here yet. In 1992, I think there were very few players (namely Radja, Kukoc who was just 23, and Sabonis) who were NBA-ready but not in the NBA.

I did forget Radja from that Croatian team, which is significant. That puts them arguably in the discussion with Spain. Though it's obviously a matter of opinion that could go either way.