Hoops

Spoilt for Riches

I am not saying we have much of a chance of beating the USA, but I am talking about tactics to give ourselves the best shot. Certainly their 49 point mutilation of China doesn't fill me with much hope. We will be competitive in all other games, and I agree, the Olympics for the Boomers will largely be decided in the first two games.

I agree that Broekhoff is a good rebounder. For his size & position.

But put him at the 4 against guys that are bigger than him and whose focus is to block out & get boards (as opposed to the wing players he can get boards against) and it's a different ballgame entirely. Bad idea IMO.

Its called live basket. You should try it eyeshutopen

What will team USA death line up be???
Draymond
Melo
KD
Klay
Kyrie

Or George in for melo

#592221

You should watch Broekhoff play sometime.

A good rebounder for the boomers with career averages of 3.2 in International play and 2.5 in the 2014 World Cup in 20 mins per game.

Broekhoff is a decent player don't get me wrong, but he is in no stretch a small ball 4, a 2/3 at most. So don't hype him up as a rebounder when that's not him.

Oh so now he has a different role in Euroleague so his ability to rebound just vanishes? I'm not a hater, I just don't like fan boy posts. You say we are in a log jam for positions 2 to 6. If Bogut get's up he will be so under done after no game time since his injury. Every other player is a bit player at best in the NBA. We are very skinny in the 4 spot with as discussed above no ability to defend the perimeter or have any ounce of foot speed.

Other countries have NBA superstars and Euroleague Superstars and you think we are going to trouble the USA. We need to worry about game 1 first, then game 2 etc etc.

Historically our problem is we start nervous and slow and our tournament is over realistically after the first 2 rounds. Can we compete...YES. But my concern is who is going to put the ball in the hole and then conversely who is going to defender guys like Batum etc.

It's true we have the most players in the NBA we have ever had, but that in itself doesn't guarantee us anything.

He has a different role in his Euroleague team but he has always been a good rebounder for the Boomers. Plus Euroleague games have fewer shots and are lower scoring.

Seems you just want to hate for the sake of it. Oh well, we will see what happens in 2 weeks time.

You're forgetting this is the same website that thinks delly is a superstar because he kept the MVP to a measly 26 points a game and doesn't manage to turn it over a lot...

This boomer team have no athleticism.
Would be lucky to finish in top 6

So this great rebounder played 31 Euroleague games last season for 25 mins per game accumulating a total of 104 rebounds at 3.3 rpg.... Yes, Broekhoff is a great rebounder.

I am also with XY. We are in a log jam with 6 of the top 8 teams who can beat eachother on any given night.

And yes, Broekhoff is a great rebounder. He could be serviceable in the 4 spot at times.

Broekhoff is a great rebounder. Can confirm.

I'm with XY.

At least this time the media haven't been exaggerating our medal chances - they've left it to the Boomers themselves to talk medals.

Of the 12 teams at the competition, the Boomers are ranked the 8th best team (barely tipping out Croatia). We are not coming off of a very high base here, and for good reason.

There is understandably a lot of optimism about our team and fortunes, but arguments for a sense of realism about our prospects. It is difficult to point to any of those other teams ranked above us (or Croatia) and say we absolutely should beat them (or vice versa). Can we beat them, yes. But the whole tournament is fraught and we have to be on our best every game. Being in the USA's group is a slight advantage for a change on the cross-over but as 2014 showed you still have to beat your opponent.

We could easily end up anywhere from second to eighth, but a medal would be an over-achieve and a quarter final cross-over loss a disappointment and probable under-achieve.

Yes, the US could probably put three teams together and have a realistic chance of sweeping all the medals. But history shows that they are not infallible, and this might be one of those years given most of their first-choice players are missing. But they are still rightly odds-on favourites for the gold.

Well we will get the first good look at them against decent competition tomorrow vs. Lithuania. The game is at 6.30am but I am sure it will stay up on the link afterwards.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0hitU-8O4w

Won't finish top 6. Stop kidding yourself

Broekhoff a great rebounder? Are you sure you're looking at the same player?

Anderson and Motum are not 4 men, they can play it offensively to a limited extent, but neither of them can guard on the perimeter at all, and neither are good athletes to compensate for the lack of defense.

I'm not even talking about beating the U.S, look at the glut of long lengthy wings and stretch/small ball 4s playing for the other squads and there you'll see the problem.

As I said, the team is built perfectly for the basketball of the 1980/1990s.
But the game has changed in 2016, you need floor spacing, you need athleticism and length and you need versatility on both ends.

Okay, we get it. You've looked at the names on the team and have already assumed a loss. Of course, Greece and Argentina could have done the same in the wins they've had to them. Fact is no one is meant to beat the USA on paper.

I am not even saying I think we can win. I am just talking about potential line ups and strategies to give ourselves some hope of doing so. My belief is that we will lose the USA game but still be in the mix for a medal, and I am basing that off having seen recent games played by France, Spain, Serbia and Argentina. France and Serbia games were serious qualification games.

A line up with Delly/Lisch Mills, Ingles, Broekhoff, Bogut/Baynes as the main seven and a touch of Bairstow and Goulding with the rest relegated to the bench would get absolutely slaughtered by the US

Couple of NBA bench players, some NBL players and bogut vs a selection of 12 of the best 24 star players in the NBA. We might have a chance to score a basket, not to win

Broekhoff is a great rebounder at his position. As for who can play the four, what about Motum and Anderson?

Australia can beat the USA in 2020
with this Squad:

Exum
Mcdowell~white
Simmons
Thon maker
Humphries

Mills
Deng Adel
Jonah Bolden
Daniel Mading
matur maker
deng gak
Makur maker

This Australian team doesn't have much versatility at all.

The guards are all small without length, and that's for both guard spots. Your biggest guard is 6'4 at a reach in this team.

We have two wings, legit! Both can't play the 4 spot either as they aren't good enough rebounders or able to at least keep people off the boards. Both of which again are more suited to the 2/3 role.

Then you have 6 bigs (who are actually all Cs truely), none of which are particularly athletic or able to defend well on the perimeter.

You have an extremely limited ability to switch pick and rolls, limited in who you can matchup with defensively, really poor floor spacing with most lineups.

I can see Lemanis is going for the dominate the game inside strategy, and over-power teams, and they will overmatch the weaker squads, but otherwise these weaknesses will be too much to overcome.

This team is built perfectly for the 1980/1990s, but horribly for 2016.

"Australia's best player is who, Delly? And we could give the US a run for their money? Please. "

Err, no. Australia's best player is Andrew Bogut, or failing that, Patty Mills.

"

There's one glaring reason why you can't put Australia a chance to compete with the U.S, it's an absolutely horrible matchup.

The U.S play small 1 through 4. We have a glut of bigs that don't have the athleticism to play the 4 against them. On top of that, we don't have any long athletic wings to match them even in the 2 spot, let alone the 4.

Our bigs can contain the 5 spot of the U.S to an extent (nobody is stopping Cousins).

But that 4 spot is going to be the undoing for Australia.
"

Broekhoff or Ingles would probably played the 4 in a small ball line up. We have the versatility to play big and small. A line up with Delly/Lisch Mills, Ingles, Broekhoff, Bogut/Baynes as the main seven and a touch of Bairstow and Goulding with the rest relegated to the bench would atleast be able to keep pace with the Americans when it comes to running the floor.

Good point anon 146. This is the reason that Vukona is (or was) such a great player at international level. His mobility and strength allowed him to match up with mobile 4's and compete with bigger 4's.

There's one glaring reason why you can't put Australia a chance to compete with the U.S, it's an absolutely horrible matchup.

The U.S play small 1 through 4. We have a glut of bigs that don't have the athleticism to play the 4 against them. On top of that, we don't have any long athletic wings to match them even in the 2 spot, let alone the 4.

Our bigs can contain the 5 spot of the U.S to an extent (nobody is stopping Cousins).

But that 4 spot is going to be the undoing for Australia.

Australia's best player is who, Delly? And we could give the US a run for their money? Please.

Yes and then Greece lost by 40 to Spain in the final without P Gasol playing

""USA's worst player would be first picked for the boomers" - yes, probably

"No chance of beating them" - no, some chance, even if only 5%"

Basketball games are played on the court, not on paper. The USA would have never lost a single game if we use that logic. The USA was beaten by Greece, who didn't have a single NBA player at the time.

Usa fielded their third string side at the last world cup and won really easily. They will win again.

"USA's worst player would be first picked for the boomers" - yes, probably

"No chance of beating them" - no, some chance, even if only 5%

Usa's worst player would be first picked for the Boomers, no chance of beating them !!

"They are the favourites for sure but wont dominate like you may think.

Spain
Lithuania
Serbia
France

All very good teams..."

I'd put Australia in that mix, especially with Bogut. I wouldn't expect Australia to win against the USA but I think we can give them a game on our day.

Serbia is not as good as they were in the World Cup. They're a team rebuilding and I wouldn't expect them to be in medal calculations. They don't have much of an inside presence now.

Brazil is probably the other threat to the USA and a strong medal candidate.

The referees cannot referee their own country at the Olympics Ricey

They are the favourites for sure but wont dominate like you may think.

Spain
Lithuania
Serbia
France

All very good teams...

I wouldn't be falling too hard for the US team just yet. They easily beat an Argentine team which is a husk of its former glory, but they did it by jacking up junk and dominating them inside.

USA wont be quite so dominant on the O boards against the better teams in the competition. They also don't appear to have much happening from mid-range. If you have a solid inside defensive presence and you make it out to shooters you could potentially trouble or beat the USA.

A team that wants a shot at them would have to be efficient offensively. Turn overs would be costly so you need a team that is either conservative, or can get back on transition defense to nullify their fast break game. Australia did a half decent job of that in 2012 before three quarter time.

Any team that wants a shot would also be praying on a poor shooting night. There will, as usual, be nights when the Americans turn up and simply cant miss. On those nights you might as well just throw in the towel.

But can they be beaten? Yes, they can. And they're at their weakest on paper that they've ever been since 1992

The USA select team would probably win gold too.

When will BSA stand up and be counted to help the District Clubs present a better standard of basketball on the court in our premier competition.

Each year the standard of competition gets weaker, crowds dwindle and the better players move east in search of better pay and opportunities.

Player revolts are more common as Clubs deleiver the bad news that their program funding is being cut of the players need to do more to raise funds.

We no longer send the Grand Finalists to compete in the CABL playoff for winners of each state competition due to the cost of being associated.

With many Clubs trying to manage by reducing salary caps and other associated expenses why haven't BSA got a major sponsor on board.

The clubs have been bled dry as on average it costs about $40000 to run the ABA program and this is usually paid by Junior parents through junior fees.

BSA we need you!!

Otherwise the demise of ABA is imminent.

AM I OVERREACTING!