Team USA 2010-2012 (From Turkey to London)

[Martti.]

The Roster for the program : http://www.usabasketball.com/news.php?n ... 2MNTroster

I think the 12 should be :

C - Dwight/Amare/
F - Bosh/Wallace
F - James/Anthony/Durant
G - Kobe/Wade
G - Paul/Williams/Rose

I would like to see one team in the world who could keep up with this.

[Valor]

only team i could think of that won't lose in a blowout is Spain....

btw...

Levin Love

either it's someone whom we've never heard of or the American National Team IT staff cannot spell

[dopeboy]

Stoudemire's weight is listed as 2049lbs.

[Dee.]

Almost every time everyone thinks that USA will crush everyone,the roster looks really great but that doesn't mean they can win it all.
Sure i think they will get the gold,but they will not go undefeated.

[Andrew]

Almost every time everyone thinks that USA will crush everyone,the roster looks really great but that doesn't mean they can win it all.
Sure i think they will get the gold,but they will not go undefeated.

They went undefeated in the 2008 Olympic tournament, even though there were a few predictions that they'd drop a game here or there or once again come up short and end up competing for the bronze. It might not be like the days of the original Dream Team, but I don't think we can rule out another undefeated run.

As for the roster, I'm guessing that LeBron, Wade, Melo, Kobe, Howard, Bosh and Paul will be locks to make every squad so long as they're healthy. I'll say that Durant, Williams, Rose, Love and Amar'e make the cut at some point.

[NovU]

I really like Melo in international stages. His toughness and quickness at PF/SF position gives trouble to almost any teams.

Anyways, anything other than gold would be a fail as usual, but they have been careful lately in picking players and working out on chemistry so I think they'll win it all for sure unless injuries bother them.

I like how USA planned all this from way before to assemble a team that was going to turn out to be full of matured superstars. They all have played together before at high level and I have to assume the chemistry is probably at better as of now and for the future as well.

[Oznogrd]

Almost every time everyone thinks that USA will crush everyone,the roster looks really great but that doesn't mean they can win it all.
Sure i think they will get the gold,but they will not go undefeated.

Thats because we used to take people who didnt give a fuck and were honestly not our 1st picks. Often times it was like the NFL pro bowl where the 3rd or 4th player we wanted at that spot went because so many players didnt want to risk injury. The presence of Coach K and a revival of patriotism out of young players though have made playing for team USA "cool" again. I really think alot of this recent USA bball revival has to do with Coach K. International ball cant be coached like the NBA and be expected to win all the time. Yes they're the same sport, but they're very different styles of the game.

[benji]

It was never a "chemistry" problem or an "international game" problem. Those were issues. But there's a huge difference from sending historically epic players like Jordan, Magic, Bird and David Robinson and having guys like Jermaine O'Neal, Antonio Davis, Michael Finley, Stephon Marbury, and Richard Jefferson as your top players.

Have more historic greats like Paul, LeBron, Wade, Kobe, Dwight Howard, etc. Shockingly the team dominates again.

Also not having Larry Brown be the coach.

[Oznogrd]

It was never a "chemistry" problem or an "international game" problem. Those were issues. But there's a huge difference from sending historically epic players like Jordan, Magic, Bird and David Robinson and having guys like Jermaine O'Neal, Antonio Davis, Michael Finley, Stephon Marbury, and Richard Jefferson as your top players.

Have more historic greats like Paul, LeBron, Wade, Kobe, Dwight Howard, etc. Shockingly the team dominates again.

Also not having Larry Brown be the coach.

well, didnt we only end up with players like Jermaine Oneal, Antonio Davis et. al because our true "best" players didnt want to go? I also think the guys you listed off for example, the "chemistry" and "international game" problem become a greater issue due to their as you said: lack of epicness as compared to athletes like kobe, lebron, paul, jordan, magic etc. Its much harder to adjust when you're not as good.

[benji]

I was thinking of chemistry as how the media traditionally treats it as "the players get along and know each other" thus the whole "they need to practice together for two years" thing. Not the "players roles and performances mesh" way. 2002 team was bad at both probably.

It still outscored everyone, it just ran into the two best teams in the tournament back to back.

The whole "problem" was a lot of overblown American arrogance anyway.

Except for Larry Brown. He was just a disaster.

[koberulz]

The whole "problem" was a lot of overblown American arrogance anyway.

I remember watching the coverage of one of the games in 2008, probably one of the pre-Olympic games, in which whoever was doing commentary said the US were looking for 'their first Olympic gold in 8 years' as though that was a disaster. What it actually means is they lost it once. Get over it.

[Andrew]

In all fairness, the USA's dominance in international basketball tournaments made the losses last decade noteworthy and gave the whole "Redeem Team" angle legs.

[koberulz]

Treating one loss as a disaster is overkill.

[Fresh8]

Here's my team:

C Howard
F James/Bosh/A'mare
F Anthony/Durant/Granger
G Bryant/Wade
G Paul/Williams

Last spot: Oden, Lopez, or Jefferson - depending who is healthy/plays better at trials

[Andrew]

Treating one loss as a disaster is overkill.

Perhaps, but again it's more that a long winning streak and period of dominance had come to an end, with the USA not even winning a medal at the 2002 World Championships and then coming up with the bronze in Athens. Even in the 2000 Oympics, there was at least one close finish from memory even though the USA went undefeated in that tournament. The way the rest of the world had caught up and the USA wasn't casually dominating international tournaments was a noteworthy talking point.

[koberulz]

But they were treating it as less of a talking point than as an unmitigated disaster, the implication being that it's just unacceptable for the US team to be bad enough to ever lose a game. No credit was given to any other country's team at any point.

[NovU]

It was a disaster or very well close to. USA team was becoming a joke, not to mention NBA itself. One loss should have been a wake up call but loss after loss after another? Seriousness of the situation was apparent, and if people didn't treat it as a disaster and say remained same attitude towards international games, I doubt we'd be seeing dedicated USA players.

[Hotwater10]

Im going to die if Stuckey dosnt get on.

[Andrew]

But they were treating it as less of a talking point than as an unmitigated disaster, the implication being that it's just unacceptable for the US team to be bad enough to ever lose a game. No credit was given to any other country's team at any point.

They did perhaps go a little overboard, but sportswriters are always looking for an angle. And as NovU said, they were coming up short for a few years there after being a powerhouse. I see where you're coming from, but I think it's fair enough to call it noteworthy and to say that it raised eyebrows.

[koberulz]

Can't it be noteworthy from an international teams improving and parity is good angle, though, rather than 'OMG THE US LOST!!!! END OF THE WORLD!!!!' The way it was handled just screams of ego on their part, like they think they should automatically rout any team they play just because they're America.

[NovU]

Nonetheless, team USA had to improve in many aspects. The other internaional teams improved a lot while USA seemed to back pedal. The changes came bit later than many expected and redeem team was finally born with efforts actually put in. If the team that included players like Duncan, Miller, Iverson or J O'neal couldn't get the job done, the reputation of both NBA and USA basketball was at stake. For sure, it was an alarming situation and finally players started taking it seriously a bit. Say, preparation wise, USA team isn't doing as much as other nations for international games, but they have more to lose and less to gain than those teams.

[Oznogrd]

Can't it be noteworthy from an international teams improving and parity is good angle, though, rather than 'OMG THE US LOST!!!! END OF THE WORLD!!!!' The way it was handled just screams of ego on their part, like they think they should automatically rout any team they play just because they're America.

Unfortunately with 90% of Americans, if its not about the US, they dont give a flying fuck. The American announcers were probably being told to make it interesting to their audience and rather than focusing on the rest of the world working hard and catching up, they focused on the US losing to keep the audience engaged. Stupid yes...but *shrugs* thats how it goes.

[NovU]

Imo, the USA media gave much credits to foreign nations for catching up. That's probably why it was more alarming since they realized they'd actually have to work hard to retain the title back.

[Andrew]

Can't it be noteworthy from an international teams improving and parity is good angle, though, rather than 'OMG THE US LOST!!!! END OF THE WORLD!!!!' The way it was handled just screams of ego on their part, like they think they should automatically rout any team they play just because they're America.

Unfortunately with 90% of Americans, if its not about the US, they dont give a flying fuck. The American announcers were probably being told to make it interesting to their audience and rather than focusing on the rest of the world working hard and catching up, they focused on the US losing to keep the audience engaged. Stupid yes...but *shrugs* thats how it goes.

Not to mention it was a rude awakening after enjoying such dominance throughout almost all of the international tournaments since the 1936 Berlin Games. I agree there's a certain amount of arrogance in that point of view, but there's a reason for that. For a long time, they were blowing out pretty much everyone they played, if not from end to end then they certainly had a comfortable lead by the final buzzer so it came to be the expectation.

[Martti.]

Though I'd dig up this thread, because the training starts soon and there was some discussion about it in the FIFA WC thread.

The candidates now are :

C - Brook Lopez, Robin Lopez and Tyson Chandler and Javale McGee
F - Jeff Green, David Lee, Kevin Love, Lamar Odom, Rudy Gay, Danny Granger, Kevin Durant and Gerald Wallace
G - Andre Iguodala, Chauncey Billups, Tyreke Evans, Rajon Rondo, Derrick Rose, Russell Westbrook, Stephen Curry, Eric Gordon and O.J. Mayo.

Rondo is doubtful now, so I guess he's out.

I think it will look like this :

C - Lee/B Lopez
F - Odom/Green/Love
F - Granger/Wallace
G - Durant/Gordon
G - Rose/Westbrook/Billups

Not comparable to the one that won gold in Beijing, but since the opponents are even weaker, they're still the favourites.