guyroch wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Canada Basketball
Collapse
X
-
-
Puffer wrote: View PostNot sure how this result plays out in the wider context. Will Canada Basketball lose support and credibility for the 20 years of disappointment? Do the better players decide what's the point of putting their health and reputations on the line if they aren't going to show up well? Or do the new crop of young and talented players get embarrassed with Canada's constant poor showing and engage with r=each other and decide it's time to get it done?
There is no doubt it takes years of commitment to the program to be able to field a quality team. This was only a preliminary, and had more NBA players in it than any other country can field in the Olympics outside of the USA. But no continuity of players, no experience playing together. This country needs at least 10 players to commit to continually show up for 4 years. I hope that happens.
You want to see Canada's dream team show up . You would have to have the World Championships in Toronto . Heck the only time Rick Fox put on a Canadian jersey was when the tournament was in Toronto .Last edited by guyroch; Mon Jul 5, 2021, 09:48 AM.
Comment
-
slaw wrote: View Post
Bottom line is Canada needs to be close to full strength to get through to the Olympics. We aren’t deep enough to go without Murray, SGA and key bigs like Olynyk and Thompson. Like many countries, we aren’t deep enough to guarantee advancement with our B or C team.
It's more about how to "peak" for one & done games. Canada came out with no urgency and thought we could turn it on... which we did. But we cut it too close.
Comment
-
golden wrote: View Post
Our "B & C" team that played in Victoria already had way more talent than anybody else in that tournament. We're getting our shorts in a knot because 37-year old journeyman, Blake Schilb, had the game of his life? We got 9 NBA players to show up - that's ultra deep enough. Feels like a lot of over-reaction in here.
It's more about how to "peak" for one & done games. Canada came out with no urgency and thought we could turn it on... which we did. But we cut it too close.
- 1 like
Comment
-
slaw wrote: View Post
But you can’t peak playing for 5 days together. The overwhelming firepower would help offset that problem.
What you can control is how much urgency and effort you come out with. This game was exactly like the 2019 Raptors vs. Orlando Game 1, when DJ Augustin hit the game winner. IIRC, Nurse ripped into his players after that game to play harder, and the rest is history. Except in FIBA, you don't get a second chance.
Even with Murray & SGA playing ... you come out lackadaisical against an inferior opponent and you're just asking for trouble. It felt like Canada was banking on their talent and depth advantage to pull them though eventually - and it almost did. If the game was 10 minutes longer, I'm pretty sure Canada takes it. If that's a playoff series, then Canada probably wins 4-1.
They needed to come out like it was an NBA Game 7. Maybe that is where the lack of FIBA experience comes into play - not understanding the urgency and 'every possession' counts mentality of FIBA. You don't really experience that in the NBA, other than elimination games.
Comment
-
You put Thompson on that team we win the qualifier no problem. Or just hit the wide open 3s. The chemistry thing is overblown, I didn't see a lack of chemistry, I saw a lack of big men and a lack of hitting wide open 3s. A lack of chemistry would be mean lots of turnovers (we only had 8) or lack of open shots (most of our shots were good open shots). We got out rebounded handedly and shot 24% from 3. That's the game in a nutshell. Chemistry is not the problem.
​
Comment
-
slaw wrote: View Post
But you can’t peak playing for 5 days together. The overwhelming firepower would help offset that problem.
Comment
-
guyroch wrote: View Post
Peak ? Cory Joseph who had the most experience playing in FIBA on the roster had 3 points vs Czech ( -21 ) 3 Points against vs China and 3 points against Greece . I love Cory Joseph cause he always says yes to Canada but PG is one of the key positions in FIBA competions and by that productivity he must have not came into camp in game shape . We keep saying we started off slow well Cory was starting in every game .
I guess the same issue with urgency also applies to the coaches. You don't want to hurt CoJo's feelings, but it's do or die.... kind of like when Casey did the un-thinkable and benched DeMar in game 7 vs. the Pacers; otherwise, we were losing that game in embarrassing fashion.
The Scrubbs died..... for this?
Comment
-
Primer wrote: View PostYou put Thompson on that team we win the qualifier no problem. Or just hit the wide open 3s. The chemistry thing is overblown, I didn't see a lack of chemistry, I saw a lack of big men and a lack of hitting wide open 3s. A lack of chemistry would be mean lots of turnovers (we only had 8) or lack of open shots (most of our shots were good open shots). We got out rebounded handedly and shot 24% from 3. That's the game in a nutshell. Chemistry is not the problem.
​
Comment
-
golden wrote: View Post
Yeah, I feel bad for CoJo. He's been there for Team Canada through thick & thin. He's the team captain. And Nurse did realize he was sucking, so he only played him 18 minutes.... but that was 18 minutes too many.
I guess the same issue with urgency also applies to the coaches. You don't want to hurt CoJo's feelings, but it's do or die.... kind of like when Casey did the un-thinkable and benched DeMar in game 7 vs. the Pacers; otherwise, we were losing that game in embarrassing fashion.
The Scrubbs died..... for this?
Kevin Pangos would have been a great asset but guys like him are proably saying to themselves now . I am only going to get a invite if all NBA players say no .
Last edited by guyroch; Mon Jul 5, 2021, 12:19 PM.
Comment
-
Primer wrote: View PostYou put Thompson on that team we win the qualifier no problem. Or just hit the wide open 3s. The chemistry thing is overblown, I didn't see a lack of chemistry, I saw a lack of big men and a lack of hitting wide open 3s. A lack of chemistry would be mean lots of turnovers (we only had 8) or lack of open shots (most of our shots were good open shots). We got out rebounded handedly and shot 24% from 3. That's the game in a nutshell. Chemistry is not the problem.
​
It comes down to the specific in-game execution points you listed ... and I'd add, also guarding the 3-pt line better and stop random scrubs from going off for 30. Your defense can't give up interior AND perimeter at the same time, which is what we did.
Thompson would most definitely help us get a few more offensive rebounds, but he wouldn't help us from 3. And he'd kill the spacing, since they packed the paint and also played a lot of zone to stop our drivers. But still, the OREB rebound battle ended up being close, 12-11 for them. We didn't get slaughtered there. Also, a lot of their DREBs were long rebounds from 3-ball misses, which I don't think TT helps that much with - that's more about hustle and energy. Still, Lyles had 11 rebounds... does TT get more than that? Probably. Maybe just enough OREBs with a couple put-backs to win a nail-biter.Last edited by golden; Mon Jul 5, 2021, 12:26 PM.
Comment
-
Primer wrote: View PostYou put Thompson on that team we win the qualifier no problem. Or just hit the wide open 3s. The chemistry thing is overblown, I didn't see a lack of chemistry, I saw a lack of big men and a lack of hitting wide open 3s. A lack of chemistry would be mean lots of turnovers (we only had 8) or lack of open shots (most of our shots were good open shots). We got out rebounded handedly and shot 24% from 3. That's the game in a nutshell. Chemistry is not the problem.
​
Comment
-
golden wrote: View Post
Birch, Boucher and Olynyk are easily explainable... they have no guaranteed contract for next year. What's TT's excuse? Hitting up another Kardashian?
Where's Tristan Thompson at..... when you actually NeedTristanThompson
Comment
-
Puffer wrote: View PostNot sure how this result plays out in the wider context. Will Canada Basketball lose support and credibility for the 20 years of disappointment? Do the better players decide what's the point of putting their health and reputations on the line if they aren't going to show up well? Or do the new crop of young and talented players get embarrassed with Canada's constant poor showing and engage with r=each other and decide it's time to get it done?
There is no doubt it takes years of commitment to the program to be able to field a quality team. This was only a preliminary, and had more NBA players in it than any other country can field in the Olympics outside of the USA. But no continuity of players, no experience playing together. This country needs at least 10 players to commit to continually show up for 4 years. I hope that happens.
You can blame individual factors from game to game, but over the past 20 years the program is clearly underachieving and it's a systemic problem. Those silly Czechs? Their program is ranked 12th in FIBA and Canada is 21st. Tossing a few NBA players who have rarely played together onto the same team with a new coach on short notice does not suddenly launch your 15+ spots up the rankings. Program needs commitment and continuity from all involved."We're playing in a building." -- Kawhi Leonard
- 1 like
Comment
Comment