Semi OT: 2024 Team USA/Olympic Basketball Thread

[Raskolnikov]

Curry goes nuclear in the 4th again to help USA seal the gold over France. Heck of a game from what I understand (only got to see the last 5 minutes). World basketball is really coming up though, only gonna be harder each time

That's the end of our reign.

Three times reigning MVP runner up Embiid, and Mount Rushmore shooter Curry/Durant, and the King are all done with team USA.

Kerr didn't overplay them....he played them because nobody else was winning those last two games.

Tatum/Brown/Haliburton. Maybe Lilliard and Edey?

IDK...but France is going to have a decade of dominance possibly.

This might have been Serbia's peak chance.

 

[clonetrooper264]

That's the end of our reign.

Three times reigning MVP runner up Embiid, and Mount Rushmore shooter Curry/Durant, and the King are all done with team USA.

Kerr didn't overplay them....he played them because nobody else was winning those last two games.

Tatum/Brown/Haliburton. Maybe Lilliard and Edey?

IDK...but France is going to have a decade of dominance possibly.

This might have been Serbia's peak chance.

Remains to be seen who will be carrying USA basketball for the next couple Olympic runs. I figure we'll see Haliburton and Edwards being the face of the program going forward. Not sure if Tatum will recover from being benched, I think he'll skip on FIBA stuff going forward. Bam and Booker might have another round in them, but they'll age out after that probably (though in 2 Olympics they'd be the same age as KD/Bron/Curry).

Edey is Canadian, so while he'll definitely be in the next Olympics, it'll be for Canada.

 

[knoxville7]

What is Curry? Is he a PG or SG? Let's think about the greatest of all time. Is he top 10 now? Has the rings, the medal, the individual awards. Is he top 10? Yes, never a defender. But, he also changed the game of basketball. He is the GOAT shooter of all time. Opinions?

top 10 all time taking into consideration all positions?? no fucking way is he top 10. top 10 at PG or SG, sure

but lets see here...

Jordan
Lebron
Kareem
Wilt
Magic
Bird
Kobe
Shaq
Duncan
Russell
Hakeem

Those are guys i would say are firmly ahead of Curry. I could list some others that I personally think are ahead of Curry like Karl Malone, Barkley, and Nowitzki for examples

 

[clonetrooper264]

top 10 all time taking into consideration all positions?? no fucking way is he top 10. top 10 at PG or SG, sure

but lets see here...

Jordan
Lebron
Kareem
Wilt
Magic
Bird
Kobe
Shaq
Duncan
Russell
Hakeem

Those are guys i would say are firmly ahead of Curry. I could list some others that I personally think are ahead of Curry like Karl Malone, Barkley, and Nowitzki for examples

I would be curious to know your reason on Barkley in particular, maybe Malone also

 

[knoxville7]

I would be curious to know your reason on Barkley in particular, maybe Malone also

Barkley has a higher PER and Win Share than Curry, so the numbers back it up. Also, to my eye test Sir Charles was a dominant force. Hell, he was the leading scorer on the dream team, not Jordan. He was an absolute beast of a player

Malone also has a higher PER and Win Share than Curry. ranks 3rd all time behind Bron and Kareem for total points in NBA history, a total Curry will not be reaching

its not a knock on Curry, its just there are TONS of great players in NBA history to compete with for a very small list to make top 10 all time. and not that my reasoning is the end all be all either

 

[Scoot26]

Agree, Curry is not top 10 all-time, not really sure where I'd put him, but surely not in top 10.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Barkley has a higher PER and Win Share than Curry, so the numbers back it up. Also, to my eye test Sir Charles was a dominant force. Hell, he was the leading scorer on the dream team, not Jordan. He was an absolute beast of a player

Malone also has a higher PER and Win Share than Curry. ranks 3rd all time behind Bron and Kareem for total points in NBA history, a total Curry will not be reaching

its not a knock on Curry, its just there are TONS of great players in NBA history to compete with for a very small list to make top 10 all time. and not that my reasoning is the end all be all either

Yeah was just curious what the criteria you were basing the ranking on. PER is fair I suppose, though only one point higher for Barkley than Curry (career average wise), but higher is higher. Curry's highest is higher than Barkley's highest, but Barkley's lowest is higher than Curry's. Their "peaks" are similar. Not sure which one resonates more with you. Curry is lacking significantly in win shares which is interesting.

Of course, Curry's career is not yet over so he could certainly add or detract from his case.

Technically also by PER, Jokic has to be in the conversation for top 10ish, he has the highest PER ever. By win shares, Barkley could be over Kobe, Bird, Magic, and others. Not disagreeing with your point, just pointing out some interesting stats

 

[knoxville7]

Yeah was just curious what the criteria you were basing the ranking on. PER is fair I suppose, though only one point higher for Barkley than Curry (career average wise), but higher is higher. Curry's highest is higher than Barkley's highest, but Barkley's lowest is higher than Curry's. Their "peaks" are similar. Not sure which one resonates more with you. Curry is lacking significantly in win shares which is interesting.

Of course, Curry's career is not yet over so he could certainly add or detract from his case.

Technically also by PER, Jokic has to be in the conversation for top 10ish, he has the highest PER ever. By win shares, Barkley could be over Kobe, Bird, Magic, and others. Not disagreeing with your point, just pointing out some interesting stats

for sure, no singular stat is going to make the case for anyone

curry is a great player and he certainly led the wave of 3 point shooting that has taken over the NBA. but if you are starting an NBA franchise with 1 player in their prime, im taking those guys before Steph(course which set of rules you are playing by matters too)

theres a case for other guys as well, but I didnt want to get into a 1 VS 1 debate hangup lol

 

[clonetrooper264]

for sure, no singular stat is going to make the case for anyone

curry is a great player and he certainly led the wave of 3 point shooting that has taken over the NBA. but if you are starting an NBA franchise with 1 player in their prime, im taking those guys before Steph(course which set of rules you are playing by matters too)

theres a case for other guys as well, but I didnt want to get into a 1 VS 1 debate hangup lol

1v1 is a whole different animal lol

And yeah one stat never tells the whole story. Some stats might even be misleading. There's a lot to consider for any top 10 discussion. Even "who would you start a team with" is almost getting into another territory (though less interesting to me because you are really only going to end up talking about a couple players).

Other than PER and win shares, perhaps eye test (so subjective for everyone really, but part of the experience), what else are you considering when it comes to top 10 players in general?

 

[Raskolnikov]

Remains to be seen who will be carrying USA basketball for the next couple Olympic runs. I figure we'll see Haliburton and Edwards being the face of the program going forward. Not sure if Tatum will recover from being benched, I think he'll skip on FIBA stuff going forward. Bam and Booker might have another round in them, but they'll age out after that probably (though in 2 Olympics they'd be the same age as KD/Bron/Curry).

Edey is Canadian, so while he'll definitely be in the next Olympics, it'll be for Canada.

Yeah ...

Ant Man, Tatum, Brown, Booker, Haliburton, Holiday, Bam would be a good start. Lavine is also impactful in a positive way for the international game and has experience with it but he held his teams together when asked already.

Bigs may be an adventure for a few cycles and take time to groom.

Those mentioned players weren't good enough to stay on the floor and win this time.

2 Mount Rushmore shooters(With Miller/Allen/Bird), King James, and Embiid secured these wins.

Team USA will be good enough to win, but the best team doesn't always win an elite 8 playoff.

Any given Sunday rule effects basketball greatly.
Defending this title may be improbable.

I think some mentioned at least will realize that and be content with gold rather than risk being in a team that blows a single game.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Yeah ...

Ant Man, Tatum, Brown, Booker, Haliburton, Holiday, Bam would be a good start. Lavine is also impactful in a positive way for the international game and has experience with it but he held his teams together when asked already.

Bigs may be an adventure for a few cycles and take time to groom.

Those mentioned players weren't good enough to stay on the floor and win this time.

2 Mount Rushmore shooters(With Miller/Allen/Bird), King James, and Embiid secured these wins.

Team USA will be good enough to win, but the best team doesn't always win an elite 8 playoff.

Any given Sunday rule effects basketball greatly.
Defending this title may be improbable.

I think some mentioned at least will realize that and be content with gold rather than risk being in a team that blows a single game.

The common thought is that Holmgren and Cooper Flagg will be the team USA bigs for the next few cycles. Wouldn't be surprised if Paolo Banchero got a spot

 

[SilenceS]

The common thought is that Holmgren and Cooper Flagg will be the team USA bigs for the next few cycles. Wouldn't be surprised if Paolo Banchero got a spot

Shit, Brown and Tatum sound like they wont play for USA after the weird Tatum benchings and Brown not picked.

 

[knoxville7]

1v1 is a whole different animal lol

And yeah one stat never tells the whole story. Some stats might even be misleading. There's a lot to consider for any top 10 discussion. Even "who would you start a team with" is almost getting into another territory (though less interesting to me because you are really only going to end up talking about a couple players).

Other than PER and win shares, perhaps eye test (so subjective for everyone really, but part of the experience), what else are you considering when it comes to top 10 players in general?

i look for complete players. ones with few flaws and minor ones at that. guys that were monsters on both the offensive and defensive ends. thats a big reason I have Hakeem as a top 10 player(and IMO the best center of all time)

 

[clonetrooper264]

Shit, Brown and Tatum sound like they wont play for USA after the weird Tatum benchings and Brown not picked.

It's petty, but I wouldn't be surprised if that happened

 

[clonetrooper264]

i look for complete players. ones with few flaws and minor ones at that. guys that were monsters on both the offensive and defensive ends. thats a big reason I have Hakeem as a top 10 player(and IMO the best center of all time)

I waffle between Hakeem and Shaq as my best center of all time. An engaged Shaq is just so unstoppable (especially when he was a little leaner like earlier in his career). Wouldn't fault anyone picking Hakeem though, he was the whole package.

 

[SilenceS]

I waffle between Hakeem and Shaq as my best center of all time. An engaged Shaq is just so unstoppable (especially when he was a little leaner like earlier in his career). Wouldn't fault anyone picking Hakeem though, he was the whole package.

A motivated Shaq was the most dominate player ever. He played against the greatest bunch of Centers of all time and dominated them except one. That was Olajuwon. King of footwork and was just tremendously smart. Shaq talked about he could never get in "The Dream" head. He couldnt intimidate him. Hakeem was in his prime and Shaq wasnt completely there yet in 95, but he talks about how he just couldnt intimidate him and couldnt get him worked up. He would just smile. Shaq also talked how Hakeem was so hard to guard because you never knew what he was going to do. He had so many moves. Then, he went on to not bash but make fun of Ewing and Mourning saying they had the G-Town moves of faking left and doing the running hook. He said you always knew what was coming from them.

 

[SilenceS]

On another note, Shaq is still salty over Nash winning MVP. Its funny when he gets on a roll on that. He is correct, Nash shouldnt have won it but he still not over it.

 

[clonetrooper264]

On another note, Shaq is still salty over Nash winning MVP. Its funny when he gets on a roll on that. He is correct, Nash shouldnt have won it but he still not over it.

Shaq holds grudges forever lol

 

[knoxville7]

A motivated Shaq was the most dominate player ever. He played against the greatest bunch of Centers of all time and dominated them except one. That was Olajuwon. King of footwork and was just tremendously smart. Shaq talked about he could never get in "The Dream" head. He couldnt intimidate him. Hakeem was in his prime and Shaq wasnt completely there yet in 95, but he talks about how he just couldnt intimidate him and couldnt get him worked up. He would just smile. Shaq also talked how Hakeem was so hard to guard because you never knew what he was going to do. He had so many moves. Then, he went on to not bash but make fun of Ewing and Mourning saying they had the G-Town moves of faking left and doing the running hook. He said you always knew what was coming from them.

spot on

the one guy that was able to handle shaq was Hakeem, the GOAT center

 

[BNB]

Top 10 lists are obviously incredibly subjective and mostly boils down to an individual's definition of what it means to be the best.

Me, for example... I don't have a much respect for guys who played the majority of the career before the 80's. I just feel like the overall talent pool was not good, and the greats looked better because of it. That's not the same as saying that guys like Wilt and Russell weren't good, but rather that I don't think they would have looked as good if you plugged them into another decade. I know people will argue that if they came up in a different era, they would have developed even more, etc., but we don't know that for sure. On the flip side, you put Shaq, Hakeem, Kareem, Duncan Robinson, and hell, even a guy like Dwight in that era... and they would absolutely dominate. We know this because they dominated against a deeper talent pool.

There's also the fact that there are a lot of facets to basketball. To be one of the best ever (in this case -top 10), you can't have very big flaws in your game for the position that you play, at the time that you played it. That last part is important because the way basketball is played changes over time. So you can't fault Shaq for not being able to shoot, because bigs weren't typically expected or even taught to shoot decades ago, where as in today's game, a big may not play much if he can't shoot.
Otherwise, to simplify it - how dominant is the player on both sides of the floor? If they aren't dominant on one side, it's hard to make an argument that they're a top 10 player of all time, imo. And that's my long way of saying that I don't think Curry is top 10. He just never scared anyone on defense.