RealGM

As with general GOAT rankings, use your own criteria.

It's Durant by a fair margin. Not even worth considering anyone else.

On the women's side, it's probably Lisa Leslie. Taurasi has played the most games and will have more gold medals but here statistical resume isn't super strong.

Charles Barkley. Lebron surpasses him with a 2024 Gold Medal.

For a question like this, I think about which players likely had an impact on their country’s medal outcome, which in this case means players without whom Team USA would not have won gold. I don’t think the 2020 team wins without KD. And I’m not super well versed in Olympics history, but I don’t think there are many other examples of that. Plus his performance in 2012, tied with Melo for most men’s gold medals (likely soon to be the only man with four), all-time leading scorer… feel like it’s gotta be KD.

And my understanding is that the women’s team just torched everyone else, so probably not a women’s player with KD’s level of impact on medal outcome, but I could be wrong.

Yeah, the case for Durant is pretty clear cut.

The list of NBA players with multiple appearances is short. Only four players have participated more than twice. Most of the players with two appearances were on the '92 and/or '96 teams that were so uncompetitive that it's hard to even say who was good.

So of those four players:
Durant
Carmelo
Robinson
LeBron

All were great in international play with good all-around games. But Durant was always the leading scorer, by a big margin, on great efficiency.

Durant due to longetivity basically. Lebron is probably 2nd if he keeps up this level of play for a gold. Melo/Barkley are probably 2/3 for now.

For the women's side, I agree it's Leslie. Including defense, she had a lot more impact than someone like Taurasi. Sheryl Swoopes might actually have an argument for second-best, even though her career overlapped with Leslie who was clearly better.

Agree that KD is likely the pick.

Give Bob Kurland some love for pre-NBA guys, might’ve had 3 were it not for WWII

It's KD but Barkley comes to mind too.

Durant.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

Laimbeer wrote:As with general GOAT rankings, use your own criteria.

So, saw this a while back but going to chime in now after the 2024 tourney.

First thing that's just tough here is that it didn't used to be possible for pros to play, so we kinda have two categories:

GOAT pre-1992 & GOAT 1992 & after, where "longevity" isn't really relevant to the former, but could be argued to dominate the latter.

I want to break down by Olympics the MOV for each USA team to really make clear some things.

1936 +17.0 (Gold, starring Fortenberry & Lubin)

1948 +33.5 (Gold, starring Kurland & Groza)

1952 +19.5 (Gold, starring Kurland & Lovellette)

1956 +53.5 (Gold, starring Russell & Jones)

1960 +42.4 (Gold, starring Oscar & Lucas)

1964 +30.0 (Gold, starring Bradley & Shipp)

1968 +26.0 (Gold, starring Haywood & White)

1972 +28.8 (Silver, starring Henderson & Jones, lost a controversial game to Belov's Soviet Union)

1976 +12.3 (Gold, starring Dantley & May)

1984 +32.1 (Gold, starring Jordan & Ewing)

1988 +30.4 (Bronze, starring Majerle & Robinson, lost to Soviet team led by Sabonis & Marciulionis)

1992 +43.8 (Gold, starring Barkley & Jordan)

1996 +31.8 (Gold, starring Barkley & Robinson)

2000 +21.6 (Gold, starring Garnett & Carter)

2004 +4.6 (Bronze, starring Iverson & Duncan, lost repeatedly, but most notably to Ginobili's Argentina)

2008 +27.9 (Gold, starring Kobe & LeBron)

2012 +32.1 (Gold, starring Durant & LeBron)

2016 +22.5 (Gold, starring Durant & Kyrie)

2020 +20.0 (Gold, starring Durant & Holiday)

2024 +19.0 (Gold, starring LeBron & Curry)

Things I'd note:

1. The level of domination of the 1956 team should not be dismissed as "as expected". It was completely unlikely what Team USA had done the previous time. Technically there was a different process in 1956 than before for choosing the team, but I don't think that made the difference. If you look at the roster in general it doesn't look stronger than 1952. The difference was Russell, who dominated on a level completely different from what Kurland could do.

2. We definitely see a fall-off in star power after 1960 for a number of Olympics and there are numerous factors here, but I'd say one factor is just that Team USA got lucky with the timing with their 1956 & 1960 outlier talents. And yeah, I think it's reasonable to think that the 1956 & 1960 Olympic USA teams would have won Gold in 1972.

3. Jordan & Ewing's 1984 team deserves some credit for bringing the dominance back, and of course, lucky timing to have access to those guys. Turns out when you rely on Majerle rather than Jordan, it hurts.

4. The 1992 Dream Team is of course legendary and the most dominant team other than Russell's. I would expect that the 1992 team would beat all before them in history and it's really just a question of whether more recent teams could top them with 3-point shooting.

5. Other than Kurland, Barkley's the first guy to be the best player on 2 Olympic teams, and what teams to do it with.

6. The 2004 team was just astonishingly bad. I think we'll probably be talking for many decades more about what happened there. It goes without saying that this by far the worst pro-era Team USA, and there's good reason to question whether some of the amateur teams from the deeper past (1956, 1960, 1984) would have been better.

Further, while folks lament the lack of talent on the roster, they had drastically more talent than any other team, and still went only 5-3. Fundamentally, this was team basketball not working.

7. From 2008 onward I'm not sure if there's that much to say other than to debate where to put LeBron & KD on our all-time list.

So then, guys who would be on my absolute shortlist for USA Olympic GOAT here:

- Bill Russell. The most dominant performance in the history of men's Olympic basketball. Period.
- Charles Barkley. The best international-style basketball player of "Jordan's generation" by a significant margin.
- Kevin Durant. I think he's earned the nod for the 2008-on group based both on how often he's played, and how well he's played.

I'd slide LeBron as the next guy to mention. Were I trying to make a starting 5, that 5th spot is where things start getting really debatable.

Doctor MJ wrote:1988 +30.4 (Bronze, starring Majerle & Robinson, lost to Soviet team led by Sabonis & Marciulionis)

1992 +43.8 (Gold, starring Barkley & Jordan)

1996 +31.8 (Gold, starring Barkley & Robinson)

2000 +21.6 (Gold, starring Garnett & Carter)

2004 +4.6 (Bronze, starring Iverson & Duncan, lost repeatedly, but most notably to Ginobili's Argentina)

2008 +27.9 (Gold, starring Kobe & LeBron)

2012 +32.1 (Gold, starring Durant & LeBron)

2016 +22.5 (Gold, starring Durant & Kyrie)

2020 +20.0 (Gold, starring Durant & Holiday)

2024 +19.0 (Gold, starring LeBron & Curry)

Other than Kurland, Barkley's the first guy to be the best player on 2 Olympic teams, and what teams to do it with.

6. The 2004 team was just astonishingly bad. I think we'll probably be talking for many decades more about what happened there. It goes without saying that this by far the worst pro-era Team USA, and there's good reason to question whether some of the amateur teams from the deeper past (1956, 1960, 1984) would have been better.

Further, while folks lament the lack of talent on the roster, they had drastically more talent than any other team, and still went only 5-3. Fundamentally, this was team basketball not working.

7. From 2008 onward I'm not sure if there's that much to say other than to debate where to put LeBron & KD on our all-time list.

So then, guys who would be on my absolute shortlist for USA Olympic GOAT here:

- Bill Russell. The most dominant performance in the history of men's Olympic basketball. Period.
- Charles Barkley. The best international-style basketball player of "Jordan's generation" by a significant margin.
- Kevin Durant. I think he's earned the nod for the 2008-on group based both on how often he's played, and how well he's played.

I'd slide LeBron as the next guy to mention. Were I trying to make a starting 5, that 5th spot is where things start getting really debatable.

Barkley was 8th on the team in minutes in 1996 (played substantially less than Pippen and Malone). Robinson was 10th and played less than Shaq.

They were the points per game and points per minute leaders, and with Robinson I think you can lean on him being a heavier minute player in the Finals and semifinals, but Barkley was only top five in minutes twice, and neither were in the gold medal game.

Using minutes as a more direct proxy…

1988: Majerle and Charles Smith (Manning third, Robinson fifth)

1992: Jordan and Mullin (Pippen third, Barkley fifth)

1996: Pippen and Miller

2000: Carter and Garnett

2004: Iverson and Marbury (Duncan third but specifically limited in the elimination rounds)

2008: Lebron and Kobe

2012: Durant and Paul (Lebron third, and big gap after those three)

2016: Durant and Carmelo (Kyrie third)

2020/21: Durant and Jrue

2024: Lebron and Steph (Durant third)

Matches up pretty closely with your designations… except when it comes to Barkley and Robinson. Now, I am not really disputing Barkley’s perceived status on the Dream Team, nor am I really disputing Robinson’s perceived status on the 1988 team either… but in both those instances they were still playing starter minutes, and in 1996 they were not even close.

I would probably have an easier time backing Pippen for that 1992/96 combination than I would Barkley, between Pippen leading the 1992 team in assists (top three in minutes) and leading the 1996 team in minutes (top three in assists). And if we pretended Mullin and Miller were the same functional player, that off-ball shooting role was evidently more essential too.

Quoting this post of mine from the WNBA forum:

Doctor MJ wrote:Here's a breakdown of Team USA's MOV in Olympic history:

1976 -0.4 (Silver, crushed by USSR because Uljana Semjonova)

1980 n/a

1984 +32.7 (Gold)

1988 +13.8 (Gold)

1992 +29.0 (Bronze, unlucky loss to CIS, not due to CIS 3-point shooting, but worth noting Cynthia Cooper was on the team and being treated like a role player because Team USA never understood what they had in Cooper.)

1996 +28.6 (Gold)

2000 +21.8 (Gold)

2004 +23.8 (Gold)

2008 +37.6 (Gold)

2012 +34.8 (Gold)

2016 +37.3 (Gold)

2020 +19.3 (Gold)

2024 +15.7 (Gold)

Things worth noting:

1. I think people today tend to just assume that Team USA has always dominated women's basketball, but this really wasn't the case until roughly the start of the WNBA. I think the WNBA really helped here.

2. By the metric above they were at their most dominant in 2008 just barely over 2016, but I would be inclined to see the 2016 team as the best team in women's international basketball history, and it's just a question of whether they were better than the 2023 Las Vegas Aces.

3. The fall off in the 2020s for the women's team has made them less dominant than the men's again, and honestly, I don't think there's any "to be expected" reason for that. I understand that historically the WNBA doesn't have the same level of dominance over foreign leagues as the NBA does, but this was always true, and unlike in the men's game, we haven't seen any "best in world candidate" level talents emerge from outside the US in a long time (since Australia's Lauren Jackson, who was born in 1981).

To put another way: I think the 2023 Aces would win a Gold Medal in this Olympic tournament, so it's not a matter of the WNBA having weaker talent at the top, nor is about that top talent refusing to play for Team USA.

In term's GOAT, I'll make a short-list like I did with the men:

- Cheryl Miller (1984). The first cross-over women's basketball star in the US. To this day it's possible we haven't seen a more talent player, but much uncertainty there. Worth noting that in 1984 there was no 3-pointer, and Cheryl was Reggie Miller's sister. Her style of play didn't cry out for a 3 to be clear - I've tended to compare her to Barkley - but god, if she had the talent for a great 3-ball, she'd be absolutely terrifying in today's game.

- Lisa Leslie (1996-2008). The obvious choice from her era, and as noted, 2008 had the largest MOV of any team...though note that Leslie was past-peak by this point.

- Diana Taurasi (2004-2024). Has the longevity argument, and I would say was the MVP of the most impressive women's Olympic team we've ever seen (2016). I wish she hadn't been on 2024's team, but what can you do?

After that it's tricky. I think Teresa Edwards is an obvious choice given that she was a guard there from 1984 to 2000. The downside there for me is that I think Team USA thinking they should focus on Edwards (and Katrina McClain) rather than Cynthia Cooper was an incredibly huge misjudgment of talent and relates to why they didn't win Gold in 1992.

So I'll give the nod to Sue Bird, who was an invaluable player on many teams without really any drawbacks. I would even argue her decision to retire after 2020 rather than continue to 2024 is an argument for her over Taurasi.

5th spot, I'll go with Breanna Stewart. She and A'ja Wilson have defined the team the last two iterations while also being seen as the clear cut 2 best players in the world. Makes sense to consider them both. The downside? Well, I think Team USA has underperformed in each of the last two Olympics, particularly this one. They should be dominating more than the men are, and they're not despite the fact that there hasn't really been an emergence of superstar talents outside of the Americans among the women the way they haven in the men's game.

AEnigma wrote:

Doctor MJ wrote:1988 +30.4 (Bronze, starring Majerle & Robinson, lost to Soviet team led by Sabonis & Marciulionis)

1992 +43.8 (Gold, starring Barkley & Jordan)

1996 +31.8 (Gold, starring Barkley & Robinson)

2000 +21.6 (Gold, starring Garnett & Carter)

2004 +4.6 (Bronze, starring Iverson & Duncan, lost repeatedly, but most notably to Ginobili's Argentina)

2008 +27.9 (Gold, starring Kobe & LeBron)

2012 +32.1 (Gold, starring Durant & LeBron)

2016 +22.5 (Gold, starring Durant & Kyrie)

2020 +20.0 (Gold, starring Durant & Holiday)

2024 +19.0 (Gold, starring LeBron & Curry)

Other than Kurland, Barkley's the first guy to be the best player on 2 Olympic teams, and what teams to do it with.

6. The 2004 team was just astonishingly bad. I think we'll probably be talking for many decades more about what happened there. It goes without saying that this by far the worst pro-era Team USA, and there's good reason to question whether some of the amateur teams from the deeper past (1956, 1960, 1984) would have been better.

Further, while folks lament the lack of talent on the roster, they had drastically more talent than any other team, and still went only 5-3. Fundamentally, this was team basketball not working.

7. From 2008 onward I'm not sure if there's that much to say other than to debate where to put LeBron & KD on our all-time list.

So then, guys who would be on my absolute shortlist for USA Olympic GOAT here:

- Bill Russell. The most dominant performance in the history of men's Olympic basketball. Period.
- Charles Barkley. The best international-style basketball player of "Jordan's generation" by a significant margin.
- Kevin Durant. I think he's earned the nod for the 2008-on group based both on how often he's played, and how well he's played.

I'd slide LeBron as the next guy to mention. Were I trying to make a starting 5, that 5th spot is where things start getting really debatable.

Barkley was 8th on the team in minutes in 1996 (played substantially less than Pippen and Malone). Robinson was 10th and played less than Shaq.

They were the points per game and points per minute leaders, and with Robinson I think you can lean on him being a heavier minute player in the Finals and semifinals, but Barkley was only top five in minutes twice, and neither were in the gold medal game.

Using minutes as a more direct proxy…

1988: Majerle and Charles Smith (Manning third, Robinson fifth)

1992: Jordan and Mullin (Pippen third, Barkley fifth)

1996: Pippen and Miller

2000: Carter and Garnett

2004: Iverson and Marbury (Duncan third but specifically limited in the elimination rounds)

2008: Lebron and Kobe

2012: Durant and Paul (Lebron third, and big gap after those three)

2016: Durant and Carmelo

2020/21: Durant and Jrue

2024: Lebron and Steph (Durant third)

Matches up pretty closely with your designations… except when it comes to Barkley and Robinson. Now, I am not really disputing Barkley’s perceived status on the Dream Team, nor am I really disputing Robinson’s perceived status on the 1988 team either… but in both those instances they were still playing starter minutes, and in 1996 they were not even close.

I would probably have an easier time backing Pippen looking at the 1992/96 combination than I would Barkley, between leading the 1992 team in assists (top three in minutes) and leading the 1996 team in minutes (top three in assists). And if we pretended Mullin and Miller were the same functional player, that off-ball shooting role was evidently more essential too.

Fair enough point as a category, but let's not that Barkley's was playing 18.1 MPG on a team where no one was playing more than 22.0 MPG, and none of their games were ever in real doubt. You can argue someone else deserved the MVP (Robinson makes sense) for that tournament, but I don't think you can argue that Barkley looked anything less that ultra-dominant when he played.

Incidentally, if Robinson had been arguably the MVP of 2 Gold Medal teams, he'd have a case in my eyes for this GOAT conversation. Of course, if Robinson had led his team to the first Gold medal in 1988, then in 1992 the US is probably still sending college players until they lose an Olympics, and while there's a good chance that's exactly what would have happened in 1992, it does throw in a bunch of uncertainty.

Re: Duncan playing less than Marbury. This is a reasonable point, though I'd note that this was really only the case because Duncan got into foul trouble. So while you could argue that Marbury was more valuable than Duncan - debatable given that I wouldn't let Marbury anywhere near the team - I think it's pretty clear that the team was built with the expectation that Duncan would be able to be a Top 2 minute guy.

Doctor MJ wrote:

AEnigma wrote:Barkley was 8th on the team in minutes in 1996 (played substantially less than Pippen and Malone). Robinson was 10th and played less than Shaq.

They were the points per game and points per minute leaders, and with Robinson I think you can lean on him being a heavier minute player in the Finals and semifinals, but Barkley was only top five in minutes twice, and neither were in the gold medal game.

[Minutes per game] matches up pretty closely with your designations… except when it comes to Barkley and Robinson. Now, I am not really disputing Barkley’s perceived status on the Dream Team, nor am I really disputing Robinson’s perceived status on the 1988 team either… but in both those instances they were still playing starter minutes, and in 1996 they were not even close.

I would probably have an easier time backing Pippen looking at the 1992/96 combination than I would Barkley, between leading the 1992 team in assists (top three in minutes) and leading the 1996 team in minutes (top three in assists). And if we pretended Mullin and Miller were the same functional player, that off-ball shooting role was evidently more essential too.

Fair enough point as a category, but let's not that Barkley's was playing 18.1 MPG on a team where no one was playing more than 22.0 MPG, and none of their games were ever in real doubt. You can argue someone else deserved the MVP (Robinson makes sense) for that tournament, but I don't think you can argue that Barkley looked anything less that ultra-dominant when he played.

Agree he was a dominant scorer, but when every other assessed team leader is top three in minutes regardless of how easily they were winning, I think it stands out that Barkley distinctly was not — without an equivalent situation as what Robinson had splitting a single position’s minutes among three similarly excellent talents.

Re: Duncan playing less than Marbury. This is a reasonable point, though I'd note that this was really only the case because Duncan got into foul trouble. So while you could argue that Marbury was more valuable than Duncan - debatable given that I wouldn't let Marbury anywhere near the team - I think it's pretty clear that the team was built with the expectation that Duncan would be able to be a Top 2 minute guy.

Agree. Everyone else you listed as a leader was still top three in minutes, and Duncan deserves some degree of responsibility for his fouls (even if he is not the one controlling what referees decide to call). I wrote that out to highlight how Barkley and Robinson were demonstrable outliers in team load; even if we look at minutes per game for Barkley rather than total minutes, he caps out at fifth.

AEnigma wrote:

Doctor MJ wrote:

AEnigma wrote:Barkley was 8th on the team in minutes in 1996 (played substantially less than Pippen and Malone). Robinson was 10th and played less than Shaq.

They were the points per game and points per minute leaders, and with Robinson I think you can lean on him being a heavier minute player in the Finals and semifinals, but Barkley was only top five in minutes twice, and neither were in the gold medal game.

[Minutes per game] matches up pretty closely with your designations… except when it comes to Barkley and Robinson. Now, I am not really disputing Barkley’s perceived status on the Dream Team, nor am I really disputing Robinson’s perceived status on the 1988 team either… but in both those instances they were still playing starter minutes, and in 1996 they were not even close.

I would probably have an easier time backing Pippen looking at the 1992/96 combination than I would Barkley, between leading the 1992 team in assists (top three in minutes) and leading the 1996 team in minutes (top three in assists). And if we pretended Mullin and Miller were the same functional player, that off-ball shooting role was evidently more essential too.

Fair enough point as a category, but let's not that Barkley's was playing 18.1 MPG on a team where no one was playing more than 22.0 MPG, and none of their games were ever in real doubt. You can argue someone else deserved the MVP (Robinson makes sense) for that tournament, but I don't think you can argue that Barkley looked anything less that ultra-dominant when he played.

Agree he was a dominant scorer, but when every other assessed team leader is top three in minutes regardless of how easily they were winning, I think it stands out that Barkley distinctly was not — without an equivalent situation as what Robinson had splitting a single position’s minutes among three similarly excellent talents.

Re: Duncan playing less than Marbury. This is a reasonable point, though I'd note that this was really only the case because Duncan got into foul trouble. So while you could argue that Marbury was more valuable than Duncan - debatable given that I wouldn't let Marbury anywhere near the team - I think it's pretty clear that the team was built with the expectation that Duncan would be able to be a Top 2 minute guy.

Agree. Everyone else you listed as a leader was still top three in minutes, and Duncan deserves some degree of responsibility for his fouls (even if he is not the one controlling what referees decide to call). I wrote that out to highlight how Barkley and Robinson were demonstrable outliers in team load; even if we look at minutes per game for Barkley rather than total minutes, he caps out at fifth.

This is a fair point. Honestly, the only reason I put Jordan as one of the leaders of 1992 is because I wasn't looking to have the argument. By value add, not sure if he's Top 5, and I'm only not sure because of the defense. Offensively, I think he was basically the only one that didn't get the memo that there was never a reason to take a hard shot on that team.

But I'd note that Barkley played basically the same MPG in 1996 as 1992, and there was really no doubt who the MVP of the 1992 team was: It was Barkley, and this surprising breakout performance above Jordan and the other stars had everything to do with why he won the NBA MVP the next year.

That said, unlike in 1992, in 1996 there was a teammate scoring more per-minute than Barkley: Robinson. Another point for Robinson in that debate.

Of course on the other hand: In 1996 they chose to use Robinson as the primary shooting option (as opposed to Jordan in 1992), and they also chose a roster that would shoot 3's worse and less. Not saying it was definitely a mistake - hard to say what's a mistake when you're winning so easily - but it does run counter to the trends not simply of the 2024 NBA, but also the 1996 NBA.

AEnigma wrote:

Doctor MJ wrote:1988 +30.4 (Bronze, starring Majerle & Robinson, lost to Soviet team led by Sabonis & Marciulionis)

1992 +43.8 (Gold, starring Barkley & Jordan)

1996 +31.8 (Gold, starring Barkley & Robinson)

2000 +21.6 (Gold, starring Garnett & Carter)

2004 +4.6 (Bronze, starring Iverson & Duncan, lost repeatedly, but most notably to Ginobili's Argentina)

2008 +27.9 (Gold, starring Kobe & LeBron)

2012 +32.1 (Gold, starring Durant & LeBron)

2016 +22.5 (Gold, starring Durant & Kyrie)

2020 +20.0 (Gold, starring Durant & Holiday)

2024 +19.0 (Gold, starring LeBron & Curry)

Other than Kurland, Barkley's the first guy to be the best player on 2 Olympic teams, and what teams to do it with.

6. The 2004 team was just astonishingly bad. I think we'll probably be talking for many decades more about what happened there. It goes without saying that this by far the worst pro-era Team USA, and there's good reason to question whether some of the amateur teams from the deeper past (1956, 1960, 1984) would have been better.

Further, while folks lament the lack of talent on the roster, they had drastically more talent than any other team, and still went only 5-3. Fundamentally, this was team basketball not working.

7. From 2008 onward I'm not sure if there's that much to say other than to debate where to put LeBron & KD on our all-time list.

So then, guys who would be on my absolute shortlist for USA Olympic GOAT here:

- Bill Russell. The most dominant performance in the history of men's Olympic basketball. Period.
- Charles Barkley. The best international-style basketball player of "Jordan's generation" by a significant margin.
- Kevin Durant. I think he's earned the nod for the 2008-on group based both on how often he's played, and how well he's played.

I'd slide LeBron as the next guy to mention. Were I trying to make a starting 5, that 5th spot is where things start getting really debatable.

Barkley was 8th on the team in minutes in 1996 (played substantially less than Pippen and Malone). Robinson was 10th and played less than Shaq.

They were the points per game and points per minute leaders, and with Robinson I think you can lean on him being a heavier minute player in the Finals and semifinals, but Barkley was only top five in minutes twice, and neither were in the gold medal game.

Using minutes as a more direct proxy…

1988: Majerle and Charles Smith (Manning third, Robinson fifth)

1992: Jordan and Mullin (Pippen third, Barkley fifth)

1996: Pippen and Miller

2000: Carter and Garnett

2004: Iverson and Marbury (Duncan third but specifically limited in the elimination rounds)

2008: Lebron and Kobe

2012: Durant and Paul (Lebron third, and big gap after those three)

2016: Durant and Carmelo (Kyrie third)

2020/21: Durant and Jrue

2024: Lebron and Steph (Durant third)

Matches up pretty closely with your designations… except when it comes to Barkley and Robinson. Now, I am not really disputing Barkley’s perceived status on the Dream Team, nor am I really disputing Robinson’s perceived status on the 1988 team either… but in both those instances they were still playing starter minutes, and in 1996 they were not even close.

I would probably have an easier time backing Pippen for that 1992/96 combination than I would Barkley, between Pippen leading the 1992 team in assists (top three in minutes) and leading the 1996 team in minutes (top three in assists). And if we pretended Mullin and Miller were the same functional player, that off-ball shooting role was evidently more essential too.

Olympics are a unusually special circunstance to evaluate american nba players due to a lot of circunstances, such as tiny sample (few games each 4 years, literally as many games as a single playoff series), absurd but usually overlapping star talent, short time to adapt to teammates and fiba ball differences

But some interesting trends show up

Back when usa top amateur players were 21-22 year old players the best american talent could outplay top foreign talent in a way a current nba age rookie 18-19 year old kid may not.
Even a lesser talent 28 year old proffesional will usually beat the supremely gifted but unexperienced/raw/less phisically built 18 year old

However a unusually strong proffesional (and what a joke it was teams like the 72 urss were considered "amateur") with top end european level players lile belov will be too much for all but the most generational 20-21 yeard old americam talents (the 56,60 teams were a lot more talented than the 72 team without a bill walton there)

Belov generation and later people like niko galis likely represented a jump in european/urss basketball top end talent at least comparable in degree (not nearly the same in raw talent but in the size of the jump in quality) to what russel/wilt/oscar/west were in the states. Wonder what you guys think of fiba ball own evolution there. Was dragic/kukok a jump in talent compared to previous perimeter talents like galis?

Or was it until ginobili (bodiroga too maybe if he evrr came?) that fiba perimeter talents were high level nba worthy?

It seems safe to assume arvidas was a talent jump vs previous european bigs and was one of the earliest "foreign" bigs who could have been a top nba player
4
but even then you needed a elite generation of proffesionals like sabonis in 88 urss or dragic/divac in yugoslabia to beat usa regular level sub-22 teams. The gap was still huge.

88 may have not been the strongest usa college team and potentially 84 usa
may have won gold in 88 (maybe) but by 92 i think croatia was a bit too good to not be the favorite vs college-usa anymore even if said usa roster had a mega prodigy on it (shaq)

In the usa side of thinghs

Lebron is a underated olympic career dominating in 3 different olympics in the modern era. But durant was the key about two weaker side (for usa standards) usa rosters (16/21) keeping the gold in america.

Barkley was amazing but usa likely easily wins gold without him regardless

Russel is incredible but only was there once.

Jordan may unironically havr played better in 84 than in his shickingly mediocre 92. Or at lwast been way more undispensable

Doctor MJ wrote:Quoting this post of mine from the WNBA forum:

Doctor MJ wrote:Here's a breakdown of Team USA's MOV in Olympic history:

1976 -0.4 (Silver, crushed by USSR because Uljana Semjonova)

1980 n/a

1984 +32.7 (Gold)

1988 +13.8 (Gold)

1992 +29.0 (Bronze, unlucky loss to CIS, not due to CIS 3-point shooting, but worth noting Cynthia Cooper was on the team and being treated like a role player because Team USA never understood what they had in Cooper.)

1996 +28.6 (Gold)

2000 +21.8 (Gold)

2004 +23.8 (Gold)

2008 +37.6 (Gold)

2012 +34.8 (Gold)

2016 +37.3 (Gold)

2020 +19.3 (Gold)

2024 +15.7 (Gold)

Things worth noting:

1. I think people today tend to just assume that Team USA has always dominated women's basketball, but this really wasn't the case until roughly the start of the WNBA. I think the WNBA really helped here.

2. By the metric above they were at their most dominant in 2008 just barely over 2016, but I would be inclined to see the 2016 team as the best team in women's international basketball history, and it's just a question of whether they were better than the 2023 Las Vegas Aces.

3. The fall off in the 2020s for the women's team has made them less dominant than the men's again, and honestly, I don't think there's any "to be expected" reason for that. I understand that historically the WNBA doesn't have the same level of dominance over foreign leagues as the NBA does, but this was always true, and unlike in the men's game, we haven't seen any "best in world candidate" level talents emerge from outside the US in a long time (since Australia's Lauren Jackson, who was born in 1981).

To put another way: I think the 2023 Aces would win a Gold Medal in this Olympic tournament, so it's not a matter of the WNBA having weaker talent at the top, nor is about that top talent refusing to play for Team USA.

In term's GOAT, I'll make a short-list like I did with the men:

- Cheryl Miller (1984). The first cross-over women's basketball star in the US. To this day it's possible we haven't seen a more talent player, but much uncertainty there. Worth noting that in 1984 there was no 3-pointer, and Cheryl was Reggie Miller's sister. Her style of play didn't cry out for a 3 to be clear - I've tended to compare her to Barkley - but god, if she had the talent for a great 3-ball, she'd be absolutely terrifying in today's game.

- Lisa Leslie (1996-2008). The obvious choice from her era, and as noted, 2008 had the largest MOV of any team...though note that Leslie was past-peak by this point.

- Diana Taurasi (2004-2024). Has the longevity argument, and I would say was the MVP of the most impressive women's Olympic team we've ever seen (2016). I wish she hadn't been on 2024's team, but what can you do?

After that it's tricky. I think Teresa Edwards is an obvious choice given that she was a guard there from 1984 to 2000. The downside there for me is that I think Team USA thinking they should focus on Edwards (and Katrina McClain) rather than Cynthia Cooper was an incredibly huge misjudgment of talent and relates to why they didn't win Gold in 1992.

So I'll give the nod to Sue Bird, who was an invaluable player on many teams without really any drawbacks. I would even argue her decision to retire after 2020 rather than continue to 2024 is an argument for her over Taurasi.

5th spot, I'll go with Breanna Stewart. She and A'ja Wilson have defined the team the last two iterations while also being seen as the clear cut 2 best players in the world. Makes sense to consider them both. The downside? Well, I think Team USA has underperformed in each of the last two Olympics, particularly this one. They should be dominating more than the men are, and they're not despite the fact that there hasn't really been an emergence of superstar talents outside of the Americans among the women the way they haven in the men's game.

For the women's side at least this year I really blame the coaching, there were a lot of time in the last game where they couldn't buy a bucket yet Reeve wouldn't put in any shot creating guards to shake things up, I was generally disappointed in the rotations and feel like someone like Hammon could have gotten a lot more from the team

Red Robot wrote:Yeah, the case for Durant is pretty clear cut.

The list of NBA players with multiple appearances is short. Only four players have participated more than twice. Most of the players with two appearances were on the '92 and/or '96 teams that were so uncompetitive that it's hard to even say who was good.

So of those four players:
Durant
Carmelo
Robinson
LeBron

All were great in international play with good all-around games. But Durant was always the leading scorer, by a big margin, on great efficiency.

Yea and Kd was incredible in his first 3 gold medal games. Had 30, 30 and 29. Melo and Bron also brought home 2 bronze medals even tho they didnt play much in Athens and werent the featured stars they were top 2 in minutes for that 06 Japan bronze in Fiba World. Kds only brought home gold in Olympics or Fiba and in that 10 Fiba run he averaged 23 Ppg on 56% shooting and no one else on the team was in double digit Ppg Chauncey closest w/ 9.8 Ppg

The Tokyo team was also the weakest Usa team i can remember specially since Dame who was supposed to be the 2nd option and prolly only other superstar on the team at that time was horrendous all Olympics and struggled w/ the rules and officiating. Jrue was prolly our 2nd best performer for that gold and he was like the 8th best guy in the gold we just won

Kd is easily Goat