# Fixing US Basketball **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [September 4, 2006, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fixing-us-basketball/371342 "2006-09-04T00:38:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![brianjedi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3be4f8/32.png) [@brianjedi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianjedi)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2006, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fixing-us-basketball/371342/21 "2006-09-05T18:49:22Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2006, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fixing-us-basketball/371342/22 "2006-09-05T22:23:56Z")
[QUOTE=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. [/QUOTE] 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. > [@Quercus](#): > > 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. > [@Quercus](#): > > 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. > [@Quercus](#): > > 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. [QUOTE=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. [/QUOTE] 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? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fixing-us-basketball/371342/23 "2006-09-06T06:10:10Z")
[QUOTE=Jimmy Chitwood] Regarding the Pistons and Ben Wallace – you do realize that the NBA “allowed” them to win the title already, don’t you? [/QUOTE] …And they came about as close as you can come to winning a second. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fixing-us-basketball/371342.md?page=1)