I just finished watching the men's Olympic basketball team stink it up against Lithuania. They lost by four points and honestly, I am not surprised anymore. In the international game you need to play a team passing game and you need to be deadly from outside. The team representing the United States doesn't play defense well enough, doesn't play enough like a team and certainly doesn't shoot well enough from the outside.

I like players like Iverson, Richard Jefferson, Duane Wade, Carmelo, etc, but how did anyone expect a high flying, take it to the bucket type of team like this to do well in the Olympics? In unrelated news, how is it that Lamar Odom can be involved in a sporting event that is second only to a high school parking lot at 4:20 in terms of drug use notoriety? I know the ganga isn't a performance enhancer unless the performance is eating pizza and reddening your eyes, but doesn't the Olympic committee have something to say about this?

Anyway...

I read an article by Bill Simmons at some point saying that you can't just throw a bunch of all-stars out on the court and expect them to bring home the gold because a bunch of great players don't necessarily make a great team. I think he is 100% right. He suggested putting together a team of NBA players that could fulfill all the necessities of a cohesive team. I think that is a fine idea, but I have different ideas of what makes a great team in the Olympics.

Have you ever played video game basketball? I remember back in the day playing NBA Live (fill in the year) on Playstation and creating my own players. What were the attributes that you always gave your created players in that game to make them successful? You couldn't make them as big as Shaq because frankly there is no wealth to be acquired playing post-up ball in video games. Yeah, it makes you feel like you are playing the game for real, but it doesn't give you any discernible advantage.