Hoops

So how much Longer do we keep making Excuses for Lemanis?

Underachieved by producing the best result in a major tournament in Boomers history with the best chemistry and most fluent play ever, then coaching the team to an even better result overall in the next major tournament with a less deep team?

To underachieve, it suggests that you expected a medal. Meanwhile, no bookies nor any FIBA experts ranked Boomers as a top 3 team in either tournament. Yet with that consistency, Australia is now ranked number 3 in the world, behind only USA and Spain.

So if Australia has underachieved over this period, it means that you expected Australia to outperform Spain and/or USA. So which team did you think we should be better than? Spain? USA? Or both?

Otherwise, you should appreciate the Boomers recent successes in major tournaments, despite failing to medal.

"Either blame Lemanis for not using these guys to rest our core, or concede that it was necessary for team chemistry to go with a 9-man rotation. "

I meant to say you have to choose one of these two options. The only alternative is to argue some alternative player/s should've played, which as I stated, ought to include a guard to give Mills/Delly/Ingles rest.

So argue either:
1) don't play Sobey/Gliddon
2) play Sobey/Gliddon x amount to rest Delly/Mills/Ingles
3) play [insert guard(s)] x amount to rest Delly/Mills/Ingles

Given it is difficult to convincingly argue that option 3 is any better than option 2, if you are arguing option 3, you should also argue that option 2 is better than option 1.

We would've won gold if Mills had've made the FT against Spain, or if the refs hadn't called that nonexistent foul on Bogut.

^^^^^
Yes great summary.:)

Sobey, Gliddon, Barlow. They were our 10th-12th men. It would be great to have 10th-12th men come in and contribute, but not many teams had that. Spain essentially went with a 9-man rotation. Early in the tournament they gave their 10th-12th men some time against weaker 1st round opponents. Not sure that Australia had that same luxury available to them given the group they were in. Hopefully the coaching staff now realizes the value in being able to rest our stars. France went deeper. That might've been the difference in getting that bronze. But going deeper also disrupts chemistry, so it's a risk. What was the cause of France's capitulation in the semi-final?

I actually had Gliddon in my WC team: decent size wing with enough length to cover opposition wings, should be defensively capable at that level internationally, good perimeter shooter. That's the foundation of a useful 3&D role player. I was expecting him to be a low minutes rotation player when selected, taking some minutes usually given to Broekhoff.

Remember, Lemanis went with a deeper rotation in Rio. Something triggered this change. Was it lack of preparation time in lead-up games to integrate Gliddon/Sobey/Barlow? A realization that they were simply not good enough, too much of a burden to offer them minutes? Or just a change in strategy that it was not necessary to go so deep? After the social media meldown, was he concerned about perceived favouritism if Glidden/Sobey played more minutes? It'd be ironic if it was the latter reason. Either blame Lemanis for not using these guys to rest our core, or concede that it was necessary for team chemistry to go with a 9-man rotation. You can't have both.

The only alternative argument is the selection controversy, which is hardly controversial. The crux of this argument, if applied logically, is that selecting other players -- and given them minutes! -- would've provided rest for our tired backcourt, Mills/Delly/Ingles. It was our BACKCOURT that was overplayed. If you make this argument, you must choose a GUARD(/WING) with ball-handling capabilities that can take minutes away from these guys! Who is it?

McCarron? I like him, probably personally prefer him to Sobey on the A-team, but is he really that much better than Sobey? On the open market, he's probably seen to be worse.
Martin? Was he even available?
Lisch? Wasn't he also injured? Regardless, he struggled in Rio at the higher level. Not convincingly any better that Sobey.
McDowell-White? A young guy that has zero international experience, not even in qualifiers, no experience playing in the Lemanis system, with no experience at a level anything close to the World Cup?
Others suggest in this thread: Gibson, Norton, Madgen, Stephens, Steindl. WTF?

Who would've changed EVERYTHING? Simmons. He was the missing ingredient.*







* A healthy Exum might've been very useful too.

It doesn't get any easier for Lemanis tonight, coming up against

Trevor Gleeson, regarded by many as the best coach in Australia

Gliddon is a longer taller defender than McCarron, though Gliddon this season has been woeful, at the time I thought they got it right. Terrico White show McCarron up in GF series so might have gone against him as well.

We need a 'calm coach power rankings'

I'll start things off from the bottom: #9 Joey "Male Menopause" Wright.

#8 Trevor " squeaky voice of 12yo boy" Gleeson

Bogut could still play in the nba compared to Bolden as Bolden has only played two minutes this season.

Because Bolden is young enough to play a full NBA season without his body breaking down.

"do you know that Bogut's nba stats were also very bad in his last season? yet he became nbl mvp and was one of the best boomers in the last WC"

Bogut had 8 points, 14 rebounds and 5 assists in game 2 against LAC in last season's playoffs, and then had 8 points, 10 rebounds and 4 assists in the next game. He's a guy very capable of having an influence on NBA games, although his body won't allow him to do it all the time.

Nostraballmus concludes he is a wanker who is not funny

The troll is feasting fellas, time to stop throwing the food out!

Thank you Me, the bloke is an absolute Moran.

Close thread.

"Yeah, Paul, "ME", Gus3232, rjd,
It doesn't take long for Lemanis' fanboys to cumm jerking to his defence.
And notice how they don't actually reply to any of the obvious problems"

The posts in support of Lemanis have been in direct response to the claimed "obvious problems". Anyway, I'd always prefer to be grouped with knowledgeable contributors like paul than useless anons that repeat the same spurious arguments.

"my comment was in response to your comment 'Australia had lower fiba ranking before the lemanis era'"


- Do you agree that Australia's results have somehow elevated its ranking up to 3rd, in probably the most talented era of world basketball, ahead of several more talented teams? It's not much more of a step to suggest that Australia has actually overachieved.

- Do you concede that Australia overachieved based on surpassing pre-tournament expectations in both tournaments? If you go by pre-tournament bookie odds, that's definitely true for both 2016 and 2019.

Just stating facts here, unlike the other side of the argument in this thread that can only produce spurious arguments.

As i said previously if you not an agent you’re a relative, you keep bagging players but other than Adel you can’t name replacements, Green injured and Adel no bloody good. I know you say he is but that means nothing, as I said agent or relative.

"that is because lemanis is taking charge of the best boomers squad of all time with so many nba players. you muppet"

How do you rate the quality and depth of talent on other national teams? Better than Spain? Or France? Or Lithuania? Greece? Serbia? Brazil? Italy? Turkey? How about Slovenia? Germany? Canada?

Australia barely featured as a top 5 chance in anyone's pre-World Cup predictions articles, outside of Australian media. Also according to the bookies.

"They were so useless that that they played no part.
As a direct result, Patty Mills (and Joe Ingles) averaged an insane 34 minutes per game, playing every 2nd day, and Dellavedova over 30."

Yes, because the Boomers had so many other quality options at guard, such as? Wait, no. Only Simmons, who seems to have been influenced by his agent (who happened to pull all of his other clients out of the World Cup, except for Joseph turning up late, giving Canada no chance to integrate him into the team).

It can be argued that Lemanis over-played Mills/Ingles/Delly; but the structure of the tournament made every game -- and every minute -- crucial, so it was a risk if Lemanis had not gone with such a tight rotation. We may have never advanced as far as we did.

Alfonso and other muppets, would you like to google the current FIBA world rankings? Check Australia's ranking in the years before Lemanis.

Green and Adel, you must be there agent, give it a break, neither have achieved anything as of now to even show they should be near the team, Green is very young and Adel can’t follow a system, it’s not street balling.

How much longer? As long as it takes for you to come up with a decent argument you muppet. In other words, we wait an eternity. Of all the stupid sh*t I have read on here....

Beautifully put "ME".

We need a 'calm coach power rankings'

Lot people on here got no idea, Bolden hasn’t even made the list yet neither has Exum. Just because you are in the nba don’t always mean you are great.

We need a 'calm coach power rankings'

Would Lemanis be better at any team other than Brisbane?

Don't make excuses for the Gliddon decision that was a howler. The guy is a mediocre NBL player had no business being on a WC team.

It would follow in the recent tradition to choose a previous assistant as the new Boomers head coach. If Lemanis doesn't continue on after 2020, it seems wise to choose an assistant given there is a learning curve in coaching international basketball.

Don't tell anon-Dave that a player like Gliddon was a unanimous selection for all coaches, which means Weaver would've selected him too.

It’s boring, Lemanis never missed the free throw that would’ve got us in the gold medal game.

Weaver described Lemanis as one of the best coaches in the world.