What Happened to the 2004 USA Olympic Team?

[gavran]

Argentina were damn good. They had a prime ginoboli and Scola plus they played incredible team ball. Let’s give them some credit

Puerto Rico wasn't.

[cam24thomas]

They had a lot of penetrators, so they would have most likely won it Ray Allen played, assuming the penetrators passed to him....

[Jasen777]

I've always read about how Larry Brown wouldn't play Lebron and that being a big reason they lost, but in 2006 FIBA, Lebron had the most minutes on that team and they still got 3rd place. The 2006 team also had shooters and a defensive backcourt, things that were missing from 2004

https://archive.fiba.com/pages/eng/fa/team/p/sid/3507/tid/379/_/2006_FIBA_World_Championship/accumulated-statistics.html

The both got beat in the semi-final, but that was their only lost in 2006 (and they had an extra knockout game). The 2004 team lost 2 games in pool play. 2006 was an improvement.

[OdomFan]

The talent just didn't mesh well because you had a guy like Duncan who's known to be very unselfish next to Iverson and Marbury who just wanted to do what they wanted to do, and a coach in Larry Brown that had a thing for not using rookies well. It was a recipe of disaster from the start.

Also a lot of the other talents sadly feared for another terrorist attack so thats why they didn't go then and thats a shame.

Would have liked to seen Jason Kidd, Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, McGrady, Carter, KG, etc. Iverson might have done better alongside all of them, but If it were up to me I'd put Ray Allen there over him.

[lambchop]

I've always read about how Larry Brown wouldn't play Lebron and that being a big reason they lost, but in 2006 FIBA, Lebron had the most minutes on that team and they still got 3rd place. The 2006 team also had shooters and a defensive backcourt, things that were missing from 2004

https://archive.fiba.com/pages/eng/fa/team/p/sid/3507/tid/379/_/2006_FIBA_World_Championship/accumulated-statistics.html

The both got beat in the semi-final, but that was their only lost in 2006 (and they had an extra knockout game). The 2004 team lost 2 games in pool play. 2006 was an improvement.

Yep, they were actually kind of lucky to get that far in 04. They got blown out by 20 points against Puerto Rico. That box score is pretty wild too, 3-24 from three, Duncan had 7 TOs, Carmelo played 3 minutes etc.

Their strongest lineup probably would have been:

LBJ/Wade (have to account for some turnovers with those versions of these guys running point, but AI and Marbury weren't exactly great decision makers either)
Richard Jefferson
Carmelo
Odom
Duncan

Only issue is that if you bench AI/Marbury, I think the team chemistry is just ruined.

[Mirotic12]

2004 Team USA results:

Italy 95 - USA 78 - 17 point loss

Puerto Rico 92 - USA 73 - 19 point loss

USA 77 - Greece 71 - 6 point win

USA 89 - Australia 79 - 10 point win

Lithuania 94 - USA 90 - 4 point loss

USA 89 - Angola 53 - 36 point win

USA 102 - Spain 94 - 8 point win

Argentina 89 - USA 81 - 8 point loss

USA 104 - Lithuania 96 - 8 point win


Basically, the only opponent that they were clearly better than was Angola, an African team. If you take out their 36 point win against Angola.........and just count the games against the European teams, the Latin American teams, and Australia...

Then you have a record of 4-4, with an average margin of victory of minus 2 points.

[hippesthippo]

In the semis against Argentina, Tim Duncan fouled out in 20 minutes (I'm not sure if he actually committed any, but he was called for 5). LeBron played 3 minutes, Amar'e played 2, and Carmelo didn't play. Wade was 1-8 in 19 minutes.

To me, a team relying Iverson, Marbury, Odom, Marion, Boozer, and Richard Jefferson screams bronze medal all the way.

A few things:

1) Coaching:
Larry Brown is a known hard-ass. You play the right way, his way, or you don't play. At that time in history his systems were highly effective, so it makes sense. The issue is it takes a lot of reps/experience/IQ in order to execute. The 2004 team was slapped together with spare parts and next to no practice time.

2) Poor roster construction:
[a]Their bigs sucked. After Duncan, they were playing Boozer big minutes who offers zero rim protection. Emeka Okafor has always been a meh player. Amare Stoudemire was a terrible defender as well. That's pretty much it. Those were the bigs they brought in to protect the rim.
[b]Their guards were all score first players with questionable shooting and decision making. AI should have been a 6th man on that team.
[c]Most of USA's top talent was extremely young relative to their international counterparts. Lebron, Melo, Stoudemire, and Wade were ages 19-22 respectively. They all should have received more minutes, but Lebron and Wade in particular. This also goes back to point #1 above.

3) Terrible rotations:
USA's biggest problem wasn't actually offense. Their offense under performed, but it was their defense that lost them games. Wade should have been starting in the backcourt next to Marbury and played a defensive stopper role.
Starters: Duncan, Odom, RJ, Wade, Marbury. A good mix of vets, youngsters, post play, shooting, and defense.
Bench: Stoudemire, Melo, Marion, AI, LBJ. A bench like this should be able to run right past any other team in the tourney, zone defense or not. Marion can lock up whoever the other team's top bench scorer is and between him and Melo, they at least have a couple options to kick the ball out for wide open 3pters [the line is 3' in from NBA range].

Basically, Brown killed the confidence of all the youngsters and they shot like it. Hesitant miss after hesitant miss. The offense lacked any real point guard play. Just a few undersized shooting guards dressed up as point guards. Most importantly, they failed to bring a reliable rim protector after Tim Duncan, who kept fouling out on ticky tack bs.

[Homer38]

Crazy that it was not just one game they loss...It was 3 games!

[Rainwater]

Two things that don't get mentioned often here:

1. Lack of talent
2. Lack of motivation

We all knew at the time that was the USA's B team. No Shaq, no Kobe, no Jason Kidd, no KG. Those guys didn't commit because they didn't care since the US always winning was taken for granted. The players on the 2004 deserve blame too. They didn't care. They were all half assing it.

It bothers me to no end that people don't see this. Half the A list guys, at the time, didn't play due to security reasons post 9/11 or personal reasons. They sent out their B squad and had young guys like LBJ, Wade, and Carmelo in their second years playing.

If the Team was Shaq, KG, Tim, Kobe, T-Mac, Kidd, Allen, and Carter it would be no contest. Instead we sent guys like Boozers, Marion, Jefferson, Odom and freaking Marbury against an improving international community. No offense to the latter list but they don't compare to the former.

[WillyJakkz]

Some notes/observations

-Despite a terrible tournament and terrible fitting team, the US still won the bronze, beating a VERY good Spain team (they had Pau, Juan Carlos Navarro, Garbajosa, Calderon, Rudy Fernandez) in the quarter finals and sending them home w/o a medal. Also beat Lithuania in the bronze medal game.

-US just had some bad fits for the international game like Marbury and AI and they lacked shooting in a big way.

-Lebron and Carmelo were still ultra young. Just 19/20.

-Argentina was really, really good with prime Manu, Oberto, Nocioni, Delfino and Scola. Probably their best ever team.

-Tim Duncan was not a fan of FIBA officiating and promptly retired from Team USA/FIBA ball after this game.

-I'd add that if it was any other NBA superstar other than Duncan, he would've gotten a lot of flak for this. Imagine Lebron retiring after a FIBA tournament because he didn't like the officiating. He would've never heard the end of that. Duncan somehow "retired" from FIBA competition very quietly.

Sounds like you REALLY don't like Tim.

[Rainwater]

Having a bunch of me first ball handler doesn't help.

Correct if I'm wrong, but did these following players withdrew from because of the security issues?
Vince Carter
Kevin Garnett
McGrady
Ray Allen

Would help a lot with these guys around, also throw out a LeBron James & Carmelo Anthony for some athleticism would help a lot too.

This really doesn't get enough attention, the top guys didn't play. I think there is a belief that the US can just throw anybody out there and the US can beat the world. I really do believe that narrative should have changed in 2002 when the US lost in the Fiba games with Reggie Miller and Paul Pierce leading the way. It took the 2004 lost for the US to take international play more seriously and send the best.

[ellobo]

Besides the roster construction, there was also an evolution in strategy and tactics that the US was slow to adapt to, plus the US was just slow to really respect the opposition.

International teams were much quicker to move toward a pace and space style, spacing the court with shooters and playing more high pick and roll and drive and kick.

US teams relied on iso scoring and post play, but against packed in defenses without illegal defense or defensive three second rules that was much less effective. US teams also tended to lack pure shooting, and would vacillate between overagressively driving the ball into traffic and forcing up contested shots, being overly passive and trying to be too unselfish, and settling for perimeter shots. And since they didn't have a lot of pure shooters, and the perimeter shots were often "prove it to me" kind of looks, US players often got tight and shot worse than they normally would in a regular star role on their own NBA teams.

NBA stars can shoot more loosely and confidently in starring roles on their own teams. If they miss a couple of shots, they're going to keep trying to shoot themselves hot because they know their team needs them to do that. On a national team, there's more pressure to only be hot because the next guy is top scorer too. And then there was the added pressure of being an overwhelming favorite that is expected to win. It created this weird dynamic of guys deferring too much, playing tight, or overcompensating and forcing things. So on top of lacking pure shooting, it seemed like the guys who were normally at least good volume scorers would shoot worse than they normally would on the same kind of looks.

On defense, for a long time US teams seemed to be relying on superior athleticism to scare opposing players into turnovers and create transition opportunities. But international ballhandlers got better at handling pressure (and US teams were often not very cohesive in applying it), so overagressive perimeter defense just led to blowbys and open drive and kick opportunities. Even when the US forced turnovers, take fouls nullified a lot of transition opportunities and got the US players frustrated.

Overall, it took the US a long time to get over the attitude that we're the best at basketball and no one else is really a threat to beat us under any circumstances, so all we have to do is show up and we'll still win even if we don't play hard, smart, or cohesively.

[Chuck Diesel]

Besides, the roster construction, there was also an evolution in strategy and tactics that the US was slow to adapt to, plus the US was just slow to really respect the opposition.

International teams were much quicker to move toward a pace and space style, spacing the court with shooters and playing more high pick and roll and drive and kick.

US teams relied on iso scoring and post play, but against packed in defenses without illegal defense or defensive three second rules that was much less effective. US teams also tended to lack pure shooting, and would vacillate between overagressively driving the ball into traffic and forcing up contested shots, being overly passive and trying to be too unselfish, and settling for perimeter shots. And since they didn't have a lot of pure shooters, and the perimeter shots were often "prove it to me" kind of looks, US players often got tight and shot worse than they normally would in a regular star role on their own NBA teams.

NBA stars can shoot more loosely and confidently in starring roles on their own teams. If they miss a couple of shots, they're going to keep trying to shoot themselves hot because they know their team needs them to do that. On a national team, there's more pressure to only be hot because the next guy is top scorer too. And then there was the added pressure of being an overwhelming favorite that is expected to win. It created this weird dynamic of guys deferring too much, playing tight, or overcompensating and forcing things. So on top of lacking pure shooting, it seemed like the guys who were normally at least good volume scorers would shoot worse than they normally would on the same kind of looks.

On defense, for a long time US teams seemed to be relying on superior athleticism to scare opposing players into turnovers and create transition opportunities. But international ballhandlers got better at handling pressure (and US teams were often not very cohesive in applying it), so overagressive perimeter defense just led to blowbys and open drive and kick opportunities. Even when the US forced turnovers, take fouls nullified a lot of transition opportunities and got the US players frustrated.

Overall, it took the US a long time to get over the attitude that we're the best at basketball and no one else is really a threat to beat us under any circumstances, so all we have to do is show up and we'll still win even if we don't play hard, smart, or cohesively.

Spot on. Also didn’t help that Larry Brown hated the players and the players hated Larry Brown.

[dc]

Some notes/observations

-Despite a terrible tournament and terrible fitting team, the US still won the bronze, beating a VERY good Spain team (they had Pau, Juan Carlos Navarro, Garbajosa, Calderon, Rudy Fernandez) in the quarter finals and sending them home w/o a medal. Also beat Lithuania in the bronze medal game.

-US just had some bad fits for the international game like Marbury and AI and they lacked shooting in a big way.

-Lebron and Carmelo were still ultra young. Just 19/20.

-Argentina was really, really good with prime Manu, Oberto, Nocioni, Delfino and Scola. Probably their best ever team.

-Tim Duncan was not a fan of FIBA officiating and promptly retired from Team USA/FIBA ball after this game.

-I'd add that if it was any other NBA superstar other than Duncan, he would've gotten a lot of flak for this. Imagine Lebron retiring after a FIBA tournament because he didn't like the officiating. He would've never heard the end of that. Duncan somehow "retired" from FIBA competition very quietly.

Sounds like you REALLY don't like Tim.

I like Tim a lot. He's an all time great, and I actually do agree with him about the officiating. But if Lebron did the same thing Duncan did (didn't win a FIBA tournament and retired from competition because he didn't like the officiating) he would've never heard the end of it. People would've called him a quitter and a fake superstar who needs NBA refs to give him calls, etc....We all know that's what would happen.

Duncan escaped that debacle pretty much unscathed with no tarnish to his reputation.

[Dooley]

Having Stephon Marbury and a bunch of extremely young guys as crucial contributors on a team coached by Larry Brown is simply an obvious and predictable recipe for disaster. Those things are simply not ever going to mesh well. People get mad at Larry Brown for not playing the young guys, but they shouldn't have relied on guys at that age to contribute major minutes in a major international tournament in the first place. And they knew Larry Brown was coaching before the tournament started. Mind-bogglingly bad decision making.

Plus not enough shooting and no one over 25 who could play center other than Duncan who should play PF at least some of the time. They should have left Marbury at home and taken veteran guards who could play next to Iverson and do what Brown wanted, and they should have brought only 1 or 2 super young guys, and they should have had at least 1 or 2 veteran centers on the roster.

But obviously it was tough because a lot of the obvious choices couldn't play for various reasons or just didn't want to play. Or were guys who didn't have big names and big reputations - imagine how many jokes there would have been if they had put Brad Miller on the team, even though Miller would have contributed a lot more than someone like Amare or Okafor at that point in time.

[Sedale Threatt]

Overall, it took the US a long time to get over the attitude that we're the best at basketball and no one else is really a threat to beat us under any circumstances, so all we have to do is show up and we'll still win even if we don't play hard, smart, or cohesively.

I actually think we attacked the problem pretty quickly. We had back-to-back catastrophes in 02 and 04 and pretty immediately instituted a more structured program. Even though it didn't bear immediate fruits in 06, it had nothing to do with cohesion or effort or still thinking we could just roll out the ball and win by 20; Greece just played the game of its collective lives and beat us straight up, which is going to happen in single-elimination competition. (We could have easily lost to Spain or France in multiple tournaments since then as well.)

I think our record since the 04 debacle is something like 71-4 with six titles in seven major tournaments, and it would be even better if we didn't have the maddening tradition of treating the Olympics as our only main objective. So it's hard to criticize the response.

[Chuck Diesel]

Reminiscing about the American failure in Athens inspired me to think about what the ideal alternate team might've looked like, with the hindsight of better understanding of international hoops and the skillets/personalities best suited to thrive in that environment. As stark as the contrast was between FIBA and the NBA at the time, the games in Athens also looked very different than what we're seeing at EuroBasket here in 2022. The physicality more closely resembled mid 90's Knicks ball, the lane was trapezoid, the three point line was closer/less prioritized and there were a lot more more giant, lumbering bigs that looked like they were fresh from a feud with the Undertaker (shout out Eurelijus Zukauskas, Daniel Santiago & Roberto Duenas).

To keep things interesting I've left off anyone who publicly bailed (Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady, Ray Allen), all members of the 2002 6th place debacle in Indy (Baron Davis, Paul Pierce, Andre Miller), anyone on the 2006 Bronze World Championship team (Kirk Heinrich/Joe Johnson/Shane Battier), Kobe (on trail for rape), Shaq (long done exerting himself in the summer) and everyone who lost by 20 to Carlos Arroyo & the plucky Puerto Ricans to kick of the 2004 Athens games. This squad is about winning that singular tournament, not building a program or selling shoes.

Chauncey Billups/Sam Cassell/Brent Barry
Richard Hamilton/Eddie Jones/Doug Christie
Rashard Lewis/Ron Artest
PJ Brown/Donyell Marshall
Marcus Camby/Kurt Thomas

Head Coach: Rick Adelman.

Positional size and versatility. Shooting. Toughness. Veteran savvy. Pre-Malice Ron Artest at the peak of his powers.

Alternates:

Eric Snow/Jason Terry
Jerry Stackhouse/Stephen Jackson
James Posey/Jim Jackson
Joe Smith/Udonis Haslem
Theo Ratliff/Clifford Robinson

[Cavsfansince84]

I think team usa thought they could win gold on auto pilot in the 00's while the int'l competition was getting better.

[ellobo]

Overall, it took the US a long time to get over the attitude that we're the best at basketball and no one else is really a threat to beat us under any circumstances, so all we have to do is show up and we'll still win even if we don't play hard, smart, or cohesively.

I actually think we attacked the problem pretty quickly. We had back-to-back catastrophes in 02 and 04 and pretty immediately instituted a more structured program. Even though it didn't bear immediate fruits in 06, it had nothing to do with cohesion or effort or still thinking we could just roll out the ball and win by 20; Greece just played the game of its collective lives and beat us straight up, which is going to happen in single-elimination competition. (We could have easily lost to Spain or France in multiple tournaments since then as well.)

I think our record since the 04 debacle is something like 71-4 with six titles in seven major tournaments, and it would be even better if we didn't have the maddening tradition of treating the Olympics as our only main objective. So it's hard to criticize the response.

Well, waiting until you have "back-to-back catastrophes" two years apart doesn't seem like a very fast response. It seems more like we didn't learn our lesson the first time and had to get spanked again before reality set in.

And you can excuse 2006, but that was another disappointment, and hard to look at as righting the ship. I don't recall the game against Greece specifically, but looking at the box score it's hard to imagine that a US team that is organized and playing hard defensively would give up 63.5% field goals. That's not just the opponent getting hot. That's the opponent consistently getting high quality shots due to some combination of bad strategy, bad execution, bad effort, or the opponent having a lot more talent than you (which was not the case). Greece even missed 10 free throws, although the US shot even worse from the line.

[Chuck Diesel]

Coach K didn’t even know the Greek players by name in 2006 after they whipped his squad’s ass, instead referring to their jersey number. He sure learned them by 2008 when we got our revenge in a blowout.