Didn't we have a debate about Euro vs. NBA talent?

[Nate]

Shawn Bradley is one of the best zone centers in the world. His problems are power players, quick centers and the defensive 3-second rule, and he wouldn't be facing any of those if he was playing for the US

Thats a really bif "IF" if you ask me Bradley has the German and the US nationality and has played for Germany internationally. He didnt made the cut (I think for the World Cup in Indianapolis) and since then didnt seem to be interested to play anymore.

On the other hand it very well could be that the German Basketball Federation isnt interested in paying huge for his insurance anymore, since his statistical output wasnt that much higher than Femerlings, Iirc. For Dirk, the insurance fee is around 200 000 Euro for a handful of games, and since Bradleys contract isnt that far behind, the federation probably doesnt want to pay for it. Beside, since his statistical output (including blocks) wasnt that much higher than Femerlings, we either already have one of the best zone defenders in the world or Bradley just isnt that good.

 

[Lars the Red]

Defense and rebounding are "fundamental skills", too. So is shot selection.

And we haven't seen much of that from the Americans.

I can't believe you're still trying to defend the Italians as fundamentally sound. They have worse fundamentals than Germany, S&M, and Turkey, which is probably the reason they're not as good as those teams.

Their spacing was better, they shot from the field better, from the line better, played better team defense, move the ball offensively better. I didn't say they were better athletes, but the know the game of basketball better.

So you admit that NBA officiating is better then?

Absofreakinlutely not! I said three officials is always better than two. The NBA officials only ref the NBA game, which frankly isn't basketball anymore.

I think you're the one who's not getting it here.

You see, you can't have it both ways--either you're talking about these players in an NBA context (in which case LeBron and Dwyane Wade are plenty good enough to take on all comers) or you're talking about them in a FIBA context (in which case none of them is close to being a "marginal" player).

Their fundamental skills are not as good as the Euros. They are much better athletes, but the aren't as complete of players as the Euros.

Raja Bell is "extremely marginal"? He's an outstanding defender, a good spot-up shooter, and a very good team player. Raja Bell is a better player (and not coincidentally, better-paid) than any guard the USA has faced in Europe.

Pay has nothing to do with fundamentally sound basketball. Raja is little more than a role player.

Brad Miller is "extremely average"? Miller would be the best player on any team the US has faced besides Germany. In fact, if you put Miller on Germany, they would immediately become one of the big Olympic favorites. Or don't you think the Germans could use an upgrade over Femerling?

He'd have to change his style to fit the system and that's were the Americans have problems. You don't see it, I do.

Shawn Bradley is one of the best zone centers in the world. His problems are power players, quick centers and the defensive 3-second rule, and he wouldn't be facing any of those if he was playing for the US.

I'll late Nate's post speak on this point.

Who defends Yao Ming better than Ostertag? Which Olympic team wouldn't love to have a Yao-stopper on the end of their bench?

Your really grasping. Yao is ten times the player Osterfat is. He plays a complete game, which is again the arguement about fundamentals. Does Greg score? Pass? His rebounding is only average, so your whole support comes from his ability to do one thing on the court.

And if you think Shawn Marion isn't capable of being effective on an international team, you obviously haven't been watching the games so far.

He can be effective because of his natural ability, but he lacks in so many areas, he can also be a liability. Just like Amare, or Iverson, or any of the players, with only a few exceptions, Duncan being one.

If you look at the role players on my list you'll see that most of them have some things in common--they're very good defenders who have the mentality to play within themselves for short minutes, and they have spots on the floor where they're money, so team USA can spread the other team's defense when they're out there. Put a bunch of those guys around Duncan, and the other teams have no chance.

You listed guys you call fundamentally sound. I didn't see many on that list that have complete games and a grasp of fundamental basketball.

 

[Joe Mama]

Lars, I am baffled by your take on Brad Miller. He is a very good distributor, he's strong on the boards, he's a decent defender, and he's a reliable shooter. Where's the weakness?

Michael Redd is very average? You must be kidding. The guy is one of the best and fastest shooters in the NBA. He and Rip Hamilton would fit the international style perfectly.

I agree that many of the players listed were big reaches, but I also believe you're too quick to discount other player's qualities.

 

[Lars the Red]

Ya know, Joe, there are times I really like the way Miller plays. He moves well, will hit the boards, but his shooting seems so streaky, one day great, the next he looks like Brian Grant pushing the ball into the side of the board or bottom of the rim. His passing is just like his shooting, solid one game, throwing it away the next.

As for Redd, I just don't see anything more than a kid that has found a niche.

Hey, but I do agree with your take on the Internationals setting up the US team. I thought that too when I saw the lack of zones immediately after the Italy game. The only way they will get a chance to work against a good team zone is if they bring in some AAU squad or college team before going to Athens.

It could be a tough road for them, and as bad as it sounds, I won't be devastated if they don't come away with the gold. I've been hoping for years that the game would come back around to the team game with well rounded ball players. If you think the only place you see selfish, poor fundamental basketball is on the NBA courts, your wrong. I see it at every level, including some of the grade school programs I've watched recently. They've taken a great game and done everything to ruin it over the last 20 years.

 

[F-Dog]

Thats a really bif "IF" if you ask me Bradley has the German and the US nationality and has played for Germany internationally. He didnt made the cut (I think for the World Cup in Indianapolis) and since then didnt seem to be interested to play anymore.

On the other hand it very well could be that the German Basketball Federation isnt interested in paying huge for his insurance anymore, since his statistical output wasnt that much higher than Femerlings, Iirc. For Dirk, the insurance fee is around 200 000 Euro for a handful of games, and since Bradleys contract isnt that far behind, the federation probably doesnt want to pay for it. Beside, since his statistical output (including blocks) wasnt that much higher than Femerlings, we either already have one of the best zone defenders in the world or Bradley just isnt that good.

Yeah, I forgot about Bradley's German adventure. He didn't look too good then, but I think he would probably still be on the team if it weren't for his insurance.

Oh well, cross one player off the list.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

It could be a tough road for them, and as bad as it sounds, I won't be devastated if they don't come away with the gold. I've been hoping for years that the game would come back around to the team game with well rounded ball players. If you think the only place you see selfish, poor fundamental basketball is on the NBA courts, your wrong. I see it at every level, including some of the grade school programs I've watched recently. They've taken a great game and done everything to ruin it over the last 20 years.

as much as i love the nba, i cannot say that i disagree with what you've written. my buddies laugh at me for yelling at the television when the refs miss flagrant travels, carries, etc. doesn't even have to be a suns game.

 

[F-Dog]

I agree that many of the players listed were big reaches, but I also believe you're too quick to discount other player's qualities.

I'd love to see you elaborate on this, Joe. Which players aren't good enough IYO to be contributors on a national team? (Besides Voskuhl, of course. )

 

[F-Dog]

Absofreakinlutely not! I said three officials is always better than two. The NBA officials only ref the NBA game, which frankly isn't basketball anymore.

The main difference I see is that Int'l officials call traveling, and NBA officials call over-the-back. It doesn't look like an entirely different game to me...

NBA officials have bad games, but so do Int'l officials (like the second game against Turkey). The NBA guys seem more consistent to me, and my guess is that the 3rd official has something to do with it.

Pay has nothing to do with fundamentally sound basketball. Raja is little more than a role player.

Again with the double standard--Euro players have weaknesses too, you know. Pat Femerling is a role player--does that make him fundamentally unsound? How many things can Femerling do on the court?

He can be effective because of his natural ability, but he lacks in so many areas, he can also be a liability. Just like Amare, or Iverson, or any of the players, with only a few exceptions...

...or Nowitzki, or Mehmet Okur, or Galanda...how many Euro teams could field a starting unit based on your standards, much less a twelve-man team?

I'm curious to see what areas you think Marion lacks in, btw.

 

[Lars the Red]

I'd love to see you elaborate on this, Joe. Which players aren't good enough IYO to be contributors on a national team? (Besides Voskuhl, of course. )

Okay, Dog, it's time to get back to the original point. You said:

There are plenty of fundamentally-sound basketball players from the US;

Now suddenly your making this an arguement about who could play on national teams. You gave a list of guys you said were fundamentally solid ball players, and I've given you a rebuttal. Let's not twist it into something different.

If you want a good example of what Euros want in a player, watch Bryant Gumbles HBO show. I'll try to get a copy of the one he had on International ball and how it's changed it's views of American players. Very enlightening.

 

[Lars the Red]

The main difference I see is that Int'l officials call traveling, and NBA officials call over-the-back. It doesn't look like an entirely different game to me...

Try playing it. I played a fair amount of International ball, and in a ProAm league with NBA players and NBA officials. It's shockingly different. International reminds you of a very physical college game. The NBA is just plain bizarre.

NBA officials have bad games, but so do Int'l officials (like the second game against Turkey). The NBA guys seem more consistent to me, and my guess is that the 3rd official has something to do with it.

Your right, the 3rd official is key to maintaining control. I played college when you only had 2. One season some conferences used the 3 official experiment. I was always in foul trouble, because you just couldn't get away with as much off the ball.

Again with the double standard--Euro players have weaknesses too, you know. Pat Femerling is a role player--does that make him fundamentally unsound? How many things can Femerling do on the court?...or Nowitzki, or Mehmet Okur, or Galanda...how many Euro teams could field a starting unit based on your standards, much less a twelve-man team?

All the guys you mentioned can hardly be called offensive liabilities on their national teams. All can shoot, they pass well, they play the team-style zones well, they are tough from the line. Are they phenominal athletes? Nope, but the are solid enough, and they all can hurt you playing their style of game. How many can field a starting unit? Where? In the NBA? That's not what the arguement has been. It's been about who has the fundamentally superior players, not who has the highest jumpers, or best dunkers, or most talented rim hangers. I'd rather watch a solid college game or international game instead of a regular season NBA game any day. You would undoubtedly see at least of couple of absolutely fantastic plays in the NBA game that couldn't be reproduced in the other two, but that wouldn't make up for the rest of the 47 minutes of bad basketball.

I'm curious to see what areas you think Marion lacks in, btw.

Shot selection, consistent shooting, passing, and to some degree, ball handling. He can be a great defender, very good rebounder, and runs the floor extremely well, but from an overall standpoint, he just isn't a complete player. He's young and can improve if he chooses.

 

[F-Dog]

Okay, Dog, it's time to get back to the original point. You said:

Now suddenly your making this an arguement about who could play on national teams. You gave a list of guys you said were fundamentally solid ball players, and I've given you a rebuttal. Let's not twist it into something different.

As I understood it, your rebuttal was that many of those players aren't good enough or versatile enough to be on a successful international team. My response to that was they're plenty good enough by international standards, and that versatility isn't something that foreign players are blessed with, either. "Fundamentals" does not automatically mean "versatility" and vice versa, of course.

Perhaps you meant something else, though?

 

[Lars the Red]

As I understood it, your rebuttal was that many of those players aren't good enough or versatile enough to be on a successful international team. My response to that was they're plenty good enough by international standards, and that versatility isn't something that foreign players are blessed with, either. "Fundamentals" does not automatically mean "versatility" and vice versa, of course.

Perhaps you meant something else, though?

Nope, I said the the NBA lacks fundamentally sound players, from top to bottom, they are a rarity. You might be surprised how many young players that years ago would have been snatched up by Euro leagues are finding themselves getting rejection letters back. The Euro coaches don't want to have to start from square one, teaching them the most basic footwork, shooting and passing drills. They don't want to deal with the selfish style of play and baggage the many have. When I came out of college you could count on at least a half a dozen teams from all over Europe or South America to contact you if you could play. Now, you don't see anywhere near the interest in US players and it's mostly due to their lack of 'basketball' ability. No one argues the athletic ability, but if it doesn't work with in the system, it's doesn't have enough value.

One funny note, a coach I used to play for told me one thing they (EURO teams) will do from time to time is bring in an American as a defensive stopper. It used to be the opposite. American's used to be brought over as 'designated shooters', the guys to carry the offensive load. Now they're more interested in them for anything but offense.

 

[F-Dog]

All the guys you mentioned can hardly be called offensive liabilities on their national teams. All can shoot, they pass well, they play the team-style zones well, they are tough from the line.

I guess I can accept Dirk as a non-liability on defense, but Okur seems to have a ways to go. And I haven't seen much of Galanda at all, but it's hard to believe that he passes well, since he had more than twice as many turnovers as assists in Euroleague. (Is 3.5 rebounds per game normal for a Euroleague big man?)

It seems to me that your concept of "fundamentals" is based around shooting and ball-handling. In the US, "fundamentals" often seems to mean footwork.


Marion has been a very good shooter in his career, btw, and he's a capable passer--better than Okur, certainly. I'm not sure what you mean by ball-handling, though--are you talking about one-on-one skills?

 

[F-Dog]

Nope, I said the the NBA lacks fundamentally sound players, from top to bottom, they are a rarity. You might be surprised how many young players that years ago would have been snatched up by Euro leagues are finding themselves getting rejection letters back. The Euro coaches don't want to have to start from square one, teaching them the most basic footwork, shooting and passing drills. They don't want to deal with the selfish style of play and baggage the many have. When I came out of college you could count on at least a half a dozen teams from all over Europe or South America to contact you if you could play. Now, you don't see anywhere near the interest in US players and it's mostly due to their lack of 'basketball' ability. No one argues the athletic ability, but if it doesn't work with in the system, it's doesn't have enough value.

I know what you're talking about, and I don't disagree.

You weren't speaking about college kids earlier, though--you were talking about the US national team, where you're picking twelve players from the entire country. I see plenty of veterans in the NBA that I think would be capable system players in any league.


I'm curious what you found to be the most bizarre difference in NBA play.

 

[Lars the Red]

I guess I can accept Dirk as a non-liability on defense, but Okur seems to have a ways to go. And I haven't seen much of Galanda at all, but it's hard to believe that he passes well, since he had more than twice as many turnovers as assists in Euroleague. (Is 3.5 rebounds per game normal for a Euroleague big man?)

Playing in the team-style zone, you really don't see guys as glaring liabilities that you do when playing a tight man to man. The times I see it come more apparent is if a team gets really hot from the parimeter, then the defense get so spread out and the lack of speed shows it's way through from a liability standpoint. Zone is way tougher to play if it's played well. It takes much more thinking and you have to be active if you play a good parimeter team. You don't see that many 'monster boarders' in International ball. You usually see fairly balanced rebounding, and good shooting definitely makes an impact on how many rebounds you have to spread around.

It seems to me that your concept of "fundamentals" is based around shooting and ball-handling. In the US, "fundamentals" often seems to mean footwork

The American footwork is bad. There athletic ability helps them make up for it, but it's not good. I look at the fundamentals as shooting from the field and free throw line, making smart passes that help people get open and forces defenses to work, dribbling to penetrate or force defenses to move, not dazzling the crowd. Position defense, checking off the boards, forcing teams to play everyone honest, that also is part of fundamentals.

Marion has been a very good shooter in his career, btw, and he's a capable passer--better than Okur, certainly. I'm not sure what you mean by ball-handling, though--are you talking about one-on-one skills?

Shawn is a pretty decent midrange jumpshooter, but his accuracy from way out (his new favorite range) is not good. His ability to slash should open opportunities for guys to get easy shots, but it doesn't happen nearly often enough. He lacks some confidence in his ball handling skills which makes him not keep his head up, looking at the whole floor.

 

[Lars the Red]

I know what you're talking about, and I don't disagree.

You weren't speaking about college kids earlier, though--you were talking about the US national team, where you're picking twelve players from the entire country. I see plenty of veterans in the NBA that I think would be capable system players in any league.


I'm curious what you found to be the most bizarre difference in NBA play.

Just as an example:

-An open hand on a player always gets a call, close it and use your forearm and you rarely have to worry. Which is odd, because I've never had blood in my urine because a guy hand checked me. I did when a guy jacked my kidney with his elbow all afternoon.

-Pushing off on the upper body when popping out on the wing gets you whistled. Putting your hand on the knee cap and pushing off (causing that hyperextension feel that freezes the defender) is okay. Guards sitting on your knee cap when checking you out does about the same thing, which is also quite popular.

-The whole 'no charge if your inside the 3 ft circle' is completely bizarre. The rules used to be you couldn't move under a player once he left the floor, now if they see you in that circle their eyes light up and they simply attack you.

-Oh, and the hand being part of the ball, is the hand, wrist, forearm, elbow, shoulder, and some times the neck. Never let a quality block be ruined by the offensive player being crushed. And never let a quality drive to the hole be ruined by a missed shot when you have a defender to blame it on.

 

[George O'Brien]

This is an interesting exchange, but hard to follow since there are so many things being discussed where the terms aren't all that clearly defined.

Let me begin with "ball handling". People lump offense into shooting, offensive rebounds, and "ball handling" which is apparently a catchall for everything else. However, this combines several traits:

- Turnovers - can the player handle the ball without a turnover?
- Handle- can the player keep the ball on a drive without it being stolen?
- Assists - can the player get the ball to teammates in scoring position?
- Catching the ball - does the player catch the ball cleanly or fumble it half the time thus screwing up scoring opportunities?
- Is the player quick to pass out of double teams?
- Does the player avoid being trapped?
- Does the player make something happen before the clock runs out?
- Does the player pass the ball on the fast break or try to go it alone?

Talking about whether someone like Marion is a good or bad ball handler depends on which aspect is being evaluated. My view is that he is good at some and not so good at others.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

This is an interesting exchange, but hard to follow since there are so many things being discussed where the terms aren't all that clearly defined.

Let me begin with "ball handling". People lump offense into shooting, offensive rebounds, and "ball handling" which is apparently a catchall for everything else. However, this combines several traits:

- Turnovers - can the player handle the ball without a turnover?
- Handle- can the player keep the ball on a drive without it being stolen?
- Assists - can the player get the ball to teammates in scoring position?
- Catching the ball - does the player catch the ball cleanly or fumble it half the time thus screwing up scoring opportunities?
- Is the player quick to pass out of double teams?
- Does the player avoid being trapped?
- Does the player make something happen before the clock runs out?
- Does the player pass the ball on the fast break or try to go it alone?

Talking about whether someone like Marion is a good or bad ball handler depends on which aspect is being evaluated. My view is that he is good at some and not so good at others.

this may be an exercise in semantics, and i don't know about others, but i've always considered "ballhanding" to describe a player's ability to dribble in traffic or drive. all the passing stuff is an entirely different category that i'd call, well, uh, "passing." marbury is an excellent ballhandler. marion is not. i wouldn't trust marion to break a trap or drive effectively in traffic.

 

[Lars the Red]

This is an interesting exchange, but hard to follow since there are so many things being discussed where the terms aren't all that clearly defined.

Let me begin with "ball handling". People lump offense into shooting, offensive rebounds, and "ball handling" which is apparently a catchall for everything else. However, this combines several traits:

- Turnovers - can the player handle the ball without a turnover?
- Handle- can the player keep the ball on a drive without it being stolen?
- Assists - can the player get the ball to teammates in scoring position?
- Catching the ball - does the player catch the ball cleanly or fumble it half the time thus screwing up scoring opportunities?
- Is the player quick to pass out of double teams?
- Does the player avoid being trapped?
- Does the player make something happen before the clock runs out?
- Does the player pass the ball on the fast break or try to go it alone?

Talking about whether someone like Marion is a good or bad ball handler depends on which aspect is being evaluated. My view is that he is good at some and not so good at others.

Great way to look at it. I also might include working the defenses, making them use energy throughout a possession. Good players do this with quick passes, forcing them to shift continuously, and dribbling into the gaps, forcing the D to slide and adjust. Like Bill Russell once said, 'If you must loaf, loaf on offense.'

 

[Lars the Red]

So, have we seen the light yet? Do we now recognize that we may have better athletes, but not necessarily better basketball players?

I loved watching the group from PR, which has an average NBA player or two, a couple of NBA castoffs, and some of your basic run of the mill International ball players, come out and beat the snot out of a physically superior squad of basketball retards. Don't blame Larry, don't blame the refs, don't blame the selection group. See it for what it is, an undressing of an inferior product that is in desperate need of an overhaul.

 

[Lars the Red]

Shamelessly bumping to the top.

I'm just in the mood for a fight.