If Cal were coaching team USA..
- Thread starter TNCatfanforever
- Start date
Funny how K gets little attention from the coaches and media.
Hell I could coach these guy's and win Gold!
Hell I could coach these guy's and win Gold!
I don't care that he gets to coach them. As long as the US wins I'm cool with it. If they start losing games then it's an issue. Coach Cal is still recruiting top notch players and getting them to commit. UK is still the "it" program with the best of the best despite this past years hiccups.
Then he would get the same benefit of seeing potential recruits just like that other coach does, but he gets his share of recruits to come to the BBN anyway, and we were all losing our minds this spring, Cal is da man![[winking]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/wink.r191677.gif "Winking [winking]")
Krzyzewski on ESPN: '!'m the luckiest coach in the world.
That right K you can do almost anything and the media & NCAA will turn there heads and let it pass by.
Anyone can hand those Super Stars a basketball and tell them go get .
That right K you can do almost anything and the media & NCAA will turn there heads and let it pass by.
Anyone can hand those Super Stars a basketball and tell them go get .
If you didn't have that cardinal in the background I'd have liked this post....
Not necessarily, Cal couldn't do it with 9-5 stars against a team with zero. Just sayin...
How does it feel to be Butler's bitch?
Also, this was a "new car" the last time IU won a title. Come back here when your program stops being such a joke.
Last edited:
I think I would file 4 final fours in 5 years under getting it done
I too agree.
How would team UK do in the Olympics. Gold, probably not. But I think they would medal.
C: Cousins
PF: Davis
SF: ?
2G: ?
PG: Wall
bench possibilities: Towns, WCS, Noel, Patterson, Jones, Lyles, MKG, Knight, Bledsoe, Booker, Aaron H, Andrew H, Meeks
How does it feel to be Butler's bitch?
Also, this was a "new car" the last time IU won a title. Come back here when your program stops being such a joke.
They would be by far the most talented team, but would be slightly vulnerable because of shooting concerns in a win or go home format.
You would possibly start Bledsoe and Meeks beside Wall. Use MKG for energy off the bench.
Knight almost has to be a backup, because both he and Wall need the ball to be most effective. Wall easily wins that battle.
L
How does it feel to be Butler's bitch?
Also, this was a "new car" the last time IU won a title. Come back here when your program stops being such a joke.
Even as an IU fan, had to laugh at that. White walls, nice! Hey I can still break out the old VCR and watch the 87 tape. Sigh.How does it feel to be Butler's bitch?
Also, this was a "new car" the last time IU won a title. Come back here when your program stops being such a joke.
Well, you all have that down to a science.I guess it feels like being a badger bitch.
Cal couldn't do it with 9 5 stars guys ONE/2 years out of HIGH School? Is that what you are saying?
MY nostradamus prediction: Cal will coach the USA team after Coach K with Coach K's recommendation. There is some Respect between the 2.
Absolutely. It had nothing to do with the following realities. Special K is just that good.
Or, in part...
K benefitted from a more developed group of stars than the one that was chosen in 2004. Would you agree with that? I'm not sure he should get the full credit for coaching as much as the entire system - including partially K - should get credit for better talent deciding to play and coaches having a better pool to choose from. Guys like Ray Allen were afraid to play because of the 9-11 attacks.
Guys who had just finished their rookie campaigns included Dewayne Wade, LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony. None of them were the players they are considered now. Not by a long shot.
Wade was a 16ppg rookie.
LeBron James was a 21ppg, 42% shooter that season. He didn't even breach 30% on his three-point attempts.
Carmelo averaged 21ppg on 43% shooting.
Boozer was a second year guy at 15ppg.
Okafor had never even played an NBA game yet.
Jefferson was an 18ppg scorer, but also was probably the best shooter on the team at 36% and 48 total three pointers his third year in the league (which is incredibly mediocre, especially by foreign standards). He was a default pick for the team after guys like Kobe, Allen, and McGrady said, "no thanks."
The 2004 team had an almost complete lack of shooters on its roster - a significant aspect when facing the ever-evolving foreign basketball landscape of the early to mid 2000s. It also was noticeably deficient in terms of lead guards who could actually run a team.
Marion shot 34% from three in the NBA in 03-04.
Iverson shot 29% from three that NBA year.
Marbury was a 32% three point shooter that year.
Odom was a 29% three point shooter that season.
Stoudamire was a second year 20 year old coming off a season in which he has missed 27 games.
All of these realities are significant when comparing what the 2004 team dealt with verses what K now has at his disposal.
Should K get credit? Yes, but let's keep an objective head in the argument and remember that the talent level now is far greater than the one employed in 2000 and 2004.
There was never any excuse for Team USA to walk away with anything less than gold. Ever. Regardless of the talent we have now in the fold, our entire team was made up of NBA players in 2000 and 2004. No other country in those tournaments could say that, yet we still lost twice. The talent was certainly there, just not a lack of focus, commitment and accountability. Those are the three things I credit Coach K with the most. Getting a group of pampered stars to buy into a team philosophy, share the ball, and work as one is not a piece of cake. As much as many want to believe they could just roll the ball out there and win a gold because LeBron et al. are on the team, it simply isn't that easy.
Instead of turning this into an anti-Duke and anti-K thing, I wish people would simply support our team and be thankful that order has been restored in the world of international basketball.
Except this argument positions the world in terms of its abilities in the 1980s and early 1990s. By the early 2000s, the world had become significantly better in basketball - with teams and talent quite capable of taking down a poor configuration of American-based NBA talent - which the 2004 team certainly constituted.
Your implication that any random conglomerate of American players should presently (or in 2000 and 2004) take home the gold is misleading. The 2004 team had virtually no shooters and Iverson/Marbury as its principal ball-distributors. While at the time it was disappointing that they lost, retrospectively it hardly comes as a shock given their personnel.
When Tubby was coaching for Team USA, this board was full posts saying it was distracting him from summer recruiting and bad for the program. Funny how things change.
Similar threads
