Tokyo won't get it for a long time.  The 2032 Olympics were already awarded to Brisbane.  2036 is up in the air, with bidding not having started, but Indonesia, India, and Egypt all want to host and plan on going for 2036, with Indonesia and Egypt both wishing to host the Olympics in their new, currently-being-built capitals, as a way to showcase the new city, the nation, and the region of the world in general.  India wants to get on the world map as well.  Then you can also anticipate bids from Madrid, which seems to bid every single time and has never hosted, and some city in Germany.  Some city in Mexico might also bid.

I think the Dream Team debate is an interesting one.  Some people are saying this team was better than the 1992 iteration.

I think it's complicated.  Those dream teams were sort of glorified Harlem Globetrotters.  All they did was soar and dunk while their opposition merely admired being on the same hardwood.  Their statistical dominance was somewhat meaningless.  They were theoretically great (and theoretically would curb stomp the 2024 dream team).  But they barely actually played basketball.

But the 2024 dream team was actually a team.  They played NBA talent across the board in real, competitive games.  They actually played basketball versus performing at a camp.  And they went undefeated.  So I guess that gives them an edge.

BUT...one last thought.  They went undefeated and won the gold against NBA level players...so that's great.  But they kind of were less than the sum of their parts.  Yeah, international rules and all.  But Serbia wouldn't be a great NBA team.  And the 2024 dream team had (predictably, as always) absurd talent.  The dominance wasn't quite what you'd expect to see.

13 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I think the Dream Team debate is an interesting one.  Some people are saying this team was better than the 1992 iteration.

I think it's complicated.  Those dream teams were sort of glorified Harlem Globetrotters.  All they did was soar and dunk while their opposition merely admired being on the same hardwood.  Their statistical dominance was somewhat meaningless.  They were theoretically great (and theoretically would curb stomp the 2024 dream team).  But they barely actually played basketball.

But the 2024 dream team was actually a team.  They played NBA talent across the board in real, competitive games.  They actually played basketball versus performing at a camp.  And they went undefeated.  So I guess that gives them an edge.

BUT...one last thought.  They went undefeated and won the gold against NBA level players...so that's great.  But they kind of were less than the sum of their parts.  Yeah, international rules and all.  But Serbia wouldn't be a great NBA team.  And the 2024 dream team had (predictably, as always) absurd talent.  The dominance wasn't quite what you'd expect to see.

I wonder if some of that sum-of-the-parts was because they had so little time together.  I wonder if they need to run a camp the summer before with 30-35 guys, get them all to work together and define roles, and then eventually make the tough decision to cut some of them that don't fit, regardless of the talent.

 

I was kind of wondering if USA Basketball could benefit from a hockey-style line change.  Take 4 out and bring in a new 4.  Then you have those 4 players on the court together as much as possible and develop some cohesiveness.  You'd have to have a 'bridge' player as you changed lines, since I don't think you can take all 5 guys out at once.  Perhaps the point guard could bridge the two lines together.  Something like that could also possibly help with giving minutes to everyone, which apparently was a problem.

Wonder if it wouldnt be better to take the NBA Finals winner from that year and let them go at it in the Olympics. Thats the best "team" the US has to offer at that given time. Theres going to be a bunch of talent, but theres also that team aspect where they know how to work together. Should probably send their coach, and run all their normal stuff.

Couldnt the Boston Celtics beat any of these less talented teams? I think so. How about some of those previous Warriors teams? I think so again...

Jordan Chiles won the Olympics

 

13 hours ago, HazletonEagle said:

Wonder if it wouldnt be better to take the NBA Finals winner from that year and let them go at it in the Olympics. Thats the best "team" the US has to offer at that given time. Theres going to be a bunch of talent, but theres also that team aspect where they know how to work together. Should probably send their coach, and run all their normal stuff.

Couldnt the Boston Celtics beat any of these less talented teams? I think so. How about some of those previous Warriors teams? I think so again...

I think fatigue would be the challenge there. Over 100 games played and then travelling international (most years) to play more games. 

15 hours ago, xzmattzx said:

I wonder if some of that sum-of-the-parts was because they had so little time together.  I wonder if they need to run a camp the summer before with 30-35 guys, get them all to work together and define roles, and then eventually make the tough decision to cut some of them that don't fit, regardless of the talent.

 

I was kind of wondering if USA Basketball could benefit from a hockey-style line change.  Take 4 out and bring in a new 4.  Then you have those 4 players on the court together as much as possible and develop some cohesiveness.  You'd have to have a 'bridge' player as you changed lines, since I don't think you can take all 5 guys out at once.  Perhaps the point guard could bridge the two lines together.  Something like that could also possibly help with giving minutes to everyone, which apparently was a problem.

This. Take Booker for example he probably has a usage rate of 30% with the Suns and for the Olympics he was asked to play defense, swing the ball, and hit open shots. He did it perfectly but it isn't easy to adjust. 

Or Steph, it took him a while to get in a rhythm playing more off ball and once he did we saw that outcome. 

13 hours ago, HazletonEagle said:

Wonder if it wouldnt be better to take the NBA Finals winner from that year and let them go at it in the Olympics. Thats the best "team" the US has to offer at that given time. Theres going to be a bunch of talent, but theres also that team aspect where they know how to work together. Should probably send their coach, and run all their normal stuff.

Couldnt the Boston Celtics beat any of these less talented teams? I think so. How about some of those previous Warriors teams? I think so again...

We won that game because Embiid wasn't a good match up and were able to bring AD off the bench who had 4 blocks, I think 6 offensive rebounds. 

Our depth is All NBA level depth

2 hours ago, DaEagles4Life said:

We won that game because Embiid wasn't a good match up and were able to bring AD off the bench who had 4 blocks, I think 6 offensive rebounds. 

Our depth is All NBA level depth

Right.  But big picture here.... the starting 5 should have been so much better that those contributions wouldn't have been so vital. 

All that talent seems to be beyond the point of diminishing returns. 

A team like this year's Celtics team probably blows out that French team, and Serbian team.

Whereas our crazy talented all star roster struggled. They don't have the chemistry. Taking the finals winner would solve that issue.  Those guys have the chemistry.

7 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Right.  But big picture here.... the starting 5 should have been so much better that those contributions wouldn't have been so vital. 

All that talent seems to be beyond the point of diminishing returns. 

A team like this year's Celtics team probably blows out that French team, and Serbian team.

Whereas our crazy talented all star roster struggled. They don't have the chemistry Taking the finals winner would solve that issue.  Those guys have the chemistry.

Jokic would have cooked Horford and Porzingus was already hurt. 

I would take what we saw 10 out of 10 times, seeing Steph and LeBron get to play together was awesome tv to watch. 

I also think Kerr's lineup choices were down right awful at times. He should have played Hali with the backups because they desperately needed a lead guard. We let teams hang around or build leads because of that. We had it down to 6 in the 3rd vs Serbia then Kerr does dumb crap 

 

 

Next cycle will be even more fun because I can see it being more of a spread the floor cut thru type team. 

37 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said:

Jokic would have cooked Horford and Porzingus was already hurt. 

I would take what we saw 10 out of 10 times, seeing Steph and LeBron get to play together was awesome tv to watch. 

I also think Kerr's lineup choices were down right awful at times. He should have played Hali with the backups because they desperately needed a lead guard. We let teams hang around or build leads because of that. We had it down to 6 in the 3rd vs Serbia then Kerr does dumb crap 

 

 

Next cycle will be even more fun because I can see it being more of a spread the floor cut thru type team. 

Yeah I mean they arent likely going to have any ball dominant guys who take over games by themselves. Maybe ANT keeps growing to become that kind of dominant force, but unless Cooper Flagg is it, they wont have that guy.

This time, I missed the Michael Redd type who was just always draining 3s. Felt like our shooting was inconsistent at best, sub-par really. Guys like Jrue hit a bunch of 3s. Other guys who you expect to shoot better were more streaky, or just off. 

They might need a few true lead guards and better shooting next time since they wont have the hero ball players. 

We can always hope that Ja Morant grows up enough by then to commit to the team.

On 8/12/2024 at 10:39 PM, HazletonEagle said:

Wonder if it wouldnt be better to take the NBA Finals winner from that year and let them go at it in the Olympics. Thats the best "team" the US has to offer at that given time. Theres going to be a bunch of talent, but theres also that team aspect where they know how to work together. Should probably send their coach, and run all their normal stuff.

Couldnt the Boston Celtics beat any of these less talented teams? I think so. How about some of those previous Warriors teams? I think so again...

I think the Celtics would probably annihilate this year’s dream team.

You can't have the reigning champs go to the Olympics when it's an international competition and you've got players from differnt countries on the one team

5 hours ago, eagle45 said:

I think the Celtics would probably annihilate this year’s dream team.

The team Tatum couldn't get minutes on? 

3 hours ago, Mat said:

You can't have the reigning champs go to the Olympics when it's an international competition and you've got players from differnt countries on the one team

The team Tatum couldn't get minutes on? 

An actual team that played a full season together and just won an nba championship….im gonna put my money on that team over an all star team.

3 hours ago, eagle45 said:

An actual team that played a full season together and just won an nba championship….im gonna put my money on that team over an all star team.

I would take the Olympic starting 5, like come on

They had KD coming on as the 6th man for most of the tournament, that team was stacked and in a best of 7 they kill the Celtics. 

In a one and done game like the Olympics they will win more often than not as well. Curry, LeBron, KD, Embiid and Booker would kill 99% of teams

Im not sure if the Celtics would beat Team USA. The premise though, is that the celtics would BE team USA. And the Celtics were a better team than any of those international teams we saw in the Olympics.

From a team perspective, USA lacked cohesion all tournament long. As we know, they dont play together very long at all. 

It was just said that team USA would kill a lot of teams. Well, they struggled to beat a couple of teams in the Olympics this year. And something tells me the Celtics wouldnt have. Not because the Celtics have more bigger and better names than team USA, but because the Celtics were the best team the USA had to offer this year and they were a heck of a lot better than the Olympic teams, ALSO with cohesion to their advantage unlike team USA. 

I think some of you guys are failing to account for that principle. And it does matter. It did show up throughout these games.

With that said, very good point @Mat that we cant just take the Finals winner because sometimes we would lose those players to an interntaional team. I guess in that scenairo, you open spot up to free agency and thats where you pick up a Bam, or AD, or Booker- whichever position you need. Then youre just adding 1 or 2 free agents. Not slapping a whole team together. 

It just won't happen and most of the players won't commit to the Word Cup the year prior in 2027 in the desert again. ANT has already said he won't and don't blame him. 

We already qualified for 2028 so why not try to build a system and take young guys for the meaningless 2027 WC. Try to build these guys for 2032 ala AJ Dybasta, Boozer, Flagg, and star role players Jalen Suggs, Bane, Vassell, Duren, Isaiah Joe, Herb Jones, Trey Murphy , Jalen Johnson,

sending the nba champs to be the us olympic team doesn't exactly work if some players aren't from the us...like porzingis being from latvia.  

1 hour ago, mr_hunt said:

sending the nba champs to be the us olympic team doesn't exactly work if some players aren't from the us...like porzingis being from latvia.  

Give all players on NBA Championship Teams immediate citizenship

2 hours ago, mr_hunt said:

sending the nba champs to be the us olympic team doesn't exactly work if some players aren't from the us...like porzingis being from latvia.  

Yeah Mat brought up that point.  That's where theoretically you open up a free agent spot. So if porzingis played for another country,  you need a PF/C free agent.  So you take that Boston team, and add an Anthony Davis or Bam Adebayo. Now they're only better. 

9 hours ago, DaEagles4Life said:

I would take the Olympic starting 5, like come on

Yeah these aren't serious discussions. People just trying to get a reaction by saying something edgy.

I would take a championship winning team over an all star team in an offseason match up.  It’s an interesting debate.  Maybe right, maybe wrong…but it’s not just an attempt at a reaction.  Not my fault you can’t see the value of teams that play together when your unbeatable team USA was down 16 against a Serbia team that would get bounced in the first round of an NBA playoff.

What happens if it's your plan for the NBA champs to play as Team USA, and there's some big upset?  What happens if the Mavericks win instead, and Luka Doncic can't play for the US?  What happens if the Nuggets win, and Jokic is their star player?

 

There has to be a way to tie the All Star Game into Olympic qualifying or team-building.