USA Basketball: The Gold Standard?

Disclaimer #1: I love USA Basketball. I want to watch every game, scrimmage, practice, etc. One of the coolest things about my former boss, Dan Hays of Oklahoma Christian University, is that he used to be the NAIA rep to USA Basketball. I would love to be that person some day. So all of my comments are meant to be unbiased, thoughts about the organization, team, and the games they play. I hope they beat Spain by 40 (mostly just so Michael Redd gets to play more...my new favorite player that's not a Spur or played for Texas).

The USA Senior Men's National Team advanced to face Spain in a rematch for the gold medal today. But it was hardly the kind of game that made you think they were clicking on all cylinders. The win over Argentina was odd in several ways:

First, Manu Ginobili, Argentina's best player and MVP, went out early with an ankle injury and didn't return. Yet, Argentina weathered the storm and cut a 20+ deficit to 6 just before the half. Argentina was led by Luis Scola and Carlos Delfino, two NBA role players that looked like All-Stars against the USA defense. Scola was basically "given" to Houston by the Spurs because they already had Scola's Argentine teammate, Olberto. My thought was that he must not be a contributor since the Spurs are widely-regarded as the best evaluator of foreign talent. Seems to me he's a lot better than Olberto. Delfino was supposedly going to be the focal point of USA's defensive game plan and drew Kobe Bryant as his defender. But he hit shot after shot to keep the game interesting.

As a coach, I've found that teams play better without their best player at times. I hated seeing the opponents best player leave with an injury because I knew it would be immediately followed by a let down from my team, as brief as it may be. Whether it is just role players getting a chance to show their skills or a lapse in intensity by the opposition can be debated. But Argentina made their comeback after Ginobili went out.

The second thing to me that is odd is how USA is being praised for outplaying their opponents. They are supposedly making the necessary adjustments against the zone, etc. To me, they are just winning on talent and athleticism, not coaching or adjustments per se. They miss FT's at an alarming rate, but then get the offensive rebound. They miss 3's but then get the offensive board. Instead, they get Lebron going to the basket or lob the ball to Howard who dunks on 3 people...these aren't adjustments, it's just talent.

Disclaimer #2: (This disclaimer is brought to you by Tim Tibbles) I am a shooter. I love shooting. I think that shooting is the best part of basketball, and thus, feel that if you are a shooter, you should be playing. Read on...

Odd thing #3: An actual substitution by the USA based on need, not just rotation. I must finally give some credit to Coach K...he finally gave Michael Redd some time in the 2nd quarter during Argentina's comeback and the sputtering offense and shooting of the US . He didn't score, in fact I don't think he even took a shot. But as I've previously discussed, he opened up some things just by being on the floor and making somebody stay close to him. Just last night in pickup ball my defender was getting yelled at for not giving help on penetration. He just laughed at the guy and said, "What am I gonna do? I'm not going to leave Rob! I'm not going to leave a shooter!"

But the best example I heard was during a WNBA game between the Sparks and the Mystics earlier this year. The commentator said that former Mystics coach Richie Adubato used to tell 3-point champ Laurie Koehn to stand up from the bench against the Detroit Shock when they'd go zone, because coach Bill Laimbeer was so scared of Koehn's shooting he'd immediately go back to man to man. Adubato would just tell Koehn to sit back down. The power of shooting!

Disclaimer #3: I like Coach K. I think he's a great coach, in fact I've even been a closet Duke fan in the past. I liked the Hurley years, loved Reddick, hated Battier. But Coach K...great coach.

Last odd thing: I'm sick of hearing Doug Collins lauding Coach K for "not feeling like he has to play everybody." That's fine for the Dream Team not playing Laettner, but this was supposed to be a team put together for specific needs. Besides the "stars," Tayshaun Prince is a defender, Boozer is a hard-nosed worker and banger, and of course you know about Michael Redd. But these guys are not being used in the tournament for the skills they bring to the table. Coach K quoted Bobby Knight as telling him "remember that you're a good enough coach to coach them." So if that's the case, coach the team. I think that he's caught up in the hype a little bit. Most coaches I know have a "zone team" they roll out, especially if the offense is struggling. How hard is it to sub Redd for one of the 2 point guards they insist on playing together?

On a personal note, I think that Carlos Boozer is getting the raw end of the Coach K deal. Here's why: when I was coaching high school girls, I had a group of 5 seniors that started the first half of the season, with a junior guard and sophomore post as subs. Late in the year I decided to insert the sophomore post in the starting lineup to go "big" and because she was easily going to be the best of the bunch when it was all said and done. So who to sit? Do I sit the 4-year started? No. She'd "earned the right" to start. Right? Do I sit my best defender. No. I might lose her because she can lose her head sometimes to frustration. So I sit personal favorite player, although she might be our most fundamental player. But I knew she could handle the "demotion" and would still give me the same effort whether starting, playing, or not. I think that this is the case with Coach K and Boozer. He's sitting because of familiarity, understanding, trust, and comfort. Not saying that he should play ahead of Howard or Bosh, but only getting scrub minutes at the end of 20-30 point blowouts? I just get the feeling that if he hadn't played for K at Duke he wouldn't be sitting so much.