Fixing US Basketball

[Least Original User Name Ever]

US Basketball has taken another shot to the chops. I would put forth the theory that the NBA is bad for basketball as a whole. The NBA, for years, has been trying to manufacture superstars and offense and (largely) individual play. Before the latest game that the US lost to Greece, while the Grecian players were practicing free throws, the US players were busy dunking on the other side and having fun. The game ended up coming down to possessions and free throws.


I say that the REAL fix (although this attempt at having a pool of US players to choose from isn't bad) is to send the "World Champions" of the NBA in to play as the American representative. The foreign players can be swapped out for bench players or players who get a special invite from the coach. I say that this will end up being the best plan to not get embarrassed.

[Jimmy Chitwood]

When you say the NBA has been trying to manufacture offense, you're not attempting to elevate the level of defense in international play above NBA defense, are you?

That aside, the simple truth is that international basketball isn't that important to NBA players, coaches or executives. The NBA is by far the highest stage for basketball players, no matter where they're from, and a lot of guys just aren't willing to sacrifice any part of their NBA career for something that isn't even that rewarding if they win. Play and win, no big deal, we're supposed to win every game by 55. Play and lose, and it's another shot to the chops, and we've been embarrassed again. Why would the NBA agree to send their champion out into that every offseason?

We used to win every game handily because we had vastly superior players showing up to play, simple as that. We've lost recently because 1. the very best players don't play, 2. basketball players from other countries have gotten way better in the last 10-15 years, 3. the teams that we've picked from the players who agreed to go have been poorly assembled, 4. the international style of basketball (and refereeing) is wacky and uncomfortable for NBA guys, and 5. again, it's not really all that important to anybody who can do anything about it that we win. We're only just now getting around to actually putting together a rudimentary international program, for god's sake. Meanwhile these other countries have had established programs, staffs and facilities for international basketball for years, all as a build-up to exactly the type of games that our guys spend a week training for in the offseason of their real basketball season. It's not really all that surprising that they've caught up to the half-assed effort we've put it into it. The fact of the matter is that if we really cared enough about it to dominate, we would dominate. But we don't, really, so other teams beat what we throw out there. I mean, really, what's the lesson we've learned here? That a haphazardly-selected group of second-tier NBA stars will only win 75% of the time against established international teams with their own NBA stars to go along with actual schemes, for whom this game is 100 times more important than the sideshow it is for USA Basketball? It's about time.

[Jammer]

I'm convinced that the problem this year was simply coaching.

Of course, in the interest of full disclosure, I'm a season ticket holding Carolina fan. :)

Jammer

[Least Original User Name Ever]

When you say the NBA has been trying to manufacture offense, you're not attempting to elevate the level of defense in international play above NBA defense, are you?

That aside, the simple truth is that international basketball isn't that important to NBA players, coaches or executives. The NBA is by far the highest stage for basketball players, no matter where they're from, and a lot of guys just aren't willing to sacrifice any part of their NBA career for something that isn't even that rewarding if they win. Play and win, no big deal, we're supposed to win every game by 55. Play and lose, and it's another shot to the chops, and we've been embarrassed again. Why would the NBA agree to send their champion out into that every offseason?

We used to win every game handily because we had vastly superior players showing up to play, simple as that. We've lost recently because 1. the very best players don't play, 2. basketball players from other countries have gotten way better in the last 10-15 years, 3. the teams that we've picked from the players who agreed to go have been poorly assembled, 4. the international style of basketball (and refereeing) is wacky and uncomfortable for NBA guys, and 5. again, it's not really all that important to anybody who can do anything about it that we win. We're only just now getting around to actually putting together a rudimentary international program, for god's sake. Meanwhile these other countries have had established programs, staffs and facilities for international basketball for years, all as a build-up to exactly the type of games that our guys spend a week training for in the offseason of their real basketball season. It's not really all that surprising that they've caught up to the half-assed effort we've put it into it. The fact of the matter is that if we really cared enough about it to dominate, we would dominate. But we don't, really, so other teams beat what we throw out there. I mean, really, what's the lesson we've learned here? That a haphazardly-selected group of second-tier NBA stars will only win 75% of the time against established international teams with their own NBA stars to go along with actual schemes, for whom this game is 100 times more important than the sideshow it is for USA Basketball? It's about time.


I didn't get the first part of what you said. Please restate.

Wouldn't it make more sense to keep these "weird" rules similar, then?

The world has caught up to us. That's a good thing. But we're playing a different game. I don't see that as a good thing because I feel that one form of the game is better than the other.

Is there a way to make us care? I can see why some players wouldn't. I mean, they're making wheelbarrows full of moeny playing a game..and then they're asked to play another game for free. In any event, you'd think that we could get enough genuine competitors to go out there and play hard. I hate to invoke the original Dream Team, but you wouldn't catch them talking about money when it came to that task.

Meh, maybe times change and it won't ever change back.

[RealityChuck]

The easiest way to fix US basketball is to bribe the players to shave points.

Just don't get caught.

[zamboniracer]

The problem is that the problem is not correctable. As the world's level of skill and talent reaches the American level then any one given game is a crapshoot. That being the case, a single game elimination tournament is a crapshoot. I think that if the US played any other national team in a best of 7, or even a best of 5, that the Americans would win, however, that isn't the current system.

[Jimmy Chitwood]

I didn't get the first part of what you said. Please restate.

Well, we're comparing NBA basketball to international basketball, and you brought up manufacturing offense. Does that mean the NBA doesn't stress or emphasize defense? I'm just wondering if that's what you meant.

Wouldn't it make more sense to keep these "weird" rules similar, then?

Sure. Let's use the rules they use in the place where the sport was first popularized; they've probably been keeping up with the times.

The world has caught up to us. That's a good thing. But we're playing a different game. I don't see that as a good thing because I feel that one form of the game is better than the other.

I assume you mean that the international game is "better." Before I say anything about it -- how?

Is there a way to make us care? I can see why some players wouldn't. I mean, they're making wheelbarrows full of moeny playing a game..and then they're asked to play another game for free. In any event, you'd think that we could get enough genuine competitors to go out there and play hard. I hate to invoke the original Dream Team, but you wouldn't catch them talking about money when it came to that task.

Oh, come on. The team was called the "Dream Team," for crying out loud! It was a marketing orgy! You don't remember the McDonald's commercials?

Anyway, it's not a question of playing hard. NBA players play hard. The guys we send out there play hard. The problem is more one of style of play. In the NBA, playing hard = go to the rim, and you'll be rewarded for it. In international play it's all taking charges and flopping around below the rim. And the game is refereed accordingly. So Dwyane Wade comes from winning the NBA title, in an environment where he's using his quickness and muscle to get to the basket, and all of a sudden he's playing six foot three guys in a matchup zone, and they're sitting back in the lane. If he goes to the basket, they flop under him, and he gets in foul trouble because initiating contact is frowned upon internationally. OK, no problem, it's easy to beat a zone, just find the shooters... JESUS WHERE'S MY SHOOTERS?

It may sound lame, but playing one style of play professionally and then having to play by a different set of rules, and going up against a team made up of decent players who've been together and been playing that style for a while makes a difference. Not enough of a difference that they're going to beat you consistently, but enough that, if you have a rough shooting night and they have a good one, you're going to lose. Hell, the NCAA's don't even use a different set of rules, and the best team doesn't always win there, does it? Does that mean only one team plays hard?

[antechinus]

A list of previous winners (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basketball_World_Championship).

USA have done fairly well since the comp started in 1950 with 3 wins. The only other country with more wins is Yugoslavia with 5.


The world has caught up to us. That's a good thing. But we're playing a different game. I don't see that as a good thing because I feel that one form of the game is better than the other.
How is the game different?
It always amazes me when I occasionally watch a basketball game on TV, how different the rules seem to be interpreted to when I used to play 10 years ago. - For us, we were not allowed to travel with the ball, but now they seem to run 5 steps for every one bounce.
- And what about defenders who have not yet assumed a stationary legal guarding position managing to draw a contact foul on the attacker. This happens all the time.
- Also, I thought grabbing the rim was a foul.

[BobT]

I thought it was amazing that after scoring 101 points against the US, Greece scored just 47 in the final against Spain.

[DanBlather]

I'd like to have the winning NCAA college team play. Basketball is a team sport and the US pros can't practice as a team long enough to develop treamwork.

[Least Original User Name Ever]

I would say that no, the NBA doesn't stress defense. I'm also from Detroit and a fan of the way the Pistons and Spurs play. There's your caveat.

As for the rules, I'd say we figure out a happy medium with international rules and NBA rules if the NBA is concerned with putting a great team out there as well. If they aren't, and I don't necessarily think they are, then we should just keep on going.

The international game isn't necessarily better. Emphasis is placed on fundamentals, whereas the NBA game seems to be predicated on...for lack of a better term...marketing.

I certainly do remember the Dream Team commercials. It was a marketing thing, for sure, but if that's the case, then it's a marketing expedition that's lasted close to 20 years.

You've also pointed to a thing that seriously irks me about the NBA, and that's how an athletic (and highly overrated) player like Mr. Wade can get to the rim and get contact and get many a foul. He runs around with reckless abandon (partly because that's his style of play) and goes to the line so many times per game.

And yeah, it does sound a little lame that these rules make it so difficult for players to adjust. I find it so very hard to believe that this adjustment can't be made. After all, it is the same damned game. Round ball, round hoop. 11 feet and so forth, right? With all that being said, I can't see a single freaking reason that our team can't go out there and win much much more.

Yes, I'm asking for a lot.

antechinus, drawing a foul is now simply "beating the guy witht he ball to the spot", therefore, the person drawing the foul can still be moving and get the call. I'm not sure when the shift in rules happened, though. The reference to playing a different game comes from the abundance of traveling (I'm looking at you, Lebron and Dwyane) and the wonderful Jordan Rules.

Also, Mr. Chitwood, would you say that team USA has a fix, or that it's just the level of talent getting internationally better coupled with different rule interpretations doing it in?


They really should just send the kids in from Hickory High, though...

[Operation Ripper]

the simple truth is that international basketball isn't that important to NBA players, coaches or executives.

I call BS. Guy, haven't you noticed our last few international teams have been made up almost entirely of millionare NBA All Stars? The highest caliber coaches doing their thing? All essentially for free? What is that called if not important?

The NBA is by far the highest stage for basketball players, no matter where they're from, and a lot of guys just aren't willing to sacrifice any part of their NBA career for something that isn't even that rewarding if they win.

I'd agree it is the highest paying, not the highest stage at all, as our best NBA players are regularly beaten by foreign teams. A lot of guys aren't willing to sacrifice? See above.

Play and win, no big deal, we're supposed to win every game by 55. Play and lose, and it's another shot to the chops, and we've been embarrassed again.

It should be another shot to the chops because we haven't won the gold in quite a while, not since 2000 if I recall.

We used to win every game handily because we had vastly superior players showing up to play, simple as that. We've lost recently because 1. the very best players don't play

Again, you are flat out wrong, we have been sending NBA All Stars for some time now, from Allen Iverson to Tim Duncan, Dwanye Wade to Lebron James, etc., etc. They are our best.

We're only just now getting around to actually putting together a rudimentary international program, for god's sake. Meanwhile these other countries have had established programs, staffs and facilities for international basketball for years, all as a build-up to exactly the type of games that our guys spend a week training for in the offseason of their real basketball season.

What in the world are you talking about? Basketball isn't rocket science! Our guys have been playing for their whole lives, in as many organizations as you can imagine, they have been exposed to far more structured programs than international players ever have. And they still couldn't guard against a pick and roll. Over, and over and over again, or make freakin' freethrows, or shoot jumpers, none of which has anything to do with having an "international program."

The fact of the matter is that if we really cared enough about it to dominate, we would dominate.

Flat out wrong, see above.

I mean, really, what's the lesson we've learned here? That a haphazardly-selected group of second-tier NBA stars will only win 75% of the time against established international teams with their own NBA stars to go along with actual schemes, for whom this game is 100 times more important than the sideshow it is for USA Basketball? It's about time.

Jesus, man, do you know anything about what has been happening with USA Basketball in international play? All of our recent teams have featured the best we have, NBA All Stars, there aren't any second-tier guys out there. Greece had no NBA stars on its roster and beat us like a drum for most of the game. The bottom line is, our best basketball players aren't really the best basketball players in the world, no matter how many times you and the press shout we are the most athletice, etc. If we don't know the fundamentals of the game, we don't really got game then do we? That's what all our losing means, guy. Christ.

[Nava]

Jesus, man, do you know anything about what has been happening with USA Basketball in international play? All of our recent teams have featured the best we have, NBA All Stars, there aren't any second-tier guys out there. Greece had no NBA stars on its roster and beat us like a drum for most of the game. The bottom line is, our best basketball players aren't really the best basketball players in the world, no matter how many times you and the press shout we are the most athletice, etc. If we don't know the fundamentals of the game, we don't really got game then do we? That's what all our losing means, guy. Christ.

Let me answer you with another quote, since I'm not really much into sports:


You know it's bad when I have problems remembering which team half the guys in the US team play for, considering how many hours I've spent watching NBA games on TV


OK, no second-tier guys... but are they really the best you have? Any player from any other country (including those who play in the NBA, making mucho bucks more than they could ever make at home) would happily get into fistfights over a chance at the national team. Pau Gasol hasn't been in the last few competitions because his team wouldn't give him permission, not because he didn't want to.

We're sending you Garbajosa now, take good care of him, willya? :)

[Jimmy Chitwood]

I call BS. Guy, haven't you noticed our last few international teams have been made up almost entirely of millionare NBA All Stars? The highest caliber coaches doing their thing? All essentially for free? What is that called if not important?

OK, number one, are you OK? Guy? Were you standing up and shouting as you typed this, or does it just seem like it? Guy? It's not that important to NBA players. It's soooo fucking important that more than half of the guys invited decline. What's that called?

Again, you are flat out wrong, we have been sending NBA All Stars for some time now, from Allen Iverson to Tim Duncan, Dwanye Wade to Lebron James, etc., etc. They are our best.

Neither Duncan nor Iverson was on the team we're talking about. Kobe Bryant. Shaquille O'Neal. McGrady. Paul Pierce. Ray Allen. Michael Redd. Chauncey Billups. Rasheed Wallace. Shawn Marion. Kevin Garnett. Vince Carter. Ever heard of any of those guys? Any of them better than Shane Battier?

Jesus, man, do you know anything about what has been happening with USA Basketball in international play? All of our recent teams have featured the best we have, NBA All Stars, there aren't any second-tier guys out there. Greece had no NBA stars on its roster and beat us like a drum for most of the game. The bottom line is, our best basketball players aren't really the best basketball players in the world, no matter how many times you and the press shout we are the most athletice, etc. If we don't know the fundamentals of the game, we don't really got game then do we? That's what all our losing means, guy. Christ.

OK, guy. See above about the "best we have." Why is it that there are international stars in the NBA, and they don't dominate the inferior American players? Go watch the WNBA if you're so enthralled by below the rim slop played by high school rules, where free throws are the be-all end-all of basketball aesthetics. Christ.

[Jimmy Chitwood]

I would say that no, the NBA doesn't stress defense. I'm also from Detroit and a fan of the way the Pistons and Spurs play. There's your caveat.

The level of defense played on an individual level by any team in the NBA is 1000% tougher than anywhere else. It's not even close. There are teams that are horrible defensively by NBA standards, but that's mostly a coaching/philosophy thing. If you need a player that plays great defense, you're going to find him in the NBA.

As for the rules, I'd say we figure out a happy medium with international rules and NBA rules if the NBA is concerned with putting a great team out there as well. If they aren't, and I don't necessarily think they are, then we should just keep on going.

Well, look. Nobody's saying that international basketball is unfair to US players, or that it's not a level playing field because they haven't adopted enough NBA rules. All I'm saying is that when you add up all the factors I mentioned (short practice time, best players don't play, the game is called differently, other countries care more about international play), it shouldn't be a shock that our teams are occasionally vulnerable. That's not to say we should be losing to Greece, but it's unreasonable, given what we're putting into it, to expect Dream Team level domination.

The international game isn't necessarily better. Emphasis is placed on fundamentals, whereas the NBA game seems to be predicated on...for lack of a better term...marketing.

I hear that a lot. Fundamentals like what? Do you think that, for instance, the Argentinians get lower in their defensive crouch? Did the Greeks pass with two hands, while the Americans kept doing it with one?

You've also pointed to a thing that seriously irks me about the NBA, and that's how an athletic (and highly overrated) player like Mr. Wade can get to the rim and get contact and get many a foul. He runs around with reckless abandon (partly because that's his style of play) and goes to the line so many times per game.

What would you prefer the NBA to look like? Dwyane Wade's going to get to the rim regardless of the circumstances. Nobody in the world can stay in front of him off the dribble. So, you can either ignore the contact and just let people crash into each other four feet off the ground over and over again, or you can blow the whistle when he gets there. Now, by international standards, when there's a six-six guy standing under the basket, and he doesn't move, that's an offensive foul on Wade. The NBA made the decision to go in a different direction -- standing under the basket isn't really very good defense; so you either challenge the shot cleanly, take a charge out away from the rim, or you get called for a foul. What about this seriously irks you? Does everyone really just want to see little skinny guys with long hair throwing bounce passes, taking 20 foot jumpers with perfect rotation, and not getting back on defense?



Also, Mr. Chitwood, would you say that team USA has a fix, or that it's just the level of talent getting internationally better coupled with different rule interpretations doing it in?

Sure, there's a fix, of sorts. We already started it in motion with Colangelo's little three year commitment. Their blueprint is to try to build a team by looking at roles, and getting the best possible player to fill that role, plus a few superstars. Of course, they're severely limited by the fact that a lot of players will either be injured, claim injury, or just flat out say no, which saddled them again with a pretty dysfunctional roster. The international game favors shooters above all else, and we do have them, we just haven't put the right ones on our rosters lately.

It's just a patently obvious fact of life that when guys get paid millions of dollars and all the fame and adulation they could ever want to play a sport, playing the same sport for more scrutiny, less money, and under less, uh, forgiving circumstances, they're going to mostly say no, and that's going to continue to be the toughest thing about building a good international roster. The people running the team also have the American public and media to satisfy, many of whom frankly don't want the US team to win, because it makes a better story and because, just like some people here, apparently, they don't like NBA players. Not that that has anything to do with fixing the team, but it's an additional pressure. My point is, under the circumstances, it's actually pretty hard to fix right away, even though everyone seems to know the problems. We should be doing better, though, obviously.

Also, as an aside, and I should stress that I'm definitely not talking about anyone here -- I feel like there are a lot of people, especially, say, 45 and over, who think basketball, properly played, is a white man's game. That's why I'm sensitive to all the "fundamentals" talk, because out of a lot of people's mouths, that's code. The international game is better = more conducive to the success of people like me.

[Least Original User Name Ever]

I had a response, but the hamsters ate it. God, I hate that. In any case, I was saying that I've heard that criticism about "fundamentals" as a race thing and I agree with it. I've seen some pretty influential sportscasters try to skirt around that one. To me, "fundamentals" means ball movement (with and without the ball, including defense), form, and, to an extent, teamwork. I think that's why Shane Battier was in the mix. He's a definite concession to the people yelling "fundamentals!" at their tv screen.
In any case, here's something (http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/columns/story?columnist=sheridan_chris&id=2572649&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab4pos1) to add to the discussion.

Let me know if you can't access it. I'll send you my ESPN Insider information. God I love the Insider.

[Quercus]

Chitwood-- I think, from my very limited exposure to it, that you're right on in your US international team analysis.
But in the interest of friendly argument...
The NBA made the decision to go in a different direction -- standing under the basket isn't really very good defense; so you either challenge the shot cleanly, take a charge out away from the rim, or you get called for a foul. What about this seriously irks you? Well, what I think irks many is that there's a feeling that the way the NBA game is called, you really have very little chance at the 'challenge the shot cleanly' part of it. Conceptually, I understand and like the idea of forcing defenders to get airborne to challenge the shot, rather than just standing there, but when any airborne contact results in a foul call, it feels less like the NBA is encouraging active defense, and more like the NBA is encouraging dunks at the expense of any defense.

Does everyone really just want to see little skinny guys with long hair throwing bounce passes, taking 20 foot jumpers with perfect rotation, and not getting back on defense?Maybe not everyone, but I wouldn't mind seeing the bit before the not getting back on defense part.

I mean, does everyone really just want to see freakishly tall shaved headed guys having a slam-dunk contest and not getting back on defense?

Also, as an aside, and I should stress that I'm definitely not talking about anyone here -- I feel like there are a lot of people, especially, say, 45 and over, who think basketball, properly played, is a white man's game. That's why I'm sensitive to all the "fundamentals" talk, because out of a lot of people's mouths, that's code. The international game is better = more conducive to the success of people like me. Well, regarding the last sentence, it's probably true that most sports fans prefer a style of play that they themselves are relatively better at. I have no doubt that bigger, stronger people prefer to watch more physical games, while smaller quicker people prefer to watch games with lots of movement and cutting. I admit that myself, I like to see teamwork and smart decisions valued over individual size or speed.
But I argue strongly that -- while it might be in some cases -- preferring to watch a more passing/defense oriented style of basketball is not always grounded in skin color. Sure, I love watching Nash (except, as mentioned, for the not getting back on defense part), but also love to watch Jason Kidd or Magic Johnson pass, or Ben Wallace's defense.
This could get into a discussion of culture versus skin color, and when and how legitimately disliking certain elements of a culture becomes racism and when it doesn't, but I'd rather talk more hoops.

[gonzomax]

The game was transformed by Micheal Jordan. The NBA saw it and made him impossible to guard with the Jordan rules. They keep looking for another to lead them.The NBA limits defense as much as possible.The Comish hated the Pistons rough defense and killed it.
Laimbeer and the Pistons were stopped be referee control.
The latest Piston team was able to let Wallace go because the NBA wont allow a defensive team win in the playoffs. They show all season what they can do ,but the playoffs are different.The game is for the general viewer not the real frans. It is clearly a business.
If we want to win international ball,we must according to ESPN develop a team concept. We have teams. Quit making an all star team and play any good NBA team.

[Marley23]

I say that this will end up being the best plan to not get embarrassed.
They didn't get embarrassed this year. The team that finished sixth in the world championships four years ago got embarrassed. This team played one really crappy game and finished third. With more time together, they'll have to be a favorite in the '08 Olympics. USA basketball tried a different approach this year, and it seems to have worked pretty well to this point.

[GargoyleWB]

The game was transformed by Micheal Jordan. The NBA saw it and made him impossible to guard with the Jordan rules. They keep looking for another to lead them.The NBA limits defense as much as possible.The Comish hated the Pistons rough defense and killed it.
Laimbeer and the Pistons were stopped be referee control.
The latest Piston team was able to let Wallace go because the NBA wont allow a defensive team win in the playoffs....

Agreed completely. Every time that defensive skill and play become prominent, the league kneecaps the defense, first through a shift of referee call preferences, and later with rules tweaks. The NBA likes to keep its unstoppable big men unstoppable, and its showy forwards showy.

Sadly, I'm a fan who loves defensive play, and I stopped watching NBA over the last couple of years out of sheer frustration as static defenders with arms raised motionless get called for hacking fouls when airborne windmilling forwards repeatedly kareen through them.

[brianjedi]

I think it's pretty clear that this U.S. team was much better than the Olympic team that got outplayed.

It seems to me, though, that the biggest problem for the U.S. team is the difference in rules between the NBA and FIBA. The goaltending rules for play around the rim is an adjustment many NBA players can't make right away, and the trapezoidal lane diminishes the importance of having a dominant low-post player.

[Jimmy Chitwood]

I had a response, but the hamsters ate it. God, I hate that. In any case, I was saying that I've heard that criticism about "fundamentals" as a race thing and I agree with it. I've seen some pretty influential sportscasters try to skirt around that one. To me, "fundamentals" means ball movement (with and without the ball, including defense), form, and, to an extent, teamwork. I think that's why Shane Battier was in the mix. He's a definite concession to the people yelling "fundamentals!" at their tv screen.
In any case, here's something (http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/columns/story?columnist=sheridan_chris&id=2572649&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab4pos1) to add to the discussion.

Let me know if you can't access it. I'll send you my ESPN Insider information. God I love the Insider.

I can access it. I think the salient point from that column is this from Colangelo, in re: the questions about the defensive schemes the US used.:


"We have a lot of work to do. And again, we have to build on what transpired here. There were a lot of good things, and there are some things we're going to have to do a little better," Colangelo said.

"You can throw a lot of great players together, but if they don't have a lot of time, I mean years together, it comes back to bite you potentially. So we want to keep a lot of our players together and learn from this experience."

When one side is coached up and comfortable with the way they're going to run an offense and defend, and the other side isn't, that makes a difference. A mediocre college team, in a structured environment, will beat a pickup team made up of the players from better college teams.

Well, what I think irks many is that there's a feeling that the way the NBA game is called, you really have very little chance at the 'challenge the shot cleanly' part of it. Conceptually, I understand and like the idea of forcing defenders to get airborne to challenge the shot, rather than just standing there, but when any airborne contact results in a foul call, it feels less like the NBA is encouraging active defense, and more like the NBA is encouraging dunks at the expense of any defense.

Yeah, the rules favor star players who attack the basket, no question. My point isn't so much that the NBA as an organization is pro-defense; it's that, going back to the OP, NBA-level defense is of a higher caliber than international defense. I think the NBA marketing wing would certainly like higher scores, more dunks, more threes, and so forth, so no argument there. But isn't the natural inference from what you're saying that, left to their own devices, NBA teams are playing pretty good defense? So good that it's actually harming the marketability of the product? Coming out of that environment as an NBA player, and it's going to be tough to play a style where any physical contact is going to be whistled, is all I'm saying.

Maybe not everyone, but I wouldn't mind seeing the bit before the not getting back on defense part.

I mean, does everyone really just want to see freakishly tall shaved headed guys having a slam-dunk contest and not getting back on defense?

It's a fair cop. I will admit that I didn't really have a point there. Phrases like "highly overrated" in conversations like this just burn me up.

Well, regarding the last sentence, it's probably true that most sports fans prefer a style of play that they themselves are relatively better at. I have no doubt that bigger, stronger people prefer to watch more physical games, while smaller quicker people prefer to watch games with lots of movement and cutting. I admit that myself, I like to see teamwork and smart decisions valued over individual size or speed.
But I argue strongly that -- while it might be in some cases -- preferring to watch a more passing/defense oriented style of basketball is not always grounded in skin color. Sure, I love watching Nash (except, as mentioned, for the not getting back on defense part), but also love to watch Jason Kidd or Magic Johnson pass, or Ben Wallace's defense.
This could get into a discussion of culture versus skin color, and when and how legitimately disliking certain elements of a culture becomes racism and when it doesn't, but I'd rather talk more hoops.

You're absolutely right. There is such a thing as quality basketball, and there is such a thing as trash basketball. And disliking trash basketball certainly doesn't make you a racist, regardless of who's playing it. My problem is with the people who do it the other way around -- if you're black, you can't play basketball the "right way." Which, as far as I can tell, involves playing while not being black. And I've been in enough gyms to know that that attitude is all over the place. I've also played enough pickup games in the ghetto to know that, um, there's more involved in playing good basketball than knowing the "right way" to play, because my pick-setting, wrist-snapping, out-boxing, defense-playing ass sure did get busted a few times.

The game was transformed by Micheal Jordan. The NBA saw it and made him impossible to guard with the Jordan rules. They keep looking for another to lead them.The NBA limits defense as much as possible.The Comish hated the Pistons rough defense and killed it.
Laimbeer and the Pistons were stopped be referee control.
The latest Piston team was able to let Wallace go because the NBA wont allow a defensive team win in the playoffs. They show all season what they can do ,but the playoffs are different.The game is for the general viewer not the real frans. It is clearly a business.
If we want to win international ball,we must according to ESPN develop a team concept. We have teams. Quit making an all star team and play any good NBA team.

Couple things. The Jordan Rules involved two key components. The first was the actual (fairly brilliant) defensive scheme, which the Commish certainly didn't "kill." The other was highly illegal, and involved, basically, repeated cheap shots. Would you prefer if the NBA just allowed flagrant fouls as a regular recourse for less talented teams?

Regarding the Pistons and Ben Wallace -- you do realize that the NBA "allowed" them to win the title already, don't you?

[Marley23]

Regarding the Pistons and Ben Wallace -- you do realize that the NBA "allowed" them to win the title already, don't you?
...And they came about as close as you can come to winning a second.