Fiba World championships

[Q-is-here]

NAW with an ugly -22 plus/minus against Serbia, which was by far the worst of any player. He shot well, but he had three turnovers and zero assists. NAW looks good one game and then bad the next. I'm hoping he'll be more consistent this upcoming season.

I think he shot the ball well overall from 3 and that would be huge for us if he can carry that into the NBA season. But yeah, he can have some pretty big ups and downs as a player.

[Eitan]

Disappointing indeed. I think the powers that be (Grant Hill?) need to really re-think how they construct the roster.

I just don't know what they can really do. Obviously guys like Tatum, Booker, possibly Durant and Lebron will hurt but I said it before the tournament I will say it again they have no bigs. Embiid is technically eligible to play but he can also play for France or not at all, Bam would be the obvious choice, then you got Chet and Naz on the select team but neither of those 2 fit what the weakness of this USA team is. JJJ had 7 rebounds total in the last 4 games. Kerr didn't play Kessler at all and when he did against Lithuiana Valuncinuas at him alive.

I am also going to put a big blame on Kerr, I think he is extreamly overatted as a coach (Could care less about his political beliefs that I know Cool really cares about) but when Curry was hurt a few years ago they were one of the worst records in the NBA, when Curry missed a ton of games 3 years ago they barley snuck into the play in spot, the year Kerr missed games do a medical reason, Luke Walton who is considered a terrible coach had the warriors on record setting win pace what they did hit. Kerr now completly failed with this team. Played Palo Banchero as the backup center and they got killed on the glass, refused to play Kessler when they got killed on the boards consistently, could not find a way to hind Reaves on defense and the USA was punished for this in both of their losses, Brandon Ingram is one of 4 guys who has an all star apperance and he was a DNP tonight and Kerr could not find a way to make him useful (I understand Ingram struggled all FIBA but come on find a way coach).

USA is still the best country in the world when it comes to depth of talent in basketball, but they are no longer the best country at developing bigs and there is a big issue with this going forward. Bam is the only big in the pipeline currently who I would feel comfrotable playing in the Olympics. Serbia has possible caught up also overall, they are in the championship game and that is without Jokic, the other Bogdonivic brother, Belijca, Tellodosic (International star PG, who might retire) and Boban all deciding to opt out of the World Cup. They are going give USA everything they can handle and more come olympic time.

Kek, you analyzed things very nicely, and I want to add factors to the differences between the USA and Europe basketball perceptions.
Basketball is a team game.
In the USA, they play more one-on-one and look for a superstars (heroes) to lead a team, and this is compared to Europe where the game is team-based and the ball movement is better (there is a reason why all the Europeans who come to the USA are considered players who pass the ball at a high level).
Individually, the US players are better, but basketball is a team game, and that explains Steve Kerr's statement and feelings at the end of the game against Germany.
In addition, it was clear that the Americans had a hard time accepting the rules of fiba world cup.
The perception of defense is also different, while in Europe the game is more physical and it is more difficult to penetrate the basket, in the USA the referees give an advantage to the attacker (that is the reason it looked like the USA had no defense against Germany), which allows more penetration and dunks (at the end it encourages ticket sales).

[KG4Ever]

Ant has played fine so far but not great and he needed to step up more in a leadership role for USA to win the gold. Ant's shooting efficiency was actually the worst among the entire team except for Cam Johnson and his FG% was 5.6% worse than the team as a whole. Maybe Ant needs to shoot less and look for his teammates more. Mikal Bridges who shot it an insane clip should have gotten more shots. Bridges shooting percentages were 66.7, 57.1 and 87.5% compared with Ant who was 48.0, 31.7 and 72.7%.

I'm not sure if Ant getting a higher usage is a good thing unless its accompanied by better efficiency. For Ant to take the next leap he needs to get his teammates more involved and improve his scoring efficiency.

[Q-is-here]

Ant has played fine so far but not great and he needed to step up more in a leadership role for USA to win the gold. Ant's shooting efficiency was actually the worst among the entire team except for Cam Johnson and his FG% was 5.6% worse than the team as a whole. Maybe Ant needs to shoot less and look for his teammates more. Mikal Bridges who shot it an insane clip should have gotten more shots. Bridges shooting percentages were 66.7, 57.1 and 87.5% compared with Ant who was 48.0, 31.7 and 72.7%.

I'm not sure if Ant getting a higher usage is a good thing unless its accompanied by better efficiency. For Ant to take the next leap he needs to get his teammates more involved and improve his scoring efficiency.

....but it's normal for the highest usage player to also take the most difficult shots because he's the guy with the ball in his hands when all else fails. You also can't just look at Ant's efficiency in isolation. What if the gravity of his presence on the floor made things easier for someone like Mikal Bridges? Who do you think drew the better defenders - Mikal or Ant?

I think a guy like Russell Westbrook in his prime (not the version we've seen the last few years) is a great example of someone who was never really efficient as a scorer, but drew so much attention that it enabled others on the floor with him to get easier shots. He ended up being a huge net plus to the offense despite not being a great shooter. And we know Ant is a better shooter than Westbrook.

[Q-is-here]

Disappointing indeed. I think the powers that be (Grant Hill?) need to really re-think how they construct the roster.

I just don't know what they can really do. Obviously guys like Tatum, Booker, possibly Durant and Lebron will hurt but I said it before the tournament I will say it again they have no bigs. Embiid is technically eligible to play but he can also play for France or not at all, Bam would be the obvious choice, then you got Chet and Naz on the select team but neither of those 2 fit what the weakness of this USA team is. JJJ had 7 rebounds total in the last 4 games. Kerr didn't play Kessler at all and when he did against Lithuiana Valuncinuas at him alive.

I am also going to put a big blame on Kerr, I think he is extreamly overatted as a coach (Could care less about his political beliefs that I know Cool really cares about) but when Curry was hurt a few years ago they were one of the worst records in the NBA, when Curry missed a ton of games 3 years ago they barley snuck into the play in spot, the year Kerr missed games do a medical reason, Luke Walton who is considered a terrible coach had the warriors on record setting win pace what they did hit. Kerr now completly failed with this team. Played Palo Banchero as the backup center and they got killed on the glass, refused to play Kessler when they got killed on the boards consistently, could not find a way to hind Reaves on defense and the USA was punished for this in both of their losses, Brandon Ingram is one of 4 guys who has an all star apperance and he was a DNP tonight and Kerr could not find a way to make him useful (I understand Ingram struggled all FIBA but come on find a way coach).

USA is still the best country in the world when it comes to depth of talent in basketball, but they are no longer the best country at developing bigs and there is a big issue with this going forward. Bam is the only big in the pipeline currently who I would feel comfrotable playing in the Olympics. Serbia has possible caught up also overall, they are in the championship game and that is without Jokic, the other Bogdonivic brother, Belijca, Tellodosic (International star PG, who might retire) and Boban all deciding to opt out of the World Cup. They are going give USA everything they can handle and more come olympic time.

Kek, you analyzed things very nicely, and I want to add factors to the differences between the USA and Europe basketball perceptions.
Basketball is a team game.
In the USA, they play more one-on-one and look for a superstars (heroes) to lead a team, and this is compared to Europe where the game is team-based and the ball movement is better (there is a reason why all the Europeans who come to the USA are considered players who pass the ball at a high level).
Individually, the US players are better, but basketball is a team game, and that explains Steve Kerr's statement and feelings at the end of the game against Germany.
In addition, it was clear that the Americans had a hard time accepting the rules of fiba world cup.
The perception of defense is also different, while in Europe the game is more physical and it is more difficult to penetrate the basket, in the USA the referees give an advantage to the attacker (that is the reason it looked like the USA had no defense against Germany), which allows more penetration and dunks (at the end it encourages ticket sales).

What is it that is reffed differently? I always hear it's more physical, but what does that mean exactly? When I think of the NBA, post-up players can practically get mauled - especially if the guy they are posting up is smaller than them - without a foul being called. But to your point, penetrating guards get a way more generous whistle in the NBA. Do they allow more hand-checking in FIBA? Because I don't see how it's possible to allow any more physical play amongst the bigs in the paint in FIBA than the NBA. But if you are saying more physical play on the perimeter is allowed, then that definitely takes away a Team USA advantage.

Also, I think the U.S. should have fewer iso-ball scorers on its roster and get more 3&D ball movers. It doesn't make sense to have Ant, Brunson, Reaves, and Ingram all on the roster. There is a diminishing return on having so many iso scorers when there are only so many possessions to go around. Bridges is also a great scorer, but he can also defend and hit 3s, so he has a lot more value than a guy like Ingram or Reaves.

[KG4Ever]

Ant has played fine so far but not great and he needed to step up more in a leadership role for USA to win the gold. Ant's shooting efficiency was actually the worst among the entire team except for Cam Johnson and his FG% was 5.6% worse than the team as a whole. Maybe Ant needs to shoot less and look for his teammates more. Mikal Bridges who shot it an insane clip should have gotten more shots. Bridges shooting percentages were 66.7, 57.1 and 87.5% compared with Ant who was 48.0, 31.7 and 72.7%.

I'm not sure if Ant getting a higher usage is a good thing unless its accompanied by better efficiency. For Ant to take the next leap he needs to get his teammates more involved and improve his scoring efficiency.

....but it's normal for the highest usage player to also take the most difficult shots because he's the guy with the ball in his hands when all else fails. You also can't just look at Ant's efficiency in isolation. What if the gravity of his presence on the floor made things easier for someone like Mikal Bridges? Who do you think drew the better defenders - Mikal or Ant?

I think a guy like Russell Westbrook in his prime (not the version we've seen the last few years) is a great example of someone who was never really efficient as a scorer, but drew so much attention that it enabled others on the floor with him to get easier shots. He ended up being a huge net plus to the offense despite not being a great shooter. And we know Ant is a better shooter than Westbrook.

I agree with some of your points, but I also think Ant's high usage may have hurt Team USA. I think Bridges is better than Ant right now and if Bridges was a bigger part of the offense, the USA may be playing for Gold. Of course, nothing is provable and so we can believe what we want to believe. I love Ant, but I worry if he shoots too much, Wolves might not realize their potential. You got to involve everybody on offense especially KAT or it will adversely affect the team. If Ant can become a good passer it opens so much up for his teammates plus his efficiency would likely beneift.

Westbrook has never won an NBA championship, so I prefer to look at guys who won titles and many times the highest usage guy is the most or one of most efficient scorers on team. Jokic, Giannis, Kawhi, LeBron, Curry/Durant, Duncan, Nowitzki, KG, Hakeem, Michael Jordan. Maybe the one guy who wasn't a super efficient scorer was Kobe, but he was great in so many areas that he made up for it.

[Q-is-here]

Ant has played fine so far but not great and he needed to step up more in a leadership role for USA to win the gold. Ant's shooting efficiency was actually the worst among the entire team except for Cam Johnson and his FG% was 5.6% worse than the team as a whole. Maybe Ant needs to shoot less and look for his teammates more. Mikal Bridges who shot it an insane clip should have gotten more shots. Bridges shooting percentages were 66.7, 57.1 and 87.5% compared with Ant who was 48.0, 31.7 and 72.7%.

I'm not sure if Ant getting a higher usage is a good thing unless its accompanied by better efficiency. For Ant to take the next leap he needs to get his teammates more involved and improve his scoring efficiency.

....but it's normal for the highest usage player to also take the most difficult shots because he's the guy with the ball in his hands when all else fails. You also can't just look at Ant's efficiency in isolation. What if the gravity of his presence on the floor made things easier for someone like Mikal Bridges? Who do you think drew the better defenders - Mikal or Ant?

I think a guy like Russell Westbrook in his prime (not the version we've seen the last few years) is a great example of someone who was never really efficient as a scorer, but drew so much attention that it enabled others on the floor with him to get easier shots. He ended up being a huge net plus to the offense despite not being a great shooter. And we know Ant is a better shooter than Westbrook.

I agree with some of your points, but I also think Ant's high usage may have hurt Team USA. I think Bridges is better than Ant right now and if Bridges was a bigger part of the offense, the USA may be playing for Gold. Of course, nothing is provable and so we can believe what we want to believe. I love Ant, but I worry if he shoots too much, Wolves might not realize their potential. You got to involve everybody on offense especially KAT or it will adversely affect the team. If Ant can become a good passer it opens so much up for his teammates plus his efficiency would likely beneift.

Westbrook has never won an NBA championship, so I prefer to look at guys who won titles and many times the highest usage guy is the most or one of most efficient scorers on team. Jokic, Giannis, Kawhi, LeBron, Curry/Durant, Duncan, Nowitzki, KG, Hakeem, Michael Jordan. Maybe the one guy who wasn't a super efficient scorer was Kobe, but he was great in so many areas that he made up for it.

I was using Westbrook as a somewhat extreme example of someone that wasn't very efficient, yet who drew a lot of attention and enabled others to get better shots because of it.

I agree Ant needs to become a better passer. He's pretty good at drive and kicks, but his pick and roll passing as a ball handler is pretty rudimentary at this point.

In terms of his efficiency, I doubt he ever becomes a lights-out shooter in the mold of Durant or Curry, so he just simply has to get fouled more and make a higher percentage of free throws (i.e. he needs more FTAs and made FTs).

One thing I notice is that his footwork and ability to use either hand comfortably around the rim makes him SUPER evasive. In other words, he's literally hard to foul because he is so good at weaving his way around contact. It's a weakness in his game that comes from a strength!

[Eitan]

I just don't know what they can really do. Obviously guys like Tatum, Booker, possibly Durant and Lebron will hurt but I said it before the tournament I will say it again they have no bigs. Embiid is technically eligible to play but he can also play for France or not at all, Bam would be the obvious choice, then you got Chet and Naz on the select team but neither of those 2 fit what the weakness of this USA team is. JJJ had 7 rebounds total in the last 4 games. Kerr didn't play Kessler at all and when he did against Lithuiana Valuncinuas at him alive.

I am also going to put a big blame on Kerr, I think he is extreamly overatted as a coach (Could care less about his political beliefs that I know Cool really cares about) but when Curry was hurt a few years ago they were one of the worst records in the NBA, when Curry missed a ton of games 3 years ago they barley snuck into the play in spot, the year Kerr missed games do a medical reason, Luke Walton who is considered a terrible coach had the warriors on record setting win pace what they did hit. Kerr now completly failed with this team. Played Palo Banchero as the backup center and they got killed on the glass, refused to play Kessler when they got killed on the boards consistently, could not find a way to hind Reaves on defense and the USA was punished for this in both of their losses, Brandon Ingram is one of 4 guys who has an all star apperance and he was a DNP tonight and Kerr could not find a way to make him useful (I understand Ingram struggled all FIBA but come on find a way coach).

USA is still the best country in the world when it comes to depth of talent in basketball, but they are no longer the best country at developing bigs and there is a big issue with this going forward. Bam is the only big in the pipeline currently who I would feel comfrotable playing in the Olympics. Serbia has possible caught up also overall, they are in the championship game and that is without Jokic, the other Bogdonivic brother, Belijca, Tellodosic (International star PG, who might retire) and Boban all deciding to opt out of the World Cup. They are going give USA everything they can handle and more come olympic time.

Kek, you analyzed things very nicely, and I want to add factors to the differences between the USA and Europe basketball perceptions.
Basketball is a team game.
In the USA, they play more one-on-one and look for a superstars (heroes) to lead a team, and this is compared to Europe where the game is team-based and the ball movement is better (there is a reason why all the Europeans who come to the USA are considered players who pass the ball at a high level).
Individually, the US players are better, but basketball is a team game, and that explains Steve Kerr's statement and feelings at the end of the game against Germany.
In addition, it was clear that the Americans had a hard time accepting the rules of fiba world cup.
The perception of defense is also different, while in Europe the game is more physical and it is more difficult to penetrate the basket, in the USA the referees give an advantage to the attacker (that is the reason it looked like the USA had no defense against Germany), which allows more penetration and dunks (at the end it encourages ticket sales).

What is it that is reffed differently? I always hear it's more physical, but what does that mean exactly? When I think of the NBA, post-up players can practically get mauled - especially if the guy they are posting up is smaller than them - without a foul being called. But to your point, penetrating guards get a way more generous whistle in the NBA. Do they allow more hand-checking in FIBA? Because I don't see how it's possible to allow any more physical play amongst the bigs in the paint in FIBA than the NBA. But if you are saying more physical play on the perimeter is allowed, then that definitely takes away a Team USA advantage.

Also, I think the U.S. should have fewer iso-ball scorers on its roster and get more 3&D ball movers. It doesn't make sense to have Ant, Brunson, Reaves, and Ingram all on the roster. There is a diminishing return on having so many iso scorers when there are only so many possessions to go around. Bridges is also a great scorer, but he can also defend and hit 3s, so he has a lot more value than a guy like Ingram or Reaves.

I meant that the European basketball game is more physical / tough than in the NBA, which make it more difficult to penetrate the basket .

Here some examples for that physicality from fiba last year.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=sqV61aTcPc8 ... _h5fPyA2eT

[Wolvesfan21]

I agree with the others. For Ant to be a superstar and efficient he needs to become a better passer and draw more fouls. You look at him compared to the LeBrons, Wades, etc. at the same age.

Compared to Westbrook. At age 21 season Westbrook has far more assists and more FTA. Then at age 22 he really exploded drawing many more fouls. Eventually of course becoming an elite rebounder at his position too.

Now Ant has already had a higher TSA% (overall shooting) then Westbrook ever had which is a big positive. Let's see him up those other stats though and really make the team better. Assists, drawing fouls and boards (may be harder playing with Rudy and KAT). Passing to me seems like the easiest and most effective way to make a leap. For someone who has the ball that much he needs to up his assists and that will open up his scoring too. Burn teams enough on passing to open teammates and they will not want to double.

[Lipoli390]

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/383 ... st-players

Ant and KAT both make top 10 list of NBA players in FIBA play.