*Update: Embiid commits to Team USA* (France gives Embiid til Oct 10th to commit)

[NoDopeOnSundays]

US just lost, so everyone's taking this seriously so we don't lose the Olympics as well. Frankly, the world's catching up fast. I wouldn't be surprised if we bring in Embiid, play some lower tier ball, and get upset. Embiid's good but not gold level great. US is really banking on Lebron, Durant and Curry teaming up.

It's definitely a sign of how the talent level in the US is dropping off that they need to somehow cheat to get guys who are not originally from the US to play for them.

The world is catching up but Hakeem played for the US in 96, this isn't something new. Also do people just forget Ewing is Jamaican? Was there outrage when he was on the dream team?


Just like Hakeem the vast majority of Embiid/Ewing development took place here, more so since they went to HS here.

[DC_Melo]

US just lost, so everyone's taking this seriously so we don't lose the Olympics as well. Frankly, the world's catching up fast. I wouldn't be surprised if we bring in Embiid, play some lower tier ball, and get upset. Embiid's good but not gold level great. US is really banking on Lebron, Durant and Curry teaming up.

It's definitely a sign of how the talent level in the US is dropping off that they need to somehow cheat to get guys who are not originally from the US to play for them.

What staggering cultural ignorance.

The sports world, not just basketball, is littered with examples of players that have dual/multiple citizenships and choose to play for their naturalized country over their birth country.

Perhaps you only have single citizenship, perhaps you have multiple. Regardless, many people who have dual or more often take pride in all their countries of citizenship. I’m a proud Portuguese born citizen with Brazilian citizenship as well. And yet I served the United States Army as a proud naturalized American. This does not take away from my birth citizenships, nor did the US “cheat” by allowing a foreign born citizen to enlist.

Such an ignorant and narrow minded take

[AussieCeltic]

He can play where he wants but saying he’s doing it because his 3 year old son was born here is weak.

[DrPampiloni]

US just lost, so everyone's taking this seriously so we don't lose the Olympics as well. Frankly, the world's catching up fast. I wouldn't be surprised if we bring in Embiid, play some lower tier ball, and get upset. Embiid's good but not gold level great. US is really banking on Lebron, Durant and Curry teaming up.

It's definitely a sign of how the talent level in the US is dropping off that they need to somehow cheat to get guys who are not originally from the US to play for them.

What staggering cultural ignorance.

The sports world, not just basketball, is littered with examples of players that have dual/multiple citizenships and choose to play for their naturalized country over their birth country.

Perhaps you only have single citizenship, perhaps you have multiple. Regardless, many people who have dual or more often take pride in all their countries of citizenship. I’m a proud Portuguese born citizen with Brazilian citizenship as well. And yet I served the United States Army as a proud naturalized American. This does not take away from my birth citizenships, nor did the US “cheat” by allowing a foreign born citizen to enlist.

Such an ignorant and narrow minded take

This is all well and honourable, but has nothing to do with the concept of international sports competitions among nations. If you do not set limits to how easily players can change national allegiance in sports, erase those competitions altogether. Then finally the NBA champions will rightfully be able to call themselves World Champions.

[DC_Melo]

It's definitely a sign of how the talent level in the US is dropping off that they need to somehow cheat to get guys who are not originally from the US to play for them.

What staggering cultural ignorance.

The sports world, not just basketball, is littered with examples of players that have dual/multiple citizenships and choose to play for their naturalized country over their birth country.

Perhaps you only have single citizenship, perhaps you have multiple. Regardless, many people who have dual or more often take pride in all their countries of citizenship. I’m a proud Portuguese born citizen with Brazilian citizenship as well. And yet I served the United States Army as a proud naturalized American. This does not take away from my birth citizenships, nor did the US “cheat” by allowing a foreign born citizen to enlist.

Such an ignorant and narrow minded take

This is all well and honourable, but has nothing to do with the concept of international sports competitions among nations. If you do not set limits to how easily players can change national allegiance in sports, erase those competitions altogether. Then finally the NBA champions will rightfully be able to call themselves World Champions.

Limits exist… players can play with a nation they are citizens of; and once they declare a nation they stay with that nation.

Now if you want to argue about what France did, giving citizenship without any real context to do so, that fine. I agree it’s pretty shady.

But Embiid moved to the US as a minor, has worked his entire pro life in the US, has paid all his taxes in the US, and is a legally naturalized citizen. He is as legitimate of a U.S. citizen as anyone else posting on this board. To say the US is cheating as the poster I was quoting suggested, is downright disrespectful to Embiid’s personal heritage.

[eyeatoma]

Its just sour grapes from people who want to see Team USA lose for whatever reason, Embiid not wanting to build the Cameroonian national team from the ground up doesn't make him a traitor anymore than Siakam. Embiid was MVP last year and Team USA could really use him, why wouldn't they want him?

Nikola Mirotic isn't Spanish altho he's been there since he was a teenager but by your guys "blood and soil" logic shouldn't he be playing for Montenegro or even Serbia before Spain? I'm sure there are other examples of this too that's just off the top of my head, I think the criticism of naturalized players rings pretty hollow all considered and is pretty easy to read between the lines on. My only issue with naturalized players is when they're only naturalized for the express purposes of basketball, if they live and built their life there or at least have some enduring connection then don't see the problem.

Very well said!

[eyeatoma]

He can play where he wants but saying he’s doing it because his 3 year old son was born here is weak.

Its actually, it shows your familial connection to a place, and he wants his son to be able to relate when he sees his father representing the country he's born from. Didn't realize mentioning your family is weak. He probably reinforced family, because he has that connection in Cameroon. But as others have said, he doesn't want to build the Cameroonian program from the ground up, and average 40 for the team to even be competitive.

[AussieCeltic]

He can play where he wants but saying he’s doing it because his 3 year old son was born here is weak.

Its actually, it shows your familial connection to a place, and he wants his son to be able to relate when he sees his father representing the country he's born from. Didn't realize mentioning your family is weak. He probably reinforced family, because he has that connection in Cameroon. But as others have said, he doesn't want to build the Cameroonian program from the ground up, and average 40 for the team to even be competitive.

No body is listening to your opinion on Embiid. We know exactly what you’re going to say before you say it.

[eyeatoma]

He can play where he wants but saying he’s doing it because his 3 year old son was born here is weak.

Its actually, it shows your familial connection to a place, and he wants his son to be able to relate when he sees his father representing the country he's born from. Didn't realize mentioning your family is weak. He probably reinforced family, because he has that connection in Cameroon. But as others have said, he doesn't want to build the Cameroonian program from the ground up, and average 40 for the team to even be competitive.

No body is listening to your opinion on Embiid. We know exactly what you’re going to say before you say it.

AHahhahaha, likewise, you've been the biggest hater on this forum about him. You even seek me out on threads just to respond. The fact that you can't respond to this shows me that you know I'm right. What a classic response lol.

[iggymcfrack]

Can't wait until Serbia beats US for the gold medal as Embiid fails to get it done in the biggest games yet again.

[Mephariel]

The fact that the US is the best at basketball cannot be doubted by anyone.
It would be insane not to be with a population of 330 millions though.

What should trouble you is how Serbia, a nation of 4 millions has the same amount of golds as you in world championships.
Safe to say that if Serbia had the same population as yours(which means a far greater pool to pick players) they would have been the far and away best.

But not the Olympic, when the best US players play. By your logic, India and China should have the best basketball players right? If Serbia has a population of 330 million, the country would have developed differently. Basketball may not even be that popular.

Also, countries like Serbia hides behind single-elimination tournaments. How many times is Serbia going to beat USA in a seven game series?

China and India don't have basketball tradition like US and Serbia. So why bring them up?
Secondly, what do you mean 7 game series?
The Olympics are also a single elimination tournament.
Do you want the Olympics and FIBA tournaments to be series? It cannot happen because it will take 2 months.
Serbia has beaten the US twice in world championships in the last 20 years and one of them was in the United States in 2002.
It ain't a small thing for such a new nation (created in 1991).

That is my point. You are bragging about beating the USA in the world championships. First, we don't send our best players in the world championships. Second, it is a single elimination tournament. At some point, team USA is going to lose. Just like top seeded college teams will lose. It is just basic statistics that you are eventually going to have an off night, bad chemistry, an injury, or your opponent shoots lights out. And even in this format, when we sent our best players, like in the Olympics, we win majority of the time. Imagine if it was actually a 7 game series. How many teams will beat team USA in a seven game series?

And when you said basketball tradition, that is my point. India have a lot of people, and they don't have good basketball players. You think if they have the tradition, they will be better than the USA? It just doesn't translate like that. Jamaica is a tiny nation with great runners. If they are a bigger nation, does that mean they will have infinitely amount of good runners? No. Because the economy will be different. People have more opportunities to do other things and they may not even be interested in running. You will always find outliers with smaller countries. Like the Dutch is incredible in speed skating. But you can't really predict how it will scale up if the country is different.

Lastly, I want to emphasize that Serbia beat the USA a couple of time in a single game. Yes that means something, but in a larger sense it doesn't. Statistically the same team isn't going to win all the time. The best college basketball team doesn't always win in the NCAA tournament. And winning the tournament doesn't automatically means you have a better college basketball program than another team.

[Nuntius]

And sure, each of those teams you mentioned is missing one or two guys. We were missing a LOT more than that. And we'd have to put together at least 4 teams of our best players before someone like Austin Reeves or Bobby Portis or Walker Kessler made it. Hence D team.

Realgm just did our ranking of the 25 best players, and Edwards is the only one who made that team. Most of the rest of that team wasn't even nominated. D team.

Let's put this to the test, shall we?

First of all, the sentence in bold is flat out incorrect. Anthony Edwards was not the only one who made that team. Tyrese Haliburton also made that list. Here's the list, by the way:

RealGM Top 25 Players 2023-24:
1) Nikola Jokic (DEN) - 72%
2) Giannis Antetokounmpo (MIL) - 61%
3) Luka Doncic (DAL) - 42%
4) Steph Curry (GSW) - 42%
5) Joel Embiid (PHI) - 43%
6) Jayson Tatum (BOS) - 45%
7) Shai Gilgeous-Alexander (OKC) - 37%
8) Kevin Durant (PHX) - 34%
9) LeBron James (LAL) - 31%
10) Jimmy Butler (MIA) - 30%
11) Anthony Davis (LAL) - 34%
12) Devin Booker (PHX) - 43%
13) Kawhi Leonard (LAC) - 39%
14) Damian Lillard (POR) - 47%
15) Anthony Edwards (MIN) - 26%
16) Tyrese Haliburton (IND) - 19%
17) Paul George (LAC) - 23%
18) Donovan Mitchell (CLE) - 27%
19) Ja Morant (MEM) - 22%
20) Jamal Murray (DEN) - 31%
21) Pascal Siakam (TOR) - 19%
22) Zion Williamson (NOP) - 23%
23) Jaylen Brown (BOS) - 28%
24) Domantas Sabonis (SAC) - 26%
25) De'Aaron Fox (SAC) - 26%

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2320792&p=108302548#p108302548

It's ok, you forgot Haliburton, these mistakes happen. Edwards and Haliburton were listed back to back, at #15 and #16. So, let's see who could the US have on the roster that would be higher ranked than those two.

Obviously, we are excluding Jokic, Giannis, Luka and SGA as they are not American. That leaves the following players:

Curry, Embiid, Tatum, KD, LeBron, Butler, AD, Booker, Kawhi and Lillard. That's 10 players. Out of those 10 players, only Tatum, Embiid and Booker are younger than 30 right now.

These are the ages of these players by the time the Olympics roll around:

Curry: 36
Embiid: 30
Tatum: 26
KD: 35
LeBron: 39
Butler: 34
AD: 31
Booker: 27
Kawhi: 33
Lillard: 34

More than that, all of them will be playing in teams that have title aspirations. That means that most of these players will be playing until late April and the ones that really succeed this year will be playing until mid June. Do you know when the Olympic basketball tournament starts? July 27th.

This means that these players will only have around 1 and a half month of rest before the tournament starts. If you factor in the training camp and the preparation friendlies then we're probably talking about a bit less than a month for most of them.

Tatum and Booker will probably be fine since they're still young and relatively healthy. The rest, though? How likely is it that they will be 100% ready to go after a grueling NBA season + playoffs with such a short time to rest? Heck, how many of them were healthy and 100% ready to go after this year's playoffs? How many of them played through injuries or were forced to miss time when it mattered?

This is why I take issue when people say that you sent your "D team" to the WC this summer. You didn't. By RealGM's voting, Edwards and Haliburton are both top 20 players. Mikal Bridges, Jalen Brunson and Jaren Jackson Jr. all made the final votes of RealGM's top 25 as well which puts them in the top 30 (based on the post I'm linking to). Brandon Ingram has made the RealGM's top 30 twice which means that he tends to oscillate between top 30 and top 40. Paolo Banchero just won rookie of the year.

Edwards, Hali, Bridges, Brunson, JJJ, Ingram and Banchero are not a "D team". They are all pretty damn good.

Sure, this summer's team had some role players in it. Guys like Bobby Portis and Walker Kessler were brought in exactly to shore up this squad's lack of size, Josh Hart was brought in for his perimeter defense and rebounding from the wing/guard slot and Cam Johnson/Austin Reaves were brought in for their shooting. Sure, those players aren't stars but a team does need role players that can provide what these players provide. Their inclusion doesn't really weaken the team. Fewer stars doesn't mean weaker team.

Given the circumstances (the age of your best players, the fact that the US does not care about the WC et cetera) this really was one of the best teams you could have sent this summer.

[durden_tyler]

Reading the thread I feel compelled to say:

The idea that it's a character flaw to choose to play for the nation that:

1. You've lived in your entire adult life.
2. You've become a citizen of - and not because the nation is bribing you to play for their national team.
3. The only country your son has ever lived in.

Just seems a bit absurd to me.

I completely understand being frustrated if you're from Cameroon, but the idea that Embiid should have to uproot his life to go play for a nation that he doesn't actually live in or raise his child in, just doesn't seem human-realistic.

What do you mean uproot his life? He can in principle play for Cameroon without ever even setting foot on the country. Probably two weeks a year tops which I guess he spends there anyway. He is not travelling by boat or anything...

So be a mercenary for Cameroon? LOL

Embiid's only mistake is that he joined a super team, in itself it was his right to "choose" which country to represent since according to FIBA/nationality rules, he has that option.

This is not a great look for international basketball since we want more parity, but the storyline remains: is US back to being a dominant team like they were for decades? i don't think so, but there is still a considerable gap and that sucks, again because we all want to see other nations have a chance. Maybe they can have the World Cup until US takes those seriously.

[Pachinko_]

But not the Olympic, when the best US players play. By your logic, India and China should have the best basketball players right? If Serbia has a population of 330 million, the country would have developed differently. Basketball may not even be that popular.

Also, countries like Serbia hides behind single-elimination tournaments. How many times is Serbia going to beat USA in a seven game series?

China and India don't have basketball tradition like US and Serbia. So why bring them up?
Secondly, what do you mean 7 game series?
The Olympics are also a single elimination tournament.
Do you want the Olympics and FIBA tournaments to be series? It cannot happen because it will take 2 months.
Serbia has beaten the US twice in world championships in the last 20 years and one of them was in the United States in 2002.
It ain't a small thing for such a new nation (created in 1991).

That is my point. You are bragging about beating the USA in the world championships. First, we don't send our best players in the world championships. Second, it is a single elimination tournament. At some point, team USA is going to lose. Just like top seeded college teams will lose. It is just basic statistics that you are eventually going to have an off night, bad chemistry, an injury, or your opponent shoots lights out. And even in this format, when we sent our best players, like in the Olympics, we win majority of the time. Imagine if it was actually a 7 game series. How many teams will beat team USA in a seven game series?

And when you said basketball tradition, that is my point. India have a lot of people, and they don't have good basketball players. You think if they have the tradition, they will be better than the USA? It just doesn't translate like that. Jamaica is a tiny nation with great runners. If they are a bigger nation, does that mean they will have infinitely amount of good runners? No. Because the economy will be different. People have more opportunities to do other things and they may not even be interested in running. You will always find outliers with smaller countries. Like the Dutch is incredible in speed skating. But you can't really predict how it will scale up if the country is different.

Lastly, I want to emphasize that Serbia beat the USA a couple of time in a single game. Yes that means something, but in a larger sense it doesn't. Statistically the same team isn't going to win all the time. The best college basketball team doesn't always win in the NCAA tournament. And winning the tournament doesn't automatically means you have a better college basketball program than another team.

Yeah sorry for jumping in, I'm just interested in this topic

I agree with the population thing. If you shrink the US down to Serbia's size, you get something like the State of Missouri. This means now your best players are Jayson Tatum and Michael Porter Jr, well guess what? With some well fitting role players around them, that's still enough to win a World Cup. Might actually even be just as good or better than that last Team USA, because in basketball there comes a point where you're getting diminishing returns if you keep shoving more talent in the same roster. Plus the roles would be better and clearer, you wouldn't have to solve riddles with usage, or explaining who is the star on this team. Take Ingram for example, he was basically redundant this summer, he didn't make a difference. I mean Damian fkn Lillard was almost redundant the last time he played FIBA. What the giant talent pool has done for Team USA is that it's given them the oportunity to **** around with Team A, B, C, D, which in the grand scheme of things is doesn't matter, there's enough talent in all of those teams. I mean I bet that you could win a World Cup just with the Americans who play in the Euroleague, I'm not joking at all. Maybe not every time, but you would win some.

My point is, comparing talent is not the interesting discussion coming out of those international competitions. The NBA does that better than anybody, the NBA is a talent competition, the more you stack the more you win. You don't need FIBA to see who is more talented.

What you, as an (I assume) American NBA fan do need FIBA for, is as a sanity check. To see if the NBA has gone too far with the rules and the bad habits. To check if NBA management and coaches are too shielded from international competition and are basically taking the piss at this point. What do I mean? You talk about 7 games. I understand those teams and players are tuned for that, but man, you shouldn't need long conferences and video sessions to make basic changes in the way you play. You should be ready, and your team should be disciplined enough to listen and apply what you tell them. Your man Kerr couldn't even get his players to box out, and I'm sure it's not for lack of trying, he probably told them until he was blue in the face. We're talking about Kerr, Spo, Lue, the absolute top US coaches, and pretty much every single team they faced was running circles around their strategy, actions, ball and body movement, defensive coverages, and just generall overall team discipline. It was vanilla coaching at best, and the toppings were super talented players with bad habits making mistakes left and right.

That is the interesting discussion that is worth having, not that dick swinging thing we're having in this forum. "Oh NBA and USA has the most talent", yeah no **** Sherlock. What about everything else? Readiness, coaching, discipline, roster construction, strategy, innovation, just basic fkn teamwork? This is the kind of dysfunctionality that an international tournament has the ability to test and expose, it's when you put people out of their comfort zone that you're really testing them, not when they are safe within their circle jrk

[Lockdown504090]

emiid almost 30 and been in the states since he was like 14-15 years old. has been a member of the philly community for 10 years. America the melting pot, isnt this what its all about? its not like this matters, they have a full roster.theyre going to stop a mudhole in whatever teams ass you put in front of them if hes on the team or not. im sure the guy loves the country that took him from cameroon to an 8 figure man.

[KGtabake]

But not the Olympic, when the best US players play. By your logic, India and China should have the best basketball players right? If Serbia has a population of 330 million, the country would have developed differently. Basketball may not even be that popular.

Also, countries like Serbia hides behind single-elimination tournaments. How many times is Serbia going to beat USA in a seven game series?

China and India don't have basketball tradition like US and Serbia. So why bring them up?
Secondly, what do you mean 7 game series?
The Olympics are also a single elimination tournament.
Do you want the Olympics and FIBA tournaments to be series? It cannot happen because it will take 2 months.
Serbia has beaten the US twice in world championships in the last 20 years and one of them was in the United States in 2002.
It ain't a small thing for such a new nation (created in 1991).

That is my point. You are bragging about beating the USA in the world championships. First, we don't send our best players in the world championships. Second, it is a single elimination tournament. At some point, team USA is going to lose. Just like top seeded college teams will lose. It is just basic statistics that you are eventually going to have an off night, bad chemistry, an injury, or your opponent shoots lights out. And even in this format, when we sent our best players, like in the Olympics, we win majority of the time. Imagine if it was actually a 7 game series. How many teams will beat team USA in a seven game series?

And when you said basketball tradition, that is my point. India have a lot of people, and they don't have good basketball players. You think if they have the tradition, they will be better than the USA? It just doesn't translate like that. Jamaica is a tiny nation with great runners. If they are a bigger nation, does that mean they will have infinitely amount of good runners? No. Because the economy will be different. People have more opportunities to do other things and they may not even be interested in running. You will always find outliers with smaller countries. Like the Dutch is incredible in speed skating. But you can't really predict how it will scale up if the country is different.

Lastly, I want to emphasize that Serbia beat the USA a couple of time in a single game. Yes that means something, but in a larger sense it doesn't. Statistically the same team isn't going to win all the time. The best college basketball team doesn't always win in the NCAA tournament. And winning the tournament doesn't automatically means you have a better college basketball program than another team.

I'm not bragging about anything. I'm not Serbian.

Secondly, if you downsize the US on the size of Serbia do you know who will be your best players and how good your team will be?
Let me give you a hint. It will be worse than Serbia.
Because Serbia is slso great in volleyball. In water polo. In soccer. Because it's a sports country.
India is not. Neither is China. The US are though.

Thirdly, not sending your best players is actually a knock on you. I don't get why you use it as an excuse since it makes your arguments weaker. This is what makes the NBA champions=world champions a dumb take (it's been talked about lately).
If you don't want to participate because you don't like it then don't send a team at all. Since you're doing it your performances will be judged accordingly.

As for the series. Are you sure you are going to win on a seven games series? Why? Have you tried it? What makes you so confident?
Serbia has beaten you inside the States in 2002 and won the tournament because along with Argentina it was the best team in the world.
Two years later in the Olympics you did send Iverson and Duncan as your best and the outcome was the same. Because Argentina was still better.

Last but not least. The US are always present in the big tournaments because if there are qualifiers you're competing against whom exactly to qualify?
Canada and? Who? Cuba? México? Costa Rica?
Slovenia has been a former european champion and couldn't participate in the next big tournament because guess what. There's actually a competition in the qualifiers. You can be eliminated.

The US is the best team in the world when everything is aligned. That happens because aside of the obvious talent and the fact that the country has actually developed the sport, the enormous pool you can draw players from is a decisive factor.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Its just sour grapes from people who want to see Team USA lose for whatever reason, Embiid not wanting to build the Cameroonian national team from the ground up doesn't make him a traitor anymore than Siakam. Embiid was MVP last year and Team USA could really use him, why wouldn't they want him?

Nikola Mirotic isn't Spanish altho he's been there since he was a teenager but by your guys "blood and soil" logic shouldn't he be playing for Montenegro or even Serbia before Spain? I'm sure there are other examples of this too that's just off the top of my head, I think the criticism of naturalized players rings pretty hollow all considered and is pretty easy to read between the lines on. My only issue with naturalized players is when they're only naturalized for the express purposes of basketball, if they live and built their life there or at least have some enduring connection then don't see the problem.

Mirotic shouldn't play for Spain, I am all for it.
But it becomes more fulsome when it's the favorite pulling this off.

[Effigy]

And sure, each of those teams you mentioned is missing one or two guys. We were missing a LOT more than that. And we'd have to put together at least 4 teams of our best players before someone like Austin Reeves or Bobby Portis or Walker Kessler made it. Hence D team.

Realgm just did our ranking of the 25 best players, and Edwards is the only one who made that team. Most of the rest of that team wasn't even nominated. D team.

Let's put this to the test, shall we?

First of all, the sentence in bold is flat out incorrect. Anthony Edwards was not the only one who made that team. Tyrese Haliburton also made that list. Here's the list, by the way:

RealGM Top 25 Players 2023-24:
1) Nikola Jokic (DEN) - 72%
2) Giannis Antetokounmpo (MIL) - 61%
3) Luka Doncic (DAL) - 42%
4) Steph Curry (GSW) - 42%
5) Joel Embiid (PHI) - 43%
6) Jayson Tatum (BOS) - 45%
7) Shai Gilgeous-Alexander (OKC) - 37%
8) Kevin Durant (PHX) - 34%
9) LeBron James (LAL) - 31%
10) Jimmy Butler (MIA) - 30%
11) Anthony Davis (LAL) - 34%
12) Devin Booker (PHX) - 43%
13) Kawhi Leonard (LAC) - 39%
14) Damian Lillard (POR) - 47%
15) Anthony Edwards (MIN) - 26%
16) Tyrese Haliburton (IND) - 19%
17) Paul George (LAC) - 23%
18) Donovan Mitchell (CLE) - 27%
19) Ja Morant (MEM) - 22%
20) Jamal Murray (DEN) - 31%
21) Pascal Siakam (TOR) - 19%
22) Zion Williamson (NOP) - 23%
23) Jaylen Brown (BOS) - 28%
24) Domantas Sabonis (SAC) - 26%
25) De'Aaron Fox (SAC) - 26%

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2320792&p=108302548#p108302548

It's ok, you forgot Haliburton, these mistakes happen. Edwards and Haliburton were listed back to back, at #15 and #16. So, let's see who could the US have on the roster that would be higher ranked than those two.

Obviously, we are excluding Jokic, Giannis, Luka and SGA as they are not American. That leaves the following players:

Curry, Embiid, Tatum, KD, LeBron, Butler, AD, Booker, Kawhi and Lillard. That's 10 players. Out of those 10 players, only Tatum, Embiid and Booker are younger than 30 right now.

These are the ages of these players by the time the Olympics roll around:

Curry: 36
Embiid: 30
Tatum: 26
KD: 35
LeBron: 39
Butler: 34
AD: 31
Booker: 27
Kawhi: 33
Lillard: 34

More than that, all of them will be playing in teams that have title aspirations. That means that most of these players will be playing until late April and the ones that really succeed this year will be playing until mid June. Do you know when the Olympic basketball tournament starts? July 27th.

This means that these players will only have around 1 and a half month of rest before the tournament starts. If you factor in the training camp and the preparation friendlies then we're probably talking about a bit less than a month for most of them.

Tatum and Booker will probably be fine since they're still young and relatively healthy. The rest, though? How likely is it that they will be 100% ready to go after a grueling NBA season + playoffs with such a short time to rest? Heck, how many of them were healthy and 100% ready to go after this year's playoffs? How many of them played through injuries or were forced to miss time when it mattered?

This is why I take issue when people say that you sent your "D team" to the WC this summer. You didn't. By RealGM's voting, Edwards and Haliburton are both top 20 players. Mikal Bridges, Jalen Brunson and Jaren Jackson Jr. all made the final votes of RealGM's top 25 as well which puts them in the top 30 (based on the post I'm linking to). Brandon Ingram has made the RealGM's top 30 twice which means that he tends to oscillate between top 30 and top 40. Paolo Banchero just won rookie of the year.

Edwards, Hali, Bridges, Brunson, JJJ, Ingram and Banchero are not a "D team". They are all pretty damn good.

Sure, this summer's team had some role players in it. Guys like Bobby Portis and Walker Kessler were brought in exactly to shore up this squad's lack of size, Josh Hart was brought in for his perimeter defense and rebounding from the wing/guard slot and Cam Johnson/Austin Reaves were brought in for their shooting. Sure, those players aren't stars but a team does need role players that can provide what these players provide. Their inclusion doesn't really weaken the team. Fewer stars doesn't mean weaker team.

Given the circumstances (the age of your best players, the fact that the US does not care about the WC et cetera) this really was one of the best teams you could have sent this summer.

The exercise was if we put together our best teams possible, the team we sent wouldn’t have been anything close to what we sent. All your excuses and hemming and hawing about players needing rest is irrelevant here. And my exact quotes was And we'd have to put together at least 4 teams of our best players before someone like Austin Reeves or Bobby Portis or Walker Kessler made it. Hence D team. It’s funny you are so quick to tell me where Brunson and Bridges would have made the team who I never mentioned. But somehow failed to address the ones I did. Gee, I wonder why?

And yes I forgot about Haliburton. My bad. Doesn’t change that the overall team we sent is our D TEAM.

[HangTime]

Think of that France front court defense of Victor/Joel/Rudy

[Pachinko_]

Man, commiting to that Olympic tournament is no joke, there's usually international travelling for exhibition games before, weeks of training camp, media, opening and closing ceremonies, I mean there's a reason you don't see many 35 year olds participating. Never mind 35 year olds who carry whole NBA teams to deep playoff runs and then have to start another camp almost immediately after the Olympics.

I'd include maybe one as a clear leader, but mainly I'd go with experienced but younger guys at their athletic peak even if they are not the biggest names, guys like Aaron Gordon, MPJ, both Jays from the Celtics ocourse, that sort of thing. Like I said before talent is not the problem, do you mean to tell me that Schroeder and Wagner are better than those guys? They're not, but you do have to understand the international game and match their discipline. So pick guys who have that mental attitude and actually fit together. In the end you might find someone like Marcus Smart or Bradley Beal in a clearly defined role might actually be more valuable in this setting than an aged superstar. I'd also consider including maybe just one Euroleague guy, like a Mike James or someone like that, just as a glue guy who will work on the FIBA intricacies with the rest.