The Dream Team and this summer's Team USA outfit are the very definition of apples and oranges, and the apple is a shocking 15-years old at this point; but it is only natural that we try to compare (and contrast) the two greatest collections of hoops talent we've ever seen.
The many significant changes and shifts in the basketball landscape have left us with two entirely different types of games to discuss, and an entirely different set of circumstances to ponder when heading into tournaments or breaking down the outcome post-medal round. Of paramount importance is the fact that the international competition Team USA faces today is 10 times better than what we saw in 1992, even though no actual evidence of such was on display in Las Vegas over the last few weeks. Beyond that, the attitudes of the observers have shifted the way we look at these teams. Let's start the comparison, with a look at the latter.
Attitude: Whether by the team's own fault or our evolving sense of what invigorates or enervates, Team USA has been up against it for over a decade now. America's razor-thin sense of patience when it comes to pro basketball plays a big part, but the downfall probably started with the 1994 group that won the World Championship. That group was nearly as dominant and just as haughty as the original Dream Team; but the general public seemed to afford Charles Barkley and Michael Jordan a bit more leeway to exult after a transition throwdown than, say, Larry Johnson and Dominique Wilkins.
By 1996, a less-charismatic gold-winning outfit was met with a yawn, as if winning by 58 points wasn't enough. In fact, discovered on an 11-year old cassette in my living room this summer was this exchange from SportsCenter, following a Dream Team highlight package:
Dan Patrick: Is it just me, or is it not that much fun anymore?Keith Olbermann: It's not just you.
So, by 2000, Team USA's brand of pro-style ball was lacking that imperceptible sense of "whatever" that pushes the bulk of the American public into "I'm sincerely enjoying this," and away from "I will warily regard this and make snide comments about it to anyone who will listen."
The 2000 gold medal win was met with a Saturday Night Live faux-commercial that seemed to be written before the tournament ever started, detailing the team's supposedly distasteful on-court manners (the kicker was a freeze-frame shot of Shareef Abdur-Rahim, a lovely gent who probably doesn't go to see PG-13 rated movies, purportedly in an opponent's face). The 2002 team was poorly-constructed, the 2004 outfit was poorly-coached, and the 2006 team wasn't told what the rest of the world already knew: Greek guard Vassilis Spanoulis cannot shoot. So here we are. Make-up time.Competition: It's much, much better. And, as we saw in 2006, it's made all the more better when you don't scout the competition properly; because overrating a player's talents is always as damaging to your cause as underrating a player's skill set. Nowhere was this more apparent than in Team USA's loss to Greece last year, when Coach Mike Krzyzewski had his guards go over the top of every screen-and-roll Greece threw at Team USA, in spite of Greece's poor precision from the perimeter. The result was Spanoulis getting sent to the line for a pair of three-shot fouls, and a banked-in three once the adrenaline started pumping. After that, Team USA started sending two players at the Greek guards while Sofoklis Schortsianitis and Lazaros Papadopoulos rolled toward the hoop for the score.It was a telling scene. The brains behind Team USA, and the coaches who ran the show in 2002 and 2004 had spent so much time underestimating the abilities of its international counterparts, that the 2006 version had taken to assuming that every international player was a made 3-pointer waiting to happen. In 15 years, Team USA had gone from not needing to know the opponent until the day of a game, to wildly overestimating its own station on the international stage, to overestimating the opponent and playing not to lose.
Team 2007: The one that got it right; and, luckily, the one that has had the easiest schedule on its way toward the medal round since Barcelona. This was a strong team, easily the most talented team since the 1992 (or 1960) model, and one that would have given the Dream Team fits with its international-style play. Instead of cobbling together a roster or jump-hook artists or lane-penetrators ill-fit for international tournaments, Team USA president Jerry Colangelo drew in a series of tall wing players that could get off a host of 3-point shots without having to run an exacting play.
This is important. In spite of iffy footwork and a perimeter touch that comes and goes, someone like LeBron James can get off a solid 3-point look on the basis of his jumping ability and height alone. Spurred on by that, and an improving stroke (LBJ isn't fading before the release), James hit an astounding 23 out of 37 looks (62 percent) from long-range.
The rest of his team followed suit, nailing an average of about 15-of-31 three-pointers per game. The Dream Team hit on about 7-of-17 per game, still nice, but nowhere near the sort of internationally-inspired barrage the 2007 model mustered. The offense is back, no worries there. It's the other side of the ball that still worries.
Defense: The D was better than the 2004 and 2006 showings, but there are still holes, and stopping opponents needs to be the first thing on Team USA's mind when it ships off to Beijing next year. It's rarely fun to read or write about defending opponents most Americans have never heard of, so you didn't hear much about this particular weakness heading into the Tournament of the Americas, but it was the reason Team USA fell short of the gold last year.Working with a smaller lineup, Coach Krzyzewski sacrificed sound interior D for the chance to go with James or Carmelo Anthony at the power forward last summer, and he paid dearly for it. With the floor spread and either Elton Brand or Dwight Howard pulled away from the basket by a sweet-shooting big, James or Anthony had to act as Team USA's help-side defender for the bulk of the game, and they had nary a clue as to how to focus on the other side of the court while guarding their man, and then having to dash into the paint to guard the rim in a moment's notice.
It wasn't their fault, James and Anthony hadn't been forced into anything close to resembling that sort of role in their basketball lifetimes, and the results were what you'd expect. This year? They improved, and Team USA's fortunes were along for the ride. And compared to the Dream Team, which couldn't be bothered to play anything more than obvious passing lane defense unless Toni Kukoc was in the building, it was an impressive feat for this batch of youngsters.
Place in history: 2007's run was not what you'd call an inspiring turn, as there were actually more eventual NBA players (seven) amongst the silver and bronze medalists in 1992 than there were (five) this summer. But the team itself, it's improving acumen at covering all parts of the floor and ability to hit for astoundingly-good percentages (47 percent, in fact) from behind the three-point line might just be the best internationally-styled Team USA we've seen.
As great as the Dream Team was, the talents were fading. Magic Johnson had just come out of retirement, Larry Bird was about to enter retirement, John Stockton was hurt, and Christian Laettner actually suited up. Talents like Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Chris Mullin, and David Robinson would have thrived in any international setting, but you'd have to wonder how the team's leading scorer (Charles Barkley) would have fared when placed in today's tournament climate. Many who have dared doubt the Chuckster came out on the losing end, but he'd have to do his best work facing the basket, and all the flopping would leave Barkley in a pretty foul mood, so to speak.
One thing the Dream Team has over the 2007 model, and probably it's most endearing on-court quality, is the ability to score in transition.
The 2007 team gathered dozens of fast-break points, but most were off advantages that would have seen the 1992 Angolan squad throwing it down. After years of working in static NBA offenses and being told to walk the ball up court after gathering a rebound, today's NBA player is out of place in the transition game. The threat of a flopping "1" in the 3-on-1 situation doesn't help, either, in international or NBA play.
The many significant changes and shifts in the basketball landscape have left us with two entirely different types of games to discuss, and an entirely different set of circumstances to ponder when heading into tournaments or breaking down the outcome post-medal round. Of paramount importance is the fact that the international competition Team USA faces today is 10 times better than what we saw in 1992, even though no actual evidence of such was on display in Las Vegas over the last few weeks. Beyond that, the attitudes of the observers have shifted the way we look at these teams. Let's start the comparison, with a look at the latter.
Attitude: Whether by the team's own fault or our evolving sense of what invigorates or enervates, Team USA has been up against it for over a decade now. America's razor-thin sense of patience when it comes to pro basketball plays a big part, but the downfall probably started with the 1994 group that won the World Championship. That group was nearly as dominant and just as haughty as the original Dream Team; but the general public seemed to afford Charles Barkley and Michael Jordan a bit more leeway to exult after a transition throwdown than, say, Larry Johnson and Dominique Wilkins.
By 1996, a less-charismatic gold-winning outfit was met with a yawn, as if winning by 58 points wasn't enough. In fact, discovered on an 11-year old cassette in my living room this summer was this exchange from SportsCenter, following a Dream Team highlight package:
Dan Patrick: Is it just me, or is it not that much fun anymore?Keith Olbermann: It's not just you.
So, by 2000, Team USA's brand of pro-style ball was lacking that imperceptible sense of "whatever" that pushes the bulk of the American public into "I'm sincerely enjoying this," and away from "I will warily regard this and make snide comments about it to anyone who will listen."
The 2000 gold medal win was met with a Saturday Night Live faux-commercial that seemed to be written before the tournament ever started, detailing the team's supposedly distasteful on-court manners (the kicker was a freeze-frame shot of Shareef Abdur-Rahim, a lovely gent who probably doesn't go to see PG-13 rated movies, purportedly in an opponent's face). The 2002 team was poorly-constructed, the 2004 outfit was poorly-coached, and the 2006 team wasn't told what the rest of the world already knew: Greek guard Vassilis Spanoulis cannot shoot. So here we are. Make-up time.Competition: It's much, much better. And, as we saw in 2006, it's made all the more better when you don't scout the competition properly; because overrating a player's talents is always as damaging to your cause as underrating a player's skill set. Nowhere was this more apparent than in Team USA's loss to Greece last year, when Coach Mike Krzyzewski had his guards go over the top of every screen-and-roll Greece threw at Team USA, in spite of Greece's poor precision from the perimeter. The result was Spanoulis getting sent to the line for a pair of three-shot fouls, and a banked-in three once the adrenaline started pumping. After that, Team USA started sending two players at the Greek guards while Sofoklis Schortsianitis and Lazaros Papadopoulos rolled toward the hoop for the score.It was a telling scene. The brains behind Team USA, and the coaches who ran the show in 2002 and 2004 had spent so much time underestimating the abilities of its international counterparts, that the 2006 version had taken to assuming that every international player was a made 3-pointer waiting to happen. In 15 years, Team USA had gone from not needing to know the opponent until the day of a game, to wildly overestimating its own station on the international stage, to overestimating the opponent and playing not to lose.
Team 2007: The one that got it right; and, luckily, the one that has had the easiest schedule on its way toward the medal round since Barcelona. This was a strong team, easily the most talented team since the 1992 (or 1960) model, and one that would have given the Dream Team fits with its international-style play. Instead of cobbling together a roster or jump-hook artists or lane-penetrators ill-fit for international tournaments, Team USA president Jerry Colangelo drew in a series of tall wing players that could get off a host of 3-point shots without having to run an exacting play.
This is important. In spite of iffy footwork and a perimeter touch that comes and goes, someone like LeBron James can get off a solid 3-point look on the basis of his jumping ability and height alone. Spurred on by that, and an improving stroke (LBJ isn't fading before the release), James hit an astounding 23 out of 37 looks (62 percent) from long-range.
The rest of his team followed suit, nailing an average of about 15-of-31 three-pointers per game. The Dream Team hit on about 7-of-17 per game, still nice, but nowhere near the sort of internationally-inspired barrage the 2007 model mustered. The offense is back, no worries there. It's the other side of the ball that still worries.
Defense: The D was better than the 2004 and 2006 showings, but there are still holes, and stopping opponents needs to be the first thing on Team USA's mind when it ships off to Beijing next year. It's rarely fun to read or write about defending opponents most Americans have never heard of, so you didn't hear much about this particular weakness heading into the Tournament of the Americas, but it was the reason Team USA fell short of the gold last year.Working with a smaller lineup, Coach Krzyzewski sacrificed sound interior D for the chance to go with James or Carmelo Anthony at the power forward last summer, and he paid dearly for it. With the floor spread and either Elton Brand or Dwight Howard pulled away from the basket by a sweet-shooting big, James or Anthony had to act as Team USA's help-side defender for the bulk of the game, and they had nary a clue as to how to focus on the other side of the court while guarding their man, and then having to dash into the paint to guard the rim in a moment's notice.
It wasn't their fault, James and Anthony hadn't been forced into anything close to resembling that sort of role in their basketball lifetimes, and the results were what you'd expect. This year? They improved, and Team USA's fortunes were along for the ride. And compared to the Dream Team, which couldn't be bothered to play anything more than obvious passing lane defense unless Toni Kukoc was in the building, it was an impressive feat for this batch of youngsters.
Place in history: 2007's run was not what you'd call an inspiring turn, as there were actually more eventual NBA players (seven) amongst the silver and bronze medalists in 1992 than there were (five) this summer. But the team itself, it's improving acumen at covering all parts of the floor and ability to hit for astoundingly-good percentages (47 percent, in fact) from behind the three-point line might just be the best internationally-styled Team USA we've seen.
As great as the Dream Team was, the talents were fading. Magic Johnson had just come out of retirement, Larry Bird was about to enter retirement, John Stockton was hurt, and Christian Laettner actually suited up. Talents like Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Chris Mullin, and David Robinson would have thrived in any international setting, but you'd have to wonder how the team's leading scorer (Charles Barkley) would have fared when placed in today's tournament climate. Many who have dared doubt the Chuckster came out on the losing end, but he'd have to do his best work facing the basket, and all the flopping would leave Barkley in a pretty foul mood, so to speak.
One thing the Dream Team has over the 2007 model, and probably it's most endearing on-court quality, is the ability to score in transition.
The 2007 team gathered dozens of fast-break points, but most were off advantages that would have seen the 1992 Angolan squad throwing it down. After years of working in static NBA offenses and being told to walk the ball up court after gathering a rebound, today's NBA player is out of place in the transition game. The threat of a flopping "1" in the 3-on-1 situation doesn't help, either, in international or NBA play.
For the Dream Team, the creative pass and perfect finish came by second nature; and that's where Magic's leadership and Bird's outlet passes helped. And, though you can't qualify this as a negative on the 2007 side (unless it lost, of course), the team's overpassing and deference was an obstacle the Dream Team never had to overcome. The Dream Team knew when it was time to finish, whereas the 2007 team (as it was for several Team USA outfits preceding it) too-often overlooked an easy bucket for a chance to throw one more perfect lob to Dwight Howard.
So you have to be happy with what you have - two teams of their times. The Dream Team's charisma and willingness to dominate was precisely the sort of ambassadorship the game needed to kick an already-burgeoning (and somewhat fractured, with the Yugoslavia conflict and breakup of the Soviet Union) international scene into gear, and create the sort of style of play that the 2007 team was built to counter. The shape of things may be a turn-off to some, but to these eyes, I can't wait for Beijing.
by Kelly Dwyer
SI.COM
No comments:
Post a Comment