Does FIBA Basketball expose NBA manufactured superstars?

[dancing2thabeet]

Then you must have really bad memory. We were over my arguments already. I'm sorry, I feel like my IQ is lowering with every reply I make, so I will stop conversing with you. No hard feelings.

Go USA.

[Tave]

Then you must have really bad memory. We were over my arguments already. I'm sorry, I feel like my IQ is lowering with every reply I make, so I will stop conversing with you. No hard feelings.

Go USA.

Let me refresh your memory. You claimed that:

1) The gap between the US and the rest of the field is smaller than it has ever been
2) The US may be the best team but is no longer head and shoulders above the rest. "Those days are long gone."
3) The only reason the US wins every game is because they are stronger and better conditioned than their opponents.

I'm sorry I just don't see a cogent argument there. I see a bunch of conclusory statements asking me to ignore the mountain of objective data pointing to the fact that the gap is still absurdly large.

[DiscoLives4ever]

I don't understand the arguments around the US having a relatively larger population than some countries. From a strictly statistical standpoint it makes sense, but why haven't we seen China or India field great teams? 95% of the world's population, so wouldn't you then expect the US to only have one top-20 player?

A lot more goes into a country's basketball program than just population statistics.

[Cycklops]

I've always wondered if the results would be better if the best NBA team with an American core of players was sent to play the international tournament instead. Such as sending Wade, Lebron and Bosh flanked with whatever the proper role players would be (Cole and Joel Anthony?) with Erik Spoelstra as the coach as Team USA.

Flank those 3 with Cole and anthony? Wtf..bow about flanking them with Durant Melo cp3...

The reason why I would prefer sending the most stacked team possible is because that way the starters wouldn't have to play heavy minutes. USA ' main strength is its depth.

The idea is that if you send a team that has already played together for an NBA season (or more), they wouldn't have to build chemistry or study plays or anything like that. They could just show up and ball.

You could always fill them out with some additional guys to help with their weaknesses though.

[SF_Warriors]

I've always wondered if the results would be better if the best NBA team with an American core of players was sent to play the international tournament instead. Such as sending Wade, Lebron and Bosh flanked with whatever the proper role players would be (Cole and Joel Anthony?) with Erik Spoelstra as the coach as Team USA.

Flank those 3 with Cole and anthony? Wtf..bow about flanking them with Durant Melo cp3...

The reason why I would prefer sending the most stacked team possible is because that way the starters wouldn't have to play heavy minutes. USA ' main strength is its depth.

The idea is that if you send a team that has already played together for an NBA season (or more), they wouldn't have to build chemistry or study plays or anything like that. They could just show up and ball.

You could always fill them out with some additional guys to help with their weaknesses though.

I get what you are saying, but of course the team owner(s) will be throwing a fit, especially if their stars play 30+ minutes in fiba with a heavy load and basically their ENTIRE team is there.
I find that scenario very unrealistic. What if that team has euro stars or role players like marc gasol or dirk, who cant even play for team usa? What if one of the stars needs offseason surgery or is recovering? Or what if the team has an older core who don't even want to play fiba ball over the usmmer?
It's not like fiba or even the NBA can force them to go..
Plus, it is better for the USA's marketing interests to bring a team full of stars.

[Cycklops]

Flank those 3 with Cole and anthony? Wtf..bow about flanking them with Durant Melo cp3...

The reason why I would prefer sending the most stacked team possible is because that way the starters wouldn't have to play heavy minutes. USA ' main strength is its depth.

The idea is that if you send a team that has already played together for an NBA season (or more), they wouldn't have to build chemistry or study plays or anything like that. They could just show up and ball.

You could always fill them out with some additional guys to help with their weaknesses though.

I get what you are saying, but of course the team owner(s) will be throwing a fit, especially if their stars play 30+ minutes in fiba with a heavy load and basically their ENTIRE team is there.
I find that scenario very unrealistic. What if that team has euro stars or role players like marc gasol or dirk, who cant even play for team usa? What if one of the stars needs offseason surgery or is recovering? Or what if the team has an older core who don't even want to play fiba ball over the usmmer?
It's not like fiba or even the NBA can force them to go..
Plus, it is better for the USA's marketing interests to bring a team full of stars.

You would send the best team with an American core. That's why I didn't say to send the Spurs.

I imagine you could also work out some pretty sweet incentives for the team owner (like a luxury tax break) which they would jump on.