Term Limits for the Olympic team

[SVCBeercats]

However, I do sort of like the Holiday Inn Express idea.

You make as much sense as the Holiday Inn Express commercials which are meant to be ludicrously funny. Or did you miss this point like you missed the point of competition?

 

[mhshuskies]

It's not that the roster is dominated by UConn players. It's that the roster has been dominated by the same players for a long time. Whalen & Augustus would be two non-UConn examples. I wish some of them would retire from international play though they should by no means feel obliged to.

Bird and Taurasi are legitimate living legends but if they are on the team again in 2020...

I feel like we're getting to a point where a whole generation of guards has been completely blocked from the national team. You could say it's up to them to be better and force their way into the team. But Vandersloot has been better (statistically, at least) than Whalen and Bird in recent seasons and eventually saw the writing on the wall and started playing for Hungary. Diggins didn't get picked for 2014 worlds after an all-WNBA season.

It's a lot harder to get a spot on the team than to keep it. It seems like favoritism hiding behind the guise of "experience".

If it’s all about winning a championship, shouldn’t demonstrated ability to WIN championships be at least part of the analysis in player selection? If Diggins was selected over Taurasi or Bird and similar choices as you suggest, then we would have had to hear “we won bronze and we would have won the championship if not for the teams that won silver and gold”.

 

[CocoHusky]

If it’s all about winning a championship, shouldn’t demonstrated ability to WIN championships be at least part of the analysis in player selection?

Absolutely not!

 

[UConnCat]

If it’s all about winning a championship, shouldn’t demonstrated ability to WIN championships be at least part of the analysis in player selection? If Diggins was selected over Taurasi or Bird and similar choices as you suggest, then we would have had to hear “we won bronze and we would have won the championship if not for the teams that won silver and gold”.

Yes and it is.

 

[Orangutan]

If Diggins was selected over Taurasi or Bird and similar choices as you suggest, then we would have had to hear “we won bronze and we would have won the championship if not for the teams that won silver and gold”.

Unless Danielle Adams started playing for Spain without me noticing, we'd be fine.

 

[HuskyNan]

I can see an argument that it's better for the future to get some younger players some international experience in lower-stakes tournaments, but this author's argument that others simply deserve a turn shouldn't be used when talking about grownups.

So basically, a player should be selected for the 2020 Olympics to gain experience for the 2024 Olympics then be eliminated from future teams? Wouldn't there perpetually be about half the team that's inexperienced, assuming the other half of the team played in the prior Olympiad? I'm not liking that idea. More than one player has had a deer-in-the-headlight look their first time in the Games.

 

[BigBird]

So basically, a player should be selected for the 2020 Olympics to gain experience for the 2024 Olympics then be eliminated from future teams? Wouldn't there perpetually be about half the team that's inexperienced, assuming the other half of the team played in the prior Olympiad? I'm not liking that idea. More than one player has had a deer-in-the-headlight look their first time in the Games.

Agreed. We should send our best. What’s complicated about that?

 

[BigBird]

ladies and gents, we need to have a moment of brutal honesty. TEAM USA has always been political and is even more so now. coaches need to rotate and term limits need to happen.

Political? No. Subjective? Yes. But I’d rather have a truly expert committee that makes the selections, as opposed to some silly rotation scheme that amounts to a participation trophy for adults.

 

[ThisJustIn]

Define truly expert committee.

 

[Bigboote]

So basically, a player should be selected for the 2020 Olympics to gain experience for the 2024 Olympics then be eliminated from future teams? Wouldn't there perpetually be about half the team that's inexperienced, assuming the other half of the team played in the prior Olympiad? I'm not liking that idea. More than one player has had a deer-in-the-headlight look their first time in the Games.

I'm not talking about Olympics, but being invited to training camps (yes, I realize there are 29 in the camp and only 12 or so on the traveling team, but we're also talking about little investment in future guards), or, better yet, a model like international soccer, where there a re friendlies and tournaments every year. The US soccer WNT had very few Olympic or World Cup veterans for most of this calendar year. In that case there's been a lot of grumbling about not enough of the Olympic and World Cup veterans and US Soccer's response has been investment in the future.

I don't even know -- are there other tournaments, friendlies, etc. in international basketball, or are pro leagues prevalent enough that there's just no time?

 

[HoopsFan21]

Define truly expert committee.

Any committee that includes Geno of course.

 

[ThisJustIn]

I don't even know -- are there other tournaments, friendlies, etc. in international basketball, or are pro leagues prevalent enough that there's just no time?

Some of the things USA bball has had to navigate over the last few years:

The WNBA calendar
The international calendar
FIBA/Olympic calendar
Year-round play
Injuries/life hiccups
NCAA requiring *gasp* x-number of credits completed by certain times.
Short practice times
Limited "tryout" times
The difference between the US and international game
A pool of willing/competent head coaches
Conspiracy theories

There's also a history of valuing loyalty and commitment. They also rarely (if ever), tell stories out of school. I've only heard one...

In more recent years, there's been a lot of talk about the team needed to "know each other" because of the short practice time. I don't know if there's a better way to pick teams w/out opening up the whole process to public scrutiny. The opinion of fans is bound to be partisan. Scrutiny by recruiter/coaches is bound to be suspect.

Ultimately, I believe serving on the National team is a privilege, not a right. My sense is players have earned a spot via physical talent and personal "virtue." And I'm good with that.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Yeah! It was pure politics selecting Taurasi, Bird, Catchings, Augustus, Moore, Fowles, McCoughtry, Charles, Whalen, Stewart, Delle Donne, and Griner. These are the winningest of the winners and you want to give some poor college kid a shot just because it is their turn. Poor babies! If they can play like Stewart, I'm all for it. You do understand how good she is ... don't you? Why not go back to the USA only sends amateurs to the Olympics and enjoy watching the USA teams lose to the other nations' professionals? Yeah, the USA men's Dream Team should have never happened. Should have send all college kids. Heck, the Dream Team's opponents could not wait to lose so they get their picture taken with the Dream Team. So they could show people these are the giants of basketball that kicked our collective behinds and we loved every moment of it. AND we got our picture taken with them! Autographed no doubt. Reread the aforementioned names. Yeah, the giants of women's basketball. "But we don't care. Their turn is up." It is up when they are beat out for their position. If a young player can do this, put them on the team, post haste.

Is USA Basketball perfect? No, nothing is perfect. Is the world unfair? Yep, sure is. Perhaps these kids need to learn this lesson early in life. Have a good cry or two or three and move on with life and learn how to deal with it. Such as practicing to become as good as the aforementioned players so they can EARN a place on the USA Olympic and World Championship teams.

There's at least one glaring omission from that winningest of winners list in my mind. Nneka went to a Final 4 every year she was in college, has helped lead her team to two straight WNBA Finals and got one Championship, has a league MVP to her name. She absolutely belongs next to all of those other players. Delle Donne hasn't actually won anything outside of the Olympic team, and Griner's WNBA legacy is lacking at this point (one Championship but otherwise Phoenix has been underachieving her entire career--that's gotta be at least a little bit of a knock on Taurasi as well). A few other of those players haven't come close to sniffing a WNBA Championship. You can't base everything off of their college success.

 

[Plebe]

There's at least one glaring omission from that winningest of winners list in my mind. Nneka went to a Final 4 every year she was in college, has helped lead her team to two straight WNBA Finals and got one Championship, has a league MVP to her name. She absolutely belongs next to all of those other players. Delle Donne hasn't actually won anything outside of the Olympic team, and Griner's WNBA legacy is lacking at this point (one Championship but otherwise Phoenix has been underachieving her entire career--that's gotta be at least a little bit of a knock on Taurasi as well). A few other of those players haven't come close to sniffing a WNBA Championship. You can't base everything off of their college success.

Delle Donne played at Delaware. I think carrying Delaware to its only ever Sweet 16 is the rough equivalent of Nneka helping lead Stanford to the Final Four, when you consider the talent they were surrounded by. By the same token, Nneka has also been surrounded by a much better WNBA team than Delle Donne. I'm not knocking Nneka and I've already said I think she should be on the national team, but players shouldn't be penalized just because they haven't had the fortune of playing on the greatest teams.

 

[willtalk]

It's not that the roster is dominated by UConn players. It's that the roster has been dominated by the same players for a long time. Whalen & Augustus would be two non-UConn examples. I wish some of them would retire from international play though they should by no means feel obliged to.

Bird and Taurasi are legitimate living legends but if they are on the team again in 2020...

I feel like we're getting to a point where a whole generation of guards has been completely blocked from the national team. You could say it's up to them to be better and force their way into the team. But Vandersloot has been better (statistically, at least) than Whalen and Bird in recent seasons and eventually saw the writing on the wall and started playing for Hungary. Diggins didn't get picked for 2014 worlds after an all-WNBA season.

It's a lot harder to get a spot on the team than to keep it. It seems like favoritism hiding behind the guise of "experience".

I think you articulated the point very well. The issue has nothing to do with any school or any particular group of players. I stated in my post on the other thread that ultimately it has little to do with Chelsea Gray or Parker, rather they are just two examples of an inconsistency and a lack of accountability that seems inherent withing the USA selection committee. Your last sentence pretty much states what the problem is.

There are probably people posting on this and the other thread that are motivated by other agenda's rather than just fairness. Still I am sure that some are at least motivated by that.

It is also never a good idea to become reactionary. The idea about giving everyone an equal shot at making the team should not be confused with giving everyone a shot at participating in the Olympic games themselves. I for one would be satisfied with allowing everyone an equal opportunity to make the team and not being so exclusionary in respect to who is invited and who is not.

The people who do the picking are always going to have a degree of bias ( or preferences ) in respect to what they value and that is why it is important to rotate those that pick so that any one mind set does not get to firmly entrenched. I mean who voted them in in the first place? If they represent the USA it should not be an entitlement position for life.

 

[SVCBeercats]

There's at least one glaring omission from that winningest of winners list in my mind. Nneka went to a Final 4 every year she was in college, has helped lead her team to two straight WNBA Finals and got one Championship, has a league MVP to her name. She absolutely belongs next to all of those other players. Delle Donne hasn't actually won anything outside of the Olympic team, and Griner's WNBA legacy is lacking at this point (one Championship but otherwise Phoenix has been underachieving her entire career--that's gotta be at least a little bit of a knock on Taurasi as well). A few other of those players haven't come close to sniffing a WNBA Championship. You can't base everything off of their college success.

"You can't base everything off of their college success." So how are you to evaluate the college players without viewing team success. How they make their teammates better is a big deal. Griner won a NCAA and lost an NCAA but she is 6'8" which is needed against in particular Australia. Delle Donne was a tad immature and emotionally tied to her sister and home. Otherwise had she stayed at UCONN or gone to Stanford or Notre Dame it would be another story. Plus her talent is hard to beat. Nneka? I have to admit I had real problem with not selecting Nneka. This is one I would like to hear the lack of selection rationale. Perhaps there is connection to Parker. Maybe without her teammate a she declined and removed herself from consideration. She strikes me as a principled person. Who would I remove for her? Hard question. As I said it isn't perfect but USA Women's Basketball has a really great track record. They did win the gold without both. Winning is what it is all about not participation.

 

[hoophuskee]

There's at least one glaring omission from that winningest of winners list in my mind. Nneka went to a Final 4 every year she was in college, has helped lead her team to two straight WNBA Finals and got one Championship, has a league MVP to her name. She absolutely belongs next to all of those other players. Delle Donne hasn't actually won anything outside of the Olympic team, and Griner's WNBA legacy is lacking at this point (one Championship but otherwise Phoenix has been underachieving her entire career--that's gotta be at least a little bit of a knock on Taurasi as well). A few other of those players haven't come close to sniffing a WNBA Championship. You can't base everything off of their college success.

I don't think what you are posting in reply to svc has much to do with what svc said. I don't see anywhere that was said Nneka shouldn't be on the team this upcoming time. It seems you are implying that? And I don't get your knock on Griner. You mean one NCAA Title an one WNBA Championship is no good? And further DT. What are you saying? Are you kidding? WHAT?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHAT?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHAT?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHAT?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[j66kicker]

Delle Donne played at Delaware. I think carrying Delaware to its only ever Sweet 16 is the rough equivalent of Nneka helping lead Stanford to the Final Four, when you consider the talent they were surrounded by. By the same token, Nneka has also been surrounded by a much better WNBA team than Delle Donne. I'm not knocking Nneka and I've already said I think she should be on the national team, but players shouldn't be penalized just because they haven't had the fortune of playing on the greatest teams.

I think,“helping your team to the final four” is different from, “being the reason your team won a championship.” We’re talking about the best of the best, right?

BTW Delle Donne’s college career and results had nothing to do with “fortune.” More to do with “choice.” She will also be able to take responsibility for any WNBA results too, as she has been able to manipulate her way to the team of her choice.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Delle Donne played at Delaware. I think carrying Delaware to its only ever Sweet 16 is the rough equivalent of Nneka helping lead Stanford to the Final Four, when you consider the talent they were surrounded by. By the same token, Nneka has also been surrounded by a much better WNBA team than Delle Donne. I'm not knocking Nneka and I've already said I think she should be on the national team, but players shouldn't be penalized just because they haven't had the fortune of playing on the greatest teams.

It looked like the Sky were going to be the team to beat in the East for the foreseeable future w/ Delle Donne, Fowles and Sloot. Delle Donne forced a (bad) trade, followed by Big Syl a year later. The Sky took about 3 steps backward. Washington probably won't be a title contender anytime soon. Delle Donne did that to herself.

 

[Plebe]

It looked like the Sky were going to be the team to beat in the East for the foreseeable future w/ Delle Donne, Fowles and Sloot. Delle Donne forced a (bad) trade, followed by Big Syl a year later. The Sky took about 3 steps backward. Washington probably won't be a title contender anytime soon. Delle Donne did that to herself.

Whether she did it to herself should have no bearing IMHO on whether she gets selected for the national team.

 

[nwhoopfan]

SVC had a list of Olympians that he said are winningest of winners. I thought Nneka belonged among that list, she just hasn't been an Olympian, at least so far. Who could she have replaced? Was Catchings considered more of a stretch 4 or a 3? I'd swap out Nneka for Catchings 100 times out of a 100 for 2016. I said it either here or the other similar thread, I think Catchings was gifted her last appearance on the Olympic team, she shouldn't have been there and didn't earn it that year.

As for DT, I have no problem w/ saying she's the best of all time. NCAA Championships, WNBA Championships, championships for her European teams, gold medals. What I'm saying is Phoenix has been underachieving other than 2014. DT sat out one of those seasons. That still leaves 4 years w/ both Griner and DT that should be considered disappointing seasons. Do the players bare some responsibility for that?

 

[Orangutan]

It looked like the Sky were going to be the team to beat in the East for the foreseeable future w/ Delle Donne, Fowles and Sloot. Delle Donne forced a (bad) trade, followed by Big Syl a year later. The Sky took about 3 steps backward. Washington probably won't be a title contender anytime soon. Delle Donne did that to herself.

Your timeline is way off. Fowles forced her trade in 2015 (she was traded midseason but did not play in any games for Chicago that year). Delle Donne was traded after 2016. She played 2 years for Chicago after Fowles left.

Delle Donne was not the first or even the second to force her way out of Chicago (Prince also forced the Pondexter swap with NY).

While Chicago was a solid playoff team with Delle Donne, it didn't look like they were poised to break through and win a title. In retrospect, Fowles' trade demand was the end of Chicago's hopes as a legit title contender.

 

[hoophuskee]

SVC had a list of Olympians that he said are winningest of winners. I thought Nneka belonged among that list, she just hasn't been an Olympian, at least so far. Who could she have replaced? Was Catchings considered more of a stretch 4 or a 3? I'd swap out Nneka for Catchings 100 times out of a 100 for 2016. I said it either here or the other similar thread, I think Catchings was gifted her last appearance on the Olympic team, she shouldn't have been there and didn't earn it that year.

As for DT, I have no problem w/ saying she's the best of all time. NCAA Championships, WNBA Championships, championships for her European teams, gold medals. What I'm saying is Phoenix has been underachieving other than 2014. DT sat out one of those seasons. That still leaves 4 years w/ both Griner and DT that should be considered disappointing seasons. Do the players bare some responsibility for that?

You are taking the entire context of svc's post the wrong way. You took the names and "winning titles" literal. Anyhow while I was typing swc responded - so you and swc have at it. I agree with you and SWC -- Nneka is a beast. I'd be shocked if she doesn't make it. Right now the frontcourt players as a guess appear to be Fowles, Griner, EDD, Charles, Stewie, Nneka and Maya. Can still be a frontcourt player added as Maya can do anything, EDD plays/can play like a wing/guard and Nneka's versatilty is all-world. I can't recall much of 2016 though. I do remember the Parker issue as I was one -- and there were others I remember the poster coco also-- we thought Parker should have been on. So I didn't care much of others (your referencing Nneka vs Catchings) because I felt Parker should have had a spot.

I still don't understand your points of DT. For example, in 2017 Bonner, DuPree and Taylor were all gone. Phoenix finished 3rd in the West behind the 2 best teams in the WNBA the year before and this past year. DT missed 3 games-- Phoenix lost all 3. Griner missed 8 games, Phoenix lost 5 (one game DT and Griner missed.). Then they went and knocked off the best team in the east. That's not underperforming, is it? They have a "two-player team."

And when you say Phoenix has underperformed since 2014-- keep in mind DT didn't play in 2015. So it's been one year Phoenix underperformed since 2014.

 

[nwhoopfan]

My bad, I stand corrected on Chicago and Delle Donne.

Griner's first year w/ Phoenix was 2013. Their records have been:

2013 19-15 postseason lost in conference finals
2014 29-5 WNBA Champions
2015 20-14 lost in conference finals (no DT)
2016 16-18 lost in conference semifinals
2017 18-16 lost in conference semifinals

DT and Griner have played 4 seasons together. 2014 was great, DT skipped '15, '16 and '17 are nothing to get excited about. They have clearly fallen way behind Minnesota and LA in the West. You have the best player of all time and potentially the most dominating post of all time. I know a basketball team is more than 2 players, but when you have 2 components like that to build a team around I would expect more. How can you call '16 and '17 anything other than underachieving?

 

[Alydar]

ladies and gents, we need to have a moment of brutal honesty. TEAM USA has always been political and is even more so now. coaches need to rotate and term limits need to happen.

Did you post that opinion when it was Catchings in her 4th Olympics at 38?

 

[hoophuskee]

My bad, I stand corrected on Chicago and Delle Donne.

Griner's first year w/ Phoenix was 2013. Their records have been:

2013 19-15 postseason lost in conference finals
2014 29-5 WNBA Champions
2015 20-14 lost in conference finals (no DT)
2016 16-18 lost in conference semifinals
2017 18-16 lost in conference semifinals

DT and Griner have played 4 seasons together. 2014 was great, DT skipped '15, '16 and '17 are nothing to get excited about. They have clearly fallen way behind Minnesota and LA in the West. You have the best player of all time and potentially the most dominating post of all time. I know a basketball team is more than 2 players, but when you have 2 components like that to build a team around I would expect more. How can you call '16 and '17 anything other than underachieving?

I think your expectations are extreme. First off DT at 34 years old in 2016 and 35 in 2017 is no longer the best player on the planet. Secondly, Griner is not "the most dominating post of all time." She isn't physical enough to be considered that yet. Her rebound numbers imo show that. Third, while you say basketball team is more than 2 players-- yet in 2017 you seem to want to disregard that and not address what Phoenix lost in 2016. Losing to Minny and LA -- how can you say it is underachieving when they have overall MORE superior players? And again- I said 2016 they under-achieved. You were the one that said after 2014-- so I mentioned you shouldn't have counted 2015, right?

SO I'll ask -- how many people you think would have projected Phoenix to beat out LA or Minny the last two years? In 2016-- maybe. Which is why I acknowledge ONE YEAR they under-achieved after 2014. But 2017? IMO you are out of your mind if you expected anything better other than them losing to Minny or LA. AGAIN I'll mention they lost Taylor, Bonner and DuPree. That is 60% of their starting lineup. How can you then say that you know that basketball is a team of more than 2 players yet so casually dismiss these 3? They wound up being one of 4 teams left in the WNBA playoffs.

***Also-- do you realize that Phoenix was among the top 4 teams left in the WNBA Playoffs the past 2 years? Because I see that you are mentioning "Conferenne Semi-finals." Now matter how you slice it-- it is the semi-finals which Phoenix has gotten to. Or are you thinking they were in the Quarter Finals and lost? In 2016 after they lost to Minny - Minny was playing for the championship against LA. And this year when they lost to LA- LA in the next round was playing for the championship against Minny. So Phoenix wound up in the at the end of the playoffs the last 2 years among the top 4 teams in basketball losing in the semi-finals.

 

[Alydar]

"You can't base everything off of their college success." So how are you to evaluate the college players without viewing team success. How they make their teammates better is a big deal. Griner won a NCAA and lost an NCAA but she is 6'8" which is needed against in particular Australia. Delle Donne was a tad immature and emotionally tied to her sister and home. Otherwise had she stayed at UCONN or gone to Stanford or Notre Dame it would be another story. Plus her talent is hard to beat. Nneka? I have to admit I had real problem with not selecting Nneka. This is one I would like to hear the lack of selection rationale. Perhaps there is connection to Parker. Maybe without her teammate a she declined and removed herself from consideration. She strikes me as a principled person. Who would I remove for her? Hard question. As I said it isn't perfect but USA Women's Basketball has a really great track record. They did win the gold without both. Winning is what it is all about not participation.

Nneka had her MVP season AFTER the 2016 team had already been selected.

 

[DaddyChoc]

It's not that the roster is dominated by UConn players. It's that the roster has been dominated by the same players for a long time. Whalen & Augustus would be two non-UConn examples. I wish some of them would retire from international play though they should by no means feel obliged to.

Bird and Taurasi are legitimate living legends but if they are on the team again in 2020...

I feel like we're getting to a point where a whole generation of guards has been completely blocked from the national team. You could say it's up to them to be better and force their way into the team. But Vandersloot has been better (statistically, at least) than Whalen and Bird in recent seasons and eventually saw the writing on the wall and started playing for Hungary. Diggins didn't get picked for 2014 worlds after an all-WNBA season.

It's a lot harder to get a spot on the team than to keep it. It seems like favoritism hiding behind the guise of "experience".

 

[DaddyChoc]

other teams have gotten better and the USA doesn't have time to be experimenting with players... other countries have their players for just about the whole 4yrs between Olympics.

sent the best and kick a**

 

[meyers7]

Why should the players be limited to their pro teams?

They wouldn't but if you are practicing 3/4 of the year with a team, with which group of guys do you think you'd have the best shot at winning a medal with??? And then add in the owner's egos and well, there you go.

Hell, why shouldn't Kenyans dominate long distance running. If the best 6 or 10 marathon runners are Kenyans they should all get a shot at medals.

I said it was a silly idea for teams. But, you raise a good point, if it just becomes a national championship, what's the point of the Olympics??

That might disappear if the starters of a gold medal winning women's basketball team was composed of three US players, a Russian and a Spaniard.

Hmmm, like a WNBA team.