ronnymac2 wrote:I don't know about nor want to comment on the potential racial angle here, but I will say that Schroeder's initial comment showed a complete lack of understanding of what has gone on at the Olympics for at least the past three decades.
European basketball is played with Ruleset A. NBA basketball is played with Ruleset B. Technically...technically....they are literally different games. That's an accurate statement.
The Olympic basketball ruleset is much closer to (may even be identical to) Ruleset A. The US sends players who dedicate their careers (at least 9 months of the year) to optimizing their games for Ruleset B.
And yet, those Ruleset B-optimized players get together for a few months (weeks?) and on a fairly consistent basis have crushed all these Euro-national teams at their own game.
This means either:
1.) Ruleset A is trash, since players from a different game with minimal practice can beat the "best" of the bunch, or:
2.) The Euro teams' "tactics, strategy, and IQ" advantage is a figment in the imagination of people. If your strategies consistently get you tossed out by a better team...shouldn't the better team's strategy be more highly prized? Isn't that what sports is all about?
Nevermind the fact that just this USA iteration alone boasted the best shooter in the planet's history in Curry, perhaps the smartest player in history (certainly of his era) in LeBron, two out of the three best defensive IQ bigs in the world in Davis and Bam, etc. The same nation that fielded guys like Paul, Kidd, Magic, Stockton, etc., in the past.
I really do like Schroeder as a player, but his initial comment was simply inaccurate.
I suppose I am kind of split down the middle?
AGrowing up with AAU basketball, I believe that more development occurs on the travel circuits—like Nike EYBL, Adidas Gauntlet, and Under Armour—than in general public high school ball for most players. The simple answer might be that the U.S. produces better individual talent because AAU allows the best players to compete against each other. The American system is great for developing individual skills, perhaps as a residual effect of the country’s emphasis on individualism. The pathways that American stars typically follow generally afford them the opportunity to focus on specific skill sets and thrive. I don’t think the U.S. is deficient in developing individual talent. It would be cool if younger high school players could compete against pros earlier, similar to the European system, but overall, the system is pretty solid.
However, there might still be room for improvement in X’s and O’s, particularly in the FIBA game (though the offense in the current league is probably close to optimal).
The U.S.'s dominance over the rest of the world likely comes down to having an abundance of talent. The U.S. had 10 players who have made All-NBA at some point in their careers, with the exception of Derrick White, who, by the numbers, was arguably the most valuable piece on the recent NBA-title-winning team—a historically dominant team. The U.S. was so blessed with a surplus of talent that they could afford not to play a man who was selected to the All-NBA First Team the past three seasons, and probably the second-best player on the 2020 USA team that won gold, and still win. What other countries have this luxury? Germany, for example, has never had an All-Star (although I think Franz will in due time).
The game is different—pace is drastically slower, defensive bigs can camp in the paint, and the floor is more cramped. But at the end of the day, it’s still basketball, and a wealth of talent can often make up for strategic shortcomings. It’s perhaps a testament to Germany’s strategy that they came within minutes of beating Team USA in an exhibition, despite having less talent. This may strengthen Europe’s argument in terms of team strategy. You could also attribute the reduced margins to the slower pace—fewer possessions likely yield more volatility in outcomes. As the number of possessions increases, we would generally expect the better team to benefit. I also think less spacing constricts individually talented players, making it harder to operate in 2 or 3 vs. 1 situations.
It’s challenging to pinpoint exactly what works best for the NBA’s style of play and rules, but there’s perhaps some evidence to suggest that European teams can orchestrate better half-court offense. The following video is about an American who grew up in the U.S. but played overseas. This isn’t just anecdotal—there’s some numerical analysis behind it.
-From when the U.S. lost in the WC
- I am not sure I agree with the NBA changing its style, but the lessons from this video could apply to FIBA play, and perhaps should impact how we recruit.
Let's not forget, while the Team USA that was at the 2023 Word Cup was the C-team, it did have 4 NBA All-Stars, and they lost to Lithuania with 1 NBA, and also Germany. The extra talent that Team USA added, was essential in increasing the certainty they would win in single elimination. Otherwise, things could easily go south.
