Sports Media Review by Jonathan Weiler

Wednesday, July 26, 2006
8:13:00 AM EDT
The reviews are in, and they’ve been uniformly positive . Under the direction of USA basketball’s Jerry Colangelo and Coach Mike Krzyzewski, the US is determined to reverse a relative decline in its international fortunes, including the sixth place debacle at the 2002 World Championships and the universally criticized bronze medal 2004 Olympic team. As reported in USA Today last week, new approach starts with a dramatically different approach to roster construction: 

“Since NBA players began competing in the World Championships and Olympics, an All-Star team has been picked without regard to almost anything else. Players were not asked to try out, simply handed spots on the team.

Those days are over. The 24 players on the national team roster -- from which 12 will be chosen for the teams that compete in the World Championships and the Olympics -- are a varied collection of young and old stars and role players.

Luke Ridnour (11.5 points a game last season), Chris Paul, last season's NBA rookie of the year, Kirk Hinrich and defensive specialists Bruce Bowen (7.5 points) and former Duke star Shane Battier (10.1 points) would never have been considered under the stars-only system. But they are the types of players Krzyzewski said will help make this a real team. ”

This new emphasis is, in part, a reflection of the difference between the way international basketball is played and the way it’s played in the NBA. As quoted in the LA Times, Coach K believes that:

“"The biggest difference between the international game and the NBA game is the fact you have to face a lot of continuity offenses…You have to be able to talk and communicate as a team, and not just one or two individuals. We'll have to change some habits.

"A lot of times in the NBA, all the isolations preclude you from having too much help-side defense. Nothing precludes that in international basketball. There's no defensive three-second call."

The LA Times also notes:

“Krzyzewski is zeroed in on the Xs. American NBA stars have struggled defensively in international play, seemingly befuddled by other teams' offensive movement and centers who shoot the three-pointer, sometimes off the fastbreak.”

And, according to multiple accounts, Coach K couldn’t be happier. From Andy Katz at ESPN.com:

"Simplicity will be the beauty of the team," Krzyzewski said. "We're making the extra pass in practice. These guys are really excited about playing with each other because the guy on the other end can catch the pass. It's like a musician who is playing with other talented musicians and we're having a little bit of a jam session."

But, of course, it’s about far more than x’s and o’s(again Katz):

“Everything is in concert with this squad, so far. Even down to the clothes they will be wearing.

USA Basketball national team director Jerry Colangelo ordered up tailored sport coats, shirts and slacks for the squad to wear during official functions in Asia. USA spokesperson Craig Miller said there was a conscious effort to have a uniform look after there were complaints when a few members of the team wore do-rags in front of a Serbian delegation in 2004.”

William Rhoden, in the New York Times also sees something bigger lesson in the apparent demise of USA basketball, calling it an “instructive lesson about complacency and what happens when greatness is taken for granted.”

And, Mike Wise, in the Washington Post says:

“Krzyzewski was brought in to prepare and coach the U.S. national team. But on a deeper level, Coach K is supposed to perform an exorcism of endorsement-driven selfishness, to rid the game of its AND1-gotta-get-mine mentality in hopes that the United States might one day share the basketball again and perhaps not get beat by Olympic powerhouses like Puerto Rico. When you lose to a U.S. territory at the Athens Games, something has gone awry.”

The approach appears sound, and the extraordinary improvement in international basketball just since 1992 has certainly warranted thinking more seriously about building a real program, rather than throwing together a team at the last minute. But, the morality tale aspects of this story are, as is often the case in these matters, overstated. The 1992 team was exceptional for a number of reasons. One, it happened to represent perhaps the greatest elite cohort in the history of NBA basketball. The presence of Magic, Michael and Bird on the same team is an extraordinary enough fact, and combining those three all-time greats with other top-50 all-time players like Scottie Pippen, Charles Barkley and Patrick Ewing, not to mention David Robinson in his prime, created an almost unimaginable collection of talent. Another point about the 1992 team is that everyone showed up. This no longer happens. The 2004 team had to make due without Shaq, Kobe, Kevin Garnett, Jason Kidd and Tracy McGrady. No one will ever convince me that the Puerto Ricos and Argentinas of the world would have won against a frontline of Garnett, Duncan and Shaq in 2004, regardless of all of the so-called “me-first” attitude problems of the modern culture of the NBA. The current team, incidentally, is also being forced to make due without many top stars, with Kobe currently sidelined because of surgery and Garnett and Tim Duncan having declined to play.

Then there’s the tendency to attack the players for attributes that are themselves a direct reflection of the NBA’s own global marketing strategy. David Stern did not set out to make the world safe for American-driven basketball by emphasizing teamwork, role players, and unselfishness. He sought to market megastars, individuals who were so transcendent that they stood above mere mortals and the teams that those mere mortals populated. Star power, not anonymous toil, has been the centerpiece of NBA marketing.

What’s happened since 1992 is that the rest of the world has improved dramatically. The consequence is that the NBA’s third string all-stars are no longer mortal locks to win international competitions. Under such circumstances, the US does need to sweat the details – to think about constructing a team better suited to the different rules of international basketball, to mirror other countries’ national teams tendency to play together over many years, and to extract a multi-year, rather than multi-week commitment from players. Again, this is all sound thinking. But, as I pointed out a few weeks ago, the evidence for greater selfishness in and declining fundamental soundness in NBA does not stand up to scrutiny (http://journals.aol.com/sportsmediaguy/SportsMediaReview/entries/103),  even if the players playing basketball nowadays appear less respectful of authority than was once the case.

The main problem in 2004 was that the team shot miserably from 3-point range, and perimeter offense and defense are central to success in international competition. The lack of outside shooting was the primary problem for the 1988 team that prompted the Dream team phenomenon in the first place. In other words, in tactical terms, the team’s problems in 2004 were not a matter of generational character: they were a long festering strategic one, based on a changing style of play in the NBA, the improvement of international basketball and the absence of many of the country’s best players from international competition. Then there was Larry Brown, whose demise Rhoden traces to to Athens. Brown bickered with Marbury (did Isiah not notice this?), refused to play his best players (Le Bron and Wade) and alienated Carmelo Anthony.

The very cohesion and esprit de corps of the current camps puts the lie to the attitude problem line. 'Do rags or not, NBA players are fully capable of doing what they’re asked to do. I am guessing that Coach K understands this.

 

 

 

Written by sportsmediaguy Blog about this entry |  Add to del.icio.us |  digg this

This entry has 0 comments: (Add your own)