Pooh_Jeter wrote:
The crazy part is that in 4 years the best case team is likely leaving NBA players off the team and in 8 years that is basically a guarantee. If you were to make a best case scenario B team (kind of like Canada does for hockey) I feel like that team would fare pretty damn well too. The way the depth of this program has developed has been astounding. When you look at the NCAA ranks we aren't just looking at 1 or 2 lottery tickets who could be impact players down the road, there is NBA or high level Europe potential all over the place.
While we may have more NBA players in four or eight years than we do now, I don't think our chances for FIBA success would necessarily be any higher than.
A lot of our core guys (especially bigs) will likely be closer to their prime in 2020 than 2024.
E.g., Olynyk, Thompson, Powell, Ejim, and Joseph were all born in the spring/summer of 1991. They will be 29 in the summer of 2020 vs. 33 in summer 2024.
Birch, Bennett, Pangos, and P. Scrubb were all 92 or early 93s, so will be 27 or 28 in summer of 2020 vs. 31 or 32 for 2024 Olympics.
Fringe guys (in terms of participation or impact) like Stauskas, Heslip, Sacre< Landry, and Bachynski are around that age or older.
Maybe Wiggins and Lyles (1995s) would be better in 2024 than 2020, but that is probably not much better than 50/50, and given their participation track record, it may not be as relevant as the peaks of the guys listed above.
Maybe we will be better at guard/wing as the development of Barrett, SGA, Brooks, and Jackson and the emergence of one or more of Dort, Akot, NAW, Wigginton, Nembhard and Llewellyn is enough to overcome the likely decline of Joseph, Pangos, Scrubb, and Heslip, but I think our big situation is unlikely to be better in 2024 than it is in 2020. Even if Shi-ttu and/or Brissett develop as expected, I would take our 2020 bigs over our 2024 bigs.