If Cal were coaching team USA..

[Son_Of_Saul]

MY nostradamus prediction: Cal will coach the USA team after Coach K with Coach K's recommendation. There is some Respect between the 2.

Except K will probably hold onto that lofty perch until he's in his eighties. He doesn't seem to want to go anywhere. As a military man, he seems to have the military mindset of a regimental approach to life. I'm not sure he's mentally capable of anything other than his current pattern of life.

I don't mean that as a knock. I'll just be surprised if he calls it quits in the next five years or so. I could see this fellow going the distance.

 

[Mark Gastineau]

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.

thumbs up

 

[Mark Gastineau]

I'm not sure he's mentally capable of anything other than his current pattern of life.

Considering his vast accomplishments as a coach at both Duke and for Team USA, as well as his service to our country and his countless charitable contributions, not to mention the huge amount of money he has made, we should all be so lucky.

 

[Mark Gastineau]

By the early 2000s, the world had become significantly better in basketball.

Yet only Team USA fielded a squad comprised solely of NBA talent. Again, there was no excuse for us to lose in 2002 or 2004.

 

[UKvisitor]

Will there come a time when the BEST for the USA team is ALL Kentucky former players? Oh yea, Real possibility. It has been before. It was long before most born.

 

[Mark Gastineau]

Will there come a time when the BEST for the USA team is ALL Kentucky former players?

Despite the amount of talent ya'll have put into the league, the chance of this happening for any school is completely non-existent. Guys like Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, James Harden, and Steph Curry will be suiting up for Team USA for the foreseeable future.

 

[UK90]

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.

I notice your little roster assessment there completely fails to mention that team's starting big man--a fella by the name of Tim Duncan, who was merely at his absolute apex and widely considered the best player in the world at the time. I'm sorry, but with a roster with the likes of Tim Duncan, Allen Iverson, Lebron, Carmelo, Marion, Wade, Amare, etc., I'm not real sympathetic to this line of reasoning. The problem was not raw talent--they still obviously had by far more of that than any other country in those Olympics--yet rolled over like dogs anyways.

And, frankly, I find these type attempts to discredit the job Coach K has done with Team USA to be sadly petty stuff. I'd point out that the 02 and 04 teams did not just lose, instead they got HUMILIATED, losing six games between them (hell, the 02 team finished in friggin SIXTH place), so obviously there's a lot more to it than just turning the NBA stars loose. Coach K's done a tremendous job getting these guys to come together, sacrifice and accept diminished roles, and play together as a team in a way the 02 and 04 coaches clearly could not.

 

[lacocat]

If Cal were coaching Team USA... ESPN would start openly supporting Team Canada.

 

[Mark Gastineau]

I notice your little roster assessment there completely fails to mention that team's starting big man--a fella by the name of Tim Duncan, who was merely at his absolute apex and widely considered the best player in the world at the time. I'm sorry, but with a roster with the likes of Tim Duncan, Allen Iverson, Lebron, Carmelo, Marion, Wade, Amare, etc., I'm not real sympathetic to this line of reasoning. The problem was not raw talent--they still obviously had by far more of that than any other country in those Olympics--yet rolled over like dogs anyways.

And, frankly, I find these type attempts to discredit the job Coach K has done with Team USA to be sadly petty stuff. I'd point out that the 02 and 04 teams did not just lose, instead they got HUMILIATED, losing six games between them (hell, the 02 team finished in friggin SIXTH place), so obviously there's a lot more to it than just turning the NBA stars loose. Coach K's done a tremendous job getting these guys to come together, sacrifice and accept dimished roles, and play together as a team in a way the 02 and 04 coaches clearly could not.

THANK YOU!!!!

 

[Mark Gastineau]

If Cal were coaching Team USA... ESPN would start openly supporting Team Canada.

I'm going to assume this is sarcasm.

 

[michaeluk26]

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.

Also, most of the players made it clear that they really did not want to even be there after the 9/11 attacks. It took
a lot of pressure to even field the 2004 team as most openly complained to be significantly worried about security.

 

[Mark Gastineau]

Also, most of the players made it clear that they really did not want to even be there after the 9/11 attacks. It took
a lot of pressure to even field the 2004 team as most openly complained to be significantly worried about security.

Wait, what? Do you have an article to back this point up? This is the first time I've ever heard something along these lines.

 

[n8lbs]

I really don't get the victim complex here. UK has been the most successful program since Calipari arrived, and yet you still complain. It's called brush it off.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

I notice your little roster assessment there completely fails to mention that team's starting big man--a fella by the name of Tim Duncan, who was merely at his absolute apex and widely considered the best player in the world at the time. I'm sorry, but with a roster with the likes of Tim Duncan, Allen Iverson, Lebron, Carmelo, Marion, Wade, Amare, etc., I'm not real sympathetic to this line of reasoning. The problem was not raw talent--they still obviously had by far more of that than any other country in those Olympics--yet rolled over like dogs anyways.

And, frankly, I find these type attempts to discredit the job Coach K has done with Team USA to be sadly petty stuff. I'd point out that the 02 and 04 teams did not just lose, instead they got HUMILIATED, losing six games between them (hell, the 02 team finished in friggin SIXTH place), so obviously there's a lot more to it than just turning the NBA stars loose. Coach K's done a tremendous job getting these guys to come together, sacrifice and accept diminished roles, and play together as a team in a way the 02 and 04 coaches clearly could not.

I'm well accustomed with your argument about the '04 team because you've made it, albeit subjectively, in the past.

I have given K credit, but the implication that he is the main cog in revolutionizing Team USA, is misleading. He's one part of the whole Team USA culture that has transformed. The reasons for that transformation are indeed arguable. Hence this current disagreement about the difference in talent levels for these teams.

As for comparisons, you apparently place a high level of value on rookie- or near-rookie - level versions of James, Wade, and Anthony. I simply do not. You also seem to put a high level of value on Marbury and Iverson acting as principal ball handlers on a team in desperate need of ball distribution. I do not. You think a team devoid of high level shooters can flourish against the international game. I do not. Last, your assertion that a team featuring one of the top 5 players in the world - Tim Duncan - is comparable to a team featuring all five of the world's best players - the current USA Team. To that notion, I also disagree.

K should be attributed large quantities of credit for his work with Team USA. The '00 and '04 squads were failures, and their coaches should be noted for failing to right the ship; however, K has had a much greater level of talent to work with. Again, to be clear - K should be attributed large quantities of credit for his work with Team USA - principally in helping gather the talent level and achieving victories with that talent by helping, in part, form a true team level of selflessness. My main concern in this argument, however, and one you historically have failed to acknowledge, is that K has had better talent to work with. I'm also concerned with the position that K has had to work miracles in getting these players to play together, as if outright denying their predispositions to selfless play. It is entirely possible that the current roster is simply more selfless and talented than the previous teams. It's also likely K has helped further those predispositions. Again, I am crediting K with the enormous job he has undertaken, but it should be clear that his job has been quantifiably easier than the coaches on the '00 and '04 team from a talent, and perhaps, cultural level.

I have given K his credit. You're forming an argument with suppositions I haven't provided in this discussion. I am simply implying that that level of talent has become fundamentally better over the last few campaigns by Team USA. Should K, in part, receive recognition for the higher level of interest from USA's best players? Yes! But I deny the implication that he's somehow acted as the sole genius behind Team USA's basketball resurgence. He's one part in a whole culture that's been transformed.

 

[Hoskins91]

I don't think coaches or fans care that much, or something would have happened by now. I can't speak for how the media would spin it.

 

[Catswin9]

It appears to me that Coach K, regardless of how good he is, gets a recruiting advantage over other qualified coaches. What say you?

 

[meteordealer]

Coach Cal should be next.

 

[WeWant9]

No, roll with whoever keeps winning. People need to give this a damn rest here.

If Cal were in this position would you be saying the same thing?

 

[5iveStarRecruit]

Lmao no.

Unless they start losing, a change isn't needed. Like the poster above said, if Cal was in this position the forum wouldn't bring this up.

 

[Catswin9]

Lmao no.

Unless they start losing, a change isn't needed. Like the poster above said, if Cal was in this position the forum wouldn't bring this up.

There is definitely some truth to that, but a two year term for everybody seems more fair.

 

[5iveStarRecruit]

There is definitely some truth to that, but a two year term for everybody seems more fair.

This is USA basketball. Being " fair" is less important than gold medals.

 

[brdmn22]

There is definitely some truth to that, but a two year term for everybody seems more fair.

Haha, this isn't 2nd grade basketball where everyone makes the team and gets a trophy. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[UKWildcats#8]

There is definitely some truth to that, but a two year term for everybody seems more fair.

How the hell is that fair? So one guy does not even get to coach the Olympics, which happen every FOUR years? Yeah, that seems real fair to the guy wasting his time to coach those guys in addition to his real coaching job.

 

[HICATFAN]

It appears to me that Coach K, regardless of how good he is, gets a recruiting advantage over other qualified coaches. What say you?

Agree and I asked the same question a couple of months ago.

AlohaCat

 

[hoodro]

Is anyone else experiencing déjà vu?

 

[poppycat]

No need to rotate. But, these are NBA players........should be coached by the best NBA coach willing.
Maybe choose among the last NBA Champ winners.
(Yes, I know a college player sometimes get pt., but in general no Olympic sport is amateur.)

 

[dezyDeco]

It appears to me that Coach K, regardless of how good he is, gets a recruiting advantage over other qualified coaches. What say you?

Don't worry, they'll change it all and put time limits on the coaches... right after Koach Krybabyschitzchi retires.

 

[Bigblueforever]

No, roll with whoever keeps winning. People need to give this a damn rest here.

If Cal were in this position would you be saying the same thing?

Would be say the same thing if K wasn't the coach? But I got a better idea let only NBA coaches do the coaching, & that clears everything up.

 

[UK90]

Would be say the same thing if K wasn't the coach? But I got a better idea let only NBA coaches do the coaching, & that clears everything up.

You know, we did have rotating NBA coaches doing it, and that way resulted in us getting utterly humiliated in 02 and 04. Then we tried a permanent coach from college and have been kicking ass ever since. But, hey, why stick with what works, let's just go back to what failed miserably right before the current guy was hired, great idea there...

Here's my idea, why don't we stop worrying about whether it's a college or pro coach, or whether it might give a recruiting advantage, or any of this other whiny nonsense, and simply give the job to the best qualified guy and let him keep it as long as he keeps winning and doing a great job? All the petty whining our fans do over this issue is embarrassing.

 

[UKDUNK]

K is doing a great job. USA bball was in bad shape before he took over. He deserves to coach it as long as he wants. I think the continuity amongst the staff contributes to the constant commitment from the top level NBA guys.

 

[poppycat]

The "Dream Team"..92..did fine with NBA coaches.........not even the best coaches in the League.
My point is: If winning is life or death for me..........I would rather pick my players than pick the coaches. The recent ability to assembly a great team recently carries more weight than the ability to coach.

 

[wildcatsboston1984]

Never change a winning formula. The problem with Coach K having a recruiting advantage, which is true, isn't that he is the senior national team coach, it's all the access has to the U18, U17, etc. guys and the way he is able to exploit that to his advantage at Duke from the likes of manipulating room assignments and all sorts of different things he or any other senior national team coach should not be allowed to have any input on. Cut that crap out and only allow him to conduct matters with the senior national team and a lot of the recruiting advantage is gone.

 

[Altro Cat]

K is doing a good job and the top NBA stars like playing for him. No need to change for the sake of change or because a few teams of other schools don't want him coaching. Remember it wasn't that long ago that USA Basketball was routinely losing big international tournaments.

 

[blubo]

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.

haha. excellent.

 

[WitnessGreatness]

USA lost in 2000 and 2004 because the team was thrown together and had a bunch of players that didn't care and didn't fit with each other and they lost to teams that have played together forever. Heck, you could take only players from LA or Chicago to Olympics right now and they would probably win gold.